By Jim Kouri, CPP
MichNews.com
Apr 29, 2005

New Jersey Used As Example in Corporate Report

Companies in the New Jersey are less prepared than most other markets in the country to face business interruptions, with nearly 30 percent saying that they have yet to create business continuity plans, and 33 percent claiming they do not consider such planning a "high priority."

According to the report issued today by AT&T and the International Association of Emergency Managers, New Jersey companies rank 8th in disaster preparedness out of 12 markets surveyed during the past year. Additionally, even those companies directly impacted by Hurricane Floyd or the 9/11 terrorist attacks were less likely to have business continuity plans than companies in other parts of the country.

New Jersey companies also scored the lowest of all 12 markets when it comes to testing the integrity of their business continuity plans, with 49 percent saying they tested them within the past year, compared to the national average of 59 percent.

"Disaster Planning in the Private Sector: A Post 9/11 Look at the State of Business Continuity in the US" surveyed 100 senior technology executives who have direct business planning responsibilities throughout New Jersey. More than 1200 executives have thus far been interviewed from companies with more than $10 million in annual revenues, representing a broad cross section of industries and markets. Up to ten additional markets will be surveyed in 2005.

"The fact that organizations in New Jersey have such a relatively low level of disaster preparedness is not only surprising, but dangerous," said Mary Livingston, regional vice president at AT&T. "While we saw a spike of business continuity planning immediately following 9/11, it seems that the urgency has greatly worn off."

According to the survey, New Jersey ranked behind seven other cities in its level of disaster preparedness -- even ranking behind such markets as Dallas, Houston and Philadelphia -- with only 71 percent that currently have a plan in place. This compares with 74 percent for companies in both New York and Washington, DC Only 66 percent of the New Jersey respondents claim business continuity is a high priority, a finding considered surprising given the state's proximity to the 9/11 attacks. Additionally, only 16 percent say they would take action if the terrorist alert level were raised, two or three percentage points higher than most of the markets.

Livingston recommends that every company, regardless of size, geography or industry, make business continuity an integral part of their business. Among the preventive measures Livingston suggests are to establish back up networks, identify alternative work sites, create protections for vital business processes, and develop a program for post-disaster employee and customer communications.

Even with the most robust business continuity plans, companies need to ensure that their plans are up to date and reflect changing circumstances and risks. The survey found that nearly 40 percent of the executives who do have an existing business continuity plan have not tested the plan in more than a year, with nearly 20 percent of those saying their plans have never been tested at all. Livingston recommends that the plans be retested every six months.

"A business continuity plan is only as good as its last test," said Livingston. "With so many changing circumstances and fluctuating levels of risk, companies have got to look at these plans as a living, breathing document that must be modified according to even the slightest changes in the network, market and external environment.

The report also found that only 23 percent consider cyber security to be a top concern, despite security breaches known to be a chief cause of business disruptions in the state. In fact, nearly 30 percent of companies have not integrated cyber security plans into their overall business continuity planning. Nearly 25 percent currently use an outside service provider to manage their network security.

Nearly 30 percent of New Jersey companies also tend to utilize outside service providers for business continuity planning, a figure expected to grow given the increasing complexity of measuring and managing risk today. However, most other markets have a higher rate of companies using outside service providers.

While New Jersey companies may lag behind many other markets in planning, 71 percent of executives have taken some precautions to protect against business disruptions, and 26 percent plan to do so in the next six months. These measures include protections against cyber security breaches and establishment of redundant network servers and back-up sites.

http://www.michnews.com/

By HILARY LEILA KRIEGER

The number of significant acts of global terror skyrocketed last year to three times their 2003 levels, according to figures from a US State Department report released by the office of Representative Henry Waxman.

Altogether, there were approximately 650 serious attacks in 2004, up from 175 the year before, which itself constituted a 20-year high, according to the information. The number of attacks in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza reportedly more than doubled from 19 to 45. Afghanistan also saw the number of major attacks double while Iraq's total of 198 was nine times higher than the preceding year's figure.

Waxman charged that the numbers may well be "a significant underestimate" due to America's definition of international attacks, which exclude attacks perpetrated domestically by nationals of the same country and attacks against US armed forces.

The data was relayed at a congressional briefing on Monday and made its way to the public after congressional aides discussed the information with the media and Waxman circulated a letter he wrote to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice criticizing the "withholding" of government figures gathered as part of the State Department's "Patterns of Global Terrorism," by law mandated to be recorded and delivered to Congress each year.

While not relating to the contents of Waxman's letter, a State Department spokeswoman said her office would be releasing the congressionally mandated information by the April 30 deadline set down by the law. She indicated that the specific numbers of attacks were compiled by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) and that they, rather than the State Department, bear responsibility for providing that portion of the data.

At deadline, however, a joint press briefing by the State Department and NCTC was scheduled to take place. Numbers were expected to be released at that briefing.

Waxman said that at the briefing by both the State Department and the NCTC, the latter said that no decision on publishing the data had been made.

According to their statements, Waxman wrote in his letter, one reason for the increase in global terror was greater awareness and monitoring, which led, for instance, to a spike in reports of incidents in the Kashmir region.

He criticized the briefing for not including the number of fatalities and injuries, information that has traditionally been provided as part of the annual report.

Waxman's letter also alluded to the release of last year's report, in which "Bush administration officials cited the annual terrorism data as an illustration of 'the great progress that has been made in fighting terrorism,'" only to have to revise the report and raise the number of attacks in light of public scrutiny.

"The large increases in terrorist attacks reported in 2004 may undermine the administration's claims of success in the war on terror, but political inconvenience has never been a legitimate basis for withholding facts from the American people," his letter concluded.

by Dan Robinson

Experts testifying before a congressional committee say the threat of terrorism may be greatest at present from Islamist terror cells in European countries.

April 27, 2005 (AXcess News) Washington - Experts testifying before a congressional committee say the threat of terrorism may be greatest at present from Islamist terror cells in European countries.

The experts told the House Subcommittee on Europe and Emerging Threats that a combination of factors lead them to believe terrorist cells in Europe may pose the biggest threat to the security of the United States and its interests ...

more at http://www.axcessnews.com/national_042705b.shtml

Official blames increase in reported attacks on deeper review

Thursday, April 28, 2005 Posted: 5:19 AM EDT (0919 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The fight against international terrorism remains "formidable" for the United States and its allies, with 651 significant attacks taking 1,900 lives worldwide last year, according to two U.S. government reports released Wednesday.

The National Counterterrorism Center released statistics on global terrorism simultaneously with the State Department's annual terrorism report.

The State Department report said "international terrorism continued to pose a significant threat to the United States and its partners in 2004."

And the preliminary NCTC report said there were 651 terrorist attacks in 2004 classified as "significant," with 1,907 people killed.

Data released last year by the State Department for 2003 said 208 attacks killed 625 people worldwide. Of those attacks, 175 were deemed "significant," which at the time marked a 21-year high.

However, the NCTC's acting director, John Brennan, stressed Wednesday that the newest data cannot be compared accurately to previous numbers, saying a more comprehensive review was conducted for the 2004 figures.

No terrorist attacks against the U.S. homeland were reported in 2004, but about 10 percent of the attacks worldwide targeted U.S. interests, Brennan said.

The State Department last week drew criticism from Democrats when Secretary Condoleezza Rice decided not to have her department release the statistics -- which had previously been part of the report -- and to allow intelligence officials to decide about their release.

As late as Monday, Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte had not decided whether to release the data -- which one Democratic congressman said doesn't support the Bush administration's claims that it is winning the "war on terror."

The NCTC's deeper review, along with the U.S.-led war in Iraq, are "the primary reasons for the significant growth in the number of terrorist incidents being reported," Brennan said. "This increase in the number of incidents being reported today does not necessarily mean there has been a growth in actual terrorist incidents.

"The data you will see today represents a break from previous years, and the numbers can't be compared to previous years in any meaningful way," he said.

The point was made to congressional staffers last week, Brennan said, but has not been reflected in the media. Improved and more user-friendly numbers will be available in June, he said.

His remarks contradicted a claim made by Rep. Henry Waxman, a California Democrat, in a letter he sent to Rice this week.

Waxman said that State Department and NCTC officials who briefed congressional leaders indicated "that the methodology and definitions used to vet the data were identical to last year's."

Waxman noted that more significant attacks took place in Iraq alone in 2004 than in all the world a year earlier.
'Significant threat'

Known as "Patterns of Global Terrorism" in previous years, the State Department report is now dubbed "Country Reports on Terrorism."

The new report said "international terrorism continued to pose a significant threat to the United States and its partners in 2004."

