[House Hearing, 106 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
PORT SECURITY: PROTECTING FLORIDA'S PORTS FROM THE THREAT OF DRUG
TRAFFICKING
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
DRUG POLICY, AND HUMAN RESOURCES
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 31, 2000
__________
Serial No. 106-278
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house
http://www.house.gov/reform
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
75-061 PDF WASHINGTON : 2001
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland TOM LANTOS, California
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut ROBERT E. WISE, Jr., West Virginia
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
STEPHEN HORN, California PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
JOHN L. MICA, Florida PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
DAVID M. McINTOSH, Indiana ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington,
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana DC
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
MARSHALL ``MARK'' SANFORD, South DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
Carolina ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
BOB BARR, Georgia DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
DAN MILLER, Florida JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
ASA HUTCHINSON, Arkansas JIM TURNER, Texas
LEE TERRY, Nebraska THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois HAROLD E. FORD, Jr., Tennessee
GREG WALDEN, Oregon JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DOUG OSE, California ------
PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
HELEN CHENOWETH-HAGE, Idaho (Independent)
DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
Kevin Binger, Staff Director
Daniel R. Moll, Deputy Staff Director
James C. Wilson, Chief Counsel
Robert A. Briggs, Chief Clerk
Phil Schiliro, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources
JOHN L. MICA, Florida, Chairman
BOB BARR, Georgia PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
ASA HUTCHINSON, Arkansas JIM TURNER, Texas
DOUG OSE, California JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
Ex Officio
DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Sharon Pinkerton, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Charley Diaz, Congressional Fellow
Ryan McKee, Clerk
Sarah Despres, Minority Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on October 31, 2000................................. 1
Statement of:
McDonough, James R., Director, Florida Office of Drug
Control; Paul DeMariano, Port Director, Port Everglades,
FL; Charles Towsley, Seaport Director, Dante B. Fascell
Port of Miami-Dade, FL; Robert McNamara, Director of Field
Operations, U.S. Customs Service; and Arthur Coffey,
president, International Longshoremen's Association........ 14
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
DeMariano, Paul, Port Director, Port Everglades, FL, prepared
statement of............................................... 31
McDonough, James R., Director, Florida Office of Drug
Control, prepared statement of............................. 17
McNamara, Robert, Director of Field Operations, U.S. Customs
Service, prepared statement of............................. 40
Mica, Hon. John L., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Florida, prepared statement of.................... 5
Towsley, Charles, Seaport Director, Dante B. Fascell Port of
Miami-Dade, FL, prepared statement of...................... 35
PORT SECURITY: PROTECTING FLORIDA'S PORTS FROM THE THREAT OF DRUG
TRAFFICKING
----------
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 31, 2000
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and
Human Resources,
Committee on Government Reform,
Port Everglades, FL.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:30 a.m., in
the Chambers, Administration Building, 1850 Eller Drive, Port
Everglades, FL, Hon. John L. Mica (chairman of the
subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representative Mica.
Also present: Representative Shaw.
Staff present: Sharon Pinkerton, staff director and chief
counsel; Charley Diaz, congressional fellow; Ryan McKee, clerk;
and Sarah Despres, minority counsel.
Mr. Mica. Good morning. I'd like to call this hearing of
the Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources
Subcommittee to order.
I'm pleased this morning to be in Port Everglades and
Broward County. I also welcome our colleague from the Ways and
Means Committee, Mr. Shaw. Actually, this is your area, and
we're so pleased to be here and thank you for being here today,
too. I know we've had trouble getting out of Washington, also,
a disruptive schedule. But I did want to proceed with a hearing
this morning. We've delayed holding this because of some of our
requests from Members, but again, thank you for hosting us
today here in your city.
I'm kind of glad we don't have too many Members here, most
of them stuck in Washington, because this isn't exactly a
Chamber of Commerce Fort Lauderdale day.
Mr. Shaw. We do better.
Mr. Mica. The sun isn't shining this morning, but I'm sure
it will be back.
I'm pleased to be here. We're here on a very serious issue,
and that's port security, protecting Florida's ports from the
threat of drug trafficking. The order of business today will be
I'll first open with a statement. I'll yield then to Mr. Shaw,
if he has a statement. And with agreement from the minority,
without objection, we're going to leave the record open for an
additional week, for 3 weeks, for members to submit statements
to the official record, because we do have people who have been
held in Washington on this occasion. So without objection, so
ordered, the record will be open for a period of 3 weeks.
Also, I notify the witnesses today that questions will also
be submitted to you from the subcommittee and also committee
members who are not with us. So we would like you to respond.
And those, without objection, will also be made part of the
record of this hearing.
As chairman of the House Subcommittee on Criminal Justice,
Drug Policy, and Human Resources, I've had the opportunity to
travel across this country examining the problem of illegal--
our illegal drug epidemic. Today we'll take a closer look at
the growing crisis here at home--namely, the smuggling of
illegal narcotics through Florida seaports. This congressional
field hearing will focus specifically on criminal activity in
and around the ports of Port Everglade and Miami, FL. These two
ports account for a large percentage of the vast quantities of
drugs being smuggled into the United States each year.
Two years ago, with the start of the 106th Congress, I took
over this subcommittee from my good friend, Dennis Hastert, who
is now the Speaker of the House. The very first place that I
visited as chairman and held a field hearing was in my own
district in central Florida near Orlando, to examine the
growing heroin epidemic in central Florida. Today, as we
approach the close, and we hope it's the close, of the 106th
Congress, we're back in Florida, and this time in south
Florida, to examine the threat posed by cocaine and other
drugs.
U.S. seaports handle 95 percent of our Nation's trade. As a
major U.S. import/export trade destination, with some of the
largest cargo and passenger ports in the world, Florida is a
natural conduit for the free flow of goods, both legally and
illegally. We know from history that Florida, with its 1,350
miles of largely uninhabited coastline, has been a haven for
smugglers. In the modern era, with its close proximity to drug-
producing countries like Colombia, Florida is once again the
target of illegal smuggling. However, this time it's with a
product of illegal narcotics.
Florida accounted for 65 percent of the total cocaine
seizures in the United States in 1998. That represents 150 to
200 metric tons of cocaine. And we may even hear testimony
today that says that's even larger.
Over the past 2 years, as subcommittee chairman, I've
conducted dozens of more than 40 hearings on the topics of
illegal narcotics. Many of those were field hearings like this,
because south Florida isn't the sole haven of the problem.
During the past year, I've presided over field hearings in
Honolulu. While it's a nice location, I might say I flew in
there on an evening, Mr. Shaw, a Saturday evening, spent the
day in a State prison and drug treatment programs and conducted
the hearing, and I flew back to Washington. I did that hearing
at the request of our ranking member, Mrs. Mink, who also has
some of the same problems at her port facilities.
We also conducted hearings in Sacramento, San Diego, other
large port areas, New Orleans, Louisiana. Additionally, Dallas,
central Florida and even in the heart of America, in Sioux
City, IA. So we have covered our Nation trying to look at the
specific aspects of the problems.
Today we come to Port Everglades because south Florida
continues to be plagued by illegal narcotics, much of them
arriving through this port facility and through our coastline.
Just last week, the U.S. Customs seized nearly $11 million
worth of cocaine and marijuana on the Miami River. In May,
Customs officials seized $6.7 million worth of cocaine aboard a
container ship docked here at Port Everglades. In April,
Federal agents arrested six dock workers in Port Everglades for
illegally smuggling thousands of pounds of cocaine and
marijuana.
Concerned with the growing security risk that we face, the
Governor of the State commissioned a study to assess Florida's
seaport security. This study, which was just released last
month, made specific recommendations on how to improve seaport
securities across the State of Florida and also specifically
here in south Florida. We look forward to hearing from Jim
McDonough, who is from our Office of State Drug Control Policy
and Florida's drug czar, about the study's findings,
recommendations, and hopefully, implementation.
Illegal drug smuggling is a topic that matters to everyday
Americans. These days you'd be hard-pressed to find an
individual or family whose life has not been affected by
illegal narcotics in some way. Drug abuse kills directly--the
last statics we had were 16,926, exceeding for the first time
in our records the number of homicides. So drug-related deaths
now exceed homicides nationally. According to Barry McCaffrey,
our national drug czar, and he took into account all the direct
and indirect, it now totals an astonishing 52,000 Americans die
per year, equal to any national security or war threat we've
ever faced. The scope of illegal drugs trade is almost
incomprehensible, with an estimated $400 billion a year, an
equivalent of 8 percent of the world's total international
trade. And the estimated cost to U.S. society--this statement
they prepared for me says $100 billion. And it can be as high
as a quarter of a trillion if we include everything.
But not all is lost. We continue to make slow but steady
progress despite the current administration's inattention,
mismanagement, and I believe at the beginning of this
administration, a lack of focused policy. We now have 31
federally designated High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas
[HIDTAs]. The HIDTA here in south Florida was, of course, one
of the original High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area
designations. These entities represent a Federal effort to
enhance cooperation, information, and information-sharing among
Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials. However,
as we'll hear later today, more must be done with regard to
HIDTA's role in seaport security.
The National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign is now in its
third year and hopefully is having some impact--beginning to
have an impact on our kids' attitudes about illegal drugs. Our
subcommittee has oversight responsibility for the Office of
National Drug Control Policy. And we are, in fact, a
congressional watchdog over the HIDTA program in this anti-drug
media campaign I spoke of.
In July, the House of Representatives passed a $1.3 billion
Colombia aid package that we hope will get to the supply of
cocaine and heroin that we're seeing coming in through this
area. Again, the subcommittee has actively and aggressively
sought to ensure that this administration is true to its word
and gets promised aid and assistance to Colombia, which, again,
is a source of so much of the hard drugs that we see coming
through here.
The illegal drug trade is clearly global. So this year I
hosted, along with the Speaker and Mr. Gelman and others, an
international drug control summit in Washington, which brought
together representatives of the various donor countries. As a
matter of fact, we're going to meet in Bolivia for the first
time I believe in February with some of the producing countries
and leaders in South America. So we continue to work with those
countries, also with the United Nation's Office of Drug Control
Policy. Pino Arlacchi is doing an outstanding job to combat the
problem of curtailing drugs at their source.
Illegal drug smuggling is a problem that concerns all of us
and one which will require a great deal of work on the part of
many good people if we're to overcome that problem. And that's
why we're here today.
I want to thank in advance our witnesses for being with us
today and providing the subcommittee with their testimony. I
appreciate that these witnesses are willing to come forward and
shed light on problems and resources and the constraints that
they face to effectively combat drug smuggling in Florida's
seaports. I want south Florida to know that I, along with many
of my colleagues, are committed to this fight, people like my
good colleague Clay Shaw, who has joined us today. And I thank
him for joining the subcommittee. We want to hear from these
local and State and Federal officials about how we can do our
job better, provide the resources and tools and, if necessary,
legislation to make positive changes and take appropriate
actions.
