borrador informe final primera …scm.oas.org/doc_public/english/hist_09/cip00437e02.doc · web...

ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATESInter-American Committee on Ports (CIP)

TENTH MEETING OF THE EXCECUTIVE BOARD OEA/SER. L/XX.1.10OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMITTEE ON PORTS CIDI/CECIP-X/doc. 28/09From March 23-27, 2009 March 16, 2009Buenos Aires, Argentina Original: Spanish

FINAL REPORT

III HEMISPHERIC CONFERENCE ON PORT SECURITY

(APRIL 7 – 10, 2008, PUNTA CANA, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC)


INDEX

Pág.

I. BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................................................3

II. VENUE AND DATE.................................................................................................................................3

III. AGENDA...................................................................................................................................................3

IV. OFFICERS OF THE CONFERENCE....................................................................................................4

V. PARTICIPANTS.......................................................................................................................................5

VI. DOCUMENTS...........................................................................................................................................5

VII. CONFERENCE SESSIONS.......................................................................................................................

Preliminary Session of Heads of Delegation ...............................................................................................5

Inaugural Session .......................................................................................................................................6

First Plenary Session ..................................................................................................................................8

Second Plenary Session ............................................................................................................................18 Third Plenary Session................................................................................................................................31 Clossing Session........................................................................................................................................41

VIII. ANEXES....................................................................................................................................................

A.List of de Participants............................................................................................................................43

B.List of Documents .................................................................................................................................57

2


I. BACKGROUND

The Inter-American Committee on Ports (CIP) is a Committee of the Inter-American Council for Integral Development (CIDI), established in compliance with Resolution AG/RES. 1573 (XXVIII-0/98) of the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (OAS), according to Articles 77 and 93 of the Charter of the Organization of American States, and Articles 5 and 15 of the CIDI Statute.

The purpose of the Committee is to serve as a permanent inter-American forum for the member states of the OAS in order to strengthen cooperation in the area of port development, with the active participation and collaboration of the private sector.

The V Meeting of the CIP (Salvador Bahía, Brazil, September 2007), agreed to hold the Third Hemispheric Conference on Port Security of the Inter-American Committee on Ports (CIP) in Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, in April of 2008. The Cuerpo Especializado de Securidad Portuaria (CESEP) of the Dominican Republic coordinated the event within the country.

The draft agenda for the Conference was prepared by the Office of the Chairman of the Executive Board, the host country, and the Secretariat. The meeting followed the Rules of Procedure of the CIP.

II. VENUE AND DATE

The Third Hemispheric Conference on Port Security of the Inter-American Committee on Ports of the OAS was held at Ocean Blue Beach and Golf Resort Hotel, in Punta Cana, Dominican Republic from April 7 to 10, 2008.

III. AGENDA

The Agenda that was adopted (document CHSP-III/doc. 2/07 rev. 1) included the following points:

1. Ratification of agreements adopted in the Preliminary Session of Heads of Delegation

2. State of international standards and regulations on port security at a global level

a) International standards on port security matters:

(i) Multidimensional Security of the OAS(ii) International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS) of the International

Maritime Organization (IMO) (iii) Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade of the World

Customs Organization (WCO)(iv) International Health Regulations and their Implementation in the Port and

Maritime Domain (WHO)(v) Impact of Port Security Measures on Maritime Labor

3


b) National and regional regulations on port security in the principal countries and regions of commercial interest:

(i) United States(ii) European Union

3. Current state of port security in OAS Member Countries:

a) Presentations from countries of North Americab) Presentations from countries of Central Americac) Presentations from countries of the Caribbeand) Presentations from countries of South America

4. Identification of frequent and common problems and solutions to these problems through best practices at a specific level of a port or terminal

a) Experiences in ports and terminals

(i) Presentations on best practices to overcome difficulties in legal, administrative, and institutional matters, in addition to those of technological cost, investments required, financial and human resources, and training

b) Projects of cooperation for port security:(i) from the United States

(ii) from international and regional organizations

c) Panel of experts on port cooperation among Member States

(i) TRAINMAR Association of South America (ATAS)(ii) Caribbean Shipping Association (CSA)(iii)Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)(iv)Inter-American Committee on Ports (CIP) of the OAS

(v) International Maritime Organization (IMO)

IV. OFFICERS OF THE CONFERENCE

Chair: Luis Taveras (Dominican Republic)

1st Vice-Chair: Ricardo Luján (Argentina)

2nd Vice-Chair: Rosalie Donaldson (Jamaica)

Secretary: Carlos M. Gallegos (OAS)

4


V. PARTICIPANTS

Delegations from the following member countries of the OAS participated in the Conference: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Grenada, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, St. Kitts and Nevis, Santa Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, United States, Uruguay, and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. A delegation from Spain also participated as Permanent Observer to the OAS, and observers from the following international organizations participated: TRAINMAR Association of South America, World Bank, Caribbean Shipping Association (CSA), Caribbean Community (CARICOM), Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), the Organization of American States (OAS), International Maritime Organization (IMO), World Health Organization (WHO), International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, and special guests. The list of participants is attached to this report as Annex “A” (document CHSP-III/doc.3/07 rev.1).

VI. DOCUMENTS

The list of Conference documents is attached to this report as Annex “B” (document CHSP-III/doc.1/07 rev. 1).

VII. CONFERENCE SESSIONS

The Conference consisted of the following sessions: Preliminary Session of Heads of Delegation, the Inaugural Session, three plenary sessions, and the Closing Session.

Preliminary Session of Heads of Delegation

This was held at 6:30pm on Monday, April 7, 2008. It was chaired by Mr. Ángel González Rul, Chairman of the Executive Board of the CIP (CECIP). Its purpose was to coordinate various operational aspects of the Conference. The following points were discussed, which led to the adoption of the respective agreements:

a. Conference Officers: See section IV above.

b. Conference Agenda: See document CHSP-III/doc.2/07 rev. 1 and in section III above.

c. Conference Schedule: See document CHSP-III/doc.4/07 rev. 2.

d. Documents: A CD was given out at the end of the Conference with all of the documents, in their original languages, to all participants.

5


Inaugural Session

The Inaugural Session was held at 7:30pm on Monday, April 7, 2008, with the participation of the following people: Ms. Sherry Tross, Chief of Staff of the Assistant Secretary General of the OAS, Mr. Ángel González Rul, delegate of Mexico and Chairman of CECIP, Mr. Luis Taveras, Chairman of the Consejo de Administración de la Autoridad Portuaria of the Dominican Republic (APORDOM); and Vice-Admiral Homero Lajara Solá, Director of CESEP. Other members of the head table were Major General José Aníbal Sanz Jiminian, Executive Director of APORDOM, Major General Luis Rivera Jiménez, Commander of the Joint Command of the Armed Forces of the Dominican Republic, Ambassador Alexandre Addor-Neto, Secretary for Multidimensional Security of the OAS, and Dr. Carlos M. Gallegos, Executive Secretary of the CIP, OAS.

Vice-Admiral Homero Lajara thanked CIP/OAS for the confidence it had deposited in the Dominican Republic upon selecting is as the venue for this very important hemispheric event. He noted the large number of attendees and the participation of a high percentage of the member states, which is a milestone in terms of attendance for this kind of event. He particularly pointed out the importance of having these exchanges of ideas and best practices, which for port security is an essential tool for enhancing security and reducing risks. For this reason, he called the Conference an historic and extremely important event. He thanked the private sector of the Dominican Republic for its support which had made the event possible, and he extended a warm welcome to all delegates, guests, and participants, wishing them a good visit in the country and success in the Conference.

Later, Mr. Ángel González Rul spoke on behalf of the Executive Board, the foreign delegations, and his country of Mexico to thank the authorities of the Dominican Republic, particularly CESEP and APORDOM, for organizing the Conference. He pointed out how much work goes into organizing such a meeting, and noted the warm reception extended to all of the visitors.

Mr. González Rul reminded the group that Christopher Columbus had come to the Dominican Republic in 1492, which led to the establishment of the first Spanish forts in that land. The country is also home to the first cultural and social institutions of the Americas, such as its first church and cathedral, the first monuments, and the first university, all of which makes Santo Domingo the quintessential city of the Americas.

He pointed out the warmth of the Dominican people and the atmosphere around Punta Cana, where it is hard to resist nature’s charms.

He gave special recognition to the delegation of the United States for its work within the Technical Advisory Committee (TAG) on Port Security, which gave rise to this series of Conferences.

The Chairman also pointed out that we seek to facilitate port operations so that the exchange of goods can take place, and passengers can safely move between ports in the hemisphere and other latitudes. Under current security regulations, we are obliged to think of intelligent measures to expedite operations as well as the protection and security of ports and ships. He urged the member countries to make our ports safe and dynamic points of exchange, in order to give a boost to business, trade, and tourism in a transparent, competitive, and efficient way.

6


The next speaker was Ms. Sherry Tross. She extended apologies from the Assistant Secretary General, Ambassador Albert Ramdin, who was unable to attend the event because of a last-minute, unexpected conflict..

Ms. Tross thanked the government of the Dominican Republic for hosting this very import Conference for the ports of the Americas. She pointed out the various activities that the OAS is carrying out in the field of port security and protection, particularly through the CIP and the Secretariat for Multidimensional Security. She noted the CIP’s successful holding of the previous conferences, and recalled the strategic framework for cooperation on port security adopted at the First Conference in Miami in 2004. She expressed a hope that the guidelines set forth in that framework to mitigate security problems will be implemented to their maximum potential in all the member states.

Ms. Tross also pointed out the active participation of the private sector in CIP’s TAG on Port Security, and expressed optimism that this joint work could make it possible to share best practices and thus enhance port security in the hemisphere, particularly for the countries of the Caribbean with their different forms of political organization.

Additionally, Ms. Tross noted the excellent recommendations produced at the First Hemispheric Conference on Environmental Port Protection (CIP) held in Panama the previous year. She urged the member states to make an effort to implement those recommendations swiftly.

In closing, she acknowledged Vice-Admiral Homero Lajara and CESEP for their efforts in organizing the Conference. On behalf of Ambassador Ramdin and herself, she wished the delegates every success in this endeavor.

The final speaker was Mr. Luis Taveras. He spoke of his high hopes that this Conference will become a wonderful way to handle such a delicate and important issue as port security and protection. He expressed certainty that it will enable participants to assess successful actions, share experiences, and overcome the challenges which each country has had to face in implementing the ISPS Code over the past almost four years.

Mr. Taveras highlighted the valuable cooperation and support offered by the President of the Dominican Republic, Dr. Leonel Fernández. With his clear vision of the future, the President has been a leader in generating and implementing institutional structures which make it possible to increase the protection and security of the national ports.

Mr. Taveras called attention to the need for clear and effective mechanisms for training human resources on port security and protection, and he pointed out the agreement about to be signed by APORDOM, the CIP, and APEC University to create an academic structure that would include graduate courses and an undergraduate major in maritime port management.

The session closed with Mr. Taveras extending a very warm welcome to all the attendees. He wished them much success in the work of the coming days, and declared the Conference to be formally opened.

7


First Plenary Session

This session was held at 8:30am on Tuesday, April 8, 2008. It was Chaired by Mr. Taveras, Chairman of the Conference. The following agenda items were discussed:

Ratification of agreements adopted in the Preliminary Session of Heads of Delegation (item 1 of the agenda). The meeting ratified the agreements reached earlier.

State of international standards and regulations on port security at a global level (item 2 of the agenda). This panel was moderated by Mr. Ricardo Luján, Under Secretary of Ports and Navigable Waterways of Argentina and principal delegate of his country to the Conference.

a) International standards on port security

(i).Multidimensional Security (OAS)

Ambassador Alexander Addor-Neto, Secretary for Multidimensional Security of the OAS, spoke about crime and its many and varied manifestations and its impact on the world. He particularly noted the current increase in firearms trafficking in the Caribbean and countries with large populations, such as Mexico and Brazil, where the rate of homicides with firearms is the highest in the world—causing more than 100,000 deaths annually.

He called attention to the direct relationship found between citizens’ level of risk and traditional risk factors in a given country, such as extreme poverty, lack of education, and low standards of living. This is true for broad sectors of the hemisphere’s population. States need to address these situations to offer more security.

Ambassador Addor-Neto noted how important it was for the OAS to create the Secretariat for Multidimensional Security. Its sphere of activities includes drugs, terrorism, security policies, illicit trafficking in persons, weapons and ammunition, strengthening the juridical capacity of specialized law enforcement and judges, the creation of databases, and the identification of problems which need to be solved jointly.

He offered some figures regarding these phenomena, such as the 4,500 people who disappear annually in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 80% of whom are the victims of unsolved homicides.

The Ambassador stressed the need for the member states to coordinate their multidisciplinary policies and programs to fight these illegal acts by creating databases and specialized approaches.

Ambassador Addor-Neto stressed that one of the main reasons that progress does not yield the desired results is that governments do not take bold measures based on long-term state policies. These would include sharing experiences, holding best practices workshops, offering multinational technical assistance and specialized courses for police and customs personnel, developing strategic partnerships between the public and private sector, and establishing groups of experts in the various areas to encompass the different kinds of issues involved.