However, the 129-page document cited "ongoing improvements in U.S. homeland security, military campaigns against insurgents and terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan, and deepening counterterrorism cooperation among the nations of the world."

"The primary terrorist threat to the United States in 2004 continued to be al Qaeda, which remained intent on attacking the U.S. homeland as well as U.S. interests abroad," the report said.

It noted, however, that 2004 "was marked by progress in decreasing the threat from states that sponsor terrorism."

While Iraq remained "the central battleground in the global war on terrorism," it was removed in October 2004 from the U.S. government's list of states sponsoring terrorism.

"Cuba, North Korea, Syria, and, in particular, Iran continue to embrace terrorism as an instrument of policy," the report said, while crediting Libya and Sudan with "significant steps to cooperate in the global war on terrorism."

"Most worrisome is that these countries also have the capabilities to manufacture weapons of mass destruction ... that could fall into the hands of terrorists."

"The tasks confronting the United States and its partners in the struggle against terrorism remain formidable," the report said.
Lawmaker critical

Waxman called for Rice reconsider her decision to withhold the statistical part of the report.

The State Department had to revise its 2003 report because it had underreported the number of attacks. (Full story)

Members of Congress and the public found the errors, Waxman wrote, "only because the underlying data on terrorist attacks was available for scrutiny."

"In effect, your decision to withhold the data this year eliminates this vital check on the veracity of the administration's claims," Waxman wrote.

"The large increases in terrorist attacks reported in 2004 may undermine administration claims of success in the war on terror," he wrote. "But political inconvenience has never been a legitimate basis for withholding facts from the American people."

However, Brennan said Wednesday that further data would be made available in June and that "there was never any effort that was applied to the NCTC to repress these numbers or not to release them."

Waxman also complained that the 2004 numbers could be "a significant underestimate." Many incidents "that most Americans would regard as terrorist attacks" were not reported because they didn't meet "the strict State Department definitions of an international" event, including insurgent attacks resulting in only Iraqi fatalities.

Brennan said that terrorist attacks by perpetrators against people of their own nationality were not part of the current statistics, but would be included in the future.

Creation of the NCTC was recommended in July 2004 by the 9/11 commission, and President Bush established the center in August by executive order.

State Department Counselor Philip Zelikow told reporters Wednesday that his agency was deferring to the NCTC as the government's "primary organization for analysis and integration" of terrorism intelligence as called for in the intelligence overhaul passed by Congress in December 2004.

Waxman, however, wrote that the officials who briefed lawmakers "made clear that NCTC compiled the data specifically for the State Department's annual report."

CNN's Andrea Koppel, Elise Labott and Pam Benson contributed to this report.

No outside forces to guard BTC, official says

Baku Today 27/04/2005 00:06

No outside forces will be involved in guarding the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline, as Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey have assumed this task, Deputy Prime Minister Abid Sharifov told a meeting of the intergovernmental commission on the BTC pipeline project in Baku on Tuesday.

The US State Department envoy on Caspian energy diplomacy Steven Mann said the United States is ready to assist in safeguarding the BTC pipe. This will not be military assistance, he said, according to Assa Irada.

�The pipeline is to be guarded by regional countries. But if their governments appeal to us, we are ready to provide counsel, hold the needed training for these countries and support them,� he said.

Mann added that there are no problems with talks over Kazakhstan�s joining the BTC project.

Sharifov reiterated that BTC construction is close to completion and oil to be transported through the pipeline will be loaded to tankers from the Ceyhan port of Turkey late in the 3rd quarter � early 4th quarter of 2005.

http://www.whisprwave.com/oil-pipeline-security.htm

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - California lawmakers gave their initial approval on Tuesday to a bill that would raise $130 million annually to improve port security by imposing a $10 fee on each cargo container shipped into the state.

"California simply cannot wait for the federal government to step up to the plate and make an honest commitment to improving port security," said Assemblymember Betty Karnette (D-Long Beach), the bill's sponsor.

The measure, which passed the chamber's transportation committee on a 7-5 vote, now heads to the Assembly's appropriations committee.

The bill would authorize the state's Office of Homeland Security to assess and collect fees on cargo container traffic and distribute the funds to California's ports.

The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, if combined, would be the world's fifth busiest complex after Hong Kong, Singapore, Shanghai and Shenzhen, said Art Wong, a spokesman for the Port of Long Beach.

The two ports handle about two-thirds of all ocean cargo shipped to the west coast of the United States every year. The two ports last year handled the equivalent of 13.1 million cargo containers, Wong said.

[Federal Register: March 9, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 45)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 11595-11598]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09mr05-33]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD17-05-002]
RIN 1625-AA11 and 1625-AA87

Regulated Navigation Area and Security Zones; High Capacity
Passenger Vessels in Alaska

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish moving and fixed
security zones in the navigable waters of Coast Guard District 17
around and under all high capacity passenger (HCP) vessels. The zones
would extend 100 yards from HCP vessels while they are underway and 25
yards from HCP vessels while they are moored or anchored. The Coast
Guard also proposes to establish a regulated navigation area that would
require other vessels operating within 250 yards of a HCP vessel be
subject to speed restrictions. These security zones and regulated
navigation area are needed to secure and safeguard HCP vessels and
ports from sabotage, terrorist acts, and other incidents. Entry into
these security zones would be prohibited, unless specifically
authorized by the Coast Guard District 17 Commander, cognizant Captain
of the Port, or the on-scene official patrol.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before April 8, 2005

by Dave Timmerman

April 27, 2005
Wednesday

In case no one has been informed, or this news skipped over you, I thought it best to get this out to Sitnews.

Most locals are well aware of the security on the cruise ship docks during the summer. It is hard not to notice the big orange barriers, guards in orange vests, or the fact that the general public in not allowed to drive onto the dock anymore (among other things).

Well there is yet another set of rules and regulations being proposed by the USCG. This new set of rules mandates a "security zone" be in place around High Capacity Passenger (HCP) vessels (know to us common folk as cruise ships).

I have copied and pasted a summary of the proposed rule below.

[Federal Register: March 9, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 45)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 11595-11598]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09mr05-33]

This proposed rule would control vessel movement in a regulated area surrounding high capacity passenger (HCP) vessels to address security concerns. It would prohibit persons or vessels from entering a security zone that extends 100 yards around and under HCP vessels that are underway and 25 yards around and under HCP vessels that are anchored or moored within the Coast Guard District 17 zone, except as noted in this regulation.

For the purpose of this regulation, HCP vessels are those vessels of U.S. or foreign registry, certificated to carry 500 passengers or more. Public vessels are vessels owned, chartered, or operated by the United States, or by a State or political subdivision thereof. For the purpose of this regulation, Alaska Marine Highway vessels are not HCP vessels. The passengers and crew of the respective HCP vessel are persons not subject to this regulation. Public vessels, vessels working on behalf and at the direction of the HCPs (i.e., local transport of passengers, tender vessels, etc.), or vessels granted waiver or permission by the 17th Coast Guard District Commander, cognizant Captain of the Port (COTP), or on-scene official patrol are vessels not subject to this regulation.

Vessels requesting to enter the security zone must contact the Coast Guard District 17 Commander, his or her designated representatives, the cognizant COTP, or on-scene official patrol on VHF-FM channel 16 or 13. The Coast Guard District 17 Commander, the cognizant COTP, or on-scene official patrol may permit vessels to enter the security zone if it is necessary to ensure a safe passage in accordance with the Navigation Rules or for other good cause. Similarly, all vessels anchored in a designated anchorage area may be permitted to remain at anchor within 100 yards of a passing HCP vessel.

All vessels operating within 250 yards of a HCP vessel in the RNA must proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course, unless required to maintain speed by the navigation rules. All persons and vessels within 250 yards of a HCP vessel in the RNA must be attentive to and comply with the orders of the District Commander, cognizant COTP, or designated on-scene official patrol. Link (there seems to be trouble with this link from time to time---if it does not work you can go to--- http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html and in the search area space for 2005 (Volume 70) Only type into that space page 11595 --- this should take you to the page you need.

Suffice it to say you will no longer be allowed to have a boat (or plane, for that matter), anywhere near a cruise ship without first contacting the US Coast Guard and getting permission. A ship docked next to Thomas Basin could block off the entrance to Thomas Basin. Part of City Float would be affected. Vessels wanting to utilize Ryus, Daly and Hansen Floats would all be subject to this rule while cruise ships were in. We all know how busy Tongass Narrows can get during the summer. There is only so much Narrows out there. If these zones were to go into effect it could greatly decrease the area that would be usable without first getting permission.