With those comments, I'm pleased to yield at this time to
the gentleman from this district, the gentleman from Florida,
Mr. Shaw.
[The prepared statement of Hon. John L. Mica follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.007
Mr. Shaw. John, thank you very much for holding this
hearing here. I do know that our time is very stressful at this
time trying to finish up our business in Washington. And
looking at the news, it looks like it might even flow over till
after the election. Of course, our objective was to get out
about 2 or 3 weeks ago. We've missed that opportunity. So this
session seems to be going on and on.
We are indeed blessed here in the 22nd Congressional
District with three wonderful seaports--the port of Palm Beach,
Port Everglades, which I'm tremendously proud of, as well as
the port of Miami. When you think of the tremendous volume of
trade that goes on in these three ports, particularly Port
Everglades and the port of Miami, you know that it is also seen
as ports of opportunity, because of our geographical location.
This hasn't only been in the question of drugs.
Just a few yards from where we're seated here, Mr.
Chairman, there is a waterway that is appropriately named
Whiskey Creek. It got its name during Prohibition. I think
anyone here could figure out exactly why it was named Whiskey
Creek during Prohibition. That, of course, was because of the
smuggling that went on.
I guess it's been about almost 2 years ago that we started
looking at--particularly here at Port Everglades we were
looking and we found some astounding information. One, we
started looking at the criminal background of so many of the
people who were on the front line on the docks, working the
docks. We saw that they were parking their vehicles almost
right alongside the ships they were unloading. We found that an
extraordinary number of these dockworkers had vans. So you
start putting these things together and you begin to understand
what is going on here.
Here in Port Everglades, the way the port is designed--I
once heard that the best way to decide where to put the
sidewalks around the school is that you let the school open
without the sidewalk and see what the traffic pattern is and
then put the sidewalk where the children would walk. I think
that's the way the roadway was put here in Port Everglades;
wherever the dirt roads led, that's where the paved roads were.
As a result, we have a tremendously convenient port, but a port
that has very, very bad security as far as ingress and egress.
We're working on it. We're doing something about it. The
Broward County Commission is concerned about it. We've gotten
some graphs that will put in some gates and do some things of
altering the roads themselves within the port. Also, the County
Commission with our Port Commissioner, Mr. DeMariano, who has
actually done, I think, an outstanding job here in Port
Everglades, we're doing and making a lot of progress with
regard to port security. But we keep working on it. And we know
we can continue to do better.
I think that we've closed down a lot and done away with a
lot of the problems we had, but I think there's still some
problems out there. That should be the focus of this hearing,
for which I'm very appreciative that you're taking your time to
come down and hold this hearing.
I look forward to the witnesses, most of whom I'm
personally acquainted with and have worked with in the past.
It's an outstanding panel of witnesses, and I look forward to
their testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mica. Thank the gentleman, and again, I appreciate your
working with our subcommittee to make certain that we have the
resources and the attention to the problem here in south
Florida and also across the country.
At this time, I'd like to introduce our panel today. We
have a witness list that consists of the following individuals:
First, we're pleased that Jim McDonough, who is the Director of
the Florida Drug Control Policy Office, which is part of the
executive office of the Governor for the State of Florida, is
with us. We have Paul DeMariano, who is the Port Director of
Port Everglades here. We have Chuck Towsley, who is the Port
Director of the Miami port. We have Bob McNamara, who is Field
Operations Director for south Florida, the U.S. Customs Office.
We have Art Coffey, who is vice president for Florida's
International Longshoremen's Association [ILA]. I'd like to
welcome the individuals who are on our panel today.
First of all, this is an investigation and oversight
subcommittee of Congress. We're part of the Government Reform
Committee. In that regard, we do swear in all of our witnesses,
which I'll do in just a moment.
Also, if you have any lengthy statements or documentation
that you'd like to be made an official part of this record, if
you'd submit them through the chair, and upon unanimous
request, they will be made part of the official record, again,
of these proceedings.
We are not going to run the clock this morning, since we
have the one panel and we don't have other Members right now to
ask questions. As I said, you will have some submitted to you
for the record. We will ask your cooperation in responding to
those.
At this time, if you'll please stand to be sworn.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Mica. Witnesses answered in the affirmative. We'll let
the record reflect that.
Mr. Shaw. Mr. Chairman, before the testimony begins, if I
could just add one comment.
Mr. Mica. Mr. Shaw, you're recognized.
Mr. Shaw. And that is recognize that both these Directors,
Mr. Towsley as well as Paul DeMariano, have been very
aggressive in putting in security, x-ray equipment, state-of-
the-art equipment. We worked very hard in Congress to get these
moneys appropriated. And I think that both these gentlemen
certainly deserve much credit for the good work that they've
done in order to increase security at Port of Miami, as well as
at Port Everglades.
Mr. Mica. Thank you, Mr. Shaw.
At this time, I'm pleased to recognize as our first
witness, Mr. Jim McDonough, who, again, is the Director of
Florida's Office of Drug Control Policy. Welcome, sir, and
you're recognized.
STATEMENTS OF JAMES R. McDONOUGH, DIRECTOR, FLORIDA OFFICE OF
DRUG CONTROL; PAUL DeMARIANO, PORT DIRECTOR, PORT EVERGLADES,
FL; CHARLES TOWSLEY, SEAPORT DIRECTOR, DANTE B. FASCELL PORT OF
MIAMI-DADE, FL; ROBERT McNAMARA, DIRECTOR OF FIELD OPERATIONS,
U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE; AND ARTHUR COFFEY, PRESIDENT,
INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S ASSOCIATION
Mr. McDonough. Good morning. Thank you very much for the
honor of appearing before the subcommittee.
Mr. Mica. Are we picking him up adequately?
Mr. McDonough. Hear me all right?
Mr. Mica. That's better. Thank you.
Mr. McDonough. Mr. Chair, if I could, I would like to
submit my statement for the record.
Mr. Mica. Without objection, your entire prepared statement
will be made part of the record.
Please proceed.
Mr. McDonough. Thank you, sir. I would like to give a short
statement just to overview the state of our efforts to counter
drug problems here in the State of Florida. Let me say at the
outset how much I appreciate the support that has come from you
personally, as well as you, Mr. Shaw, from the subcommittee as
a whole in supporting us.
As you know, we do have a problem here in Florida. We have
a problem on the demand side. We have a problem on the supply
side. And we have, with your leadership and assistance, taken
steps to counter both. I'm happy to say we've seen some
dramatic progress on the demand side. We'll continue to work
that. We're a long way from bringing it down to the level that
we want to bring it down to, but we have seen some progress.
And I can go into that, if you'd like.
On the supply side, we have also taken a number of steps,
one of which is our efforts at the seaports. Of course, I will
focus for the most part on the seaports. There are some
parallel things that we're doing that should reenforce
virtually every effort that we take here.
Our goal in Florida, simply put, is to bring down the
supply of drugs coming into our State and moving then some for
local consumption, some for transport elsewhere, down by one-
third. To do that we had to establish a base line of where we
were. So some time ago in late summer, early fall of 1999, we
undertook, with the cooperation of Federal agencies, to
establish a base line on the amount of supplies coming in, a
macro view of where they were coming.
Simultaneously, the Florida legislature in the spring of
1999 directed that my office would undertake a study
specifically of the seaports. We executed the beginning of that
study to contract for that study in December 1999. Therefore,
occurring at the same time along two lines merging was an
intelligence assessment of where we were and a specific study
of access through our ports.
On the intelligence front first, we concluded through
interagency assessment that we could, in fact, affix the amount
of drugs coming into Florida as between 150 to 200 metric tons
of cocaine every year, as mentioned in your statement, sir. We
also did our best to affix amounts for other drugs. Heroin, we
affixed at three metric tons. We were unable to come up with an
accurate assessment on the marijuana coming in or the club
drugs and other drugs, but cocaine certainly was stark at 150
to 200 metric tons.
At that time, we assessed that what is intercepted on the
way to our borders and at our borders something like 50 percent
roughly of the take throughout the entire Nation. And I have
taken a close look. I tend to stay up with the intelligence
estimates, which most recently were putting the targeting for
the United States for cocaine as 512 tons, of which we are
picking off about 112 at the borders. Bottom line on that one,
Florida is taking an appreciable share of the amount of cocaine
entering into the country.
As we looked further, as we merged this with the security
studies and took a look at our own information sources, local
sources from law enforcement, State, and Federal, two things
fell out of that. No. 1, that the majority of the drugs that
I've mentioned were coming into our seaports, not all of them,
but perhaps as high as 70 percent or more were coming in from
seaports. That we were being fairly successful in picking off
some of that, but certainly not to the levels that would deter
the smugglers from bringing it in here. It varies year by year.
Sometimes we're able to seize as much as 25, 30 tons, sometimes
less. It goes up and down.
What did fall out of both the seaport assessment and
intelligence study is that we did not have good systemic
approaches to interdicting those drugs once they entered into
our sovereign waters and certainly as they went beyond that to
the transportation nets. Having recognized that problem and
seeing how the study was going, we worked very closely with the
Florida Ports Council with those elements of the council that
deal with the security at the ports and certainly with the
gentlemen at this table as we have tried to affix the extent of
the problem we can do about it. I will go further into that
issue bringing me out on questions.
Let me just tell you that we recognize clearly that we have
a problem and we determined just as clearly that we would do
something about this as a State and as a partnership with local
leadership matching out the ports and law enforcement to do
something something about it. We also looked to the Federal
Government's support on this.
In the summer of this year, the Governor of this State, Jeb
Bush, and myself went to meet with General McCaffrey to engage
his assistance on partnering at our ports to better secure
them. As you well know, at the same time we were taking our
study down here, a commission at the Federal level was taking a
look across the Nation at our ports. We published our findings
in a report this September of this year.
Although, the two reports were done separately, in
September, the Grand Commission Report, as it's referred to,
came out and the findings were very close in terms of access
control was something that needed to be addressed. We needed to
take a look at who was working at the ports. We need to take a
look at the things that either allow fast movement of illegal
drugs or would deter fast movement of illegal drugs, things
such as where you park your vehicle, what sort of processing
the cargo goes through as it moves out, access roads,
identification checks and so on.
The partnership that we appealed for we hope will be
honored. I'm very encouraged by signs that I've seen. In
essence, it amounts to an intelligence effort that better
identifies with a great deal of accuracy where the drugs are
coming in or where they're likely to come in, the inspections
systems that deal with the humans in the net, the incorporation
of the intelligence picture and the technology available on the
ports to better screen that which is coming in and then
reinforcement through the entire transportation net. This boils
down to things like what can the Feds do for us. It gets into
some of the non-intrusive inspection technology coming in here.