8


He stressed that it is important for the member states to offer their full support to these endeavors, by joining efforts to work towards the common good.

(ii). - International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS) of the IMO

Captain Curtis Roach, Regional Maritime Advisor, IMO, stated that the main problems in port security and protection stem from the increase in maritime and port activity in recent years. This increase is accelerating, and unfortunately, some sectors of importers and exporters do not attribute enough importance to strict adherence to port security measures, out of a belief that they are an obstacle to the continuous, efficient flow of merchandise. (See CHSP-III/INF 30/08)

He stressed the importance of designing early security warning measures to monitor merchandise and containers of questionable origin or that are tied to agents and shippers with a history of infractions which cast doubt on their commitment to the system.

He called attention to the need to review current standards and improve systems in order to establish a manual of code practices, which would allow regulations in force to be applied more expeditiously and help staff interpret them in their day to day work.

Captain Roach urged the member states to join the working groups that have been formed in several regions to study the more common situations that arise on the flagships and ports of countries that have not signed on to SOLAS (International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea) or the ISPS Code.

He noted the additional activities that the IMO has been proposing to enhance compliance with the existing rules, in some cases adjusting them to the new regulations that have been created in other international organizations such as the WCO, the European Union (EU), and the International Standards Organization (ISO).

Additionally, Captain Roach explained that the security standards set in Circular letter MSC/1192 of 2006, which also contains information request forms, have been given to the governments for updates.

Part of the progress made over the last year is the Global Shipping Information System GSIS). Captain Roach said that this will bring great benefits to the users of maritime transport and ports.

He also mentioned the formation of the Maritime Security Council (MSC), a special working group which will update regulations manuals and prepare new ones for the application of the Code. Its conclusions will be ready in December of 2008.

In closing, Captain Roach noted that IMO works continuously to adapt and revise the rules regarding security and the protection of ships and port facilities.

(iii). - Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade of the World Customs Organization (WCO)

This topic was introduced by Mr. Carlos Ochoa, Program Manager, U.S. Customs and Border Protection. He indicated that the WCO Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade is a project that was unanimously approved in June of 2005 by the 150 member states of the WCO, including 22 OAS member states. The project seeks to improve and strengthen international trade.

9


The purpose of the international customs community’s efforts to secure the supply chain is to protect world trade from the threats posed by international terrorism, organized crime, and other problems that continuously threaten the customs sector. It also offers a structure to ensure the movement of legal merchandise that is internationally negotiated. The Framework of Standards is not only aimed at providing a more secure international trade environment, it also points to new ways for customs authorities to work together for twenty-first century trade.

According to its cooperation principles, the Framework of Standards consolidates the ties between customs authorities and their shareholders, who undertake to jointly implement a series of 17 regulations to secure and facilitate international trade.

Mr. Ochoa made it clear that the direct participation of the private sector in these activities has been key. Special opportunities for joint activity have arisen, both between the customs authorities of different countries, and between customs authorities and the private sector of the same or other countries. (For further information, see www.wcoomd.org/files/1.%20Public%20files/PDFandDocuments/SAFE%20Framework_EN_2007_for_publication.pdf)

Mention was made of the Container Security Initiative (CSI) and the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The initiatives have been increasing their activity in the member states, incorporating important ports in such countries as Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Panama, and Uruguay.

Mr. Ochoa stressed the slogan of the programs: “Preventing the entry of terrorism.” C-TPAT has played an important role in this, allowing for customs monitoring and oversight to increase, without hurting the efficiency of cargo handling operations, and without hindering the competitiveness of ports or their security.

He explained a new framework for comprehensive monitoring throughout the border-to-border transportation chain within the WCO Network. This institutes global action throughout the C-TPAT supply chain security initiative, which several countries have been joining, to establish an uninterrupted network offering progress in the implementation of electronic breakthroughs, management and control of risks, and more selective inspections.

He pointed out that this year C-TPAT has 8,265 affiliates in the member countries, and that membership has skyrocketed in the past few months.

Finally, he urged the ports that have not yet done so to join the CSI and C-TPAT programs. This is a way to coordinate the various activities with the private sector, and makes it possible to strengthen these mechanisms to yield better results and reduce risks in order to ensure global supply chain security. (See CHSP-III/INF 15/08).

10

http://www.wcoomd.org/files/1.%20Public%20files/PDFandDocuments/SAFE%20Framework_EN_2007_for_publication.pdf

http://www.wcoomd.org/files/1.%20Public%20files/PDFandDocuments/SAFE%20Framework_EN_2007_for_publication.pdf


(iv) International Health Regulations and their Implementation in the Port and Maritime Domain (WHO)

Dr. Christian Frederickson, Regional Coordinator, World Health Organization (WHO), noted that health is directly related to port protection. Health can be a means of spreading terrorism, and merchandise, particularly perishable goods, can be targeted. (See CHSP-III/INF 16/08).

Dr. Frederickson indicated that the WHO International Health Regulations (IHR) contain some mandatory rules that should be considered, which even cover standards of individual behavior. He noted the importance of enforcing these kinds of rules, particularly on tourist passenger ships and especially in the Caribbean, because they are potential spreaders of viral infection.

He gave details on various common viruses and the diseases they cause in humans. The most serious ones, because they pose a constant threat, are malaria, yellow fever, and polio—the latter having recently reappeared in the Caribbean countries.

Dr. Frederickson further explained the most common ways these diseases are transmitted. Their most common vectors are mosquitoes, which makes border control, particularly maritime border control, an essential way to prevent flare-ups of these diseases.

He urged the member states to prepare special security plans and emergency plans for when such viruses may appear. These must be ready and in place, whether the outbreak is autochthonous to the area or whether it is a new variation or an unusual outbreak imported from other areas or countries.

He stressed that the ISPS Code has established a series of recommendations to prevent, control, and attack these kinds of virus. It requires the inspection of ships and their cargo, crews, and passengers.

He noted that it is important to bear in mind the special measures sometimes called for when there is great danger of spreading disease. One example is scabies, for which isolation areas must be created, and specialized equipment, epidemiologists, and laboratories must be used. All of this must be available as soon as such an outbreak is detected. Care must be given to the sick, alerts about the risk of contamination must be publicized, and a special plan to fight the disease must be implemented. This should be established as a nationwide strategy.

Dr. Frederickson concluded by pointing out that at maritime borders, the WHO recommends that tourist ports of entry and exit be defined; that both passenger and cargo ships be monitored; that instructions be given with precise rules for inspection; and that foreigners entering the country should be required to meet standards of prevention and vaccination. It is vital to have prevention policies that allow for very rigorous health controls, as well as a statistical index of the most relevant diseases and viruses in the country.

(v) Impact of Port Security Measures on Maritime Labor

Mr. George Quick, Vice President, International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, noted the important role played by ships’ crews in implementing the rules of the ISPS Code, not only as Company Security Officers, but in general. The officers and crew of a cargo or passenger vessel must oversee and enforce security and protection measures. It is believed that this has not been sufficiently recognized in the world maritime transport system. (See CHSP-III/INF 17/08).

11


He stressed that ever since the Code first went into effect, there was a potential conflict between security and efficiency in the operation of ships. This fact has placed pressure on the crews, as well as other conditions which affect them when they enter port facilities and ships.

He made it clear that the while the Code includes special control measures for personnel going aboard a ship, this in no way means that the rights or working conditions of the crew operating the vessel should be undermined. This is expressly recognized in IMO Circular 1112 on enforcement of the Code.

Mr. Quick pointed out that in order to avoid such problems and ensure that the rights of maritime workers are respected; international standards should be applied, including the issuance of a single international identity card to crew members, as was proposed by the International Labor Organization (ILO). A model identification document has been prepared.

He also stated that, in the opinion of his Organization, the requirement of some countries (such as the United States) for foreign crew members to have visas in order to disembark is excessive. They additionally require one’s physical presence in the respective consulate and charge fees for those visas. He cited other countries, such as Australia, in which a visa is required but it is free of charge and available electronically. All of these bureaucratic obstacles are hindering application of the Code’s regulations, creating problems for the workers on the vessels, and hurting the system.

b) National and Regional Regulations on Port Security in the Principal Countries and Regions of Commercial Interest

(i). United States

Mr. Sean Connaughton, Administrator, U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) explained that regarding security and protection, his agency is geared to defend and facilitate trade, transportation, and the exchange of persons and merchandise into and out of the United States with the lowest possible level of risk and material damages. (See CHSP-III/INF 25/08).

The Administrator spoke of the more common measures that are in effect and actually applied. For example, there are rules requiring electronic delivery of the cargo manifests 24 hours before a ship sets sail from the previous port to a U.S. port. He also noted the positive impact that this has had on application of the CSI agreement and the DOE rules (Department of Special Operations, Anti-Narcotic Police of Guatemala), which are applied in mega ports.

Furthermore, Mr. Connaughton pointed out the good results and growth of the C-TPAT and the Maritime and Port Security programs of the United States Coast Guard (USCG).

He gave details on the new rules for application of the 2007 Safe Port Act, with such important requirements as the so-called 10+2 automated manifest, and training of border personnel.

He mentioned additional measures which have made it possible to establish systems to detect high-risk cargo, and laws which will require all containers entering the United States to be scanned at the port of origin, starting in 2012. He also mentioned special rules for in-transit cargo, and the

12


obligation to submit documentation electronically before the arrival of the vessel, as well as the requirement that vessels have a security alert system.

Regarding cargo in yards, he stressed the importance of non-invasive inspections using state-of-the art technology, and the importance of keeping a registry, an identification system, and CVs of port yard workers.

Mr. Connaughton indicated that in order to comply with all the aforementioned rules, MARAD has designed an extensive training program for Naval Company Security Officers, Port Facility Security Officers, and Ship Security Officers, aside from the general training of all port and ship personnel.

MARAD’s policy is that the first line of defense is ensuring that all port and ship personnel realize that they must be the eyes and ears of the security systems.

Finally, he mentioned the Maritime Security and Safety Information System (MSSIS). This is a latest generation mechanism which allows all users to know in real time the location and status of the cargo, to have automated identification of same, and to have access to data on transit, arrival, or departure from any port. This affords the greatest possible transparency for security, reducing environmental risks and dangers, and ensuring commercial activity.

(ii). European Union (EU) Mr. Pedro J. Román, State Port Director of Spain, gave a presentation on the development of port security regulations currently underway in the European Union (See CHSP-III/INF 21/08). He indicated that the main risks to security are stowaways, the illicit trafficking of drugs, weapons, and ammunition, armed robbery on the high seas, and sabotage. He explained that the EU has developed some additional, mandatory rules to complement the Code, and stressed the following ones:

Regulation 725 on security improvements, Guideline 2005/65 on acts which threaten the principles of the EU, such as peace, democracy, human rights, and environmental protection. He indicated that these rules apply not only to ships and port facilities as indicated in the Code, but also to all passenger ships in national traffic, and they establish periodical inspections on the status of security levels.

Rules on risk assessment and the spreading of knowledge and techniques used to arrange security measures.

Rules on the sphere of application of Port Facility Security Plans and the need for these to consider more contingency measures and plans to cover all the various areas of security and be able to conduct periodic exercises.

Rules on crisis management and the value of having, for all of these activities, well-trained and security-conscious human resources who can handle disaster if it strikes.

Regulation 884/2005 on the establishment of teams of inspectors certified by the EU, to act with the support of the European Maritime Security Agency (EMSA).

13


Current Sate of Port Security in OAS Member Countries (item 3 on the Agenda)

This session was moderated by Ms. Rosalie Donalson, Delegate of Jamaica. The following cases were discussed:

a). Presentation from countries of North America

(i). Mexico

Mr. Francisco Pastrana, Rate Director of the Dirección General de Puertos de México, explained the current situation of his country regarding security matters (see CHSP-III/INF 23/08). He spoke of the activities the Port Authority is conducting in this regard, particularly to foster implementation of the ISPS Code and a review and approval of risk assessments. He also indicated that support is being given for approval of the Port Facility Security Plans, including updates and amendments to them. A set of annual audits are being conducted to test the effectiveness of those Plans.

He described in detail the procedure designed for the application of the certification process, which consists of six stages that must be completed in chronological order.

He indicated that to date, 269 individual port facilities have been involved, 172 of which have completed all the requirements of the Code and must now be certified.

Mr. Pastrana also stressed the program to foster a culture of port security, which has made it possible to increase security measures and establish permanent channels of communication and coordination among the various authorities involved in the process. These have been adhered to by the private sector and the general maritime port industry.

As for evaluation of the annual verification audits, he indicated that some problems have been detected, such as flaws in updating and developing security plans, and shortcoming in the training of staff assigned to these tasks.

Furthermore, he reiterated that 618 Protection Officers have completed their training through special programs established by the Nautical School and Maritime Port Education Centers.

He also mentioned an increase in the use of state-of-the-art technology, such as x-rays and gamma rays, and the installation of other special equipment to detect illegal substances. He highlighted the creation of the Maritime Traffic Control Centers, which allow continuous monitoring of the location of ships in port and in routes in the Pacific and the Gulf.