There has already been a first round of comment where only 19 entities supplied comment to the USCG. These comments, and the request for more time to respond, prompted the USCG to extend the comment period until MAY 27th. That is only one month people. I copied and pasted the information on where to send your comments and who to direct them to, along with a few more things---

Request for Comments

On March 9, 2005, D17 (MOC) published a Federal Register Notice seeking comments on the proposed Regulated Navigation Area and Security Zones; High Capacity Passenger Vessels in Alaska (70 FR 11595). The initial comment period was 30 days. A total of 19 public comments were received by the April 8, 2005, deadline, and all of them raised important issues on possible effects of the proposed rule.

Additionally, others persons commented to the Coast Guard and said they needed more time. To ensure the Coast Guard receives comments from interested parties and to allow more time for dissemination of the proposed rule, the Coast Guard is re-opening the public comment period for an additional 30 days.

We encourage you to submit comments and related material pertaining specifically to this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD17-05), and give the reason for each comment. You may submit your comments and material by mail, hand delivery, fax, or electronic means to the project officer at the addresses or phone numbers listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, but please submit your comments and material by only one means. If you submit them by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you would like to know that your submission reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. The recommendation made by this office may be affected by comments received.

Public Meeting

We do not plan to hold a public meeting. However, you may submit a request for a public meeting by writing to District 17 (MOC) at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that a public meeting would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a separate notice in the Federal Register.

Dated: April 18, 2005.
James C. Olson,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard District.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 27, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to District 17 (MOC), 709 West 9th St., Room 753, Juneau, Alaska 99801.

District 17 (MOC) maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and related materials received from the public will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at District 17 (MOC), 709 West 9th St., Room 753, Juneau, Alaska 99801 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Matthew York, District 17 (MOC), 709 West 9th St., Room 753, Juneau, Alaska 99801, (907) 463-2821."

So there it is Ketchikan (and any other communities that could be effected by this new rule). Get your comments in. I realize that there is a lot of information to trudge through here...but really it is just the tip of the iceberg (and don't be suprised if we have security zones around them someday too!).

Dave Timmerman
Ketchikan, AK - USA

By Audrey Hudson
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


The Homeland Security Department's inspector general is investigating an incident involving 14 Syrian passengers aboard a flight from Detroit to Los Angeles last summer described by many federal air marshals and passengers as a dry run for a terrorist attack.
The investigation began shortly after the June 29 incident, but did not become public until the final phase of the inquiry when passengers reported facing hours of questioning in March from inspectors.
The interviewed passengers said the questioning by inspectors suggested the flight had faced a serious situation. Some federal officials have dismissed the incident and suggested passengers had overreacted and were never in danger.

People are often unreasonable,
irrational, and self-centered;
Forgive them anyway.

If you are kind, people may accuse
you of selfish, ulterior motives;
Be kind anyway.

If you are successful, you will win some
unfaithful friends and some genuine enemies;
Succeed anyway.

If you are honest and sincere
people may deceive you;
Be honest and sincere anyway.


What you spend years creating
others could destroy overnight;
Create anyway.

If you find serenity and happiness,
some may be jealous;
Be happy anyway.

The good you do today,
will often be forgotten.
Do good anyway.

Give the best you have,
and it may never be enough;
Give your best anyway.

In the final analysis,
it is between you and God;
It was never between you and them anyway.

-Mother Teresa-

Head of Homeland Security Agency Compares Current Challenges to Coast Guard in 1915

WASHINGTON - Adm. Thomas H. Collins, commandant of the Coast Guard, gave the annual State of the Coast Guard address at Bolling Air Force Base today. His speech, titled "Making History," is presented below as prepared for delivery.

"The State of the Coast Guard is a great opportunity to take stock of where we�ve been and where we�re going. As a longstanding history buff, and even a teacher of it once upon a time, I am fascinated by the lessons history offers us and appreciate the value of understanding and applying those lessons in our current efforts. There are many quotes about history and the role it plays in society � one of my favorites is, "History never looks like history when you are living through it" -- quite true for us today.

Consider the following list of organizational challenges:

* A realignment and reorganization of field commands �
* A reorganization of district and headquarters offices �
* A new Department �
* An expanding mission portfolio �
* A new international agreement and a new domestic law that significantly expand Coast Guard authority and operations �
* A significant growth in the number of Coast Guard personnel �
* An expansion of our coastal communications systems �
* An increased port security role for the Coast Guard �
* A significant increase in the boarding of vessels at sea and escorting them into port �
* Fighting our Nation�s war �

Some of you may hear that list and think, "Wow, today the Coast Guard really has a lot on its plate."

While that list of challenges sounds familiar, I�m actually talking about the Coast Guard of 90 years ago. Around 1915, the Coast Guard had:

* two reorganizations of its Headquarters;
a reorganization of its districts;
* a restructuring of field commands and cutters� chain-of-command;
* a new Department, when during World War I, we became "that hard nucleus about which the Navy forms in time of war;"
* a new international law, the Treaty for the Protection of Fur Seals and Sea Otters, which greatly expanded our operations in the Gulf of Alaska;
* a new domestic law, the Espionage Act which created our Captains of the Port;
* A greatly expanded coastal communications system to support our U-boat patrols; and
* The at-sea boardings of vessels carrying ammunition and explosives to ensure their safe arrival in port and offloading of their cargo.

Of course, most significantly, the modern Coast Guard was created when the Revenue Cutter Service was joined with the Lifesaving Service in 1915. Who we are today � an effective, efficient, and professional multimission, maritime, military service � is a direct result of the seemingly chaotic transformation of 1915 �

� History in the making.

But the modern Coast Guard didn�t just happen. It was sound, visionary leadership, a willingness to change what needed to be changed, and just as importantly, the willingness to safeguard those guiding principles most critical to organizational success.

In 1915, the Coast Guard�s first Commandant, Commodore Ellsworth Bertolf, knew what was important, what had to remain rock solid no matter the changes we experienced: our core ideals, our value to the Nation, the "who we are". And he knew that the rest could change: our name, our Department, our size, our mission mix. As a visionary for our Service, he kept our core ideologies tightly fixed, but he displayed a powerful drive for progress that enabled him to change and adapt without compromising the Service�s core values or operational principles.

We must apply the lessons of history today. We must be willing to change that which impedes progress but safeguard that which makes us relevant and operationally successful.

In fact, from the earliest days of our Constitution and the Revenue Marine � to Bertholf�s day and the establishment of the Coast Guard � to the challenges we face today � change and opportunity has always been a part of our history. Today the United States is confronted with tremendous challenges � the world's greatest superpower and greatest democracy, attacked by a network of terrorists who seek the destruction of our freedom, our economy, and our culture. No one will ever forget the searing image of airliners crashing into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and a Pennsylvania field. And from the horror of those moments come changes for our Nation and our Coast Guard.

Since 9/11, we've adapted operationally and culturally to those threats to our security and safety. Security and safety are inseparable. They are integral. They are both about preventing harm to Americans. While homeland security has refocused our operations, we remain committed to our traditional missions of search and rescue, fisheries enforcement, waterways management, and environmental protection.

All our missions, however, benefit from our aggressive efforts to find the best way to deliver service to America � to secure our liberty and our economic prosperity. Our willingness to change operationally, organizationally, and technologically are fundamental to our success. But just as important, is our clear view that these changes are anchored by our core values of honor, respect, and devotion to duty and our operational principles of on-scene initiative, flexibility, and managed risk.

Because we�ve adapted, because we�ve changed in response to the new environment in which we operate today, we are successful.

This has been an extraordinary year for the Coast Guard, one in which we continued our operational excellence across all missions. We accomplished these goals through our international coalitions, interagency cooperation, industrial partnerships, and because of our outstanding professionals in the field.

As Secretary Chertoff said at his swearing in, "America today is safer, stronger, and more secure." I absolutely agree. Let me list some of our accomplishments:

1. On July 1st of last year, we began enforcing the Maritime Transportation Security Act, one of the most important pieces of legislation in Coast Guard history and critical to increasing the security of our Nation�s ports. We�ve conducted over 6800 compliance boardings of foreign vessels since July 1st, and when required, we expelled, detained, or denied entry to those vessels that did not meet our strengthened security standards.

2. We�ve increased the number of our Maritime Safety and Security Teams to 13, adding them in Anchorage, Honolulu, New Orleans, San Diego, and Miami. In addition to their everyday mission of protecting our ports and waterways, we�ve used these teams for the G8 Summit, both National Political Conventions, the Presidential Inauguration, the Super Bowl, and President Reagan�s Funeral.

3. We�ve enhanced the fusion of intelligence and operations by standing up 30 Field Intelligence Support Teams. We've leveraged technical intelligence and vessel tracking through our Atlantic and Pacific Area Maritime Intelligence Fusion Centers. And our partnership between the Intelligence Coordination Center and the Navy's Office of Naval Intelligence is improving our global maritime intelligence integration.