U.S. Customs has been very helpful there. We're
anticipating over the next 5 years some $30 million worth of
equipment there. It also has to deal with the intelligence
efforts, the HIDTA efforts that you mentioned a short while
ago. One of the things we had specifically asked for in
partnership is the formation of a third HIDTA in Florida in the
Jacksonville area, which we do feel is a vulnerable port, then
an interconnection of those HIDTA's. We would then have three
in Florida with the Jacksonville area, the Orlando area and the
Miami area.
In connection with those three with Puerto Rico, which
marks an entry into the domestic sovereign boundaries of the
United States, so that when they were transshipped further from
Puerto Rico into the United States or into our ports, we would
have a very clear intelligence picture of what's coming in. We
are looking forward to progress on all of those.
In the meantime, Florida has moved forward. With the
findings on the study, we plan, in fact, to implement a set of
minimum standards. We have costed it out to the State of
Florida at approximately $28 to $29 million that we will spend
in the next 24 months. That will be again in partnership with
the ports.
And we have put in place throughout the State other law
enforcement agencies and efforts that will not only interdict
the drugs at the port, but those that do get through that we'll
have other chances to catch the drugs as they move in Florida
and further to catch the moneys as it moves back out, ie., we
are following, in fact, the leadership that you have shown us
on this and the strategy that you have helped to develop at the
national level to better cut the drug supply. If we do all
that, our anticipation is over the next 5 years we can, in
fact, reach our goal of cutting the supply of drugs in Florida
by 33 percent.
On that note, I'd like to close.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McDonough follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.019
Mr. Mica. Thank you. And we'll withhold questions until
we've heard from all of the witnesses.
I'll recognize next Paul DeMariano, Port Director of Port
Everglades.
I'm lucky I can say anything today. I think we're all
getting a little weary from flying back and forth from
Washington and meeting late into the night.
Thank you. You're recognized.
Mr. DeMariano. No problem at all, Congressman. I've been
through a lot of that with my name.
Congressman Mica and Congressman Shaw, thank you for
contacting us and inviting our testimony at this important
hearing on port security as a function of the Subcommittee on
Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources.
I would also like to submit my prepared remarks, but I will
make an introductory remark, if I may.
Mr. Mica. Without objection, your entire statement will be
made part of the record.
Please proceed.
Mr. DeMariano. Thank you.
Not long ago, I attended a fly in at the invitation of
Congressman Shaw, including 2 days of very interesting meetings
in Washington hosted by the Congressman, which included input
and interviews with various key legislative leaders. At one
session, both Senator Graham and Congressman Shaw spoke at
length and with great sincerity to all of us about the high
priority that has been given to drug interdiction and a greater
emphasis on illegal traffic in contraband, as well as the need
for much sharper security within the operating seaports of
Florida.
Most, if not all, professional Port Directors which I know,
including my friend and colleague Chuck Towsley, who's with us
here today, as well as all Florida Port Directors, without
question, have embraced and are dedicated to the concept that
we must acknowledge the popularity of Florida as a gateway, as
I think you said, Congressman, not just for legitimate cargo
and crews unfortunately, but for the movement of drugs which we
all know has a severely damaging effect on every aspect of
American life.
The Florida Seaport Transportation and Economic Development
[FSTED] Council has impaneled a security committee, which is
chaired by our director of public safety here at Port
Everglades, Mr. Jeff Brown, to address the issues of seaport
crime. The efforts of the Florida Ports Council and the FSTED
Security Committee are supporting the mission of Jim McDonough.
We have, of course, heard from Jim. And we continue to hear
from our Governor Bush. And we are well aware of your
congressional emphasis on port security.
I can tell you that at Port Everglades, we are singularly
dedicated to the development of this booming seaport within our
very, very vibrant Florida economy and we intend to go about
this work with port security right on the front burner. We
intend to partner with Jim McDonough in the weeks and months
ahead, in fact, to pursue opportunities within the
Transportation Outreach Program being offered by the Florida
Department of Transportation as a specific means of providing
security improvements throughout the State. I trust that what
Jim has said and my comments on this, you will be convinced
that we are absolutely deadly serious about the matter of
security.
At Port Everglades, in order to provide effective security
to counter drug smuggling and criminal issues generally
associated with seaports, we've developed a number of
mechanisms to ensure the best security practices are utilized.
We believe that providing a crime-free work environment to our
clients is of the utmost importance. Our commitment to this
belief is evidenced in the testimony that I've prepared.
With that, I'll conclude, Congressman. We do have prepared
remarks, and I'll be glad to take questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. DeMariano follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.021
Mr. Mica. Thank you.
I'll recognize Chuck Towsley, Port Director for the Miami
port.
Mr. Towsley. Good morning, Congressman Mica, Congressman
Shaw. It's a pleasure to be here and address you today as to
this most important matter before us.
As you know, I am director of the Dante B. Fascell Port of
Miami-Dade. The port of Miami is the largest container port in
Florida and in the top 10 in the United States. And certainly,
as a result, we have security issues that you are tasked with
finding solutions or helping us find solutions. We are here to
help you do that.
We have more than 40 shipping lines calling on 132
countries and 362 ports around the world. Of these, 26 carriers
serve 33 countries and 101 ports in Latin America and the
Caribbean alone. So you can appreciate the magnitude in volumes
and issues that flow through the Port as relates to security.
In 1999, the volume of cargo moving through the Port was
almost 7 million tons. It is estimated the port of Miami's
impact on our community is $8.7 billion and some 45,000 jobs.
As you can see, we are a major player in the maritime industry.
Thus, the administration at the Dante B. Fascell Port of
Miami-Dade continues working to enhance our security
operations. In 1998, administrators of the port of Miami
identified areas that could be tightened. As a result of those
efforts, we've led to several improvements through amendments
to the Port's security legislation, which is county ordinance
Chapter 28A of the Miami-Dade Code.
These amendments require that the Miami-Dade police
department, on behalf of the seaport, conduct criminal
background checks on all persons working in the secure areas of
the seaport before they receive seaport identification badges.
If they have had a felony within 10 years, they do not qualify
for an ID.
These amendments to Chapter 28A allow the port of Miami to
work at a local level to make the port a catalyst in the port
security field. Increased port security practices make
traveling for the cruise passengers a safer experience and
helps ensure that cargo reaches its destination safely while
assisting and reducing smuggling.
Drug and smuggling interdiction has and will continue to
receive the highest priority at the port of Miami. The port of
Miami continues to be proactive in addressing all issues
pertaining to security. In addition to working at the local
level to tighten security, the Port is also working closely
with State of Florida officials to identify funding for other
security enhancements such as high mast lighting, additional
fencing, camera surveillance, inspection equipment and others.
These enhancements that we have now are estimated to be an
additional $8 million required to increase our security.
While the port of Miami is making an investment in
equipment, we're also investing in our security personnel. Each
security officer has an additional orientation at the Port by
our senior training coordinator and from law enforcement
agencies involved in port operations. The training includes
cruise and cargo procedures, tariff, safety operations, and how
to report to HazMat and terrorism threats. I think it's
important to note that the port of Miami spends some $4 million
in our operating budget currently related to security, which
represents more than 5 percent of our annual operating
revenues.
The port is cooperating with the security study with Mr.
McDonough on the reports of the deep-water ports to ensure that
each has a security master plan. We are also active members of
the newly formed Port Security Committee comprised of U.S.
Customs and U.S. Coast Guard and the Immigration and
Naturalization Service. The port of Miami's security staff
works hand-in-hand with these agencies to identify and address
security issues at all levels.
Enhanced security measures initially implemented at the
port of Miami will include a state-of-the-art electronic gate
system. We are in the process, as Congressman Shaw mentioned,
of installing four gamma ray inspection units, which are
scheduled to be under way, completed within a short period of
time. We're in the construction and design of those units,
currently awaiting their delivery.
Our new gate system is linked to our new ID badge system.
Everyone who works in the secured areas of the Port that has
gone through the background check gets an ID. Within the ID is
a microchip that allows us to then scan proximity scanner and
all that individual's information is then available to the
people at the gate to see if there's been cancellation of their
ID; if there's an alert put on to follow them or any other
pertinent information, including who their authorized to haul
for with respect to the truck drivers.
We're also going to be cross-referencing our permitting
system with our ID system. That is so a trucking company that
comes in, we have the stats and that the driver's all cross-
referenced so that we can be sure that there is no security
violations being attempted through false IDs.
As mentioned, the port, with our Stolen Automobile Recovery
System gamma ray technology machines, we've designated to
detect contraband vehicles and equipment inside containers
illegally moving into the port. As you know, quite often, the
vehicles and this other equipment moving out of the port also
carries the money that then goes back into the drug trade. We
think it's very important not just the specifics on the
interdiction on the drugs, but also on the money-laundering
aspect also.
Finally, the port has a sophisticated system of
surveillance cameras and plans are being developed to
substantially enhance the port's security capabilities in this
regard.
The port of Miami has continued to work collectively with
the U.S. Customs and U.S. Coast Guard, Immigration and
Naturalization, U.S.D.A., Florida Department of Law
Enforcement, Miami-Dade police and the other law enforcement
agencies in our effort. I would like to say personally my
policy at the port of Miami is a zero-tolerance policy for any
criminal activity. And I can assure you that we will take the
necessary actions whenever they are brought to my attention
through the authorities.
We have been working with Mr. McDonough in his efforts at
the State level for his important work and we look forward to
the implementation of his and your recommendations. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Towsley follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.023
Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony.
And we'll now turn to Bob McNamara, who is Director of
Field Operations for south Florida for the U.S. Customs
Service. You're recognized, sir.
Mr. McNamara. Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit my
statement for the record.
Mr. Mica. Without objection, your entire statement will be
made part of the record.
Please proceed, and can you pull the mic up a little bit
closer. Thanks.
Mr. McNamara. Mr. Chairman, Representative Shaw, thank you
for this opportunity to testify on criminal activity at the
seaports in south Florida.
My name is Robert McNamara. I am the Director of field
operations for south Florida. In my capacity as Director, I am
responsible for oversight of the inspection and control of
international passengers, conveyances and cargo arriving and
departing through the seaports and airports in south Florida. I
have oversight responsibility for Miami, Port Everglades, West
Palm Beach, Fort Pierce, and Key West.
Before I begin, let me express U.S. Customs' gratitude to
Congressman Mica for holding this hearing and for
Representative Clay Shaw's leadership in this area. In
addition, I know Congressman Shaw partnered with Senator Bob
Graham in his support and participation on the Presidential
Commission on Crime and Security in U.S. Seaports and the
success of its year-long study, in which U.S. Customs played a
large role.