He noted that a Training Trust had been created for members of the Merchant Marine, which works in coordination with the Dirección General de Marina Mercante and responds to observations and findings made in the annual audits of the port facilities.

Finally, he gave statistical data on expenditures for maintenance and investment in port security and protection, and stated that the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPPNA) had been created, which is the coordinating agency for Mexico, Canada, and the United States.

14


b). Presentations from countries of Central America

(i). Costa Rica

Mr. José Luis Díaz Valverde of the Empresa Nacional de Puertos and Mr. Alberto Manuel Calvin of the Junta de Administración Portuaria y Desarrollo Económico de la Vertiente Atlántica (JAPDEVA), spoke about Executive Decree Nº 31845 of the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation, which implemented the Code system in Costa Rica, since Costa Rica is not a signatory of the SOLAS Convention of the IMO. (See CHSP-III/INF.24/08)

They pointed out the effective collaboration that Cost Rica has received form U.S. Customs and from the Central American Commission for Maritime Transportation (COCATRAM). They also highlighted the fact that JAPDEVA has been in charge of implementing the Code in the ports of Limón and Moín, and to that end has created an institutional port security commission (management, divisions, offices, PFSO, etc.) which hears, discusses, assesses, and proposes actions in this area.

The ports themselves have created a comprehensive security office led by the port facility security officer (staff, resources, moveables, etc.). A port security plan has been developed to follow-up on these operations, which makes it possible to have a working tool to cover operations conducted for this purpose. Investment plans have also been drawn up with relatively significant budgets, which have made it possible to consider the budgetary limitations and find self-financing for the security system.

They stated that a cooperation agreement has been signed between the national coast guard and JAPDEVA to arrange mutual support and make the port terminals more secure within the port anchorage area, thus reducing vulnerability and the risk of a maritime accident.

Finally, among the problems they have faced is limited compliance with the Code because there is resistance to change, a lack of a culture of security, and limited financial resources to develop the system of protection.

(ii). - El Salvador

Mr. Luis Escalante of the Autoridad Marítimo Portuaria (AMP) of El Salvador told of progress made in implementing the Code in his country. (See CHSP-III/INF 18/08). He indicated that to date four port facilities have been certified, two in Acajutla, one in Corsain, and one in Paso Technology.

He proceeded to explain the general features of each of the facilities and investment projects carried out to attain certification, which was issued for a two-year period. He stressed the work being done by the AMP as the certifying agency. He clarified that El Salvador has applied all aspects of the Code, even though it is not a signatory of the SOLAS Convention. He also indicated that a Port Security Regulation had been approved, which is used as the legal basis for enforcement of the Code and allows the AMP to issue certifications and conduct inspections and audits, as well as coordinate with other authorities involved in the process.

15


Mr. Escalante described the procedure being used for the certifications issued through AMP’s Department of Port Regulation, which is also used by the private sector through the Port Security Committees and agencies receiving technical assistance from the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG). In addition, he explained the procedure which has been used to conduct the audits, which provides the database needed for renewal of the certifications in the future.

(iii). Guatemala

Ms. María Isabel Fernández, Executive Director of the Comisión Nacional Portuaria of Guatemala, assessed progress made in implementing the Code in her country. (See CHSP-III/INF 19/08) She noted that her Commission is the certifying agency, expressly delegated to that task by the Ministry of Communications, Infrastructure, and Housing.

Thus far in Guatemala, three ports and seven port terminals have been certified. Additionally, all private operators working inside national ports are now obliged to get certified.

She gave a brief description of investments and security projects that have been carried out in various ports, implemented because of the importance of this issue for foreign trade, particularly traffic headed for the United States.

Ms. Fernández pointed out the creation of a Technical Committee of Port Facility Security Officers (PFSO), which discusses problems that arise and shares best practices.

She stated that her Commission requires that audits be conducted twice every calendar year, and coordinates the scheduled visit of specialized personnel from the USCG during the corresponding six-month period.

She expressed appreciation for the special cooperation the Commission has received from the National Customs Service to boost its follow-up and development activities. This has made it possible to conduct coordination exercises and adopt contingency plans.

As for human resources, Ms. Fernández indicated that thus far 150 PFSOs have been trained. A basic comprehensive security course has been taught to more than 2,700 port workers. Three national security forums have been held, which has led to various outcomes, such as the training of workers before their shifts to indicate the risks involved with the cargo they will be handling. She also indicated that the forums have led to a proposal for a regulation for enforcement of the Code, particularly to promote the methods and systems for operating scanners.

Finally, she explained the identification measures that have been designed to monitor occasional workers through a system of armbands.

(iv). Honduras

Mr. Dennis Chinchilla, Director of the Comisión Nacional de Protección Portuaria of Honduras explained in detail the mechanism that his country has designed for the operation of the Comisión Nacional de Protección Portuaria, the agency in charge of certifying national port facilities. (See CHSP-III/INF 22/08) Before the certification could be conducted, a special regulation was required

16


since the General Law on Ports had not yet been passed. He also explained that ships are certified by a different agency, the Dirección General de Marina Mercante.

He also referred to a special regulation on port security which contains rules to facilitate application of the ISPS Code and to facilitate training in this area.

He stressed the extensive cooperation his Commission has received from the Armed Forces and the National Police for coordinating matters related to port security.

Regarding training, he noted that a national training plan had been drawn up, which not only includes staff in government agencies, but also staff in such private sector entities as shipping companies and port operators.

He called attention to the Audit Plan which has made it possible to identify the aspects of training that need to be reinforced, as well as the ones that need to be updated in response to technological advances and to follow best practices.

Mr. Chinchilla provided a chart of the investments and projects on security that have been done in the various ports. He also indicated which technological advancements have been used in the country, as they have yielded positive results for the implementation of the CSI and C-TPAT agreements, as well as the Business Alliance for Secure Commerce (BASC).

As for problems that have arisen in enforcement of the Code, he noted, among others, the lack of harmonization of the various regulations in force, a shortage of adequately trained personnel, and a lack of cooperation or implementation of a regional agreement to facilitate research and establish useful databases for the different countries in the area.

(v). Panama

Ms. Zoila Yaniselli, Assistant National Port Director of the Autoridad Marítima de Panamá (AMP), spoke about progress that has been made in applying the Code and incorporating new technologies to improve security. (See CHSP-III/INF 20/08)

She explained that AMP has created a division of labor. The Maritime Division does certifications and audits of ships. The Port Division is in charge of everything related to ports, terminals, and port facilities. This division of labor is necessary given the large number of national flagships that must be certified.

She gave details on the various sizes, locations, and developments in the different ports of Panama, including problems finding just the right parameters for each unit, since in some cases these parameters vary according to specifications mentioned in the Code.

Ms. Yaniselli indicated that AMP has established that audits must be done annually. Some standard procedures, with mandatory processing stages, have been designed for both the audits and for certifications.

17


She pointed out that the Port Protection Committee was created by Resolution J.D. 09/2005. This entity consists of the following public agencies: the Maritime Port Authority, the Canal Authority, the Public Security and National Defense Council, the National Police, the National Maritime Service, Customs, the Bureau of Migration, and the Technical Judicial Police. This Committee has become the main entity responsible for coordinating the entire national port protection system.

Second Plenary Session

This session was held on Tuesday, April 9 starting at 8:30 am. It was moderated by Mr. José Gama, Special Advisor of the Secretariat of Ports of Brazil. Discussion continued under the topic “Current State of Port Security in the OAS Member Countries” (Agenda item 3). The following cases were presented:

c. Presentations from countries of the Caribbean

(i). Barbados

Mr. Everton Walters, General Manager of Barbados Port Inc., spoke about progress being made in his country regarding security. He indicated that for the port of Bridgetown, since it is a multimodal port and the main one in his country, security is essential to its development and operation. (See CHSP-III/INF 28/08)

He spoke of the new security facilities that have been added to the port, as well as some state-of-the-art technologies including radiation detectors, an HVC scanner, and closed-circuit TV equipment (CCTV). He also pointed out that training of human resources has been identified as an essential measure.

Mr. Walters said that Barbados Port has a new corporate vision, which has allowed it to establish partnerships to conduct planning for port security. It has received essential support from the USCG, which has improved its results and reduced risks.

He noted that several regulations have been designed to establish contingency plans in various areas. This has yielded excellent results, both in terms of exercises and monitoring.

Mr. Walters spoke of the main problems that have been identified. They include: a shortage of financial resources to carry out activities with new technologies; inefficiencies which have hampered some operations; increased costs of services; resistance in the private sector to pay a security tax; conflicts that have arisen with other national control agencies; and a need to bring training of all personnel up to the highest level, not only those specifically working on security.

(ii). Grenada

Mr. Enrique Cummins of the Grenada Port Authority reported that in his country the security system falls under the Royal Grenada Police Force, the agency in charge of all aspects of security. Its responsibilities include migration, the coast guard, firefighting services, and the Port Police (See CHSP-III/INF 29/08).

18


He noted that the agency designated to oversee compliance with the Code and to certify ships and port facilities is the office of the Police Commissioner, an agency that was strengthened with the creation of the Security Committee, which includes the National Security Service, the Police, Customs, and the Port Authority.

He gave an overview of spending on port security. This includes the installation of x-ray equipment for luggage on cruise ships, CCTV, adequate perimeter walls, metal detectors, equipment for detecting drugs and explosives, additional lighting, and access control.

He noted that numerous vessels that do not meet the IMO’s minimum standards arrive in Grenada’s ports. This makes it difficult to enforce the Code and to follow security rules in general.

Finally, he indicated a need to incorporate the standards of the code into national legislation, to make it easier to implement adequate security measures. He noted that in public terminals, the Port Police conducts security activities, whereas in the privately-run ports, there is a special force that is trained and hired privately to offer security services.

(iii). Jamaica

Captain Hopeton Delisser of the Port Authority of Jamaica reported on progress made in implementing the Code in his country. (See CHSP-III/INF 31/08) He clarified that this is limited to the Kingston Container Terminal and the port with the most cruise ship traffic, Montego Bay.

He pointed out Jamaica’s advantages as a hub port for Caribbean maritime traffic, particularly because of its geographical position and proximity to the United States. All of this makes security a very important issue, and allowed Kingston to move 3.2 million TEUs during 2007.

He spoke of spending on security, including procurement and implementation programs being carried out in the container terminal and the main port for tourist ships.

Captain Delisser noted the various security measures adopted by the Port Authority of Jamaica, including: the creation of a National Accreditation and Certification Committee; procurement and installation of non-invasive monitoring equipment; installation of CCTV, electronic access controls, and the adoption of the CSI agreement with U.S. Customs.

He stressed the importance of having a schedule of audits, which are required three times per year and include not only scheduled audits, but also a mechanism for unscheduled, surprise audits. This encourages ports to remain constantly vigilant of their security obligations. It also allows for field testing of measures adopted in the security plans approved by the Committee. Captain Delisser also said that after each audit the Inspection Committee prepares a port authority report which indicates any shortcomings detected, areas in which correction is required, and the general status of the port in terms of risk level and security.

Finally, he pointed out a program to procure new x-ray equipment. This includes a large number of mobile scanners, VACIS for both containers and palletized cargo, and x-ray equipment for passenger ships. All of this would leave the two ports largely compliant with the Code, and prepared to implement the rules for monitoring of 100% of cargo headed to the United States.

19


(iv). Dominican Republic

Vice Admiral Homero Lajara, Director of the Cuerpo Especializado de Seguridad Portuaria (CESEP), spoke about progress made in his country on implementing the Code. (See CHSP-III/INF 26/08)

He indicated that initially the Dominican Port Authority was in charge of compliance with the Code. Then CESEP, comprised of members of the Navy, was created. It has jurisdiction over port security in both public and private ports. He spoke about CESEP’s successes, which have yielded a lowering of risk levels and the detection of more illicit goods. He also noted the importance of the technical advisory services and other cooperation from the USCG for the training of specialized personnel. This has certainly been a positive development for the Dominican Republic.

Vice Admiral Lajara indicated that the new law 426/07 against stowaways has made it possible to conduct prevention activities and to punish stowaways. This is a modern law that is new to Latin America.

He described the different kinds of ports that CESEP works in: government-run, private, and recreational ones. He explained the investments on several of them, particularly the ports of Caucedo and Haina, where new technologies have been incorporated and a large number of operational personnel have been trained.

The Vice Admiral pointed out progress made in the electronic monitoring of containers, the identification of operations personnel in the ports, biometric access control for staff, and the activation of special CCTV equipment—all with respect for the dignity and rights of port workers.

He also spoke about the use of electronic navigational charts, a system to determine the location of ships and follow their deployment, which has helped apply security measures more effectively. He noted that all these measures have made it possible to keep the costs of security services down, while maintaining the efficiency and coordination of port operations.

Finally, he spoke of the excellent coordination CESEP enjoys with the Navy, and the fact that the two entities complement each other well.

