1. Ports and Shipping Security
Mike Ircha, PhD, P.Eng.
Adjunct Research Professor, Carleton University
Professor Emeritus, University of New Brunswick
Senior Advisor, Association of Canadian Port Authorities

2. Introduction
Shipping underlies global economy:
• global economic growth: 3.5% in 2010
• world fleet: 1.3 billion DWT in 2010
- 60% increase from 2000 (container fleet: 264%)
Global container port throughput:
• 231,689 TEU in 2000
• 541,000 TEU in 2010 (234%)

3. Introduction
Container growth led to larger ships:
• post-Panamax ships (6,000+ TEU) now common
• Emma Maersk - largest ship, 14,800 TEU
• new build order for 18,000 TEU ships
Canadian ports essential for trade, handling:
• 280+ million tonnes, worth $162+ million
Canadian ports transship U.S. cargo creating a need
for complementary security programs

5. Maritime Security
Historically, piracy was a ship-to-ship attack for
cargo and passengers
UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
• piracy - a universal crime, punishable in every
state
In 2010: 53 ships hijacked and 1,181 seafarers
captured in 445 attacks

6. Maritime Security
Terrorism undermined definition of piracy:
• 1985 hijackers of Achilles Lauro sought political
and religious goals
• IMO - 1988 Suppression of Unlawful Acts against
the Safety of Maritime Navigation (SUA):
- violence on board
- damaging or destroying a ship or cargo
- damaging navigation equipment

7. ISPS Code
September 11, 2001- demonstrated a clear need for
marine security
December 2002 – IMO added:
• new offences to SUA, and
• International Ship and Port Facility Security
(ISPS) Code to the International Convention for
the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS)

8. ISPS Code
ISPS Code included:
• mandatory requirements for governments, ports,
ships and shipping companies
• guidelines for developing multi-layered risk
assessment security plans
National governments:
• set security threat levels
• provide instructions and information on threats
• approve/certify security plans

9. ISPS Code
Ships and ports required to:
• develop nationally certified security plans
• designate ship and port security officers
• provide onboard equipment:
- security alert alarms
- GPS and ship ID number for long Range
Identification and Tracking (LRIT)
• ensure security awareness, access control, training
• provide communications to coordinate ship/port
response

10. ISPS Code
Port and ship security plans were to be in place by
July 1, 2004
IMO global ISPS compliance survey:
• ships - 86%, ports - 69% (2004)
• all major Canadian ports compliant
• by 2005, ports 97% and ships 90%+ compliant:
No noticeable disruption in world trade.

11. U.S. Maritime Security Response
“America’s ports have become more secure since 9/11. The
primary emphasis in port security has gone from preventing
cargo theft, to protecting people and facilities from terrorism.
That's a major shift.” (Kurt Nagle, AAPA, 2006)
U.S. went beyond ISPS Code:
• Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA)
• Container Security Initiative (CSI)
• Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism
(C-TPAT)
• Security and Accountability for Every Port Act
(SAFE)

12. U.S. Maritime Security Response
MTSA (2002):
• implemented ISPS Code
• established Area Maritime Security Committees
• undertook security plan vulnerability assessments
to ensure:
- security patrols
- restricted areas and access controls
- appropriate identification procedures (TWIC)
- presence of surveillance equipment

13. U.S. Maritime Security Response
Container Security Initiative (CSI) (2002):
• extended screening out to foreign ports
• electronic manifests 24 hours prior to loading
• U.S. Customs in foreign ports
• radiation and gamma/x-ray screening (about 5%)
• electronic seals
• Halifax, Montreal and Vancouver - 1st to join CSI
• 58 world ports participate
CSI containers not re-inspected on U.S. arrival

14. U.S. Maritime Security Response
Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-
TPAT) (2001):
• voluntary program to secure U.S. supply chains
• by 2008, some 8,150 companies enrolled
• joint private/public development:
- security criteria
- sharing best practices and procedures
• U.S. Customs teams visit partner/vendors
• parallel Canadian program

15. U.S. Maritime Security Response
Security and Accountability for Every Port Act
(SAFE) (2006):
• TWIC, CSI, C-TPAT
• interagency operational centers
• Port Security Grant Program:
- training, communication, equipment, facilities
• 100% container screen in foreign ports by 2009
- EU concluded SAFE costly, disrupts trade, and
doesn’t improve security
- technical problems led to an extension to 2014

16. Canadian Maritime Security Response
ISPS Code:
• Transport Canada lead department
• CPAs initially concerned about lack of TC guidance
• Marine Transportation Security Regulations (June
2004), currently under review to:
- address gaps, ambiguities, omissions
- clarify interpretations
- harmonize with partners (particularly with U.S.)

17. Canadian Maritime Security Response
Maritime Security Contribution Program (2004):
• $115 million for ports ($1.7 billion in U.S.)
• security initiatives include:
- fencing, CCTV cameras, equipment
- access control, restricted areas, secure
communications
• gamma/x-ray/radiation portals for containers
• $432 million to federal departments and agents:
- Marine Security Operations Centers
- on-water security presence, communications

18. Canadian Maritime Security Response
Marine Transportation Security Clearance Program
(2003):
• background checks for port workers
• controversial consultations, resulted in:
- risk-based criteria for specific duties
- smaller restricted areas
- independent appeal review mechanism
- minimum information for fair assessment
• need for national/international TWIC:
- sailor's shore leave

20. Gamma/X-Ray Image

21. Conclusion
Canada’s maritime sector has enhanced security:
• programs complement U.S. initiatives
• Transport Canada responsible for ISPS and other
marine security programs
Additional port security enhancements are needed:
• but added security must be balanced with efficient
trade flows
• further federal funding needed to remain
competitive with US counterparts