Mr. Chairman, there is a great deal to be concerned about
at our Nation's major seaports, including security lapses that
jeopardize our fight against drug smuggling, exposure to
internal conspiracies, trade fraud, cargo theft, stolen
vehicles, and other serious crimes.
The good news is that there is a partnership between the
Federal and private sectors at many of our major seaports. In
addition, coordination among law enforcement agencies is
strong. Clearly, the basis for cooperation exists to improve
conditions in our seaport environment. Our challenge now is to
focus cooperation and provide the proper resources to make it
effective.
Booming activity at our Nation's seaports is yet another
welcome sign to our prosperous times, but it also presents
unique challenges to our agencies. We must process all of that
added commerce with an eye toward protecting America from
crime.
Florida, with over 1,350 miles of coastline, 14 major
seaports, and 8 major international airports, is a major
gateway for legitimate international cargo, passengers, and
conveyances and offers a complex environment in which to deal
with the threat of crime. Balancing the facilitation of
legitimate commerce with interdicting contraband and arresting
those responsible for smuggling through Florida's ports is a
considerable challenge.
The fact is every ship, every additional container,
presents added opportunities for drug smugglers. For example,
the 12 seaports in the United States that the Federal
commission surveyed accounted for 69 percent of all cocaine by
weight seized from cargo shipments and vessels, over half of
all marijuana, and 12 percent of all heroin. Clearly, there is
a serious threat out there, and we must do a better job of
addressing that threat.
Drug smuggling is a prevalent crime in the port of Miami
and Port Everglades. By pounds of cocaine seized from 1996
through 1998, the port of Miami ranked No. 1 and Port
Everglades ranked No. 2 in the Nation. During those years,
63,662 pounds of cocaine were seized at the port of Miami and
30,283 pounds at Port Everglades. Most of this cocaine was
detected concealed in containerized cargo shipments and
commercial vessels, including vessels on the Miami River.
However, our seizure statistics vary from year to year. For
example, in fiscal year 1999, 27,126 pounds of cocaine were
seized in Miami and Port Everglades compared to 15,410 pounds
in fiscal year 2000. For marijuana seizures, it is the
opposite. In fiscal year 1999, for the port of Miami and Port
Everglades, Customs seized 10,798 pounds compared to 34,041
pounds for the two ports in fiscal year 2000.
Two weeks ago, Customs found 1,235 pounds of cocaine and
3,283 pounds of marijuana concealed within cargo containers,
which had arrived at Port Everglades. Also, within the last 2
weeks, Customs seized 375 pounds of cocaine and 5.5 pounds of
heroin in cargo containers arriving at the Miami seaport.
Many of the narcotic seizures at our ports indicate the
involvement of internal conspirators. Two significant internal
conspiracy examiner investigations recently conducted by
Customs and DEA at Port Everglades subsequently resulted in
arrest of 45 individuals, including 35 dockworkers and contract
security personnel, on drug smuggling and related offenses.
Customs applauds the port of Miami's positive steps toward
securing its seaport. A significant weakness, however, is that
dockworkers are permitted to park their personally owned
vehicles at dockside or near vessels that are lading or
unlading. As internal conspirators frequently use their
personally owned vehicles to remove drug shipments from the
port, this weakness is a serious challenge to the integrity of
the security system.
On the other hand, Port Everglades requires dockworkers to
park their personally owned vehicles in a segregated, fenced
area, away from the docks.
Customs has also taken a proactive lead in implementing two
pilot programs in the port of Miami and Port Everglades. The
first project is an interdisciplinary tactical team of special
agents and Customs inspectors designed to enhance the Customs
presence at the port of Miami and Port Everglades. This
uniformed tactical team conducts patrols in marked units,
providing a highly visible and unpredictable Federal law
enforcement presence. This unit also provides immediate
response to criminal and civil violations of Federal laws
occurring in the ports 24 hours per day.
The second project is a crime data collection project at
the port of Miami and Port Everglades. This project is designed
to improve intelligence gathering and analysis of criminal
entities and activities and to share that intelligence with
other interested Federal and State and local agencies.
While the intelligence initiative is still in the
collection stage, the tactical team has already produced
results. The tactical team has made two drug seizures on the
Miami River. The first seizure involved 165 pounds of cocaine.
The second seizure involved 119 pounds of cocaine concealed in
a cook's cabin of a cargo vessel on the Miami River.
Other positive initiatives should include actions that will
directly impact Customs' ability in targeting contraband, such
as enhancing the quality of manifest information, the shipper's
documentation we use to select high-risk goods. We need to
explore options that would standardize manifest information and
require its advance delivery to Customs in electronic form.
We must also develop and implement Customs new automated
system for processing goods, the Automated Commercial
Environment [ACE]. ACE, as the members know, represents one of
Customs' most critical infrastructure needs. Among its many
features is an enhanced ability to use information for
selecting suspect cargo for examination.
Of course, the best targeting plans can be laid to waste by
internal conspiracies. That's why we need to implement better
controls at seaport facilities. In order to achieve this, we
need to strengthen physical security, tighten controls on the
movement of goods and limit who has access to sensitive areas.
Customs can also stand to benefit from acquiring better
technology. We must devise common systems for sharing
information about the movement of vessels, passengers and goods
through our seaports. There should be a coordinated effort by
the principal Federal agencies involved in national security to
achieve this goal.
Finally, I would highlight the need for additional training
to implement these changes. There is a direct link between
training and operational success. The fact remains that despite
the gains technology and improved information offer us, we must
have technically proficient personnel to contend with our
spiraling workload and security issues and added manpower to
implement these changes.
Mr. Chairman, this is by no means an exhaustive list. It
forms an effective start in addressing the problems we face at
our major seaports.
I hope that with the help of this subcommittee, we can take
the next important step and confront the critical resource
challenges we face in strengthening seaport security.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McNamara follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5061.030
Mr. Mica. Thank you, Mr. McNamara.
I'll now recognize Mr. Art Coffey, who is the vice
president of the International Longshoremen's Association.
Welcome, sir, and you're recognized.
Mr. Coffey, if you'll proceed. Thank you.
Mr. Coffey. Yes, Chairman Mica and Mr. Shaw, thank you very
much. We're happy to be here today.
Just as a brief statement, hopefully it'll be part of the
record. I have a written statement that I have----
Mr. Mica. Without objection, your entire statement will be
made part of the record.
Please proceed.
Mr. Coffey. The ILA is in full agreement with the
objectives of the Interagency Commission on Crime and Security
in U.S. Seaports ``the Commission'' to deter and counter the
threats of terrorism, smuggling, and other criminal activities
in the maritime environment in and around the Nation's seaports
and to provide a reasonable and necessary security needed to
safeguard passengers and cargo transporting our ports.
In sum, the ILA has been and remains committed to the
objectives of the commission and to the concerns expressed by
member of this committee and to cooperating with government
agencies to achieve the desired ends. However, it is with
regard to the means and methods of achieving these objectives
that we must except, more particularly with respect to the
treatment of shore-side handlers in these ports.
The ILA members, no less than working men and women in
every other sector of our country's commerce and economy, are
solid, patriotic, hard-working mainstays of their families. The
members of this union have very special attachments to their
local communities and to their country, which are second to
none. They are not a bit less concerned than fathers, mothers,
brothers, sisters of families of their counterparts in inland
industries and occupations to the effects of drugs and
terrorism acts that imperil their and their loved ones' lives
and well-being. To even suggest that they, as a work force,
would be any more trustworthy and cooperative is demeaning.
Thus, the members of the committee may be aware that the
ILA already has in place a program to assure a drug-and-
alcohol-free workplace for its members, which is
conscientiously administered and enforced. The ILA strongly
recommends a committee system to strike a balance between
preventing criminal activity and eliminating from the ports
those individuals who have paid their debt to society.
The rank-and-file longshoreman has every motive to keep
drugs away from his children and guns from those who can
threaten his family and quality of life as any other American
working person.
The ILA will continue to respond to the calls to cooperate
with the government agencies at all levels to make our seaports
not only crime-free but crime integrity free as well. All that
we ask is that the means and methods to accomplish these
objectives be reasonable, rational, realistic and evenhanded,
so that those whom it represents will not labor under
undeserved onuses or handicap for no better reason than the
places of their employment happen to be along the country's
coastlines.
Respectfully, Art Coffey.
Mr. Mica. Thank you for your testimony. I thank each of the
witnesses this morning for being part of this hearing.
I'll start with some questions. We have a couple of
problems here. First of all, we've got the problem of making
certain that those that are working at the ports and
administering the ports have proper credentials and clean
records, first of all, to handle the work and administration of
those ports. Then we have a government responsibility to make
sure that we've got both proper equipment, resources, personnel
to deal with any of the problems we have with illegal narcotics
or commerce coming through those facilities.
Let me first focus on the question of sort of cleaning up
the work force. Mr. Coffey just testified that longshoremen are
committed to having the highest standards and employment
credentials. Some time ago there was a report that a
significant portion of some of the dockworkers and those
actually handling the cargo had criminal background records.
Maybe we can start here in Fort Lauderdale and tell me what
your current situation is with background checks on those
actually dealing with the cargo at both Fort Lauderdale and
Miami.
Mr. DeMariano.
Mr. DeMariano. I think we should draw some attention to the
fact that not all dockworkers are longshoremen belonging to the
ILA. Many dockworkers, of course, belong to other labor unions
or are unaffiliated.
Mr. Mica. Are you doing checks on all of these folks that
have access?
Mr. DeMariano. Yes, sir, anyone that has access to our
waterfront, regardless if it's union affiliation or non-
affiliation.
Mr. Mica. What's the record? I mean, you're finding that
would clean up some of the problems that were identified
previously?
Mr. DeMariano. Yes. I think that there is ample evidence,
and particularly we've heard about it this morning, that there
is indeed a network and an entrapment so to speak we're
catching of a number of people who have explicitly difficult or
felonious backgrounds. Those people are not permitted access to
the waterfront, nor to cargo proximity. As I said earlier, they
are not all longshoremen. I speak of the generic member of the
ILA.
Mr. Mica. You have in place then adequate checks on these
people and ways to make certain that they're not accessing
either the cargo or the port facility?
Mr. DeMariano. Yes, sir, indeed we do.
Mr. Mica. What about Miami?
Mr. Towsley. With respect to the Dante B. Fascell Port of
Miami-Dade, as I had mentioned in my testimony, we were, I
believe, the first port in Florida to initiate the requirement
of the criminal background check. We have that system in place.
And I do believe it is acting as a deterent from individuals
that know they wouldn't qualify.