(v). Suriname

Mr. Michael Amafo of the Suriname Ports Management Company, the entity that controls the companies that manage the main port facilities in that country, reported on the status of implementation of the Code in his country. (See CHSP-III/INF 35/08) He gave an overview of the seven river ports, where to date 16 different facilities and terminals have been certified. He remarked that there are no maritime ports.

He noted that in order for SOLAS, and thus the Code, to be applied, a Special Law on Maritime Security was passed, SB No. 90 of 2004. The law placed the Suriname Ports Authority (SPA) in charge of certification. He showed an organizational chart on the operations of the Authority, and the procedure designed for port certification.

He stated that the authorities generally responsible for security in Suriname are the Ministry of Justice and Police, the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Transportation, Communications, and Tourism,

20


and the Attorney General. These entities gather intelligence, establish the security levels stipulated in the Code, and coordinate with the SPA on the application of measures corresponding to each level.

He mentioned additional security measures that are applied, including, for example, a request for a set of data which the ship must provide prior to its arrival in port, a list of the latest ports in which it has anchored, a list of crew members, and a manifest of any hazardous cargo being transported.

In addition, he explained that a system of annual audits has been established, as well as coordination visits with the USCG. This allows for monitoring of security levels and application of the best security practices identified.

On training, he indicated that a special program has been under way since 2004.

Finally, he spoke about the installation of new technology in various terminals. This includes CCTV equipment, special lighting, perimeter walls, electronic access control, and the installation of a scanner for containers.

(vi). Saint Lucia

Mr. Kennedy Francis, of the Saint Lucia Air & Sea Ports Authority (SLASPA) reported on progress made in his country regarding the Code. (See CHSP-III/INF 34/08) He indicated that Resolution 50 of the Council of Ministers established the Royal Saint Lucia Police Force as the entity in charge of certification, which reports on security to the Commissioner of Police and the Prime Minister, through the Director.

He listed the following as the authorities responsible for setting security standards and application of the Code: Customs, SLASPA, the Department of Immigration, and the Division of Maritime Affairs. He also mentioned that private security forces have been created to offer their services to port operators.

Some of the regulations he mentioned were No. 49 of 2004 on ship and port facility security, regulation 8.13 on port and airport security, and law 11 on navigation. Together these constitute the legal framework for security in Saint Lucia.

As for administrative aspects of security, he pointed to the security plans for ships and port facilities, procedures on security standards for port operations, contingency plans, and the port security master plan.

He also noted the creation of a National Advisory Committee on Security. This agency evaluates and follows up on compliance with legal and administrative standards, and defines the various levels of security to be applied.

Finally, he indicated that new technologies and security facilities have been incorporated into the ports. These include CCTV, and the computerization of monitoring mechanisms, of personnel access and cargo access, and electronic systems for the identification of people.

21


(vii). Trinidad and Tobago

Mr. Michael Brathwaite of the Trinidad and Tobago Coast Guard told of the progress his country has made in security for its port system. He started by identifying 12 port terminals that have been certified so far, and described the various kinds of facilities these include, such as general cargo terminals, bulk liquids terminals, and tourist passenger ship terminals. (See CHSP-III/INF 38/08)

He noted that the Code has been applied in his country since 2004 through national regulations on ship and port facility security. The Coast Guard was designated as the agency in charge of enforcement and certification of the Code’s standards.

He told of the investments made in security and monitoring equipment. In his view, these are significant amounts, in line with the volume of cargo and passengers moved through the different terminals.

Mr. Brathwaite indicated that the Coast Guard has created and trained a special force of 98 staff members to apply the Code’s standards. He estimates that this number will need to increase in the future.

The main obstacles to compliance with the security rules are the following: cultural rejection of the changes; lack of awareness among shipping agents of the importance of compliance with the Code in order to maintain traffic with the United States; delays in monitoring tourist ships, which causes problems with and complaints from passengers; the high cost of using state-of-the-art technology for cargo monitoring systems.

Finally, he explained that a special plan has been laid out to expedite the implementation of security standards. This will include several measures aimed at correcting the aforementioned problems. d). Presentations from countries of South America

This session was moderated by Mr. Fernando Sánchez Alvadera, the ECLAC representative. The following cases were presented:

(i). Argentina

Mr. José Luis Facchini from the Naval Prefecture of Argentina told of progress made in his country in implementing the Code’s security measures. (See CHSP-III/INF 32/08) In this vein, he gave a detailed analysis of the entire Argentine port system, including the different kinds and sizes of ports certified or about to be certified. In some cases it is difficult to implement the security measures because of the 126 ports that must comply with these rules; only 99 have been certified so far.

As for the legal regulations applicable to the system, he mentioned the following: Law Nº 26.108; National Executive Decrees 1241/03 and 1973/04; Ordinance 97-80 in Volume 8-DJPM (Registration of Port Trade Associations); Ordinance 1-94 in Volume 8- DJPM (A.P.V); Ordinance 4-03 in Volume 2- DPSN (Ship Certification); Ordinance 6-03 in Volume 8- DJPM (PI Certification); Ordinance 9-03 in Volume 8- DJPM (OPR); and Ordinance 1-04 in Volume - DJPM (PFSO and VSO).

22


He spoke of the technical measures they have taken, such as: perimeter fencing, access barriers, access gates, lighting, electronic security, CCTV, and others.

He also pointed out the organizational measures taken in the following areas: modification of plans and procedures for the entry of personnel and for the identification of cargo, vehicles, and persons.

Regarding human resources, he indicated a need to increase training, particularly to raise awareness among all staff in both public and private enterprises.

Mr. Facchini noted that practical exercises have been conducted in virtually all of the facilities. The results have been positive, however, it is believed that improvements can be made in the future, because shortcomings have been identified in various areas, such as the computerized systems to detect intruders and the alarm systems.

In closing, he spoke about activities that are currently being implemented. These include the following: audits of recognized security organizations, continuous improvements to resume the process of future evaluations; a new structure of the security plans; updating of PFSO training; continuation of the awareness campaign; establishment of standards for risk assessment; incorporation of scanners into the container inspection system; and the establishment of standards for equipment maintenance.

(ii). Brazil

Dr. Luis Resano of the Special Port Secretariat gave a progress report on Brazil. (See CHSP-III/INF 36/08) First he spoke about the division of labor to separate certification of ships from certification of port facilities. The former are under the jurisdiction of the Maritime Authority, and the latter are under the jurisdiction of the National Commission of Public Security in Ports, Terminals, and Navigable Waterways (COMPORTOS).

He mentioned the creation of the National Port Security Council, the coordinating agency comprised of the following entities: Ministry of Justice (Chair), Ministry of Defense (Brazilian Navy), Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Special Port Secretariat. This Council is charged with setting standards on public security in port terminals and navigable waterways; drafting specific public security projects for ports, terminals, and navigable waterways; verifying programs to improve public security activities; maintaining statistical information on criminal acts that occur in ports; and assessing needs regarding public security.

To date, COMPORTOS has issued certifications for 226 port facilities.

As for problems that have been detected in implementing the Code, he indicated, among others, the following: problems with deadlines for implementation of the security plans; differences in terms of designation of certifiable companies; problems analyzing risk assessments; problems approving security plans; and problems in the procurement, installation, and operation of new state-of-the-art technology.

Dr. Resano mentioned some new elements incorporated into terminal security, such as: fixed and mobile cameras; motion detectors; erection of physical barriers; perimeter enclosures; and an increase in the number of personnel using the port operations.

23


(iii). Chile

Commander Claudio Sepúlveda of the Dirección General del Territorio Marítimo y Marina Mercante of Chile (DIRECTEMAR) gave a presentation on progress made in his country in implementing the Code. (See CHSP-III/INF 41/08) He presented a chart to compare the security regulations of the IMO, the ILO, the WHO, and the WCO. In each case he gave details on how these standards have complemented each other and been coordinated since 2004.

He also spoke of regulations comparing the ISPS Code and the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG), particularly regarding the biometric i.d. card for crew members (ILO Convention 185), the set of practical recommendations on security and health in ports, standards on the human factor, and permission for maritime personnel to go on land.

He stated that currently the WCO is being urged to review measures to protect all international movements of closed transport units, particularly high-risk hazardous cargo.

A chart was shown comparing WCO and WHO regulations as of June 2005. It showed factors such as protecting people’s health from biological, chemical, and radioactive hazards and the 2005 International Health Regulations.

He indicated that DIRECTEMAR is the designated authority in Chile, and to date it has certified 84 port facilities. It also has a process for long-term and short-term implementation of an automatic identification system (AIS). This will be integrated into the current maritime traffic control platforms. There are 13 stations operating in ports and 10 operating at sea.

He pointed out that, pursuant to WCO instruction, the principles of the Regulatory Framework are being applied, particularly to harmonize advance electronic information, to have a consistent risk management approach, to use non-invasive detection equipment, and to obtain advantages for customs and commerical outfits.

He noted that in Chile, the Customs Administration is currently implementing a system to analyze risk information, so as to identify high-risk shipments. He mentioned that this system may include a mechanism to validate the risk assessment, take decisions, and identify best practices, such as those proposed by the Convention on Facilitation of International Maritime Traffic (FAL Convention). It also includes standards for requesting advance electronic information on cargo shipments and container shipments, so that an adequate risk assessment can be done ahead of time.

Regarding high-risk hazardous cargo which could be used in a terrorist attack with serious consequences, the ISPS Code is being used in conjunction with the IMDG Code.

Commander Sepúlveda indicated that the WHO International Health Regulations of 2005 are being incorporated into the main international trade ports in the country. The objective is to verify whether the following targets are being met: basic capacity in place in ports to conduct surveillance and response to a public health emergency of international concern; ability to conduct a procedure in response to a disease for which notification is mandatory; existence of a program to monitor drinking water on ships; existence of a program to monitor food services in ports and on ships; appropriate management of hazardous industrial waste and ship waste; a program to control vectors and reservoirs with pesticides; treatment of infectious residue (incinerators, steam sterilizers, hydrolysis); management

24


of bilge water; and safe conditions for transport of cargo bearing biological, chemical, or radioactive hazards.

As for certifications, he reported that 100% of port facilities (81) and national flagships (35) were certified under the Code on time by July 2004. This helped maintain the flows of international trade.

He also reported that inspections required for the annual renewal of certifications and statements of compliance were conducted without problem. Work is being done on reassessments and security plans that must be submitted to renew the certifications and statements of compliance that expire in Chile in the first half of 2009. He indicated that a practical exchange of experiences is ongoing between DIRECTEMAR and the USCG, with representatives visiting each other’s ports.

The Commander also noted that an annual inspection and audit plan is in place to verify security measures at the certified ports. The objective is to have mutual, continuous improvement.

Finally, he stated that the Chilean maritime administration voluntarily submitted itself to an IMO technical audit. This was part of Chile’s participation in the program for international cooperation, training, and support for implementation of the international standards on port security and protection for Latin American countries.

(iv). Colombia

Navy Captain Manuel Hernández of Colombia gave a brief overview of his country’s port system. He then spoke of the components of the legal framework established for implementation of the Code, particularly the following provisions: Decree 730/04 which established the sphere of application of the ISPS Code, and Law 8 which set the standards of port security. (See CHSP-III/INF 37/08)

He noted that the ISPS Code is a tool which favors the competitiveness of the port sector in the region, and helps create jobs to improve the logistics of the Colombian foreign trade sector.

The Captain said that state entities responsible for maritime security have become more integrated thanks to the Code. He described the scenario of threats faced in the country, and explained the methodology that has been used to evaluate security and assess risks.

He also spoke of the models used in the port facility security plans, application of international certificates for ship security, and statements of compliance with the Code.

He stated that 50 port facilities and terminals had been certified throughout his country.

Captain Hernández listed the controls that have been introduced since July 1, 2004, with the following highlights: notification prior to arrival; application of the communication protocol; arrival visits; request for international security certificate; continuous synoptic record; statement of security level; design of security systems that focus on means and not processes; incorporation of good controls at land access points and maritime access points; awareness program on incorporating security concerns into port activity; programs to familiarize pesonnel with the Code philosophy; increase in and implementation of internal audits and exercises; strengthening of work with local protection committees to design port facility security plans; and implementation of goverment policies to evaluate private sector plans and thus foster secure maritime activity.

25


He also spoke about the newly created National Port Protection Committee, which is complemented by local committees in each port. These are comprised of the following agencies: Port Captaincy (DIMAR), Navy, Coast Guard, National Anti-Narcotics Police, Customs, National Prosecutor, Bureau of National Taxes and Customs (DIAN), Association of Ship Operators, and the Municipal Mayor’s Office.

He pointed out the Port Security Crisis Management Simulation Exercises. These have made it easier to coordinate among the various government institutions and private organizations when faced with a port security crisis. It has also facilitated knowledge and experience required on a national level in case a crisis should arise from an external threat.

Among other measures being implemented are efforts to consolidate the channels of cooperation between the government, non-governmental organizations, and the private sector, with a view to adopting preventive measures as is stipulated in the ISPS Code objectives.

