If you're looking for evidence that maritime security is a hot topic in Congress, here it is: At press time, there were no fewer than 11 pieces of legislation affecting maritime and port security in the U.S. House and Senate.

Most of those bills were filed last fall. Nine of them were sent to the appropriate committees or subcommittees but have gone no further. One—S. 1214, the Port and Maritime Security Act sponsored by Sen. Ernest Hollings (D-S.C.)—passed the full Senate in late December, but its companion House version is on hold. Now another—House bill H.R. 3983, the Maritime Transportation Anti-Terrorism Act of 2002—appears likely to move forward over the next few months.

H.R. 3983 has some powerful proponents: Its sponsors are Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) and Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman and ranking Democrat, respectively, of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, as well as Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.) and Rep. Corrine Brown (D-Fla.), chairman and ranking Democrat of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.

The bill passed both the subcommittee and the full committee late last month. It would require vessels, terminal facilities and ports to develop anti-terrorism plans on a local, area and national level. It also directs the Coast Guard to conduct port vulnerability assessments; approve local anti-terrorism plans and integrate them into area and national plans; establish anti-terrorism teams to protect ports, vessels and cargo in U.S. territory; and assess the effectiveness of anti-terrorism measures at foreign ports.

Of greatest interest to shippers is a requirement that the U.S. Department of Transportation develop a pre-arrival cargo identification and screening system for containerized shipments, including inspections at foreign ports, by June 30 of next year. DOT also will be required to develop performance standards "to enhance the physical security of shipping containers," including establishing standards for seals and locks. In addition, DOT would issue identification cards to port workers who enter "secure areas," which are as yet undefined.

Although they are similar in their objectives, there are some important differences between H.R. 3983 and S. 1214, says Susan Turner, director of government relations for the American Association of Port Authorities. "The House bill has a more general approach ... It says, you have to plan locally to deter and respond to terrorism, but we're not going to tell you how." The Hollings bill, by contrast, is fairly specific in its instruction on how to achieve its objectives, she reports. "We think [the House bill's more flexible approach] is a good idea."

Another difference is that the Hollings bill addresses both cargo crime and anti-terrorism measures and would apply to all U.S. ports. H.R. 3983, on the other hand, deals only with terrorism, says Turner, and focuses on ports where a terrorist attack would result in catastrophic loss or cause widespread economic disruption.

The two pieces of legislation also differ when it comes to assigning responsibility for controlling information on cargo movements. The House bill would make DOT's Transportation Safety Administration responsible for collecting and analyzing shipment data. The Senate plan would hand that task to U.S. Customs, which already collects data on inbound shipments.

Regardless of how the differences between the two bills eventually are resolved, the measures set a complex and challenging agenda that will be difficult to meet. The will to comply clearly is there, but proposals for funding the implementation of local, regional, national and international security initiatives may be insufficient. The Hollings bill offers both loan guarantees and grants of about $80 million annually through 2006, while the House bill proposes grants of about $75 million annually through 2005. According to Turner, AAPA's members prefer grants but estimate that they will require more than $200 million annually to meet new security demands. There is one positive note on funding, however: The Bush administration, recognizing the additional burdens that security needs are placing on the already overburdened Coast Guard, has proposed a $1.6 billion increase in the Coast Guard's Fiscal Year 2003 budget.