Mr. Mica. That is both active longshoremen and others who--
--
Mr. Towsley. Yes, absolutely, including our own employees
who have access to the waterfront area are required by that
ordinance to go through the full process which includes a
criminal background check.
Mr. Mica. Do you have any percentage of people who have
problem backgrounds that are working now? Before I thought we
heard some 30 percent or plus had backgrounds with either
felonies or some criminal record.
Mr. Towsley. The way our ordinance works, when it came in 2
years ago, effectively was that if an individual had been
working at the port, criminal background check went 5 years. If
they had a felony conviction within the 5-years, they didn't
qualify, even if they were working at the Port at the time. New
employees, it goes back 10 years. So there is a provision under
our ordinance that allows for an appeal before a committee. And
the committee will review the extenuating circumstances that
may be----
Mr. Mica. You're telling me you have sort of a zero now,
folks that are working, that you're checking either through
longshoremen or at the Port that now have some type of problems
with their background?
Mr. Towsley. There are individuals who have had problems in
their background who are----
Mr. Mica. Who are still there?
Mr. Towsley [continuing]. Who are still there, that's
correct.
Mr. Mica. And you're also----
Mr. DeMariano. I think that's an accurate statement. While
we are taking a somewhat harder line on the appeal process, we
are attempting to make it very, very matter of fact that any
difficulty with background checks will deny waterfront access.
Mr. Mica. I'm told that at the Miami-Dade Port, the appeal
process is not handled in the same manner; there's less of a
standard, lesser standard for appealing and staying.
Mr. Towsley. Mr. Chair, two things: One is the statistics
that were given by Customs earlier were stated that it also
includes the Miami River. There is no one here who represents
the Miami River Commission. But I would like to state that when
you talk about the port of Miami, when you include the river,
the river does not and we do not control jurisdictional issues
over working at----
Mr. Mica. So there are no controls in the Miami River?
Mr. Shaw. None.
Mr. Towsley. Not as far as I'm aware for security ID,
background checks.
Mr. Mica. That's one of the areas where we're finding more
and more problems?
Mr. Towsley. That's correct.
Mr. Mica. Did you have something you wanted to add briefly?
Mr. Towsley. I was just going to say that there is a
difference between the appeals process. We have an independent
committee that is made up of representatives of law
enforcement, court adminstration and the union that do hear the
individuals. To me, I don't know if it's a lesser standard. I
think it may be viewed as a more fair standard.
As I understand it--I can't speak for Port Everglades'
process--but the appeals that they do have only relates to
procedurally if everything has been done in accordance to
procedure and they do still have an issue, then the permit is
denied. There's a philosophical difference in allowing someone
to have due process with respect to appeal.
Mr. Mica. Well, one of the recommendations of the State
review that was released last month recommended minimum
standards--security standards; is that correct, Mr. McDonough?
Mr. McDonough. Yes, Mr. Chairman, it is.
Mr. Mica. Have any of those been adopted statewide?
Mr. McDonough. We are going to adopt them. We are now going
through a planning process so that each port can put into
effect this plan which I will look at to approve or disapprove.
Mr. Mica. One of the elements appears to be some difference
in again looking at the employment criteria and standards for
people who are employed in and around directly at the ports. Is
this something that should be a consideration? It's a general
recommendation that we have minimum statewide security
standards.
What do you think?
Mr. McDonough. We have a number of strong views on that.
The bottom line is yes, we need to have standards. We need to
have background checks.
I'd like to take you very briefly through the system.
Mr. Mica. Do you think the State--now the legislature has
taken some action. Is this something the legislature should
handle or should we look at it federally as far as some type of
legislation?
Mr. McDonough. I think all of the above. We are only able
to do background checks as pertains to convictions in this
State. The way in which we do that, we will run a check up to
the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, which will then give
feedback to those that have asked and will tell you whether or
not there's been a conviction for whatever cause in this State.
It doesn't extend to the Federal system.
Now the outcome of that, we have indications that at the
port of Miami upwards of 17 percent of the current members of
the longshoremen's union indeed have a felonious conviction on
their record. Now that, however, just reflects those that have
such a conviction on State records.
Mr. Mica. That's longshoremen, 17 percent of longshoremen.
It doesn't include the other workers in the peripheral area.
Then we take out the Miami River operations. It doesn't appear
that there's anything in place there. This report also says
that there are 14 ports I believe and 2 of them have some
things in place, most of them have basically nothing or very
little.
Mr. McDonough. That's correct. At the time of the study,
although at this time, there are various plans falling into
place where others will now do the same thing. A standard we
wish to go to is that every port will indeed have a background
check. We also in our study and in our plan have taken into
account the non-port areas which are historically vulnerable to
smuggling. The Miami River is one. We need to develop systems
to control access to those ports, check manifest, limit
birthing time, etc., so that we can bring down smuggling there.
Mr. Mica. Mr. McNamara, you said one of the problems is
dealing with internal conspiracies. Let me first hear your
opinion about what's going on. Wev'e heard the two port
directors. We've heard Mr. Coffey. We heard a little bit from
the drug czar. Tell me what you see from the Customs
enforcement standpoint both about who's working there, have
they cleaned up the act, and then where the gaps are and how we
need to approach this whole problem.
Mr. McNamara. As my statement indicated, Mr. Chairman, I
think there are steps that are being taken both at Port
Everglades and Miami to improve the security. However, the
access is still there. The control is not effected. We've seen
a drastic increase in percentage of internal conspiracies
versus what we consider----
Mr. Mica. Did you say a drastic increase?
Mr. McNamara. Internal conspiracies in Miami, for instance.
Mr. Mica. What about Fort Lauderdale?
Mr. McNamara. We've actually seen it go down, the number.
Mr. Mica. And the increase in Miami, is that related to the
sheer volume? Miami has a much greater volume, doesn't it?
Mr. McNamara. Yes, it does. The issue with us in Customs is
that we cannot be there 7 by 24. We cannot be there all the
time. There is not a presence on the seaport. So if the
container ships arrive in the middle of the night and off-load,
people on the dock, whether they are longshoremen or people
that work on the dock that have access to that container, can
rip it off.
Mr. Mica. One of the things Mr. Shaw and I hear when we get
back is that we've added so many personnel that south Florida
is going to sink from Customs officials and others down here.
You're telling me you still we don't have adequate
personnel to deal with this situation on a need basis?
Mr. McNamara. Yes, sir. Because of the limited number of
personnel, we cannot cover it round the clock, we cannot look
at the shipments as the ships arrive.
Mr. Mica. Have you submitted or can you submit to the
subcommittee what manpower you think it would take. The other
thing too is also enforcement, going after these folks. Are you
working with the DEA, FBI, whoever and FDLE, the other
enforcement agencies local and State say for sting operations
or coordinated efforts with the NIDTA? I mean, if you go in
and, so to speak, clean house a few times, you certainly will
get their attention.
Has that taken place? What's the problem? Don't we have the
people to even do that?
Mr. McNamara. The investigation that took place here in
Port Everglades was a joint--it was led by Customs but with DEA
and resulted over the last couple years in 45 arrests. Thirty-
five of the people that were arrested were dock and ILA members
that worked at the docks and had access to the docks. We're
working with the other agencies.
We get information from both DEA and the Coast Guard. We
now have the Florida Department of Law Enforcement working with
us on the Miami River. They've augmented our staff of agents
down there so they can participate in what's going on, on the
Miami River.
Mr. Mica. Is the Miami appeal process for people working
there with the shady background, is this also a problem in
cleaning house from your standpoint? Be candid with us.
Mr. McNamara. I will, sir.
Mr. Mica. I know you have to go back and work with these
people but.
Mr. McNamara. The issue to Customs is that if we arrest
people while they're under appeal, they're still working. The
issue is if you're doing the check, do they have a right to
come back to work or are you going to let them to continue to
have access to the secured areas?
Our concern is not that they are continuing to work
somewhere on the port, it is that they're having access to the
containers on the ports where we want to keep them out of. We
want to control where we have to do our work. If they are going
to be allowed back in there all hours of the night, even after
we know that they're convicted felons or they have records,
then that defeats the whole purpose of doing the check.
Mr. Mica. There are 35 people you said that were arrested.
Are some of these folks still working?
Mr. McNamara. I don't believe so. No.
Mr. Mica. They're all out of service?
Mr. McNamara. In jail.
Mr. Mica. To deal with this problem, Congress also
appropriated, Mr. Shaw helped, on this issue of getting you not
only the personnel but also the equipment, surveillance
equipment, detection equipment. I thought we had on order ion
scanners, the whole range of equipment to deal with the cargo
and passengers, the massive amount that you have to pass
through the ports.
What's the status of that?
Mr. McNamara. In 1999 Congress appropriated approximately
$34 million for what we considered non-intrusive inspection
technology. There is a 5-year plan. That was based off a 5-year
plan that we submitted. A number of pieces of this equipment
were on the drawing table and they have been tested. Some of
them have been tested right here down in Miami. As a result of
that testing, either they went back for additional enhancement
or improvement or the additional x rays were ordered. That
money was for the whole southern tier, for the southwest border
across the Gulf here to Florida and Puerto Rico. So we've spent
over half of that money so far. And we are purchasing
additional equipment. Miami is scheduled to get a $7 million
piece of equipment in January.
What our concern is with this equipment, a lot of it is
new. It's innovative. We want to make sure it works. We don't
want to go out and spend the money and put it out there if it
doesn't meet our needs.
What happens with it is some of it is low density where
when you're doing a container, what happens, you don't see the
whole container or if it contains certain type of merchandise.
And the conspirators know this that after awhile we use and
find it. The next time they bring in a shipment what they'll do
is they'll hide it behind something or secrete it in something
that we cannot x ray easily. What x rays basically do is either
show us something that is in the container or give us an
anomaly that causes us to do a full examination.
They are on order. There is a schedule for deployment over
the next couple of years that started in 1999 when we got the
money. I would say that probably more than half of that money
has been spent to date.
Mr. Mica. Mr. Shaw and I are most interested in some of
that equipment coming into south Florida and particular other
ports in Florida. One of the reasons we appropriated it is we
wanted you to have the technical equipment to detect this
stuff, not only stuff coming. We understand that it will also
detect stolen cars and other goods, even money going out.
If you could supply the subcommittee too with--and maybe
the Commissioner could do that--with a list of what's
obligated.
You don't know what's obligated specifically?
Mr. McNamara. I don't have that with me today.
Mr. Mica. If you could do that for the record, I'd like
that to be part of the record. We want to keep an eye on that,
because it's nice for us to appropriate that, but not to have
the equipment delivered is something else. We need to look at
what hasn't been delivered. If there's any problems and also if
we have any research technical problems that need to be
addressed, we want to see that gets attention.