He called attention to the positive results of the simulation exercises. They have made it possible to identify national capacity to offer port security, and a need to involve other government entities and private actors in order to have national coordination on port security and the ISPS Code.

Captain Hernandez concluded by saying that while technology is important, it is not everything. What is most important is to have well-trained human resources.

(v). Paraguay

Mr. Juan Carlos Muñoz of the National Port & Navigation Administration (ANNP) spoke about the status of implementation of the Code in his country. (See CHSP-III/INF 33/08) He explained that ANNP works in coordination with other state and private sector entities, which in turn interact with the terminals and ships. These include: the General Naval Prefecture, the designated authority for enforcement of the ISPS Code, the Hydrographic Authority, and the coastal navigation safety stations.

He indicated that several rules on operational procedures have been instituted. Noteworthy are the procedures manuals for certain individual processes that were adopted through resolutions of the Authority’s Board of Directors. There is also an updated procedures manual for all administrative and operational processes, and there are other procedures manuals that must be followed at all ports.

Regarding security personnel, he noted that the Port Security Department falls directly under the office of the chairman. Organizationally, it includes the Head of the Department of Port Security, based in the central administration. It has well-equipped offices and equipment, and is the place from which terminal port activities are coordinated.

The Department has an operations area chief, an administrative area chief, and three chiefs for the operations area guard group rotating in round-the-clock shifts. There are 15 security officers in three 5-man guard groups, rotating in round-the-clock shifts. And there are six administrative officers and three administrative assistants (attorney, secretary, and assistant).

Security personnel are outfitted with proper equipment. They wear uniforms and jackets with logos, which also helps identify their duties. Most of the Port Facility Security Officers are staff members

26


who take classes to enhance their knowledge of security, self-defense, weapons use, and firearms shooting practice.

The Department has a radio base in the guard post, outfitted with eight walkie-talkies for internal and external communications, with an average range of 25 to 39 km.

Access control for entry and exit of the public terminals is conducted through inspection of packages, luggage, vehicles, and persons, taking into account the experience, background, suspicions, and information received.

At strategic points in the area of import and export of container cargo, rigorous inspections are conducted, for which security personnel become directly involved. There is also a mobile patrol unit that has all the necessary equipment, such as radios, buoys, navigational lights, and sirens.

Mr. Muñoz also said that there is a system of daily reporting, including a log book that is passed from one guard to the next. The minutes in the log book are transcribed for the chairman on a daily basis, and if anything stands out, the Security Department sends a message via note to the chairman. He also stressed that there are internal security regulations which describe the rules of the Department of Security and Surveillance.

He stated that the security and control infrastructure consists of a closed circuit system with 21 television cameras distributed around the port sector.

Regarding lighting, he said that the import area has 8 illumination towers with 6 beacons each, and that the export area does not have an illumination system.

There are programs to improve the security systems, including approval of the repair of some piles and realignment of the access lanes. Electronic devices for CCTV monitoring are going to be installed for ‘A-B-C-G’ warehouses. And while this measure is being implemented, surveillance will be conducted through the security officers.

As for the container area, the floors are being upgraded and a masonry wall reinforced with concrete pillars, mesh, and gabions is being built to enhance perimeter security.

As for the specific infrastructure for security and control, new CCTV systems are being repaired and new circuits are being installed.

In closing, Mr. Muñoz said that through implementation of the ISPS Code, his authorities have been able to largely mitigate the vulnerabilities detected in the evaluation process by applying corrective measures. This process has taken on its own dynamic throughout the port facilities, placing demands on each and every person involved. They have instituted a process whereby more and more security plans are constantly updated and training is continuous.

(vi). Peru

Commander Juan Pozo of the National Port Authority (APN) reported on progress made in implementing the Code in his country. (See CHSP-III/INF 39/08) He first mentioned that the APN is the designated authority for implementation of the ISPS Code and other security rules applicable to

27


Peru’s ports. These include: Law Nº 27943 (National Port System Law), Supreme Decree Nº 003-2004-MTC (Regulations of the National Port System Law), Supreme Decree Nº 006-2005-MTC (National Port Development Plan), and Supreme Decree Nº 019-2004-MTC (Measures for Application of the ISPS Code). He also noted that 10 laws have been passed containing various measures for port protection, general training, recognized security organizations, and more.

He indicated that Peru has 31 ports in its national territory (14 major ones), including maritime ports, river ports, and lake ports. Peru also has 45 port facilities that accept international traffic and cabotage traffic (plus 17 minor ones). All of the international traffic port facilities have obtained ISPS Code certification.

He noted that the APN renewed the Statement of Compliance of a port facility a third time, prior to the verification audits for 2007.

He reported that the protection and security unit within the APN is the advisory body. It falls under the general management and is in charge of proposing policies and regulations regarding the protection of port facilities and the security of port activities and services, in coordination with other line agencies.

The main protection measures adopted include the following: preparation of a Port Facility Security Assessment; preparation of Port Facility Security Plans; a training and awareness campaign for staff involved in port facility security (from terminal managers at the highest level, through the port facility security officers (PFSO), to the last participant in public security surveillance); training of the port community on the importance of ISPS Code compliance; implementation and outfitting of security in general; development of a port security training program; port security training for 20,000 users of the national port institutions; renewal of the Statement of Compliance of a Port Facility at all port institutions that get certified; public information on port security made available on the APN website; registration and issuance of identity cards to the port facility security officers at the certified port facilities; standardization of the syllabus for training in port security; training of port security instructors; preparation of a contingency plan for work stoppages; and coordination with the competent authorities for implementation of the National Port Authority Contingency Plan.

He pointed out that the following measures had been implemented this year: continuation of ISPS audits for annual renewal of Statements of Compliance; certification of facilities implementing ISPS; evaluation of the security plan for the port of Callao; implementation of the cabotage inspection plan relevant to the ISPS Code; creation of national and local port security committees including the private sector and international trade authorities; creation of additional security measures for minor facilities not covered by the ISPS Code; continuation of the ISPS port facility security program targeting the port community.

To conclude, Commander Pozo said that the APN focuses on security measures to ensure protection of the entire supply chain for trade through Peruvian ports.

(vii). Uruguay

Mr. Edison Peña of the National Port Administration explained the policies that have been applied in his country. Cargo security has been deemed to offer a competitive advantage worth developing. He said it is necessary to coordinate all efforts so that the synergies created can outweigh the costs entailed in maintaining security (See CHSP-III/INF 27/08).

28


He pointed out that there is a campaign to coodinate these tasks between the public and private sectors through partnerships to work on common objectives and help the benefits pay off in the short term.

As for the costs associated with security, which will increase if cost-cutting mechanisms, procedures, and tools are not used, he noted that it is important manage these factors. Spending must be in line with the size and volume of activity in each port so that it does not get out of hand.

The following noteworthy measures have been adopted recently: scanners for non-invasive cargo inspection; risk analysis for physical inspection; security cooperation networks; and the addition of adequate infrastructure.

He made clear that the country’s approach is to visualize the entire transportation chain and its components, pointing out that certified port terminals give added value to the system by ensuring security in the ship-to-port interface and with all the other links in the supply chain.

In terms of measures being implemented, he indicated that they are geared toward transparent management, detection of vulnerabilities, the authorities’ commitment to ensure expeditious and efficient monitoring, and management mechanisms that help facilitate trade and increase security.

Mr. Peña emphasized the need to perceive the costs associated with security as an opportunity to improve the port system, and thus enhance the country’s standing in international trade.

Finally, he encouraged taking a global view of the situation, which will allow our ports to cooperate in ways that will help strengthen the national and regional economies by ensuring the safe flow of cargo. Regardless of whether the port is a hub or a feeder, we must ensure the security of cargo at all points in the chain, because the increased share of the regional market is not necessarily associated with domestic consumption, but with the services provided to the cargo of third parties.

(viii). Venezuela

Captain Rafael da Silva, from the Instituto Nacional de Espacios Acuáticos e Insulares (INEA), reported on the status of implementation of the Code in his country. He first said that the designated authority in charge of certifications is INEA, according to the Organic Law on Aquatic and Island Spaces. (See CHSP-III/INF 40/08) He indicated that INEA has an Office of the General Manager for Security and Maritime Personnel which covers maritime and port security.

He listed, among others, the following laws which constitute the underpinnings of the country’s security system: the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Organic Law on Aquatic and Island Spaces, the Organic Customs Law, the Organic Security and Defense Law, the General Law on Ports, the General Law on Marine and Related Activities, and the Coastal Zones Law.

Regarding the certification process, he indicated that INEA has performed technical evaluations on each port facility. Once the various security studies were conducted, once a port security plan was submitted and revised, and once the plan and the implementation program were approved, INEA proceeded to issue the respective statement of compliance or certification.

29


He pointed out that all efforts have focused on ensuring safe and reliable operations, for both the crew and the ships and for workers on land, while always paying attention to preservation of the environment.

He called attention to the fact that implementation of the ISPS Code required 320,000 man hours of training. This was offered to personnel in the ports and terminals that were certified, and to the communities and authorities of the national port system. He said that by obtaining ISPS certification, his country has proven itself to be a secure and reliable provider to the world energy markets.

He expressly stated that in order to obtain ISPS certification, the Port Authority and Venezuela’s port administrations made investments on the order of US$29,767,441.86. This included the hiring of specialized national firms, training, and procurement of equipment to ensure the security of the port facilities. He indicated that current spending is geared to stepping up security and protection in port facilities through the procurement of latest generation technology and the implementation of x-ray systems for cargo, among other areas.

He stressed the need for port administrators to coordinate port protection with state security agencies.

Captain da Silva also said that some port facilities do not have cargo scanning systems (x-ray and others). Therefore, physical inspections must be conducted, which raises costs and slows the flow of merchandise.

He pointed out that the Venezuelan Navy and Coast Guard continuously patrol in the vicinity of port facilities where international maritime traffic is located, in order to complement the security work performed by the port administrators.

He alluded to the work of the National Integrated Customs and Taxation Administration (SENIAT), which is currently computerizing customs operations in commercial ports, in order to provide them with non-invasive inspection equipment as required to combat smuggling and prevent undesirable and prohibited elements from entering port facilities.

INEA is currently conducting studies to improve the traffic of vessels in its territorial waters and in the exclusive economic zone, including port facilities.

Lastly, he gave a list of the most recent measures applied to implement the Code, including the following: increased underwater inspections at the major ports; use of canines for detection; enhancements to the perimeter walls and fencing around port facilities; an increase of maritime patrols in the ports and mooring zones; the procurement of high-tech equipment to improve the systems for entry into port facilities; remote-controled specialized cameras to complement the work of surveillance personnel and the security management system; national reserve troops deployed to support security, with specialized training in these areas; and the drafting of an annual inspection and audit plan to verify the level of security at the certified port facilities.

30


Third Plenary Session

This session was held on Thursday, April 10, starting at 8:30am. It was chaired by Mr. Luis Taveras, chairman of the Conference and principal delegate of the Dominican Republic. The moderator was Mr. Pascal Olivier of SOGET S.A.

The following topic was discussed: “Identification of frequent and common problems and solutions to these problems through best practices at the specific level of a port or terminal” (item 4 on the Agenda).

The session began with a presentation on best practices to handle legal, administrative, and institutional issues that may arise, as well as technology costs, investments required, financial and human resources, and training.

a). Experiences in ports and terminals

(i). Manzanillo International Terminal (MIT) of Panama

Mr. Eric Chang spoke about the best practices that have been used at his port to provide high quality service with high security standards. (See CHSP-III/INF 7/08)

He explained that MIT has created a comprehensive security policy which has yielded optimum results, as seen by statistics kept since the Code was first applied in 2004. At present, it is noteworthy that the labor force of more than 700 employees is highly motivated and well trained, and the modern facilities and equipment have helped make this port a productive hub for transshipment of containers from Latin America.

He pointed out that over the years MIT has received many accolades, including being named one of the ten most efficient ports in the world by Containerization International. It has won awards from the Caribbean Shipping Association three times, including “Best Container Terminal in the Caribbean” in 2004, and in 2006 it received the “Excellence Award” from the Maritime Authority of Panama for its security measures.

He pointed out that risks are continously on the rise. For this reason the company decided to make a culture of comprehensive security a matter of policy. This includes factors beyond investments in equipment and technology, to include awareness campaigns and training of human resources in general.

Worthy of note, he said, was the fact that personnel involved in security have become involved in various events in daily life. He highlighted the training program for new employees and the retraining of senior staff, which helps maintain their security awareness. This is one of the main reasons the port has shown such good results.

Next, he explained how the security department is organized, and the responsibilities and actions it carries out on a daily basis. He also described the relationships between that department and the administrative and operational areas.

31


Mr. Chang stated that several elements have been used, including: drug-sniffing dogs (passive and active), bomb-sniffing dogs, patrol dogs, dogs for detecting illegal substances, closed-circuit video systems, perimeter alarms, internal radios connected to a control center, and a digital reader that allows personnel to enter and exit using fingerprints.

He said that some of the best practices MIT has instituted revolve around organization, training, investments, and liaisons.