4. We supported � and continue to support � America�s Global War on Terror. We are proud of the unique capabilities we provide the theater commanders, while mindful of the sacrifices of those that gave their lives so that others may know the joy of liberty. Among them, we especially remember Petty Officer Nate Bruckenthal who died so far from home protecting Iraqi freedom. While we mourn his loss, we honor Nate�s sense of service and duty which is reflected in his fellow Coast Guard men and women.

5. We didn�t just have a record-setting year in counter-drug operations; we had a record-shattering year, seizing over 240,000 pounds of cocaine, exceeding the previous record by over 72 percent and 100,000 pounds. And this year, we�re ahead of last year�s pace. Keeping these drugs off our streets helped save innumerable lives from the tragedies of illegal drug use.

6. Our efforts to protect the nation's valuable fish stocks continued to be both robust and effective. In 2004, Coast Guard units conducted over 4,500 domestic fisheries boardings, an increase of more than 1,000 boardings from the previous year. These efforts resulted in a compliance rate of over 96 percent, and the seizure of more than 130,000 pounds of illegally caught marine species. In cooperation with our international partners, we significantly reduced the instances of foreign fishing vessel incursions into the rich fishing grounds off Alaska, and have made illegal high seas driftnet fishing a far less lucrative endeavor.

Yes, it has been another high-paced operational year for the Coast Guard. And while ensuring this day-to-day operational excellence, we are concurrently improving the way we deliver services to America, in very substantial ways. We are adjusting our mission strategies, our force structure, our organization, and revamping our capabilities to get the job done.

In essence, we are shaping our future, just as Commodore Bertholf did 90 years ago. We should be able to look back with pride and say, "We envisioned it; we created it; we made it happen � and our country and our children�s future are better for our efforts." We recognize there is a natural set and drift caused by external forces � and as professional mariners, we know we have to adjust our course and speed to account for them.

Our "game plan" is embedded in my Commandant�s Direction of People, Readiness, and Stewardship. Our fantastic people are key to effective service delivery. We are ensuring they have the right competencies to work effectively in our complex operating environment. I have directed a top-to-bottom review of professional competencies, especially those of our boarding teams, to ensure we have the right doctrine, training, and tools necessary for the 21st century. Concurrently, we are taking a round turn on our leadership development program. Our new and improved personal and unit leadership development programs are in place, and I expect all hands to take advantage of them. Sound leadership is the key to our success, today and tomorrow. Some of our best individual leaders are here with us today:

� our first-ever civilian inspirational leadership award, the Putnam Award was presented to Ms. Norma Bullock from Headquarters civilian personnel;

* Lieutenant Commander Adrian West of Group Mayport [Florida] is our Witherspoon Award recipient; and
* Chief Damage Controlman Travis Lovvorn of Group Humboldt Bay [California] is our McShan Awardee.

Congratulations to the three of you -- would you please stand and receive our applause?

As significant as inspirational leadership is to the performance of our people, so is our ability to provide them with the right tools and services to enhance their personal success. We have committed to the largest tuition assistance program in Coast Guard history, believing firmly that a well-educated workforce is essential to deal with this era�s growing complexities. We have instituted a new fitness program and new wellness standards to ensure personnel readiness is at an all-time high. We are joined today by two officers who represent the epitome of fitness, our Elite Athletes of the Year:

* Lieutenant Kerry Karwan, from MSO [Marine Safety Office] Houston-Galveston, who is an elite volleyball player; and
* Chief Warrant Officer Christopher Whitlock, an outstanding triathlete, stationed at the Personnel Command [located in Arlington, Va.].

Would you two please stand?

Other important components of our workforce are our Reservists and our Coast Guard Auxiliary. They have played a critical role in our operational readiness. The threats and our response requirements have changed since September 11th, so our personnel surge capabilities must adjust as well. The Reserve Strategic Employment Study, due to me shortly, will outline what we require from the Coast Guard Reserve during an emergency or surge operation. I expect the Study to provide me with a better understanding of the total reserve forces needed to support our missions, including individual qualifications required and recommendations on how we employ our reserve forces. Coast Guard Auxiliary leadership has a new strategic plan that meshes well with our current security and safety environment. We are leveraging their extensive talents to enhance all our missions.

In regards to our active-duty workforce, we must be doing things right. We have some of the highest retention rates ever in the history of our Service. And recent results from our organizational assessment survey show impressive results � we saw significant improvement between 2002 and 2004 in the areas of leadership and quality, training and career development, innovation, customer orientation, and use of resources. We set a new benchmark standard amongst 23 other government agencies in the area of communications, leadership, and quality. This is indicative of the significant strides we have made over the past two years in our leadership development programs and the opportunities for individual professional growth across the entire workforce. I am very pleased with our progress but we can continue to do even better � there is no more important focus than the commitment to our workforce.

In terms of our second strategic area of emphasis � Readiness � we will continue to seek ways to improve our operational excellence.

In 2004, we instituted the Maritime Transportation Security Act. In 2005, we build on its success by continuing to close remaining security gaps. We are actively involved with the development of a refocused national maritime homeland security strategy and policy, mandated by Homeland Security Presidential Directive number 13. And we will pursue legislative and regulatory changes to expand the population of vessels covered by our security regime, remove barriers to information sharing, and strengthen credentialing standards.

We will use technology to its fullest. The United States is bounded, but not protected, by its ocean borders. This fact requires viewing the oceans as they are: not borders or mere barriers to cross but rather, expansive pathways for potential threats that are ripe for exploitation and disruption. Security depends more than ever on our ability to achieve an effective understanding of the global maritime domain.

We've initiated a major acquisition project for the Nationwide Automatic Identification System to deploy sensors to track vessels in all our ports, waterways, and coastal areas. This vessel-tracking capability will greatly enhance our Maritime Domain Awareness, providing critical real-time vessel position and information. Having increased awareness of the vessels in and near our waters will allow us to better focus our resources on specific vessels of interest, resulting in improved mission effectiveness and operational readiness.

The Coast Guard's Command 2010 initiative will transform command and control as we increase maritime domain awareness. Specifically, Command 2010 will provide additional sensors for tracking cooperative and non-cooperative vessels, will fuse vessel tracks with historical data, law enforcement information, and intelligence through the Common Operational Picture, and will increase interoperability between all echelons of command.

The Coast Guard is at the beginning of a 5-year plan to arm all of its aircraft. This Airborne Use of Force capability is being established across the fleet to provide support to our entire range of missions, including air intercept, counter-narcotics, delivery and force protection of boarding teams, and counter-terrorism.

By interagency partnerships in Charleston and Miami, and the Joint Harbor Operations Centers in Norfolk and San Diego, the power of co-location and unity of effort has been proven. The Nation is best served when Federal, state, and local responders join forces and coordinate intelligence and operations. We will expand the number of integrated joint operations centers and aggressively pursue closer partnerships with private industry and all levels of government.

Our Deepwater recapitalization is key to readiness and our ability to meet our multimission requirements. I thank the Administration for its strong support and recognition that the original Deepwater plan must change to reflect the post-9/11 environment. I am encouraged by the statements of support I have received from Congress and look forward to working with Congress to deliver the President�s budget.

Our Deepwater partnership with Integrated Coast Guard Systems, a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, remains strong. It is worth noting that Deepwater is an important contributor to the Nation's industrial base and economic engine; more than 300 subcontractors and suppliers in more than 40 states are contributing to the program, with even more companies involved in the supply and production of parts and subsystems.

This year's approval of a revised Deepwater Mission Needs Statement and Implementation Plan, reflecting our post-9/11 needs, is the program�s most significant development since we awarded the Deepwater contract. The new plan moves the delivery dates of the Fast Response Cutter and Offshore Patrol Cutter up by 10 and 5 years, to 2007 and 2010, respectively.

The National Security Cutter is the flagship of Deepwater�s System of Systems. Last month, together with Secretary and Mrs. Chertoff, I participated in the keel-laying ceremony for our first National Security Cutter, a significant milestone in Deepwater's transformation of the Coast Guard for our 21st-century missions.

We are moving out smartly to realign our field organizations, establishing Sector commands. After 9/11, it became obvious that we needed to realign our operational face to the public � having two Coast Guards in the same city just didn�t make sense.

The Operations and Marine Safety communities are being integrated in the field first, where it matters most -- at the point of service delivery. Necessarily, if we�re changing our face at the point of delivery to the public, we also have to look at the chain-of-command, to realign the Operations and Marine Safety staffs at districts, Areas, and Headquarters to the response and prevention construct we are implementing at the Sector level. We will see those realignments within the next 12 months.