Has Commissioner Kelly met with officials or anyone from
Department of Justice or DEA folks in sort of a summit on the
Graham Commission report, now the State report, that you know
of to address some of the recommendations?
Mr. McNamara. I know that he has had briefings with the
Attorney General and, you know, the Department of Justice, as
well as other areas of government. And I know--I believe he
testified on October 4th on the Hill. But I do not know what
further recommendations came out of that.
Mr. Mica. Mr. McDonough, I like to have these hearings, but
I like to see something productive come out of them. I would
think that maybe you could help us take a lead and see if we
couldn't get ONDCP, our DEA folks, Customs, everybody who is
involved in this, maybe the south Florida HIDTA people--if
these recommendations sit on a shelf, it's sort of useless and
a shame. Maybe we can from the Federal level--and I know there
are some specific recommendations in here, increasing a
National Guard recommendations at the seaport. But if we could
get all of the folks together maybe sometime in November or
December and see what we can pick off.
There are some specific recommendations, Clay, for Congress
in here and the congressional delegation. Again, it's nice to
have these hearings, but if nothing comes of them, we're all
sort of spinning our wheels.
I'd like to see if you can't help convene that, Jim.
Mr. McDonough. Sir, if I may.
Mr. Mica. Yes. Would you?
Mr. McDonough. I'd be happy to and I will. We have put some
plans in motion. I can give you a very brief rendition.
Mr. Mica. Go right ahead.
Mr. McDonough. I'm meeting with General McCaffrey in
Orlando on November 29th, I think it is. I've been in
correspondence with his office and with him as well in the
intervening months since, first of all the meeting between
Governor Bush, he and I, in the White House and subsequently
the publication of our plan. I cannot speak for him. I don't
know how it will work its way out. But I actually am optimistic
that he will review the studies, both this study and the Graham
Commission study, and then will, if he has not already, be
meeting with the chief of Customs, with the administration of
DEA, the leadership of the FBI.
What I'm anticipating is a favorable response that will put
in place, in fact, an information and intelligence effort, as
well as a number of systems to include an enhancement of the
NII, the Non-Intrusive Inspection package, which will include
as part of it not just the equipment but the training of the
handlers, the maintenance system to keep them in operation to
include the repair parts, and perhaps an adjustment to the
fielding plan.
But I will take as further guidance your direction to me,
sir, and encourage them. Of course, I am a State agency and I
have to----
Mr. Mica. Right. We'll be glad too work with you in our
subcommittee. We'll be glad to call the Federal folks together,
but I think it would be good to have something concrete come
from these recommendations.
Finally, Mr. McNamara, some of the equipment, etc., that
has been installed, I have reports that we still have problems
with the subversion of the technical equipment. Can you
describe what's going on, surveillance equipment and so forth?
Mr. McNamara. A couple of times we've had incidents where
the cameras, for instance, that we've installed have been
knocked down or blocked. So that if we have a camera on a pole
to watch the area, the stacking of the containers is put right
in front of cameras so the camera is useless. You cannot see
anything.
We've had accidents where cameras were knocked down or
where our x-ray system was put out of commission for a short
period of time because of another accident. There are things
like that that have happened on the port. The equipment is
sometimes out there in the elements. If it's outside the
building where we normally do the cargo examination, it's
subject to the mishaps that happen on the seaport.
Mr. Mica. Purposeful mishaps sometimes.
Mr. Shaw.
Mr. Shaw. Mr. McNamara, who mans these scanners? Who is
looking at the TV screen to see if these containers are piled
up in such a way that it obscures the visibility of another
container?
Mr. McNamara. Customs inspectors.
Mr. Shaw. If vision is obscured, wouldn't that be an
automatic warning to the inspector that something is going on?
I mean, this problem has been there ever since I've been
working with it. These guys will pile the stuff up. You can't
see them, and somebody makes a grab.
Mr. McNamara. Yes, sir. As a matter of fact, one time they
were watching and they saw this car go in behind it. They
couldn't see what was going on behind the container. So they
responded. They went out there and they checked it. It happened
to be an elderly couple that got on the port by mistake where
they weren't supposed to be. They were looking for a cruise
ship. So they guided them back out.
That's the kind of thing that would happen. We monitor the
screen. And if they see something or we think that there's
something maybe going on, we respond.
Mr. Shaw. Are we still seeing the situation where the cargo
will come in and they could be open. They're under seal.
They're opened and, of course, there's a new seal inside with
the tools and everything together with the contraband. The
contraband is grabbed and the thing is resealed.
Are we still seeing that going on?
Mr. McNamara. To the extent that it used to happen, I don't
think it's happening as much, but yes, there is tampering with
the containers. The removal of the whole container door, taking
the contraband, putting the container door back together.
Mr. Shaw. That takes awhile, doesn't it?
Mr. McNamara. They're very quick at it. It's just pins on
the outside of the door that you can pop out and pull out. They
do have duplicate seals, multiple seals that go on there.
Mr. Shaw. Is it a huge problem with the pins being pulled
out and doors being pulled off? If it is, we can certainly
require that some alteration of these containers be made so
that wouldn't be done so readily without some destruction to
the pin anyway.
Mr. McNamara. I wouldn't say that it's a major problem.
It's just one of the ways that they're able to gain access and
make it look like nobody was there. There are various things
that they do with the container that we have to learn--catch
them and then learn that this is something to look out for,
whether it's the seal, whether it's the pins, whether it's the
locking mechanism, different things like that that we have to
become familiar with. Then we train our inspectors constantly,
updating that information so that they know what to look for
when they're out looking at the containers before they even
open it.
Mr. Shaw. I believe it was you that testified with regard
to back in 1998 where the port of Miami was No. 1 and Port
Everglades was No. 2 with regard to internal conspiracies.
Do you have an update up on that?
Mr. McNamara. In 1999, we were one and two again. In 2000,
we were three and four.
Mr. Shaw. But three and four, I assume Miami was three and
Port Everglades was four; is that correct?
Mr. McNamara. Yes.
Mr. Shaw. That tells me something else, because you also
said that it's getting worse in Miami.
Mr. McNamara. See what happens is that this is based on the
number of narcotics that was seized. What happens is that when
we do our job real well, they ship to some other place. In this
particular case, the No. 1 and No. 2 was Puerto Rico and Tampa.
That's because of large loads that were found in those
locations.
Mr. Shaw. When Customs first brought the problem to me with
regard to the criminal background of so many of the dockworkers
and I brought it to the attention of Miami-Dade's County
Commission, they did move very quickly. Mr. Towsley is
absolutely right that they were the first, I think, in the
country. Then we brought it up to Port Everglades. The County
Commission up here passed it. It took them a little while to do
it, but they got it done.
Of course, you're talking about this whole thing, you don't
really solve the problem, you just probably move it.
Recognizing that, I went up and told the folks up at the port
of Palm Beach to watch out. It was coming their way. I imagine
that's probably happened.
What is the port of Palm Beach doing? I don't know if
you're prepared to even answer that question.
Mr. McNamara. In terms of some seizures, we've had some up
there. We recently had--Fort Pierce actually, we had a small
boat. We haven't seen a lot of small boats bringing it in. We
found a 2,000-pound load a couple of months ago coming into
Fort Pierce.
It is our concern that the movement up, just like some of
the Haitian vessels moved up to Port Everglades, we're
concerned what's going to move up to West Palm. The cruise ship
is another issue. And West Palm hasn't gotten any staff
increases over the last couple of years. So the chairman asked
me about staffing. That's one of the concerns we have. If we do
a real job and staff up Miami, it pushes it to the next port
that could push it to next port. Then you go to a port like
Fort Pierce, basically I have five or six inspectors up there,
which just cannot cover it.
Mr. Shaw. Part of the problem I know is a budgetary problem
and one of the problems that is connected with that is the
tariff goes into the general fund rather than staying with the
Customs. We've had that problem with trying to get a larger
Customs presence at the Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International
Airport, as well as other things. I think perhaps next year, we
should start to look at that and work with that somewhat.
Now, Mr. Towsley has testified that they're getting hit
with also the Miami River. If we were to pull the Miami River
statistics out of the port of Miami, how would that affect
their standing?
Mr. McNamara. Miami would have dropped down drastically,
OK, the port of Miami as opposed to--We include the Miami River
as part of Miami Seaport. It's covered by the same people. It's
the same Port Authority. In the fiscal year 2000, cocaine, for
example, 8,211 pounds, of which 7,115 pounds was on the River.
Mr. Shaw. So the port of Miami, I guess, would really drop
off?
Mr. McNamara. Yeah.
Mr. Shaw. That's an important statistic because I want to
know what's working. Obviously, we don't have the surveillance
on the Miami River that we have----
Do you have any suggestions as to how we could attack that
problem on the River?
Mr. McNamara. It's going to have to be multi-agency with
the private sector, because every time we're on the River and
we're doing something, you have the Miami Commission that is
concerned about the business on the River and try and
facilitate the business and the businesses that are on there
and the shipping companies with our problem of enforcement. The
type of trade and the location from where that trade comes from
lends itself to smuggling, conspiracy. And it's a difficult
problem, a very difficult problem to try to address.
Obviously, intelligence, obviously people to gather that
intelligence. Our Customs agents working on the River, they're
assigned a group to work the River to try to pinpoint where
some of this may be happening, to help us out with the
targeting of the vessels, where they're hiding these vessels.
Again, they go down to Haiti, for instance. They sit down
there for a long period of time. What ends up happening is they
secrete it down in the bowels of the vessel down below the sea
level, under cement floors. Trying to get at it is what the
problem is.
Mr. Shaw. A ship coming into the port--coming into the
Miami River, they're supposed to check in at some point with
Customs.
Are they doing that? Are they not doing that? What happens
when a ship comes in and reports that it's going up the Miami
River, what do you do and how long does it take you to do it?
Mr. McNamara. We make a determination on whether we want to
examine; how we want to examine; what we want to put there; do
we have intelligence on that ship that would want us to put
dogs on it; run a dog across it.
What happens is that, again, they know our staffing. They
know how many people we have there. Not too long ago, a couple
months ago my person that runs the oversight of the Miami River
for me in terms of inspection--contraband inspection told me
that about 10 ships came in all at the same time. Once you have
that many ships coming in to come up the River, it's very hard
to do them all.
Mr. Shaw. At what point do they radio you, after they dock
or when they're still out at sea?
Mr. McNamara. They normally tell us that they arrived. The
agent normally comes in and says I have a ship arriving. That
could be right before it comes in or after it docks they let us
know, they'll advise us that the ship is there for clearance.
Mr. Shaw. So they could have already cleaned it out before
they even call you?
Mr. McNamara. Could.
Mr. Shaw. Aren't you given some type of intelligence as to
what's coming in, either by the Coast Guard or other means?
