Florida ports lead the nation in security
Amended state laws take effect July 1
By Jim Dow
Florida port security is heading into a new era.
On July 1, extensive modifications to Florida's seaport security laws will take effect, giving individual ports new options that will reduce
| Kauffmann. |
costs and allow local port officials to better tailor their security plans to meet the specific needs of their ports. At the same time, Florida will retain its role as the developer of security systems that serve as the de facto prototype for the rest of the nation's ports.
'We're light years ahead of the rest of the country, realistically,' commented Chris Kauffmann, the senior director of terminal operations and seaport security at the Port of Jacksonville. 'No one else has come as far in developing a port worker credential system. No one else has the level of automation for tracking port entry or exits.'
Florida got its jump on the rest of the country in the years prior to 9/11. The state initially mandated the Florida Seaport Security Assessment of 2000, leading to requirements that all 14 of the state's public ports implement new security standards in June of 2001.
The rest of the nation got its initiation into advanced port security when Congress passed the Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) in November of 2002. Most of the standards from that bill had to be in effect by July 1, 2004, although key elements like the development of a biometric-based Transportation Worker Identity Card (TWIC) have yet to be completed.
Florida, meanwhile, will in June begin the credential enrollment process for the Florida Uniform Port Access Credential (FUPAC), which the federal Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration are calling the TWIC prototype.
For Florida port officials and port users, the state's early security laws and advanced port security programs have been both a blessing and a curse.
Florida ports are already dealing with issues that will inevitably be
|
| Heightened security at gates. |
tomorrow's growing pains for ports in other states, and port users can take comfort in knowing that they will have the highest available levels of safety when they use Florida ports.
But Florida ports have had to shoulder the difficulties of pioneering the new levels of port security, both in terms of operational challenges and added costs. Those burdens can also amount to a competitive disadvantage when competing against other ports, particularly major Southeast Atlantic ports like Savannah and Charleston.
What's more, when Florida was developing its stringent new port security laws, lawmakers and the various officials helping to draft the laws were thinking in terms of traditional crime. They were thinking about stolen cars going out and illegal drugs coming in, not terrorism.
That led to problems when the U.S. Congress passed the MTSA, which was geared primarily toward stopping terrorist attacks.
'The impacts of 9-11 and the requirements of the Florida law and the MTSA began to create a concern for our seaports. There were two different standards,' said Nancy Leikauf, the executive vice president of the Florida Ports Council, a nonprofit corporation that serves as an association for the state's public ports.
For example, the original Florida law prohibited ports from hiring or allowing regular access for anyone who had been convicted within five years of crimes involving controlled substances, illegal possession or use of a firearm, or theft crimes like burglary or robbery.
The MTSA prohibits personnel that have had felony convictions within seven years, with a special emphasis restricting those convicted of murder, espionage, acts of terrorism, or crimes involving explosive devices.
The Florida laws have been amended to coincide with the prohibited past crimes and the seven-year 'look back' period of the MTSA. Florida officials are also concerned that as new programs like the FUPAC identification cards are implemented, Florida's prototype system will be grandfathered into the eventual TWIC program without requiring revisions.
But after several years of living with the Florida security laws port officials commonly refer in statutory language as the 311.12 standards, they had many Florida-specific concerns. Those concerns have basically been addressed in the bill passed in the closing week of this year's state legislative session.
'It's a very good piece of legislation,' the FPC's Leikauf said.
Extensive Adjustments. The single broadest change in the Florida law is that rather than placing a single set of standards on all ports, the amended law hews to the concept that different ports have differing security needs and situations.
'If you've seen one port, you've seen one port,' Kaufman observed. 'They're all different, and you need more flexibility to manage your assets.'
Added Port Everglades director Phillip Allen: 'It allows each port to assess its own areas of risk.'
|
| Allen. |
This year's bill says that while individual ports must adhere to both statewide minimum standards and the federal requirements under MTSA, individual directors will be responsible for developing not only the overall security plan, but determining 'security area designations' within the port.
Many ports have restaurants or even banks located on port property, for example, and technically, the law requires their employees to undergo the same levels of security screening as workers dealing with freight in the yard.
'That was not the intent of the legislation,' Leikauf said. 'These are unrestricted areas the public should be allowed to use.'
By designating different areas of the port with different levels of security, there are more options concerning the way the port is accessed and patrolled.
The different security designations include unrestricted public areas basically open to all; restricted public areas that require port workers, employees and visitors to present identification; restricted access areas that limit who goes into the area and requires identification; and secured restricted areas that require supervised control of access at all times. The law also allows for temporary designation of upgraded levels of security in specific areas when there is a high security alert from the Department of Homeland Security.
Avenue for appeals. The amended law also provides a means for ports to seek adjustments to security standards or to appeal the findings in security audits by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE). Ports can take up issues with two different councils created to review port security issues. In the past, the only recourse port officials had was to take up an issue with the state legislature and request a change in the law.
For issues related to port security standards, the law creates the Seaport Security Standards Advisory Council. The council will meet at least once every four years, and will consider issues like the ongoing applicability of various sections of the law in light of changing circumstances like the development of new technology for port security.
|
| Waterside security |
The council will include two port directors, two port security directors, and one representative each from the FDLE, the Office of Motor Carrier Compliance within the state Department of Transportation, the Attorney General's office, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, the Office of tourism, trade, and Economic Development, and the Office of Drug Control, whose representative will chair the council.