The Coast Guard also fully supports Secretary Chertoff�s Second-Stage Review, where the department is considering the necessary operational and management changes to make America more secure and our department more integrated and efficient.

As we work towards the future, we have a duty to wisely steward the assets and resources placed in our care. Just as good leaders are important to our success, our people must have the right tools to do the jobs we ask of them. As we work with Integrated Coast Guard Systems to bring Deepwater on line, they are also working with us to update our failing legacy assets. Senior leadership in the Coast Guard, Department, Administration, and Congress all recognize the deplorable state of our cutters and aircraft. We have the 39th oldest fleet of the 41 major navies and coast guards of the world � only Mexico and the Philippines are older. Our dedicated men and women deserve better and they will get it.

We have and are continuing to address the issues surrounding our legacy assets:

* This year, the Coast Guard Yard will start on the Mission Effectiveness Project, to upgrade our Medium Endurance Cutters for their remaining service life. This project will replace aging, obsolete, and in many cases, failing systems, ensuring the operational readiness of these "work horses" until Deepwater�s Large and Medium Security Cutters come on line.
* We are converting our 110-foot patrol boats into more capable 123-foot cutters, equipped with a modernized bridge, completely upgraded command and control systems, and stern boat-launch capability. Sometimes, change is uneven but it offers us the opportunity to learn from the school of hard knocks. The first 123, MATAGORDA, had problems when it came out of the yard, but those have been corrected and I�m happy to report that MATAGORDA recently returned from a very successful patrol. We�ve taken the lessons learned from MATAGORDA�s conversion and applied them to follow-on efforts.
* Re-engining the HH-65 helicopter fleet continues to be my highest aviation concern. We are moving out at best speed at the Aviation Repair and Supply Center to restore operational safety and reliability to these critical assets. We are looking at ways to speed things up, including accelerating engine delivery, standing up a second re-engining facility, and purchasing additional aircraft. I am confident we will complete operational re-engining in 2007.

Clearly, we are moving out across a broad front with a wide variety of initiatives � and necessarily so. There are a number of factors driving us to change, but none more important than our need to secure America�s maritime border. We are on a mission to effect change, not for change�s sake, but because the times require it.

As I close, let me cite another quote, this one from a New York newspaper: "The consensus of those we interviewed on the streets of Manhattan is that we�ll welcome the new century with open arms. But don�t expect us not to be a little frightened. Business is changing. Work is changing. Science is advancing. The world political climate is unlike anything we�ve ever witnessed. Even the weather seems different. Many see the party coming to an end. Others see a dawn of even greater opportunity."

Can you relate? Well, that passage was actually written when then-Second Lieutenant Bertholf was the Executive Officer on Revenue Cutter BEAR -- December, 1899!

But the point is the same. Whether it�s a hundred years ago or a hundred years from now, change is constant and always brings some degree of discomfort. But it�s also necessary for opportunity -- an opportunity for us to lead an ever-evolving, ever-improving Coast Guard.

"History never looks like history when you are living through it" � Coast Guard men and women, let me assure you that we are making history in today�s Coast Guard. These are dynamic and exciting times, and we must meet them with a sense of purpose and urgency. With your help, your ideas, and your energy, we will make the Coast Guard even more effective, and better integrated with our partners in government and in the private sector.

I thank you in advance for your efforts and look forward to another great year in the service of America.

Thank you and Semper Paratus!"

###

The U.S. Coast Guard is a military, maritime, multi-mission service within the
Department of Homeland Security dedicated to protecting the safety and security of America.

U.S. Coast Guard Changes to Confront 21st-Century Security Threats
Posted by Admin on Friday, April 22, 2005 - 07:14 PM CST
Government


By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Coast Guard has evolved to confront 21st-century security threats to the nation while continuing to perform more traditional duties, the organization�s commandant said here April 21.

The Coast Guard has "adapted operationally and culturally to those threats to our security and safety" since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, Adm. Thomas H. Collins said at Bolling Air Force Base, here, during his "State of the Coast Guard" speech.

When the Department of Homeland Security stood up, the Coast Guard transferred into it. Collins said that homeland security priorities have "refocused our operations."

Yet, the Coast Guard remains "committed to our traditional missions," such as search and rescue, fisheries enforcement, waterways management, and environmental protection, Collins said.

It�s been "an extraordinary year" filled with Coast Guard accomplishments, Collins said, noting 6,800 security checks of foreign vessels were conducted since July 1 as part of enforcement of the Maritime Transportation Security Act.

Security at the nation�s ports and waterways has been ratcheted up, the admiral reported, with new Maritime Safety and Security Teams posted to ports at Honolulu, New Orleans San Diego, Miami and Anchorage, Alaska. The teams were also engaged in security missions for the 2004 G-8 economic summit meeting held at Sea Island, Ga., both national political conventions, the Presidential Inauguration, the Super Bowl, and President Reagan�s funeral.

The Coast Guard continues to support America�s war on global terrorism, Collins reported, noting his service has established new intelligence and vessel-tracking centers and maintains partnerships with the National Intelligence Coordination Center and the Office of Naval Intelligence.

Collins cited his service�s support to overseas U.S. military commanders, pointing to the death of Coast Guard Petty Officer 3rd Class Nathan B. Bruckenthal, who was killed April 24, 2004, while protecting an oil terminal off the Iraqi coast in the northern Persian Gulf.

Bruckenthal was the first Coast Guard member killed in military action since the end of the Vietnam War. The Coast Guard mourns the loss of Bruckenthal, Collins said, noting the departed petty officer�s sense of duty "is reflected in his fellow Coast Guard men and women."

The Coast Guard also continues to be actively engaged in the war against drugs, Collins noted. Coast Guard counter-drug operations in the past year produced "shattering results," he said, with the record seizure of more than 240,000 pounds of cocaine, exceeding the previous record by 100,000 pounds.

And, current Coast Guard anti-drug operations are outpacing last year�s, Collins reported. Such interdiction missions keep drugs off the street and "save innumerable lives from the tragedies of illegal drug use."

The Coast Guard has also increased its efforts to prevent illegal fishing, Collins reported, noting that 4,500 searches of domestic fishery vessels were conducted in 2004, an increase of 1,000 over the year before. He said more than 130,000 pounds of illegally caught fish and other marine species were seized during these operations.

Coast Guard sea-going patrols have also "significantly reduced the instances of foreign fishing vessel incursions into the rich fishing grounds off Alaska," Collins said.

And, he observed, "it�s been another high-paced operational year" for the Coast Guard, as his service continues to evolve and adjust its mission strategies, force structure, and capabilities "to get the job done."

SEA TRANSPORT: Japan Helps Guard Straits of Malacca

April 3, 2005: Japan, increasingly concerned over piracy, and potential terrorism, in the Straits of Malacca, is offering to send coast guard ships to help patrol this vital waterway between Malaysia and Indonesia. Japan�s economy would be badly hurt if the straights were closed, as this would force tankers and other merchant vessels to take longer routes to and from Japan. With the current shipping shortage, this would drive shipping rates way up. Japan has already been training Indonesian naval and coast guard personnel at Japanese bases.

March 1, 2005: All of a sudden, pirates are a hot topic in counter-terrorism circles. But why? Pirate attacks were down last year. And they are expected to decline even further this year because last Decembers tidal wave literally washed away many known, or suspected, pirates, and their speedboats, in Indonesia. Well, it seems that some Southeast Asian terrorist cells have been overheard discussing hijacking a large tanker or container ship and doing something nasty with it. The scary part of that is that there are plenty of pirate groups that could get a bunch of terrorists aboard a large ship. These pirates usually just loot the ship, and crew, of any valuables, and then speed off with their goodies. There isn�t usually much violence, although last year about 400 merchant sailors were killed, injured, kidnapped or missing as a result of pirate attacks.

Just like the 911 airplane hijackers, it is possible, with enough money and some well educated (in how to navigate one of these large ships), to grab a vessel near a major port, or the Straits of Malacca or the Singapore Straits. One of these thousand foot ships could be run into port facilities, or sunk at a choke point and block sea traffic. Such an attack would have a greater global economic impact than the September 11, 2001 attacks. That�s because ships would have to travel several days longer to get to their destination (usually the Persian Gulf, or Japan/South Korea/China/Taiwan). Not only would shipping costs go up, but there would be a lot of shortages, because there is a shipping shortage at the moment. That has been caused mostly by China, which is in the midst of an economic boom that is attracting oil, and raw materials, imports from all over the world.