Maybe that's the problem. We ought to make sure so that they
don't have an hour to unload before you know they're there.
Mr. McNamara. Sir, the intelligence usually is on something
on a given ship or something that they have information.
Mr. Shaw. Not on the arrival?
Mr. McNamara. No. That happens. If the ship is coming in
and the Coast Guard knows that this particular ship might be
loaded with something, they'll give us that information through
our agents.
Mr. Shaw. Is the Coast Guard aware of the ships that are
coming in? Do they have some way of monitoring what's coming in
and particularly what's headed up the Miami River? It seems
that's where the big problem is. Obviously, statistically
that's exactly where the problem is.
Mr. McNamara. Sir, I don't know if they know of every ship
coming in.
Mr. Shaw. The statistics we have on Port Everglades, does
that include the Dania Cutoff Canal or other ports of entry?
Mr. McNamara. Yes, sir.
Mr. Shaw. What problems do we have at the other ports of
entry in Broward County?
Mr. McNamara. The only one I'm familiar with, we have some
airport, some internal carriers at the airport, as well as the
cruise ships, as well as the cargo. I'm not aware of any
problem----
Mr. Shaw. The port at the La Dania Canal, that's not a
problem? You don't see any problems?
Mr. McNamara. I haven't gotten anything that tells me that
is a problem.
Mr. Shaw. Could I make a suggestion from a statistical
standpoint that you might want to put a subcategory for the
port of Miami so that they can be rewarded rather than
embarrassed by these statistics. Because it does sound like
they're doing a pretty good job down there. And we continue to
work to get the latest technology installed. I think I've seen
all of it at one time or another. It's really quite amazing.
I'd like to just turn our attention just a moment to--well,
before I do that, let me get back to Paul DeMariano.
Where are we as far as increasing the security, the ingress
and egress from the outside along the roadways? I know I've
brought home a lot of money and appropriated for some
improvements, but I really haven't seen it coming out of the
ground.
Mr. DeMariano. We've commissioned that work, Congressman
Shaw, in a firm having been selected, Bermello-Ajamil
Associates, who are specifically charged with the roadway
control points and physical constraints within our road system.
As you correctly pointed out, like Boston, which is a city full
of cow pastures converted into streets, this port has such a
history.
We do have a number of shortcuts, as you know, to get from
the airport, for example, to the 17th Street Causeway. This
will all be the subject of pretty intense, in fact, five
physical checkpoints which are going to be done and confirmed
in terms of design for construction within 9 months. That work
is underway. I would say the first 20 percent of that work has
been completed.
Mr. Shaw. I would guess that this is being done with
cooperation of Customs, as well as the Sheriff's Office?
Mr. DeMariano. Yes, sir, it is, that is for certain. And
indeed, the Sheriff's Office is taking a more active role with
us on police activity per se within the seaport. We will very
shortly recommend a larger jurisdiction for the Sheriff and BSO
here at the Port with the sense in mind, the philosophy that
professional police departments should be providing more hands-
on professional police activity, rather than us attempting to
grow expertise in that area. We will commission that contract
through the Broward Sheriff's Office.
Mr. Shaw. Very good. I'd like to go back, if I could, just
a moment to Puerto Rico. Obviously, they're part of our country
and once someone breaches security there, they're in.
What is happening over there, Mr. McNamara?
Mr. McNamara. I am not familiar with Puerto Rico in the
last couple of years. I used to have oversight back in 1995
over Puerto Rico. I could find out and submit that to the
record, if you would like.
Basically, I can tell you that dropping the air drops, what
was happening back in 1995 was the dropping of narcotics off
the shore of Puerto Rico or the Dominican Republic. Then they
were then transiting here to the United States from Puerto
Rico.
What's exactly happening right now I am not familiar with,
I'm not responsible for.
Mr. Shaw. Does either the port of Miami or Port Everglades
have heavy volume of shipping coming from Puerto Rico?
Mr. DeMariano. We have a limited volume as compared to
Jacksonville, which is a very, very heavy gateway to Puerto
Rico. We do have a degree of Puerto Rican cargo and a dedicated
service which calls here at our mid-port area. I have no reason
to think that is receiving any more or less scrutiny than our
other port areas.
Mr. Towsley. We have a similar situation in Miami. We do
see most of the Puerto Rican cargo coming in through
Jacksonville.
Mr. Shaw. Mr. Coffey, I want to get a little bit of a
clarification of your testimony. As a longshoreman, do they
support background checks as they're presently being done or do
you all still have objections to that?
Mr. Coffey. No, we don't have any objections to that.
Mr. Shaw. I wanted to clarify that, because in listening to
your testimony, that was a little bit of a gray area.
Mr. Coffey. What the longshoremen--really it's happened, I
suppose, over the years of just getting painted with a broad
brush and Miami as the Miami River and so on and so forth. In
my 30 years in Miami and Fort Lauderdale on the docks, I've
seen an awful lot in the growing ports in both ports. Some of
the other ports are mature ports and they're diminishing in
size. The ILA itself nationally is 14,000 strong. It used to be
over 100,000 at one time. There's quite a bit of a difference.
I'm so glad listening to Mr. McNamara, there is a no ILA Palm
Beach, Fort Pierce or the Miami River so they can paint that
brush again.
One of the things we have discussed quite a bit--We're part
of committees from time to time on the port with Customs and
with the local police and the Port Director's office--is that
because of the Miami River something would have to be done.
There seems to be a project going on to dredge this river to
make it deeper so that there will be more traffic there.
The only thing that we really realize is that the things
that probably are--and again, it's a guess on my part. I don't
have any information other than what I can suspect and take as
a prudent man to look at--is that what a man takes off in his
pocket off the pier if there's any type of drugs in that is
really not corrupting our Nation. What goes off in containers
is probably the thing that's doing it because there's that much
more that can be done.
A few years back the shipping industry had changed the way
they ship cargo. Where you had all sorts of different bills of
lading in order to get a shipper's cost, now they have one. So
nobody really knows who touched the cargo. And they have what
they call inter-modalism where there is a price from say Taiwan
to Hialeah. That's the one cost. And those containers come into
the port and then they leave the port and they're off the port.
Prior to that time, we used to strip and stuff the
containers on the port ourselves. I know that at that time we
had Customs' agents in all the sheds that we had on Dodge
Island and in Port Everglades. And I guess through attrition,
manpower losses, they had to centralize. And those people are
not in those port areas any longer. Basically, what we've
looked at is watched containerized cargo make it more efficient
for the shipping industry, but it probably has given an awful
lot of difficulty to this country and to Customs as far as
moving these things.
As far as the Miami River is concerned, my only suggestion,
if anything, is that the containerized cargo just shouldn't be
allowed on the River. I don't see Delta Airlines going to North
Perry Airport. I don't see American Airlines going to these
other airports. They have them centralized. I'm sure that would
be more of a restrictive job if they were on all of these
little places. If American Airlines took that little plane that
they have, the Eagle, and said we're going to do the Eagle
service out of North Perry, that would be a problem, I think.
My only suggestion to this whole matter is that if it's in
containers and we believe it's in containers, and we have
technology for it and we can do something about it, we put the
containers in one spot where, according to the stats, it's less
vulnerable in the port of Miami than the Miami River. I don't
know why anybody would want to dredge the River and continue to
increase the tonnage. It does a million-and-a-half tons a year
right now.
Mr. Shaw. The dredging of the river is an environmental
project also. There's some stuff down there that's pretty bad.
Mr. McNamara, what do you think of that suggestion?
Mr. McNamara. In terms of shutting down the Miami River?
Mr. Shaw. No, no, no. I'm talking about requiring that the
container ships all go into a designated port.
Mr. McNamara. The containers, to this point, are not our
problem. It's the boats themselves.
Mr. Shaw. You were saying that they were actually in the
infrastructure?
Mr. McNamara. In the infrastructure of the boats. A lot of
these boats come in and park for weeks. I don't know that they
would be allowed to do that at Dodge Island or----
Mr. Shaw. They'd have to pay a lot more.
Mr. McNamara. There's commerce along the River, shipyards
or container yards that operate along the River that
accommodate these particular boats and their cargo.
Mr. Shaw. Mr. Towsley, do you have any suggestion on that?
Mr. Towsley. I agree with Mr. McNamara's comment that part
of the problem with the River is the types of vessels. However,
the containers, we certainly would welcome the additional
traffic, but I'm not so sure that the type of vessel we could
not--don't have the space or the luxury to be able to have the
vessels sit there for weeks for loading and unloading, the
system that they use at the River. It is a niche market that we
don't adequately service.
Mr. Shaw. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mica. Thank you.
Mr. McNamara, can you tell me what kind of traffic pattern
we're seeing, where the drugs coming from, as far as country of
origin or transit coming into south Florida, what are you
seeing lately?
Mr. McNamara. Basically, the Colombian cocaine and heroin
are coming through the Caribbean corridor. The ones that come
to south Florida through Haiti would be one of the main points
of transshipments. Marijuana is coming from Jamaica.
Mr. Mica. Directly?
Mr. McNamara. Directly.
Mr. Mica. Haiti is still the big transshipment point?
Mr. McNamara. Yes.
Mr. Mica. Through the Dominican Republic and over to Puerto
Rico and then up?
Mr. McNamara. The other areas, obviously any country,
whether it be Venezuela, Ecuador that the ships call on,
received the Colombian cocaine and boarded on those vessels
that's headed for south Florida. We see it coming out of those
countries, also.
Mr. Mica. Venezuela, you're seeing an increase?
Mr. McNamara. I don't know if it's an increase. I'm just
saying that there have been incidences where ships that called
on these other ports within these countries. Where it got
loaded on, where the container got loaded on, when we look into
that after we investigate it, we try to find out whether that
was something that the cocaine got loaded on in Ecuador or
Venezuela or whether it was transhipped from Colombia--got
loaded in Colombia and the ship just stopped there.
Mr. Mica. One of the recommendations of the report was that
Customs change the manner in which it calculates staffing
because Puerto Rico is considered, I guess, a domestic shipment
point.
Did you want to respond to that? Is that something that we
need to look at because, again, it's not counted in the
equation for staffing.
Mr. McNamara. In terms of working out how many people you
should get and Commissioner Kelly has contracted out and
developed what we call a resource allocation model that is
currently tied up in OMB and Treasury. But that model is
supposed to take into account various types of work load to
determine where resources, if we get any resources, are to be
distributed to.
So the question comes down to what are we going to be doing
with the domestic cargo, because it is domestic at that point,
from Puerto Rico? If there was a reason to believe that it
should be reexamined because there might be drugs and they were
put on subsequent to examination in Puerto Rico, we will do
that. The issue, of course, in the trade is that it's already
been examined in Puerto Rico. It's domestic. You shouldn't be
examining it.