He also said that appropriate management of human resources is of vital importance, thus MIT considers security measures to be more than an expense; they are the means to protect the company’s assets and an investment in the sound, stable image of a secure port.

(ii). APN Terminal, Kingston Jamaica

Captain Omar Walker described the best practices used at this terminal, which has been particularly concerned with security issues given that it moved 1.3 million TEUs the previous year.

He pointed out that the security equipment is provided by the Government of Jamaica, which also ensures their good an efficient use in the hands of the authorities.

He said that security is a priority on the same level as operational, commercial, and administrative considerations. Thus there is a high level of integration and coverage of all functions in the terminal.

One of the best practices he explained was the special structure of the security system, and he gave details on the various areas that it covers. It encompasses all activities performed at the terminal, from access through monitoring, documentation, stacking, movements in yards and on board, and others.

He described how non-invasive inspections are conducted with VACIS scanners, and with ARACOR’s Eagle mobile cargo inspection system, which allows 70 containers to be inspected per hour. He gave details on operations conducted with the Electronic Access Control System (EACS), which is complemented by x-ray inspection robots.

He also gave information on the operation of the system and the inspection procedures that allow for interconnectivity between the customs and police monitoring systems.

Finally, Captain Walker gave statistics on incidents that have occurred since 2004, which show that progress in this area has been meaningful. (See CHSP-III/INF 10/08)

(iii). Port of Caucedo, Dominican Republic

Mr. José Rodríguez provided information on the best practices underway at this terminal. He noted that it is part of a complex of ports operated by DP World at 53 terminals in 27 countries over five continents.

He pointed out that the essential concept is that all security measures are geared towards a logistical platform in which security of the entire supply chain is a priority.

32


He indicated that the Terminal is mixed, public and private, as valuable cooperation is received from CESEP for security matters. He also mentioned the BASC agreement and the ISO 28,000 certification of the terminal among its accomplishments.

Some examples of best practices are: use of the Navis Terminal Operating System (which functions in real time); the large percentage of staff that share the culture of security; a permanent and on-going system of risk analysis before and after events or disasters; continuous realignment of processes and controls; continuing education program for all personnel; a system of periodic internal and external audits; use of key performance indicators (KPIs); and the holding of joint meetings with security and operations personnel.

Finally, Mr. Rodríguez said that the terminal is in the process of getting certified under the C-TPAT agreement. (See CHSP-III/INF 8/08)

(iv). Port of Barrios, Guatemala

Mr. Pavel Chinchilla presented the best practices being followed at the Puerto Barrios Terminal, which is a privately operated port under a paid usufruct contract. (See CHSP-III/INF 11/08)

He indicated that the Port has a philosophy of comprehensive security, which is complemented by the hiring of a private security guard company with highly trained staff.

In order to comply with international regulations on maritime security for ships and port facilities (ISPS Code, IMO), the security of cargo, operations, ships, and personnel within the facilities is secured through the following general activities: physical surveillance, security guards, motorized patrols, maritime patrols, electronic surveillance, CCTV cameras, access controls, inspection rounds, and anti-narcotic and anti-terrorist controls. These are conducted in coordination with the Division of Ports and Airports (DIPA), Office of the Superintendent of Tax Administration (SAT), and the Ministry of Defense.

Internal measures can be divided into the following areas: administrative ones, including straightforward decision-making structures; legal ones, with service contracts that are structured in a way that identifies the scope and responsibilities of the services being hired; and financial ones, with budgets that are duly approved for the execution and implemention of new security standards, which are paid for with fees for services.

Mr. Chinchilla described how the standards of the Code have evolved in his port. Since 2004 the following stages have been completed: application of the ISPS Code and certification of the port facilities, increase in the number of CCTV cameras and addition of access control equipment; and increase in the number of K9 units to four. Since 2005 compliance with the ISPS Code has been enhanced with training sessions, simulations and practices, and by developing relationships with other agencies. Following are some of the frequent problems that have arisen: review of merchandise: manual inspection of export and import merchandise and low percentive of effective inspections. Such

33


inspections lead to complaints by the exporters and importers, delays, damages, loss of merchandise, and loss of market share.

He noted that the Port has set the following short-term goals for itself: inspect 100% of the containers exported and imported; avoid unnecessary invasive inspections; improve anti-narcotics and anti-terrorist controls; improve customs inspections (tax evasion); help make maritime trade more secure; and comply with security standards on the transport of merchandise in containers.

The following measures have been taken to help meet those goals: selection of a firm to install x-ray and gamma ray equipment, increased penetration and output, faster scanners, a good level of technical support and a training program, legal improvements (local and international), identification of customer references, improved environmental impact, greater intercommunication facility, and reasonable costs.

Mr. Chinchilla noted that several training programs have been launched in subjects never before taught for their port operations, such as radiological training now being done for 16 members of the port staff. He also called attention to the fact that in June 100% of the employees and users of the port will be introduced to these new topics. The objective is to familiarize everyone with how the equipment works and allay any fears.

He indicated that this program seeks to give order to operational flows, reduce claims for damaged merchandise, reduce insurance costs, reduce risk levels, have better customs and anti-narcotics control, and point out the importance of adjusting merchandise declarations.

Finally, he spoke about next steps. He said that these will be geared toward certifying the port under the Secure Freight Initiative (SFI); inspection by the SFI, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and DOE group; evaluation of the x-ray equipment in place and evaluation report on the gamma ray equipment; BASC certification; development of a new management system; and implementation of a system of audits.

(v). Haina International Terminal (HIT), Dominican Republic

Mr. Armando Rivas reported on the best practices followed at his Terminal, which is in Santo Domingo. (See CHSP-III/INF 5/08) In 2001 the private firm, HIT, signed an agreement with the Dominican Port Authority to consolidate operations of the Río Haina Terminal. In fulfillment of the agreement, HIT is making improvements to infrastructure in different parts of the terminal, including new fencing, pavement, drainage, lighting, the procurement of 2 gantry cranes, and improvements to operations.

Also, starting in 2004, HIT has been in charge of ISPS Code implementation. This obliged HIT to introduce the following measures: cargo inspections by customs (Imports and Exports), with the participation of all relevant government agencies and a HIT representative; comply with and uphold national and international regulations on port security; fulfill the requirements to maintain ISPS certification; maintain BASC certification by complying with the standards; continuously raise security standards to keep Haina free of drug trafficking, stowaways, and terrorism; and institute programs and newsletters to raise awareness among the work force to curtail illegal activities and the use of drugs and alcohol.

34


He noted that the terminal currently meets the following security standards: ISPS and BASC certification; there is one port facility security officer (PFSO) and three alternate officers; the PFSO coordinates all security measures with CESEP; water and land patrols are performed by the port operator and supervised by CESEP; the port is outfitted with CCTV systems; and the port has a single computerized access control system developed by HIT, which handles traffic of equipment, personnel, and vehicles, and works in coordination with the terminal system.

Finally, in light of these good results, he noted that the terminal has been praised by various national and international institutions for doing an excellent job on security.

(vi). Port of Veracruz, Mexico

Mr. Rubén Medina told of best practices at his port. He gave an historic account of the process of implementation of the ISPS Code at Veracruz, which has gone through the following stages: evaluation process from February 25 through March 16, 2004; approval on May 7, 2004; preparation of a security plan from May 8 to June 9, 2004; and approval of the plan and final certification on June 21, 2004.

He noted that within this process, several measures have been adopted to ensure compliance with the ISPS Code, including, among others: the hiring, training, and certification of the PSFO; hiring and training of personnel to perform specific A/18.2 security tasks; procurement of automated equipment for access control; walk-through metal detectors; Garret portable metal detectors; x-ray tunnels for inspection of bundles and luggage; ICIS gamma ray portal to inspect merchandise and detect radiation and OCR; CCTV; procurement of a patrol boat; installation of x-ray and gamma ray equipment to inspect cargo and containers; implementation of the AIS identification system; and implementation of a thermal camera for inspection of merchandise.

Finally, he said that there are currently 470 guards performing security functions, all of whom have been certified by the designated authority. (See CHSP-III/INF 13/08)

(vii). Port of Buenos Aires, Argentina

Mr. Hugo Sposaro reported on best practices in the port of Buenos Aires. He began his presentation by describing the mission and functions of the Gerencia de Seguridad y Control Ambiental. They include: preparation of security guidelines under the jurisdiction of the port of Buenos Aires; preparation of and coordination with port security and civil defense committees; coordination with the Navy Prefecture on security and environmental protection; coordination with all national entities involved in security and environmental protection under port jurisdiction.

He indicated the various components and equipment currently being used, including the following: ecological surveillance vehicles; CCTV, designed to maximize efforts to mitigate undesirable incidents, with a total of 84 cameras which allow visual monitoring 24 hours a day, 365 days a year; incorporation of control zones adjacent to the port that do not fall under the Code regime; and monitoring of the water surface in the harbor, in order to respond quickly to potential oil spills.

As for environmental conservation policy, he noted that this is geared towards promoting training to protect human, environmental, and labor resources by creating awareness among the various actors

35


involved in port activities and operations regarding how to care for and respect the environment. The port also promotes the rational and sustainable use of natural resources within the jurisdiction of the General Port Administration, while it encourages change and values through environmental education. It seeks to prevent the harmful and/or dangerous effects of potential environmental diasters, so that these activities can be economically, ecologically, and socially sustainable.

In closing, he said that the port has designed a Special Program of On-going Training Exercises. The purpose is to ensure that security is a top priority and to protect port facilities in every way, including economically, when money must be spent on equipment or facilities. Thus, these are considered to be additional services offered by the port, and not just a cost. (See CHSP-III/INF 6/08)

b. Projects of cooperation for port security:

(i). United States

Commander Raymond Negron of the U.S. Coast guard presented the USCG’s cooperation projects. He pointed out that the USCG is considering several direct activities to benefit the various ports that have been receiving assistance.

He explained in detail such activities as inspection and risk assessment visits, as well as visits to establish the use of best practices.

He indicated that the program is aimed at meeting the following goals in the long term:

Growth of bilateral and multilateral cooperation Workshops to evaluate security measures Implementation of best practices, which generally revolve around such factors as the gathering

of preliminary information and exchanges with the United States’ trading partners Design of a program of periodic visits while maintaining a continuous dialogue Visits to more developed ports to see the practical application of security measures. On this

point he noted that since 2005, 146 visits to different ports have been conducted, all of which have been positive in different ways.

Special inspections of container facilities, bulk liquid and bulk solid cargo facilities, cruise ship terminals, specialized terminals, etc.

Institution of maritime control centers Creation of EPIC intelligence centers Creation of Security Committees Holding of joint exercises coordinated with other ports Development of a cooperation and technical assistance agreement

He spoke of the various experiences of the countries of the hemisphere, giving details on programs in different countries and best practices the USCG wishes to develop with them.

Finally, he stressed that the maritime port security system should have a global approach, and should be implemented with the cooperation of the national and international community.

36


Next, Major Vermond Robert of the United States National Guard gave a brief summary of the cooperation mechanisms which his organization offers to the other countries of the hemisphere. He pointed out the technical assistance and mutual cooperation workshops, because they not only provide training for port personnel, but also review equipment and make recommendations to improve facilities and select specific equipment.

In closing, he said that his program has visited 59 terminals in 20 countries, and that it is available by request through the United States embassy in the respective country. It is free of cost to the requesting country. (See CHSP-III/INF 12/08)

(ii). International and regional organizations

Dr. Michael Donner of the World Bank reported that regarding security, the Bank has focused on two specific lines of action: implementation of the ISPS Code and establishment of Supply Chain Security (SCS).

As regards implementation of the Code, he explained the methodology used in a study of 12 countries to identify costs incurred by ports or governments to comply with this standard.

He noted that the countries selected encompass a wide variety of kinds of ports, including 3 in East Africa, 5 in the Baltic and Black Sea, and 4 in Latin America.

He pointed out that the study covers such issues as the order of magnitude of the ports and the volume of cargo that they move, security levels in port facilities, the lay-out of the port, its geographical position, collateral benefits gained from implementation, and the average cost per TEU or per ton.

The study’s starting point was the launching point of the Code, 2004, and costs were adjusted to current values.

He stated that the average security levels found in the study were lower than what had been expected. In many cases, the levels had only been designed to meet the minimum required for certification

He also explained that the study made it possible to draw comparisons with a study done by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) on the same topic. The following elements are noteworthy regarding the two studies.

UNCTAD performed its evaluation through questionnaires designed specifically for that purpose. It took a sampling of 55 ports on 5 continents. The World Bank only covered 12 ports, but the study was conducted through site visits by Bank technical specialists.

UNCTAD’s questionnaire primarily covered ports in developed countries. The Bank, in turn, only visited ports in developing countries.

UNCTAD included major and minor ports, while the Bank primarily analyzed medium-sized and minor ports.

UNCTAD just concentrated on port facilities; the Bank evaluated the entire supply chain logistics.

37


When comparing the results it is important to note that in the UNCTAD study the average costs of investments were as follows: US$3.60 per TEU and US$0.08 per ton. In the World Bank study the figures were US$4.95 per TEU and US$0.22 per ton.