Nations around the Malacca and Singapore Straits have already united, with the United States (and other major naval powers), to form more maritime patrols. If terrorist pirates did seize a large ship, there would probably be a chain-of-events worthy of a fairly exciting movie. Most of the really big ships have security devices on board that at least alert the owners back home when the ship, or crew, is in trouble. There would be time for local warships and commandoes/swat teams, to be brought to bear. But stopping or sinking one of these ships is difficult. U.S. Navy SEALs and Marines have practiced getting on to a ship held by terrorists, and fighting to regain control. It isn�t easy. And the terrorists could bring aboard explosives to rig the ship for rapid sinking at the right moment.

Pirates, in general, are not interested in becoming Islamic martyrs, but if Islamic terrorists recruited some experienced pirates to their cause, you could have a hijacking. Apparently that possibility has become more immediate of late.

February 17, 2005: Since September 11, 2001, thousands of merchant ships have been boarded by U.S. Navy sailors. It�s all about looking for terrorists, but many of the suspicious ships targeted for boarding are just ordinary smugglers, or completely innocent. These guys often don�t like the law in general, but are not about to pick a fight with an American warship. So they show their displeasure in other ways. Many have taken to stringing barbed wire along the deck railings. American boarding parties have taken to carrying wire cutters with them because of this. Other suspicious skippers have strung cables from the deck to masts and cranes. This makes it difficult for a boarding party to come in by rappelling down from a helicopter. Now that�s spite.

Other merchant seamen have invented some more practical problems for boarding parties. A common one is welding shut hatch covers and doors to areas they don�t want the law looking at. This forces a well prepared boarding party to have welders on call to get into these areas. A messier way to create a lack of access was found in ships where barrels of grease, oil or other slippery liquids were placed around the ship, near passages leading to forbidden areas. As the boarding party came aboard, the barrels and buckets were knocked over, leaving the boarding party to deal with the slippery situation as best they could.

The U.S. Navy has responded by working with the various coast guards and port officials in the areas they are patrolling, to exchange information on the suspicious, and uncooperative, characters they run into. Smugglers tend to move among a small number of ports, or coastal villages, where they pick up and drop off material. So the American ship captains let it be known that bad behavior will be repaid. American naval officers are not obliged to report, to the local authorities, everything their boarding parties find. But give the boarding party a hard time, and you can expect trouble from the local law in the next port you enter.

February 9, 2005: Incidents of piracy, which has been a growing problem over the past decade, fell sharply (by about a third) in 2004. There were 445 attacks on merchant ships in 2003, but only 325 last year. The dramatic drop came from more energetic policing in the Philippines, Vietnam, Bangladesh, India, the Caribbean, the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. Meanwhile, attacks were up in the Malacca Straits, Nigeria, Balikpapan, Malaysia, the Singapore Straits, South China Sea and Haiti. The Malacca Straits, between Indonesia and Malaysia, are the busiest seaway on the planet, and provides more potential pirate targets than anywhere else. Nigeria is beset by several oil stealing (and smuggling) gangs that are at home on the water, and have lots of guns. Balikpapan is the largest oil exporting port in Indonesia, and has attracted a lot of bad guys with fast boats and big guns. Malaysia has been cursed with piracy for centuries, and for many coastal families, it�s a tradition. The Singapore Straits, between Singapore and Malaysia is a favorite target of Malaysian pirates, partly because of all the traffic coming out the nearby Malacca Straits. The South China Sea also has a long pirate tradition, and corrupt Chinese naval police have added to the problems lately. Haiti has a lot of coastal traffic, and several seagoing gangs that have learned how to steal at sea.

Nearly all acts of piracy are basically seagoing muggings. Late at night, speedboats full of heavily armed (with pistols and assault rifles) men come alongside a large merchant ship, use grappling hooks to scramble aboard, and then overwhelm and rob the small crews (rarely more than 40 sailors). The pirates then basically steal anything portable. These ships don�t carry much cash, funds are transferred electronically as needed. But there are plenty of portable electronic items aboard, and knowledgeable pirates know what to look for and take. Less skilled pirates just take what they can find and get away. In rare cases, the ship is stolen, and the crew killed. There are many unreported (or less reported) pirate attacks on fishing boats, small coastal freighters and pleasure craft (especially yachts). These are more likely to result in murder and stolen ships. It�s easier to unload a small fishing boat, than a thousand foot long container ship.

The acts of piracy on the large merchant ships are carefully reported because these vessels are covered by expensive insurance policies. That's a primary reason for the decrease in pirate attacks, for the insurance companies will raise rates for ships operating in piracy prone areas, making local ports less competitive, and likely to lose business. In response, vulnerable ships are being equipped with more security equipment (cameras, sensors and the like.) If the crew can spot the pirates coming, they can use water hoses to hold them off until the local coast guard or harbor police can show up. If the pirates lose the element of surprise, they usually speed off. The pirates see this a low risk business, and avoid the police and coast guard. However, it is believed that most pirate attacks are carried out by a few groups. Also, nearly all pirates are operating close to home, and it is believed that the December, 2004, tidal waves in the Indian Ocean wiped out several pirate gangs in the region.

October 27, 2004: The U.S. Coast Guard is very concerned about port security in the United States. Some vulnerabilities are widely known. For example, in Puerto Rico, the main port of the island, San Juan, could easily be blocked if someone set off a large bomb in a ship while the vessel was in the main shipping channel. This would close the port, which is the main entry point for food that millions of island residents depend on. Two other well known vulnerabilities are the Houston ship channel and one of the tight turns in the Mississippi river below New Orleans. Block these two choke points with a large, sunk, ship and you stop nearly half our exports and oil imports.

Australian ships and ports are at risk of terror attack, according to a new study.

Released by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), the study highlights last year's bombing of a Philippine ferry as an example of the danger posed by regional terrorist groups.

The attack on Superferry 14 in February 2004 killed 63 people with another 53 missing presumed dead.

Terror group Abu Sayyaf, a regional affiliate of al-Qaeda, claimed responsibility and six militants were arrested and charged.

The bomb had been carried on board as passenger luggage hidden in a TV set.

ASPI said al-Qaeda, Abu Sayyaf and Jemaah Islamiah (JI) posed the main terrorist threat to Australian shipping and ports.

"As recently as March this year Philippine military sources were quoted in the media as saying that Abu Sayyaf was training with JI to prepare for possible seaborne and underwater attacks outside the Philippines," it said.

In the study, authors Dr Anthony Bergin and Dr Sam Bateman, cited a range of potential terror risks, including attacks on Australian passenger or cargo ships, commuter ferries, ports or offshore oil and gas facilities or on a visiting US warship.

Or terrorists could use ships to infiltrate Australia or to launch an attack, possibly even using a weapon of mass destruction.

"Terrorists might see some cruise vessels and ferries as having iconic value," they said.

"An attack on one of them could cause many casualties and have maximum impact."

They said keeping Australian maritime approaches secure from terror attacks posed a major challenge, and the government had taken significant steps forward.

These included forming the new Joint Offshore Protection Command and Maritime Information System.

But gaps remain, including coordination of security arrangements between state and federal agencies, inadequate security checks on visiting foreign seafarers and inadequate arrangements for coordinating security for dangerous cargoes such as the fertiliser ammonium nitrate which can be used as an explosive.

"Australia has two main challenge dealing with the maritime terrorist threat," Dr Bateman told reporters.

"The first is the institutional one of ensuring appropriate coordination between diverse Australian government and state government authorities. Then there is the operational one of meeting the demands of geography and distance."

ASPI director Peter Abigail said there had been a tendency of terrorists to attack transport infrastructure, so far focusing on road, rail and air.

That had given rise to a view that the maritime sector would be their next logical choice. But there had actually been few such attacks, among them the Superferry 14, USS Cole and MV Limburg.

ASPI said the difficulty of actually mounting such attacks should not be under-estimated with the job in national defence agencies usually entrusted to elite forces.

As well, maritime attack doesn't offer the same prospects for mass casualties as did the September 11 attacks in the US or the Madrid training bombings.

"However, a terrorist attack on Australia's maritime interests remains a credible scenario," Mr Abigail said.

Opposition defence spokesman Robert McClelland said the ASPI report showed the government's record on border protection was more about political rhetoric than real outcomes.

Mr McClelland said the problems included the lack of port police, inadequate funding for port security, failure to inspect more empty containers, inadequate checks on foreign sailors and the absence of a national approach to managing dangerous cargoes.

"The government must listen to this independent expert advice and act swiftly to remedy the litany of threats to our maritime security," he said in a statement.

There is no doubt that the New York and New Jersey region today is better prepared to deal with another massive attack than it was on September 11, 2001. But how muchbetter is the region prepared? And what would happen if more than one attack took place simultaneously? This study found that while considerable progress has been and iscontinuing to be made, the port and the region are still very vulnerable.1 Much more isrequired both to prevent future attacks and to cope with the consequences and aftermath, should an attack occur.