Our counsel feels that it is still coming from
international waters and therefore, it might be subject to some
sort of narcotics onboard or put onboard and therefore, we do
have a right to examine that particular cargo.
So the question comes down to what is it that we are going
to be wanting to do with this cargo. Quite frankly, Mr.
Chairman, we have so much work right now that, again, it's a
resource issue as to how much we can look at. For instance,
right now in Miami, we're looking at about 25 percent of empty
containers, mainly because of the fact that we know that empty
containers are used as a source of concealing narcotics and
there's no cargo in that container. It's just a container.
Mr. Mica. I also want to ask our staff if they can come and
look at the equipment. I don't know if I'll get a chance to do
that. I want to see what's in place, the big order that we put
in, Mr. Shaw. We need to do a little check and see what is in
place and if there are problems with this equipment, we've got
to get that on line.
In 1993/94 up to 1995, the Coast Guard's budgets were
pretty dramatically slashed and it was a big impact
particularly on Florida. Mr. Shaw and I have worked to try to
get the Coast Guard back up to speed, so to speak, and back in
this activity since they're so essentially, not only for the
safety of the waterways, but also sort of our first line of
defense.
Mr. McNamara, what's your opinion of the resources? You
have to do this non-prejudicially. As far as Customs'
resources, tell me if your observations of Coast Guard getting
back up to snuff is adequate.
Mr. McNamara. I truly am not familiar with the issue.
Mr. Mica. The two port directors?
Mr. DeMariano. I will offer this comment, Congressman.
We're generally aware that under the Federal assessment of
seaport problem, which was alluded to by Jim McDonough, there
will be a heightened responsibility offered to the U.S. Coast
Guard. It's my sense in talking to the captain of the port, who
I'm sure will speak for himself, there has not been a
corresponding assist to him in capability, manning or funding.
And obviously, we have all in our careers known that the Coast
Guard has had a high degree of national security--port security
responsibilities. Here we're talking I take it more about
contraband----
Mr. Mica. Right.
Mr. DeMariano [continuing]. Pilferage, drug smuggling. I
think clearly that represents a new area and one that's going
to require great resources.
Mr. Mica. Mr. Towsley.
Mr. Towsley. As we increase our security at the ports and
as we develop and improve our security master plans, the role
for Coast Guard, in terms of review of those plans and working
with us, is going to increase their workloads. I, likewise,
don't believe that their manpower and their budget have
correspondingly increased. I certainly don't have firsthand
knowledge to suggest that.
Mr. Mica. What is their presence here that you feel is
still inadequate--resources inadequate to deal with the
problem?
Mr. Towsley. I really can't address that specifically. I
know certainly that the issues that we have had at the port
since I've been there in terms of emergencies and so on, the
Coast Guard has always been there and provided a tremendous
level of service to us.
Mr. Mica. Clay, one of the things that we observed when we
went down to Puerto Rico, the Coast Guard and some of the
others, the bump up that they got--we got a significant
supplemental was in place and then deflated afterward. So they
started on sort of ramping up. It's all sort of fallen apart,
again, which is a problem. Puerto Rico, in particular, has a
lot of it coming in through--transiting through there and ends
up here.
Mr. Shaw. If I can take a crack at answering your question,
as a non-sworn witness, I can say that in the 20 years that
I've been in Congress, I do not think that we've adequately
funded the Coast Guard in any one of those years. It's not
under the Department of Defense. It's under the Department of
Transportation. They do not get the attention that the others
armed services get.
I think that should be something that the next Congress
should really take a close look at, because of the dual mission
of the Coast Guard, being one of defense in time of need and
being one of law enforcement on a full-time basis that makes it
a wonderful service that we need really to look at. In
increasing the funding for the Coast Guard, we could certainly
recognize their reserve military capabilities.
Mr. Mica. Thank you. One last question to Mr. McDonough. We
seemed to identify today one of the gaps, which is the Miami
River.
Is there any strategy from your standpoint to deal with the
Miami River on a specific basis, given the fact that you have
to work with all the local, State and Federal agencies?
Mr. McDonough. Yes, sir, there is. Many of them are
mentioned. So I'll just tick off the generic list of things
that need to be done.
First of all, we need a better intelligence system so we
can anticipate what is coming in.
Mr. Mica. Let me interrupt you, because you said the
legislature is giving $28 million additional dollars. Is that
at the port area?
Mr. McDonough. What I said was the seaport study called for
physical structures that would total $28 million.
Mr. Mica. Is that into the Miami River?
Mr. McDonough. No, sir. It's for the 14 ports. Separately,
however, we are planning to work on the Miami River.
Mr. Mica. But there's not anything specific as far as
finances--finance program to deal with that?
Mr. McDonough. There is, in fact. What we have done is we
reinforced the Federal agents at the Miami River with Florida
Department of Law Enforcement agents and local law enforcement,
but the State has paid for the more manpower from the Florida
Department of Law Enforcement.
Mr. Mica. Maybe to abbreviate this, could you provide the
subcommittee with a one-pager and give us an outline of what
the State is doing locally and if there are any Federal
elements that need to be included, something that needs to be a
component, whatever it may be----
Mr. McDonough. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mica [continuing]. That we can provide so that we sort
of put the pieces to the puzzle together.
Mr. McDonough. I shall.
Mr. Mica. I think that will be helpful in dealing with that
area and also timely as we start this next cycle.
One of the other issues I think that was raised in here was
money laundering. I'm not sure if anyone wants to talk about
that.
Mr. McNamara. Illicit money laundering. Maybe you know
something about this, Mr. McDonough.
Mr. McDonough. Sir, I'll address that.
Mr. Mica. If you would, go ahead.
Mr. McDonough. I have been directed by the Governor of this
State and by the legislature of this State to incorporate a
number of steps to intercept the money on the way out. We, of
course, worked through a variety of law enforcement agencies,
to begin with the Federal assistance, but also State and local.
Recently, the legislature has recommended 36 specific steps
to do our best to intercept the money. We're doing that. For
example, this morning I was met at the airport by a local law
enforcement agent and she, in fact, works the money laundering.
I asked her how they were doing here in Fort Lauderdale. She
reported that they recently picked up $8 million. That's a
pretty good take in a short period of time.
The Miami HIDTA works with it extensively. They have an
office called Impact. The last time I checked, they had 17
Florida agencies involved with them, and they take in a
significant amount.
We have changed reporting procedures from banks within our
State so that when you hit specific limits, the transaction is
reported, etc. We do not have a good base for how much money is
laundered either electronically or physically through State. We
have to guess at that. My only guess it's in the order of
billions. I would put it in the low single digit billions, but
beyond that, I'm not really sure.
I do believe that we're only taking, at the moment, a minor
percentage of the money. By minor percentage I would say less
than 5 percent. I don't think that's enough to impact.
I do believe on the interdiction front, on the seizure of
the drugs themselves, talking specifically of cocaine, I think
we may be pushing up now beyond 15 percent maybe 20 percent.
That's a significant take.
My own measure, if we begin to hit seizures of drugs at 30
percent or so, it drives the traffickers elsewhere or deters
them completely. If we begin to hit the money at the rate of 10
percent or so, I think it will really break it back. So far we
are not there.
Mr. Mica. Mr. McNamara.
Mr. McNamara. Mr. Chairman, with regard to the money going
out as a result of the proceeds of drug interdiction, first of
all, we have inspectors that as part of the our outbound
program are looking to uncover, find money. We have done that.
I'm seeing, if I have the exact number of how much money, total
outbound currency reporting south Florida CMC, this is just for
south Florida, the entire CMC, in 1998 was $9 million. In 1999
it was $9,184,000 and in 2000 year to date in June was $9.6.
We're getting some of the money going out, by no means all of
it.
On the same token, our agents are investigating and
participating in these HIDTA groups, as Mr. McDonough that
talked about, that are looking at doing the intelligence and
analysis of the organizations that are laundering money. So
it's a two-prong approach, trying to catch what's going out in
cash and people that are taking it out. Sometimes they're
taking it out in their luggage. Sometimes it's in shipments.
And also trying to unearth the smuggling organizations and how
they're transferring that money.
Mr. Shaw. Are there reporting requirements on electronic
transfers?
Mr. McDonough. There are.
Mr. McNAMARA. Same thing, $10,000.
Mr. Mica. Mr. Towsley.
Mr. Towsley. Mr. Chairman, we've heard testimony this
morning I think from all the agencies in terms of resources and
needs and improvements that we need. I have a question. Is
there some way that some of the dollars that are being
laundered that are being captured at the ports could be
dedicated to come back to the seaports and our enforcement
agencies?
Mr. Shaw. Good try.
Mr. Mica. We're trying to work on a percentage basis, too.
Mr. Shaw. No, no, no.
Mr. Mica. It hasn't worked out too well.
Mr. Shaw. There are laws that do a certain amount of that.
I don't know what law. Of course, it would go back to local law
enforcement for the money it seized. You are supposed to get a
certain portion of it.
Mr. Mica. But not the ports.
Mr. McNamara. But the seaports could, if they provided
information that lent itself to the seizure of drug smuggling
or drug information or money, that they could share in some of
that.
Mr. Shaw. Mr. Towsley, make a deal with the gentleman to
your left.
Mr. McNamara. Can I clarify?
Mr. Mica. Yes.
Mr. McNamara. Mr. Shaw, you asked me about La Dania. There
was one seizure. It was a Haitian vessel that went up there. I
guess it got kicked off the river. A wooden vessel that had 300
pounds of coke during 2000.
Mr. Mica. Any further questions, Mr. Shaw?
Mr. Shaw. No. I just want to thank all these witnesses for
their time and being with us, their candidness and bringing us
up to date on what's going on.
One real quick question. Does Tampa do any background
checks and things of this nature? Why did they jump up above
the other ports?
Mr. McNamara. I don't know, but I could find out for you.
Mr. Shaw. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for coming
down here, Mr. Chairman. I very much appreciate it.
Mr. Mica. I expected us to be well into the congressional
recess at this point. I thank you for being with us today. I've
got to scoot back to Washington. I thank each of the witnesses
for their help and the State of Florida. I didn't mention, the
Governor, Jeb Bush, I've never seen anyone more committed to an
issue than our Governor. I'd thank you, Mr. McDonough, to
convey our appreciation. He hasn't let up on this for a second.
I'd like to thank the two south Florida port directors for
their cooperation; Customs, for your assistance; and also, the
International Longshoremen representative. I know that just by
working with us and also ensuring that we have the very highest
standards of everybody's boat here, particularly at our ports,
and we appreciate your cooperation.
There being no further business to come before the
subcommittee this afternoon, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:38 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
-