He stated that when identifying the collateral benefits of applying the security measures, no major differences were found. Both studies found the following benefits:

• Reduction of the number of additional operations• Reduced thefts and smuggling• Growth of revenue from custsoms duties• Better customs control• Decreased delays• Greater order in operations• Maintained levels of efficiency

As regards expansion of the Bank study to include Supply Chain Security, Dr. Donner indicated that this has allowed them to create an SCS Guide. This will serve as the basis for further studies, and will help determine the investments required to cover the complete path of cargo from its point of orgin to its final destination. It will also make it possible to identify commercial agents and transport companies that take greater care in protecting their cargo.

He pointed out that both studies have received cooperation from other agencies committed to the system, such as the World Customs Organization (WCO), the International Standards Organization (ISO), the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the World Trade Organization (WTO), regional agencies, national governments, and the International Association of Logistics Professionals (IALP).

He noted that both studies identified the most relevant initiatives, including:

• Submission of manifests 24-hours in advance• C-TPAT• CSI• ISO 28.000• ATDI• 10+2 documents rule• 100% scanning of containers by 2012• AEO• Multilateral, bilateral, and unilateral cooperation between agencies or countries• Joint border operations• Authorization and registration of operators

The following equipment advances have noticeably improved security: computerized cargo systems, data collection systems, risk analysis software, special container seals, scanners, and real time electronic controls for truck and maritime transport. (See CHSP-III/INF 9/08)

38


c. Panel of experts on port cooperation among member states

This session was chaired by the First Vice Chairman of the Confeence, Dr. Ricardo Luján, principal delegate of Argentina. The panel moderator was Dr. Carlos M. Gallegos, Executive Secretary of the CIP.

(i) TRAINMAR Association of South America (ATAS)

Mr. Luis Musolino, on behalf of TRAINMAR Association of South America (ATAS), spoke first. He explained the procedures ATAS is applying to detect training needs; they emanate from the UNCTAD mechanisms. He said that training cannot be provided on just any topic. It is essential to first conduct a needs analysis, which makes it possible to select the topics and materials to be used, to identify instructors’ profiles, and to define the target population. With all of these elements it is necessary to evaluate what the students should know and compare that to what they actually know.

He explained that ATAS has had excellent results with this methodology, not only in Latin America, but also in such countries as Romania, Georgia, Egypt, and China. He pointed out that ATAS currently has programs for basic and advanced training of PSFOs and ISPS auditors. (See CHSP-III/INF 42/08)

(ii) Caribbean Shipping Association (CSA)

Mr. Fernando Rivera of the Caribbean Shipping Associaton explained the activities of his association and detailed the programs underway to provide cooperation to the member countries in that part of the Americas. He particularly pointed out cooperation for taining and technical assistance in the operation of specialized terminals and cruise ship terminals. This has allowed the CSA to form a working group to evaluate these experiences and best practices, and to establish an Inter-governmental Port Security Committee.

He noted that CSA has established a database in order to help furnish countries with information on the use of state-of-the-art technology, and of the costs and effects of impacts on other aspects of port operations.

He indicated that this program benefits the member countries of CSA, but that it is also open to other countries who may wish to join.

(iii) Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)

Dr. Fernando Sánchez, the ECLAC representative, explained the cooperation offered by ECLAC in the area of transport, as well as its concern for port security and the need to raise security standards

He noted that security has a direct impact on the development of the transport sector, and therefore, on the economic growth of the member countries.

He stressed the importance of establishing ties of cooperation to allow countries to reduce their economic risk, which can threaten the normal life of a country. He said that for these reasons, the respective Ministers instructed ECLAC to assess the status of implementation of the ISPS Code, to

39


identify the effects of compliance with it, and to evaluate how this may affect competitiveness and efficiency.

He remarked that the study ordered by the Ministers revealed the level of costs to be expected for implementation of the Code’s requirements, and how these are transferred to the users of the system. This is cause for great concern and warrants further study.

Dr. Sánchez pointed out the cooperation programs that ECLAC is implementing. They are geared toward incorporating all activities, not just port operations but also supply chain security for all international transport. Some shortcomings have been identified which must be corrected with technical assistance and specific cooperation.

(iv) Inter-American Committee on Ports (CIP) of the OAS

Dr. Diego Sepúlveda spoke on behalf of the CIP to describe cooperation in general, as well as what CIP specifically offers for port development.

He noted that the CIP and its predecessor, the Inter-American Port Conference, have been offering cooperation programs to the member countries since 1956. These have yielded optimum results and have concentrated on the modernization of ports and the participation of the private sector in the new scenario of the hemispheric port system.

He pointed out the Agreement on Cooperation and Mutual Assistance among Inter-American Port Authorities, which was signed by 19 countries. However, while it is still in effect, it has only been ratified by 4 national legislatures—those of Argentina, Ecuador, Peru, and Mexico. Thus this is a lost opportunity to further develop cooperation on port issues.

Dr. Sepúlveda said that the agreement allows and fosters the exchange of experts, in-house training, and specific technical assistance among port authorities. In general, it opens the door to exchanging experiences and promoting best practices, but it is not sufficiently used.

He also spoke about the importance of specific forums for discussing specific topics, such as this Third Hemispheric Conference on Port Security. He noted the benefits these offer to the countries, as can be seen in the recommendations emanating from the first two Conferences, and from others, such as the Conference on Environmental Port Protection which the CIP held last year in Panama.

He drew attention to the importance of working with the private sector through the Technical Advisory Groups (TAGs), which have produced excellent results. He highlighted the work of the TAG on Port Security, chaired by the United States.

He also said that CIP spends almost 60% of its general budget on suspport for training. This has yeilded very good results for a large number of beneficiaries.

He formally expressed CIP’s appreciation to Puertos del Estado of Spain, which for more than 12 years has been giving significant support to the member countries for human resources training, not only with special courses on Port Engineering and the Environment and on Port Management, but also through a

40


system of internships on various topics in different ports in Spain. These have provided the ports of the hemisphere with many opportunities for improvement of both the public and private sectors.

(v) International Maritime Organization (IMO)

Captain Curtis Roach, regional representative of the IMO, reported on the extensive cooperation his organization has been providing to the member countries for impementation of the security measures established in the Code.

He noted the results of seminars and courses. He specifically pointed out the very beneficial training activity conducted in the Port of Veracruz, Mexico, which provided special support to the countries of the Caribbean.

He highlighted initiatives by the IMO and other international and regional organizations that have been providing cooperation in the maritime port sector. He also noted the special program for technical assistance and cooperation the IMO has been offering to the member states for implementation of the Code.

Lastly, he made clear that it is important to create new opportunities for cooperation, and that it is necessary to generate and design specific tools to motivate ports in the hemisphere to raise their standards and levels of security. (See CHSP-III/INF 14/08)

Closing Session

This session took place on April 10, 2008 at 2:30pm. The following people presided over the session: the Minister of Defense of the Dominican Republic, General Ramón Antonio Aquino García; the Commander General of the Navy, Admiral Julio César Ventura Bayonet; the Director of CESEP, Vice Admiral Homero Lajara Solá; the Chairman of the APORDOM Board of Directors, Mr. Luis Taveras; the Executive Director of APORDOM, General José Aníbal Sainz Jajemilian; the Assistant Secretary of Ports and Navigable Waterways of the Republic of Argentina, Dr. Ricardo Luján; and Dr. Carlos M. Gallegos, Executive Secretary of the CIP.

Vice Admiral Homero Lajara spoke first. He thanked the delegates for their attendance, the authorities for speaking at the Conference, the private sector for supporting the Conference activities, and he also thanked the support personnel. He highlighted the fact that the Conference had been successful in drawing delegates from 32 of the 34 member countries of the OAS, as well as representatives of Spain, France, the IMO, WCO, WHO, ECLAC, and the USCG, and Ms. Sherry Tross, Chief of Staff of the Assistant Secretary General of the OAS and Ambassador Alexandre Addor-Neto, Secretary of Multidimensional Security of the OAS.

He noted that bilateral agreements of great interest to the Caribbean had been signed during the course of the Conference, particularly between Haiti and Dominica

He urged the delegates to raise the profile of the CIP within the OAS. He also thanked that agency for its work on behalf of the member states, and for the distinguished performance of the CIP Executive Secretary, Dr. Carlos M. Gallegos.

41


Finally, he called for a Fourth Hemispheric Conference on Port Security, and concluded by wishing everyone well on the return to their respective countries.

Next, Dr. Gallegos praised the work accomplished during the Conference. He expressed satisfcation that the many points on the extensive agenda were covered, and concluded that goals and objectives had been set which would make it possible to assess the true status of implementaiton of the ISPS Code in the member states of the OAS.

He pointed out that the Secretariat has a whole file of proposals aimed at spreading best practices to all the ports of the hemisphere, and that these can be shared at the upcoming meetings of the CIP, the TAGs, and the Executive Board.

He congratulated the authorities of the Dominican Republic and the private sector sponsors for an excellent job in organizing the Conference. He particularly singled out Vice Admiral Homero Lajara of CESEP and Mr. Luis Taveras of APORDOM.

Lastly, Mr. Luis Taveras closed the session by thanking the CIP/OAS for giving the Dominican Republic the opportunity to demonstrate its managerial capacity by organizing such a large event as this Conference.

He pointed out the high level of professionalism demonstrated throughout the Conference, as well as the pleasant atmosphere of fraternity and friendship that reigned among the delegates. This enabled them to share experiences and take in ideas and information that will certainly be most useful to the member countries.

He also stressed the commendable work of the Executive Secretary of the CIP/OAS, Dr. Carlos M. Gallegos, and indicated that this cooperation will allow the the CIP, APRODOM, CESEP, and APEC University to implement the agreement they have signed. The accord seeks to train professionals in maritime port issues, to bring greater success to the ports of the country and the region.

Mr. Taveras thanked all of the staff of APORDOM, the CIP, and CESEP for their collaboration. He also thanked all the delegates for their contributions to the success of the Conference.

Finally, on behalf of the Dominican Republic, he again thanked all the participants and wished them a happy return home. The Conference adjourned at 2:45pm.

42


ANEX A: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

I. MEMBER COUNTRIES OF THE OAS

ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA

Jason ROBERTSChief Port Security OfficerAntigua and Barbuda Port [email protected]

ARGENTINA

Ricardo, LUJANSubsecretarioPuertos y Vías Navegables [email protected]

Carlos SPOSAROSubgerente Seguridad y Control AmbientalAdministración General de Puerto Buenos [email protected]

José FACCHINIPrefecto PrincipalPrefectura Naval de [email protected]

BAHAMAS

Herbert BAINISPS Coordinator for the BahamasBahamas Port [email protected]

BARBADOS

Everton WALTERSChief Executive OfficerBarbados Port [email protected]

Kenneth ATHERLEYDivisional ManagerBarbados Port [email protected]

43

mailto:[email protected]








BELIZE

Kendrick DALYChief Safety and Security OfficerBelize Port [email protected]

Stacie SWIFTHuman Resource ManagerBelize Port [email protected]

BRAZIL

Jose GAMAAssessor Especial Secretaria Especial de [email protected]

Luiz RESANOAssessor do Subsecretario de Planejamento e Desenvolvimento Portuario Secretaria Especial de [email protected]

Jose COUTOSecretario de Acompanhamento e EstudosSecretario Especial de [email protected]

Camilo DE SOUZACoordenadorSecretaria Especial de [email protected]

David SICCAEstado Maior de Armada Divisão de Portos e HidrovíasMarinha do [email protected]

Itacir COELHOCargo Comissionado TecnicoAgência Nacional de Transportes Aquaviá[email protected]

Enzio BORGHETTISecretario Executivo – Commisão Nacional Segurança Pública PortuariaMinistério da Justiç[email protected]

44











CANADA

Terry BATTENSenior Advisor Port OperationsTransport [email protected]

Stephen LARKINSenior Policy Analyst, Marine Security Policy (International)Transport [email protected]

Douglas FRASERCounsellor, Alternative RepresentativePermanent Mission of Canada to the [email protected]

CHILE

Hernan PAREDESSubdirector Dirección de Seguridad y Operaciones MarítimasDirectemar- Armada de [email protected]

Claudio SEPULVEDAJefe Protección Instalaciones PortuariasDirectemar-Armada de [email protected]

COLOMBIA

Manuel A. HERNANDEZAgregado Naval, Militar y AéreoArmada Nacional, Dirección Marítima

COSTA RICA

Urías UGALDEPresidente EjecutivoInstituto de Puertos del [email protected]

José DIAZDirector de Seguridad PortuariaJunta Administración [email protected]

45









Alberto CALVINJefe de SeguridadJunta Administración [email protected]

DOMINICA

Benoit BARDOUILLEGeneral ManagerDominica Air and Sea Ports [email protected]

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC

Luís TAVERASPresidente del ConsejoAutoridad Portuaria [email protected]

José SANZDirector Ejecutivo Autoridad Portuaria [email protected]

Homero LAJARA Director Cuerpo Especializado de Seguridad [email protected]