For appeals on determinations made by the FDLE after security audits, ports can go to the Domestic Security Oversight Council (DSOC). That council will determine if findings in the FDLE audits actually conform with security standards.
There is also a process for cases when ports feel there are waivers when a port has developed an alternative means for complying with the standards. Ports can first bring a proposal to the Office of Drug Control and the FDLE. If no determination is made within 90 days, the request is then considered by the DSOC, which will make a recommendation back to the Office of Drug Control and the FDLE. The legislature directed those agencies to give great consideration to any recommendation from the DSOC.
Costs and personnel. Port officials say that there have been two waves of increased costs in the post-9/11 era of increased security. The first wave was for capital improvements to security-related infrastructure. Leikauf said the federal government has provided $58 million for infrastructure improvements in Florida, while the state has provided $62 million. Individual port executives are quick to note that they have had to divert millions from their own revenues into security improvements.
'The ports now have their new gates and their closed circuit television monitors and their command centers in place,' Leikauf noted. 'But they now have ongoing operating costs, and those costs are too high.'
Some ports have new, specialized operating costs like the $900,000 a year Port Everglades spends on its one-of-a-kind floating water gates, which can block a USS Cole-type of watercraft attack on the port's extensive petroleum product terminals. The port provides virtually all the fuel for South Florida, from vehicles to three major airports.
The most common operating cost related to security, however, is personnel.
Ports rely heavily on sworn law enforcement officers contracted from local sheriff's offices or police departments, with private sector security guards handling limited duties.
Officials say the arrangement has worked well, but it is costly.
'Sworn officers are expensive,' Leikauf noted. 'Some of them have upper-tier salaries, and over time the cost would grow exponentially.'
The old law also contained FDLE mandates like a requirement that all cruise terminals have two uniformed officers on duty whenever the terminal is open.
Individual ports will now have more of a say on not only how different areas should be staffed, there will be new options on the types of officers on duty.
The new law specifies that ports need to have a better mix of sworn law enforcement officers and certified private security personnel to keep operating costs down. The law also provides an option of hiring certified security personnel who would be port employees, working for newly authorized seaport law enforcement agencies.
For security personnel that are not sworn officers, the new law states they must have Class D licenses and complete either Class D training or an equivalent program from the Department of Agriculture.
In addition, they must complete certified seaport training. That training curriculum must be developed by the FDLE in conjunction with the state Community College System by December 1, 2006. The training must meet or exceed training standards established by the MTSA.
When the training program is in place, marine security specialist candidate must take at least 218 hours of seaport-specific training.
Port officials note the new seaport-certified personnel will not only reduce costs, but will likely improve overall competency.
'You might have a very good uniformed officer at a port who is an expert on domestic violence, but not on seaport security,' Leikauf said.
Allen pointed out that although security is a legitimate 'number one priority,' ports need to be realistic about the costs.
He said that before 9/11, Port Everglades was spending $4 million a year on security, and during 2006 that outlay will total $18.5 million.
'It has a significant impact on our bottom line,' he said, adding, 'We have to do it smarter. You can't just keep throwing people and money at it. We're an enterprise here, a business unit. These improvements are paid for by our users, with no taxpayer money'even though the port benefits all the people.'
Security advances. Florida has some of the nation's most advanced security infrastructure, and is developing new operating practices that will be first in the nation.
Florida was able to obtain a federal grant, for example, that provided each public port with an automated system for tracking who comes in and out of a port. It not only allows security officials to determine the whereabouts of people or vehicles that have come into the port, but records a history of those entries and exits that provide useful data for the port and the state.
'The goal is simple,' Kauffmann said. 'The system can capture, track, and store data on movements at the 14 public ports, and get that information to the FDLE.'
The new technology that will attract the attention of the entire industry, however, is the FUPAC access credential program.
Using fingerprint-based biometric identification, it will provide a new level of accurate identity verification that will offset practices like the use of fake IDs.
Florida officials had been waiting for the development of the federal TWIC program, but as that has lagged, port directors pushed the state for the development of FUPAC.
In addition to providing a more accurate form of identification with the use of a biometric reader, the credentials will also be valid at all ports. That was a challenge that has taken up much of the last two or three years, but all have agreed on the system. Drivers will be able to go to all the ports with a single credential, whereas in the past they have needed separate credentials for each port.
Florida will also implement a uniform criminal background check, using both FDLE and FBI data.
Again, that will mean additional costs for Florida ports–$85 for an initial check and $35 for an annual check to make sure there are no new criminal charges.
Port officials are at times exasperated by the unique security demands of operating in Florida, yet they know in the near future the efforts will pay off.
'I can't say this has been an easy transition from 311.12 to MTSA to this year,' said Allen, who was interim director at Port Everglades when 9/11 occurred, and who was named port director in February after a second stint as interim director.
There will be other adjustment to come, Kauffmann realizes.
'We are really only one link in the development of standards,' he said. 'The International Maritime Organization is involved. People are looking at the supply chain from raw materials to a product on the shelf. It's an international, national, state, and local effort, and it's massive in all its elements.'