There is a continued absence of national and regional �architectures� linking federal,state, local and city agencies and offices charged with security responsibilities, and anabsence of integrated processes among these organizations. Many other barriers andchallenges remain. Specific omissions include the lack of well-coordinated, integratedplans for prevention and response to attacks; no electronic or cyber �backbone� linkingthese many organizations with secure, reliable and redundant communications; and anabsence of effective means of responding to multiple events. Even with such deficiencies, New York and New Jersey appear to be better prepared for futurecatastrophes than many other port complexes in the United States. Appearance, however, may not always coincide with reality.

This report shows what has been accomplished to date, and what must be done, to make this complex port facility and region more secure. The report uses the concept of �network-centric operations2,� about which much more will be said, as one pillar of aprescriptive construct. The report contains eight papers that provide analysis of the threat, the current organization and preparedness to respond and prevent attack, network-centric operations, information architecture, overcoming the cultural and bureaucratic barriers, and metrics for assessing progress. The report also calls for a�testbed� to evaluate and assess how, under the network-centric operations framework, the many agencies and resources across government and the private sector could bebetter integrated and used to enhance the security of the region with greater effectiveness and efficiency.

Finally, the report reflects two major workshops, many working group meetings and theinputs of over 60 specialists and informed observers.

Full Report

Zoning the ocean
By Doreen Leggett/ dleggett@cnc.com
Friday, April 15, 2005

BREWSTER - When residents of the Florida Keys were told about the government's intention to put a Marine Protected Area in their waters, they blocked the main road and threatened to secede from the Union.

"My boss was hung in effigy," said Ben Cowie-Haskell, who worked at the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary at the time.

Cowie-Haskell said that after a contentious start, and a whole lot of public involvement, a plan was put in place, but the initial outrage could have been moderated with more education.

As Marine Protected Areas are increasingly discussed for areas off the Cape, Cowie-Haskell said it's important to remember that there are many different types and they have been around for a long time. There is one already off the peninsula's coast, the Stellwagen Bank Marine Sanctuary.

People "immediately assume the worse case scenario, of a no-access area or a no- fishing zone," Cowie-Haskell told the crowd gathered Tuesday at the Cape Cod Museum of Natural History for the "Ocean Treasure" program it sponsors with the Sanctuary.

But only 1 percent of the Marine Protected Areas in the country fall into that category, said Cowie-Haskell, operations coordinator, at Stellwagen Bank.

Although they may have been around for more than 60 years (one of the first was the Fort Jefferson National Monument, off Florida, in 1936) they have garnered a lot more interest in the last several years.

For one, they caught the interest of then-President Bill Clinton, who signed the first executive order supporting MPAs in May 2000. It is an order that the current president also supports.

Since the order defines a Marine Protected Area as "any area that has been reserved to provide lasting protection for all or part of the natural and cultural resources therein," there is a lot of room for interpretation, said Cowie-Haskell.

The value of MPAs has also been discussed in both national ocean reports that were published last year, and were suggested by both state Sen. Robert O'Leary, Democrat of Barnstable, and the Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies as a way to protect Nantucket Sound.

The nation's retailers are applauding the rejection of a federal tax to cover security improvement costs.

April 2004--The National Retail Federation (NRF) is applauding the Senate Commerce Committee's recent rejection of a proposed federal tax to cover the cost of security improvements at the nation's ports. According the NRF, the costs are already covered through shippers' fees, and instituting any more fees would impose an unnecessary tax on the American consumer.

In a 13-10 vote, the Committee approved the removal of the "security service fee" from S. 2279, the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2004. The amount of the fee was not specified in the bill and would have been levied at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security. The bill sets several standards for international cargo and port security measures

Full Story

Blog Tags: Antiterrorism, Counterterrorism, Force Protection, Homeland Security, Maritime Security, Port Security

Wave Dispersion wins tech award: Sylvan Lake-based Wave Dispersion Technologies Inc. has won the "Technology Best Small Business 2004" award from the Michigan Small Business and Technology Development Centers. Wave Dispersion has developed a floating breakwater called WhisprWave that offers erosion control as well as defense and security applications as port security barriers and force protection. Current customers include the United States Navy, Army, Coast Guard, Army Corps of Engineers, as well as the federal Department of the Interior and the states of Washington and Louisiana. More at www.whisprwave.com or www.misbtdc.org.

Sylvan Lake, MI - April 8, 2005 - Wave Dispersion Technologies, Inc. (WDT), a private maritime technology company, is pleased to announce that it has won the 'Technology Best Small Business 2004' award from the Michigan Small Business Technology Development Center (MI-SBTDC). WDT's WhisprWave� floating articulated breakwater technology affords erosion control protection to shoreline beaches, coastal marinas, anchorages, and other areas subject to destructive or annoying erosionary wave/wake forces. Naval defense and security applications for WhisprWave� include port security barriers and force protection, physical deterrence and incursion prevention. Current customers and contracts feature the US Navy, US Army, US Coast Guard, US Army Corps of Engineers, the US Department of the Interior, and the States of Washington & Louisiana.

WDT received the award at a Regional Partners Meeting and Reception on April 7th, at the St. Regis Hotel. The Regional Partners Meeting is an event during which the MI-SBTDC acknowledges the bankers, service providers, and co-operating organizations that provide support to the organization as well as highlighting the recent successes of their clients.

Scott M. Conn
Intelligence Operations Specialist
U.S. Coast Guard Activities San Diego
cya@cox.net

Port security is an issue that has long been overlooked. It has never been a priority in national security policy until 9/11 at which time the seemingly unimaginable method of attack sensitized bureaucrats to the seriousness of terrorist threat possibilities. The establishment of the Depart-ment of Homeland Security and subsequent transfer of the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. BorderPatrol to the Department, fostered a new way of thinking in terms of securing our borders. It is now realized that border security has a maritime nexus and reaches far beyond our coastline. The traditional focus of drug and alien smuggling interdiction now gives way to the possibility that terrorists may use existing smuggling infrastructure to move personnel and resources to and fromthe United States. As serious as this is, the greater concern is that terrorist may smuggle aweapon of mass destruction (WMD) into the country by maritime vessel. Closer to home, thethreat directly against a port stakeholder is another primary concern. Naval assets, cruise ships, ferries, sport-fishing vessels, and other excursion-type tour boats are vulnerable to a variety of terrorist tactics.

Boston Globe
March 28, 2005

Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod - The United States is dramatically expanding its seacoast defenses by arming Coast Guard helicopters with machine guns, training security teams to rappel onto a hostile ship and take control of it through force, and deploying sensors, satellites, and surveillance cameras that feed new high-tech harbor command centers.

The buildup of maritime muscle, part of a comprehensive program detailed in the Department of Homeland Security's 2006 budget plan, stems from fears that, deterred by land and air defenses, terrorists may try to attack the nation by sea. Scenarios include smuggling in a nuclear bomb aboard a freighter or crashing an explosives-laden fast boat into a liquefied natural gas tanker, mimicking the 2000 USS Cole bombing.

To counter the threats, Homeland Security is transforming U.S. coastal defenses, from a search-and-rescue service that also policed for migrant and drug smugglers to a more militarized force aimed at stopping terrorists. Meanwhile, a U.S.-Canadian planning group is working on a cooperative maritime defense arrangement inspired by the North American Aerospace Defense Command.

"We already know that terrorists operate at sea," said James Carafano, a homeland security specialist at the Heritage Foundation and coauthor of a recent study on maritime counterterrorism. "They haven't done it here yet, but someday they will. We don't want to wait to get prepared until the day after a Cole bombing in New York Harbor."

Carafano said the economic consequences of an attack that shuts down commercial ports would be far worse than the loss of air transit after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. But identifying threats is not easy with more than 95,000 miles of coastline, 361 ports, 200 daily arrivals of foreign vessels, and 76 million recreational boaters to monitor, according to Coast Guard data.

Moreover, although the Coast Guard patrolled U.S. coasts for enemy submarines during World War II, its culture for the past half-century has been largely that of a rescuer of lost fishermen and an enforcer of safety rules. At the time of Sept. 11 attacks, U.S. coastal protections included only a small number of significantly armed patrols, mostly for use against drug smugglers.

But that is changing, and New England has been among the first regions to experience the transformation.

The Coast Guard recently tested its first armed Jayhawk helicopters from its Cape Cod air station. With M-240 machine guns, armor plating, and night-vision equipment, the upgraded helicopters are now designed to intimidate, disable, and destroy a hostile vessel.

Coast Guard Lieutenant Commander Jay Balda, who oversaw the Cape Cod armed helicopters project, said the new military power requires rigorous retraining of crew members to avoid harming boaters who innocently wander into a secure zone.