José LOZANOSubdirector Ejecutivo, Encargado de Asuntos InternacionalesAutoridad Portuaria [email protected]

Lludelis ESPINALAsesora MarítimaAutoridad Portuaria [email protected]

Maria de Lourdes NUÑEZAsesoraAutoridad Portuaria Dominicana

46







Freddy DOMINGUEZEncargado del Departamento de Evaluación y AnálisisDirección General de [email protected]

EL SALVADOR

Carlos A. BORJADirector EjecutivoAutoridad Marítima Portuaria [email protected]

Fredy VILLALTAMiembro del Consejo DirectivoAutoridad Marítima [email protected]

José ESCALANTEEncargado de Seguridad PortuariaAutoridad Marítima [email protected]

GUATEMALA

María I. FERNANDEZDirectora EjecutivaComisión Portuaria [email protected]

Pavel CHINCHILLASuperintendente de Seguridad Integral-Oficial de Protección OPIPTerminal Portuaria Puerto [email protected]

Rafael AGUILARAdministrador Portuario Nacional Empresa Portuaria Nacional [email protected]

Alfonso CAMPINSSecretario [email protected]

47










Hugo ARRIAGAAbogadoEmpresa Portuaria Nacional Santo Tomas de [email protected]

GRENADA

Henrique CUMMINGSOperations SupervisorGrenada Port [email protected]

Don McKENZIEAdjunct to Commissioner of PoliceRoyal Grenada Police [email protected]

HAITI

Ginelle L. NOELChef de Gabinet du Directeur GénéralAutorité Portuaire [email protected]

Hugues DESGRANGESMembre de Autorité DesignéeAutorité Portuaire [email protected]

HONDURAS

Dennis CHINCHILLASecretario EjecutivoComisión Nacional de Protección [email protected]

JAMAICA

Rosalie DONALDSONSenior Vice PresidentInternational MarketingPort Authority of [email protected]

48









Hopeton DeLISSERVice PresidentHarbours and Port ServicesPort Authority of [email protected]

MÉXICO

Ángel GONZÁLEZ RUL Director General de PuertosSecretaria de Comunicaciones y [email protected]

Francisco PASTRANADirector de Tarifas y EstadísticasSecretaria de Comunicaciones y [email protected]

Manuel MONDRAGONJefe de Departamento de Asuntos Internacionales PortuariosSecretaria de Comunicaciones y [email protected]

PANAMÁ

Zoila YANISELLISubdirectora de PuertosAutoridad Marítima de Panamá[email protected]

Eric A. CHANGSuperintendente Jefe de ProtecciónTerminal Internacional de [email protected]

Giselle CASTROOficial Técnico de ProtecciónAutoridad Marítima de Panamá[email protected]

49









PARAGUAY

Juan MUÑOZMiembro Titular del DirectorioAdministración Nacional de Navegación y [email protected]

Víctor FERREIRA FuncionarioAdministración Nacional de Navegación y [email protected]

PERÚ

Juan POZOJefe de la Unidad de Protección y SeguridadAutoridad Portuaria Nacional [email protected]

SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS

Errol DOUGLASGeneral ManagerSt. Christopher Air and Sea Ports [email protected]

SAINT LUCIA

Kennedy FRANCISChief of Ports PoliceSaint Lucia Air and Sea Ports [email protected]

SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES

Cornelius CHARLESPort Facility Security Officer and Chief of Ports PoliceSVG Port [email protected]

50








SURINAME

John A. DEFARESGeneral ManagerSuriname Port Management [email protected]

Charl GETROUXOperation Manager Suriname Port Management [email protected]

Pearl GERDINGHead Security Suriname Port Management [email protected]

Michael AMAFODirector Maritime Authority Suriname [email protected]

Lloyd GEMERTSRegistration, Inspection and Certification DepartmentMaritime Authority [email protected]

TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

Michael BRATHWAITECommander Port Marine Ship Safety Port Authority of Trinidad & Tobago

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Sean CONNAUGHTONAdministratorMaritime [email protected]

Gregory HALLDirector Office of International ActivitiesU.S.Maritime [email protected]

51









Michael BROWNCaptain, retiredU.S. Coast [email protected]

Ryan LAIInternational Trade SpecialistUnited States Department of [email protected]

Lillian ALMODOVAR Senior ManagerInstitute for Water [email protected]

David GRIER Senior Navigation AnalystU.S. Section [email protected]

Carlos OCHOAProgram ManagerU.S. Customs and Border [email protected]

Janet ESPINO-YOUNGLieutenant CommanderUnited States Coast [email protected]

Scott FERGUSONCaptainUnited States Coast [email protected]

Kevin COOKOperations Command Implementation TeamUnited States Coast [email protected]

Anthony CURRYCommanderUnited States Coast [email protected]

52











Raymond NEGRONInternational Port Security Liaison OfficerUnited States Coast Guard

Edmond MORRISPort Security SpecialistUnited States Coast [email protected]

Christopher ROBERGECaptain United States Coast [email protected]

Suzanne ENGLEBERTCaptain, Chief of PreventionUnited States Coast [email protected]

Carlos TORRESCommanderUnited States Coast Guard [email protected]

George QUICKVice PresidentInternational Organization of Masters, Mates and [email protected]

URUGUAY

Gaston SILBERMANNVicepresidenteAdministración Nacional de [email protected]

Edison PEÑASub Jefe Departamento OPIPAdministración Nacional de [email protected]

Hugo GIUSIANOOficial de Protección de la Instalación Portuaria Puerto de Juan [email protected]

53










Osvaldo SEVESODirector de Secretaria de Protección MarítimaPrefectura Nacional [email protected]

VENEZUELA

Rafael DA SILVA Presidente Instituto Nacional de Espacios Acuáticos e [email protected]

II. OAS PERMANENT OBSERVER STATES

SPAIN

Santiago MONTMANYJefe del Departamento de Cooperación Puertos del [email protected]

III. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

ASOCIACION TRAINMAR AMERICA DEL SUR

Luis MUSOLINOLicenciado en Administració[email protected]

CARIBBEAN SHIPPING ASSOCIATION

Fernando RIVERAPresidentCaribbean Shipping [email protected]

Stephen BELLGeneral ManagerCaribbean Shipping [email protected]

54








CARIBBEAN COMMUNITY

John LEWISSpecialistCaribbean Community [email protected]

COMISIÓN ECONÓMICA PARA AMÉRICA LATINA Y EL CARIBE

Fernando SANCHEZ-ALBAVERADirectorDivisión de Recursos Naturales e InfraestructuraComisión Económica para America Latina y el [email protected]

INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION

Curtis ROACHRegional Maritime Adviser, CaribbeanInternational Maritime [email protected]

ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES

Sherry TROSSChief of StaffAssistant Secretary [email protected]

Alexander ADDOR-NETOSecretarioSeguridad Multidimensional [email protected]

WORLD BANK

Michel DONNERPort and Maritime Transport SpecialistTransport UnitWorld [email protected]

55








WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION

Christian FREDERICKSONCommunicable Disease Advisor, Regional Coordinator for Integrated Vector Management and PesticidesWorld Health Organization/Pan-American Health [email protected]

56



ANEX BLIST OF DOCUMENTS

Número de Documento/ Document Number

Título/Title Idioma/Language

CHSP-III/doc.1/07 Lista Preliminar de Documentos Textual

CHSP-III/doc.1/07 rev. 1 Lista de Documentos Textual

CHSP-III/doc.2/07 Proyecto Preliminar de Temario E, I

CHSP-III/doc.2/07 rev. 1 Proyecto de Temario E, I

CHSP-III/doc.3/07 Lista Preliminar de Participantes Textual

CHSP-III/doc.3/07 rev. 1 Lista de Participantes Textual

CHSP-III/doc.4/07 rev. 1 Proyecto Preliminar de Calendario E, I

CHSP-III/doc.4/07 rev. 2 Proyecto de Calendario E, I

CHSP-III/doc.5/07 Informe Final E, I

CHSP-III/INF.1/08 CV Resumidos Miercoles E

CHSP-III/INF.2/08 CV Resumidos Martes ECHSP-III/INF.3/08 CV Resumidos Jueves ECHSP-III/INF.4/08 CV Resumidos Jueves ICHSP-III/INF.5/08 Río Haina, Un Puerto enfocado a la Seguridad

y a la Calidad (Presentado por Armando Rivas )

E

CHSP-III/INF.6/08 Administración General de Puertos S.E. - Puerto Buenos Aires (Presentado por Carlos

Hugo Sposaro)

E

CHSP-III/INF.7/08 Mejores prácticas utilizadas en la resolución de problemas encontrados durante la

Implementación de los estándares para la protección portuaria (Presentado por Eric A.

Chang C.)

E

CHSP-III/INF.8/08 Puerto Multimodal CAUCEDO (Presentado por José Antonio Rodriguez)

E

57


CHSP-III/INF.9/08 The World Bank activities in relation to Port Security and Supply Chain Security

(Presented by Michael Luc Donner)

I

CHSP-III/INF.10/08 Existing Security Measures at Jamaica's Major Seaports (Presented by Omar Walker)

I

CHSP-III/INF.11/08 Identificación de problemas frecuentes y comunes y procura de soluciones a los

mismos mediante mejores prácticas - Puertos Barrios, Guatemala (Presentado por Pavel

Chinchilla)

E

CHSP-III/INF.12/08 U.S. Coast Guard International Port Security (Presented by Raymond Negron)

I

CHSP-III/INF.13/08 Implementación del Código PBIP - México (Presentadio por Ruben Medina)

E

CHSP-III/INF.14/08 State of International Standards and Regulations on Port Security. (Presented by

Curtis A Roach)

I

CHSP-III/INF.15/08 U.S. Customs and Border Protection - CTPAT (Presented by Carlos Ochoa)

I

CHSP-III/INF.16/08 International Health Regulations - CAREC/ PAHO/WHO (Presented by Christian

Frederickson)

I

CHSP-III/INF.17/08 Maritime Security from the Viewpoint of Maritime Labor (Presented by George A.

Quick)

I

CHSP-III/INF.18/08 La Seguridad Portuaria en El Salvador II (Presentado por Luis Escalante)

E

CHSP-III/INF.19/08 Protección Portuaria en Guatemala (presentado por Maria Isabel Fernández)

E

CHSP-III/INF.20/08 Estructura de Protección en Panamá (Presentado por Zoila Yaniselli)

E

CHSP-III/INF.21/08 Desarrollo Legislativo Estratégico de la Unión Europea sobre la Mejora de la

Protección de los Puertos (Presentado por Pedro J. Román)

E

CHSP-III/INF.22/08 Protección Portuaria en Honduras (presentado por Dennis M. Chinchilla)

E

CHSP-III/INF.23/08 Protección Portuaria en México (presentado por Francisco Pastrana Alcántara)

E

58


CHSP-III/INF.24/08 Protección Portuaria en Costa Rica (Presentado por Lic. José Luis Díaz V y el Sr.

Alberto Manuel Calvin Jhonson)E

CHSP-III/INF.25/08 US Port Security (Presented by Sean Connaughton)

I

CHSP-III/INF.26/08 Plataforma Tecnológica Con Visión Futurista al servicio de la Protección Portuaria (Presentado por Homero Lajara Sola)

E

CHSP-III/INF.27/08 Protección Portuaria en Uruguay (Presentado por Edison Peña)

E

CHSP-III/INF.28/08 Protección Portuaria en Barbados (Presented by Everton Walters)

I

CHSP-III/INF.29/08 Protección Portuaria en Grenada (Presented by Enrique Cummins)

I

CHSP-III/INF.30/08 IMO Maritime Security Policy background paper

I

CHSP-III/INF.31/08Existing Security Measures at Jamaica's Major Seaports (Presented by Hopeton

Delisser)I

CHSP-III/INF.32/08 Protección Portuaria en Argentina (Presentado por José Luis Fachinni)

E

CHSP-III/INF.33/08 Protección Portuaria en Paraguay (Presentado por Juan Carlos Muñoz)

E

CHSP-III/INF.34/08 Current State of Port Security in Saint Lucia (Presented by Kennedy Francis)

I

CHSP-III/INF.35/08 Port Security in Suriname (Presented by Mr. Michael Amafo)

I

CHSP-III/INF.36/08 Protección Portuaria en Brasil (Presentado por Luis Fernando Resano)

P

CHSP-III/INF.37/08 Protección Portuaria en Colombia (Presentado por Manuel Hernández)

E

CHSP-III/INF.38/08 Port Security in Trinidad y Tobago (Presented by Michael Barthwaite)

I

CHSP-III/INF.39/08 Situación Actual de las Medidas de Protección Portuaria en el Perú (Presentado

por Juan Pozo)

E

CHSP-III/INF.40/08 Protección Portuaria en Venezuela (Presentado por Rafael da Silva)

E

CHSP-III/INF.41/08 Protección Portuaria en Chile (Presentado por Claudio Sepúlveda)

E

59


CHSP-III/INF.42/08 Capacitación PBIP (Presentado por Luis Musolino)

E

60