Last month, DHS introduced a security plan that will be managed by TSA whereby US port workers will carry a tamper-proof photo ID card with fingerprint biometrics. The Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) “is designed to ensure that individuals posing a security threat do not gain access to our nation’s ports,” said Kip Hawley, head of the Transportation Security Administration. With last month?s ruling, he added that it ?represents a significant milestone towards putting TWIC on the fast track.” However, the program is causing a wave of controversy among the thousands of workers manning state ports of entry. Each state has been putting its own program together for port security, and this mandate will require workers to have two forms of security identification, forcing workers or employers to purchase the state and federal documents, which could cost up to $239 per person.
The State of Florida became proactive in securing its ports, thanks to a law passed in 2000 that was designed to protect against drug smuggling. The law required agencies running public ports to put up fixed barriers?gates and fences?to control access to docks and other sensitive areas.
However, the TWIC initiative is not being viewed as productive to maritime commerce. “This is an unacceptable alternative for Florida shipping and cruise industries…and will have a negative effect on moving commerce in our state,” said Bill Janes, director of the state’s drug control office. TSA has held several town meetings around the country, introducing the program and fielding questions. Within 18 months, approximately 750,000 maritime workers nationwide will receive the TWIC card, which is valid for five years, to enter secure areas of ports and to board ships. Fingerprint and personal information?ie birth date, address, phone numbers, employer data, and photo?are some of the data that will be gathered in the collection by year’s end. In addition, before issuing a federal card, the government will conduct a background check on every worker, reviewing criminal history, terrorist watch lists, legal immigration status, and outstanding warrants. Further, Florida laws deny IDs to anyone convicted of serious crimes such as carjacking, dealing in stolen property or burglary, Janes said. He added that TSA should allow states to have more stringent requirements and recognize Florida’s ID as equivalent to the federal card.
Florida State official Jim Kneeland, who oversees the ID program for the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicle, said that his staff tried to work with TSA to develop the card to be used for port security but after long delays proceeded to develop the card without federal assistance. Florida will kick off its proprietary program this month by issuing a card valid for four years at a $100 fee. The overlap issue is a common one often seen between state and federal jurisdictions. The regulations do not match, forcing workers to carry two unique ID cards. One negative of the proposed federal TWIC rule is that it requires checking immigration records to ensure applicants are US citizens, creating even more red tape and more delays.
With the requirement of federal and state ID beyond the duplication of efforts, speakers leveled criticism at other parts of the proposed regulations. Requiring a fingerprint scanner on every vessel at US ports would cost the tug and barge industry alone about $40 million, said Skip Volkle, General Counsel for Tampa-based petroleum shipper Maritrans.
Other states are having issues of administration. Stephen Connor, security director of the South Carolina Ports Authority, said the rule requires port officials to retrieve IDs from workers no longer employed at their port. “How are we supposed to know…if someone’s moved or changed their employer?” he asked.
Florida?s program meets the needs of maritime security in the state, and they have spent several years putting this program into place. Federal security programs should not make the cost of security prohibitive to individuals or force duplication of efforts. It is counterproductive, unnecessary duplication, and a waste of limited financial resources to achieve the same goal.