"We have to be sure the vessel is hostile before engaging," he said. "The best solution is to not use our armed helicopters except in situations where a Coast Guard surface vessel is there as well, so we can see better if it's a bunch of men with weapons or a couple guys who are ignoring us because they are intoxicated and being stupid."

The first armed Jayhawks were transferred from Cape Cod to North Carolina after four months of testing, but Captain Bill Peterson, the Coast Guard's head of aviation, said a permanent squad of armed helicopters will be in place soon, although he did not specify when for security reasons. The Homeland Security Department plans to add permanent squads at five more bases next year.

In North Carolina, the armed Jayhawks have been linked with a new Coast Guard security team trained to rappel onto the deck of a moving ship. The team also is trained in close-quarters combat and handling a weapon of mass destruction.

Similar waterside security teams are now based around the country, including one in Boston. Using their highly maneuverable boats with front- and rear-mounted machine guns, the team helped sweep for underwater bombs and kept boaters away from waters near the site of the presidential inauguration, the Super Bowl in Tampa, the Group of Eight summit in Georgia, and both political party conventions.

"We enforce security zones around high-value assets," said Lieutenant Michael O'Neill, operations officer for the Boston team. "Let's say it's a craft approaching an LNG tanker. We'll intercept it quickly and force them to quickly show their intent."

Maritime

Laboratories & Research Facilities

Homeland Security Centers of Excellence

The Department of Homeland Security is harnessing the nation�s scientific knowledge and technological expertise to protect America and our way of life from terrorism. The Department�s Science and Technology directorate, through its Office of University Programs, is furthering this mission by engaging the academic community to create learning and research environments in areas critical to Homeland Security.

Through the Homeland Security Centers of Excellence program, Homeland Security is investing in university-based partnerships to develop centers of multi-disciplinary research where important fields of inquiry can be analyzed and best practices developed, debated, and shared.

The Department�s Homeland Security Centers of Excellence (HS-Centers) bring together the nation�s best experts and focus its most talented researchers on a variety of threats that include agricultural, chemical, biological, nuclear and radiological, explosive and cyber terrorism as well as the behavioral aspects of terrorism.

Current Announcements

• Homeland Security Centers (HS Centers) Program - Broad Agency Announcement (BAA). Calling for proposals that will focus on research efforts for a university-based Center of Excellence in High Consequence Event Preparedness and Response. This BAA invites eligible institutions and groups of investigators to form consortia capable of creating and sustaining innovative research and education in emergency preparedness, with special emphasis on acts of terrorism. The Center will engage in mission-oriented research to significantly enhance the capabilities of first responders and others. The notice invites colleges and universities to submit letters of intent by February 18, 2005, and full proposals are due on April 22, 2005.

HS-Centers

• The Department selected the University of Southern California (partnering with the University of Wisconsin at Madison, New York University, North Carolina State University, Carnegie Mellon University, Cornell University, and others) to house the first HS-Center, known as the Homeland Security Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events (CREATE). The Department is providing the University of Southern California and its partners with $12 million over the course of the next three years for the study of risk analysis related to the economic consequences of terrorist threats and events. (Awarded November 2003.)

• Texas A&M University and its partners have been awarded $18 million over the course of the next three years for the Homeland Security National Center for Foreign Animal and Zoonotic Disease Defense. Texas A&M University has assembled a team of experts from across the country, which includes partnerships with the University of Texas Medical Branch, University of California at Davis, University of Southern California and University of Maryland. Texas A&M University�s HS-Center will work closely with partners in academia, industry and government to address potential threats to animal agriculture including foot and mouth disease, Rift Valley fever, Avian influenza and Brucellosis. Their research on foot and mouth disease will be carried out in close collaboration with Homeland Security�s Plum Island Animal Disease Center. (Awarded April 2004.)

• The University of Minnesota and its partners have been awarded $15 million over the course of the next three years for the Homeland Security Center for Food Protection and Defense, which will address agro-security issues related to post-harvest food protection. The University of Minnesota�s team includes partnerships with major food companies as well as other universities including Michigan State University, University of Wisconsin at Madison, North Dakota State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, Harvard University, University of Tennessee, Cornell University, Purdue University and North Carolina State University. (Awarded April 2004.)

Maritime

Posted on Sun, Mar. 20, 2005

Port security a major concern on Gulf Coast
President's budget would cut funds for protective measures
By ELANA SCHOR
THE SUN HERALD WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON - Since Sept. 11, 2001, ports have been given $565 million to beef up security, but where that money goes and what it goes for has been subject for debate.

Ports are still trying to achieve compliance with the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002's new standards for waterside surveillance, cargo screening, personnel improvements and regional planning.

Meanwhile, lawmakers, ports and the Department of Homeland Security are debating whether there is enough funding to cover every shoreline and how best to determine the danger to each individual port.

No foolproof formula exists for evaluating which would be the most likely target for terrorist activity.

"We share the concerns about the way this (new) program's been proposed," said Mark McAndrews, director of the Port of Pascagoula.

McAndrews said his port, which ranked 23rd in the nation for cargo volume in 2003, has received nearly $800,000 from DHS since the grant program began.

That has been enough, he added, to cover the cost of compliance with the MTSA. As for the new security standards DHS continues to issue, "we'll address those as they emerge. We have upgraded our security personnel, let me just put it that way."

A recent internal audit at DHS found less than 25 percent of the port security grants it gave between June 2002 and the end of 2003 were used for their intended purpose, if used at all.
In addition, President Bush's budget proposal for the fiscal year that starts in October kills the port security grant program outright, asking ports to compete with trains, planes and other transit powers for one $600 million pool of protection money.

"Funding is so inconsistent at the individual port levels," said Kurt Nagle, president of the American Association of Port Authorities. "It's not enabling them to make investments in infrastructure."

April 1, 2005, 11:10AM
By DALE LEZON

FAST FACTS
� Sixth largest port in the world
� Leads the nation in foreign tonnage
� Second in the nation in total tonnage
� Serves more than 150 privately owned facilities, such as petrochemical refineries and processing plants

Source: Port of Houston

The Port of Houston is a national petrochemical asset and more federal funding is needed to protect it from terrorist attacks, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn said Thursday after meeting with port officials.

"The consequence of a successful terrorist attack on the Port of Houston would be astronomical," Cornyn, R-Texas, said. "It would effect a body blow to the economy of the United States, put a lot of people out of work and threaten our national security."

Cornyn, chairman of the Emerging Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee, said he plans to co-sponsor legislation with fellow senator Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., which would require the Department of Homeland Security to allocate funds based on risk assessments of facilities like the port, which is home to one of the world's largest petrochemical complexes.

Risk-based funding

Threats, vulnerability and the consequence of possible attacks would be used to determine funding levels, he said.

"It would mean a lot more money coming here," he added,

The department has risk-based funding programs available now, said Valerie Smith, department spokeswoman. The department recognizes, however, that some areas, such as Houston and its port, are more likely terrorist targets, and supports further risk-based funding to protect them.

Port already given millions

Funding also is allocated based on state population, Smith said.

The federal government has given the port about $16.7 million for security.

U.S. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas; Harris County Judge Robert Eckels; Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Shelby; and Port of Houston Authority Chairman Jim Edmonds joined Cornyn at the news conference and support the planned legislation.

LOS ANGELES, April 1 (Xinhuanet) - US Homeland Security Department said Friday that beginning today, foreign visitors departing from the San Pedro and Long Beach ports in southern California are required provide their finger scans and other information.

Visitors must follow new checkout procedures before departing on their ship. They will be asked to provide their two index fingers cans and hold for a digital photo as part of a pilot program to test and evaluate an automated biometric exit process, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

The US-VISIT security procedures apply to all visitors -- with limited exemptions -- entering the United States. Most visitors experience the biometric procedures -- a digital, inkless finger scan and digital photograph -- upon entry to the US.

The exit procedure requires foreign visitors departing the US to check out of the country at exit stations located within the seaport. Similar to the entry process at airports or seaports, their travel documents will be read, their two index fingers will be scanned at the exit station, their digital picture will be taken, and they will receive a printed receipt that verifies that they have checked out. US Customs and Border Protection officers are expected provide foreign visitors with a card explaining the exit process when they arrive in the US at one of the airports or seaports participating in the pilot.

US-VISIT entry procedures are currently in place at 115 airports,15 seaports and in the secondary inspection areas of the 50 busiest land ports of entry across the US.

By the end of the year, US-VISIT entry procedures will be implemented in the secondary inspection areas of all remaining land ports of entry, according to DHS.

To date, more than 23 million foreign visitors have been processed through US-VISIT, and more than 500 criminals or immigration violators have been denied admission to the US because of the program, DHS officials said. Enditem