[Senate Hearing 108-72]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 108-72
BORDER SECURITY: HOW ARE STATE AND LOCAL OFFICIALS COPING WITH THE NEW
LEVELS OF THREAT?
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 12, 2003
__________
FIELD HEARING AT ANOKA, MINNESOTA
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Governmental Affairs
Available via the World Wide Web: http://govt-aff.senate.gov or
www.senate.gov/~govt-aff
87-907 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio CARL LEVIN, Michigan
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
Michael D. Bopp, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Joyce Rechtschaffen, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Darla D. Cassell, Chief Clerk
------
PERMANENT COMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska CARL LEVIN, Michigan
GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
Joseph V. Kennedy, General Counsel
Elise J. Bean, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Mary D. Robertson, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Page
Opening statements:
Senator Coleman.............................................. 1
Senator Collins.............................................. 3
Senator Dayton............................................... 27
WITNESSES
Monday, May 12, 2003
Anne Lombardi, Interim Director, Field Operations, Chicago Bureau
of Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland
Security, Chicago, Illinois.................................... 5
Rich Stanek, Commissioner of Public Safety and Director of
Homeland Security for the State of Minnesota, St. Paul,
Minnesota...................................................... 14
Patrick D. McGowan, Sheriff, Hennepin County Sheriff's Office,
Minneapolis, Minnesota......................................... 15
Ardell F. Brede, Mayor of Rochester, Minnesota................... 17
Paul Nevanen, Director, Koochiching Economic Development
Authority, International Falls, Minnesota...................... 18
Ray Skelton, Captain, U.S. Merchant Marine (Retired),
Environmental Governmental Affairs Director, Duluth, and
Director of Security........................................... 26
Steve Leqve, Airport Manager, Rochester International Airport,
Rochester, Minnesota........................................... 29
Michael Curry, Director of Security, Canadian Pacific Railway,
Minneapolis, Minnesota......................................... 31
John Hausladen, President, Minnesota Trucking Association, St.
Paul, Minnesota................................................ 32
Alphabetical List of Witnesses
Brede, Ardell F.:
Testimony.................................................... 17
Prepared statement........................................... 51
Curry, Michael:
Testimony.................................................... 31
Prepared statement........................................... 62
Hausladen, John:
Testimony.................................................... 32
Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 65
Leqve, Steve:
Testimony.................................................... 29
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Lombardi, Anne:
Testimony.................................................... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 43
McGowan, Sheriff Patrick D.:
Testimony.................................................... 15
Prepared statement........................................... 49
Nevanen, Paul:
Testimony.................................................... 18
Prepared statement........................................... 52
Skelton, Captain Ray:
Testimony.................................................... 26
Prepared statement........................................... 54
Stanek, Rich:
Testimony.................................................... 14
Prepared statement........................................... 47
Exhibit List
1. GCorrespondence from Hennepin County (MN) Sheriff Patrick D.
McGowan, to Senator Norm Coleman, regarding additional comments
in connection with the Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations' May 12, 2003, Border Security hearing.......... 99
2. GSupplemental Statement of Michael Curry, Canadian Pacific
Railway, to the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations' May
12, 2003, Border Security hearing.............................. 101
3. GCorrespondence from Thomas B. Heffelfinger, U.S. Attorney,
District of Minnesota, U.S. Department of Justice, to Senator
Norm Coleman, regarding the Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations' May 12, 2003, Border Security hearing.......... 102
4. GCorrespondence from Rochester, Minnesota Mayor Ardell F.
Bride, to the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations,
clarifying his position on funding to cities and block grants.. 108
BORDER SECURITY: HOW ARE STATE AND LOCAL OFFICIALS COPING WITH THE NEW
LEVELS OF THREAT?
----------
MONDAY, MAY 12, 2003
U.S. Senate,
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations,
of the Committee on Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 8:30 a.m., at
Anoka-Hennepin Technical College Auditorium, 1355 West Highway
10, Anoka, Minnesota, Hon. Norm Coleman, Chairman of the
Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Coleman, Collins, and Dayton.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR COLEMAN
Senator Coleman. Thank you. We are thrilled to have the
students here. I hope you enjoy watching democracy in action.
Some of us have said, ``Legislation, it's like making sausage;
you don't want to see how it's made, but in the end, it comes
out OK.''
It is important for the young people to see what we are
doing, and that's our future. So hopefully, it will be a very
positive experience for you.
Let me begin by simply thanking all of you for coming out
so early for my first hearing as Chairman of the Senate's
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations to discuss what
remains a very important topic. We live in changing times in
this post-September 11 world. And there is the issue of
security and how we cope with new levels of threats for all of
us.
I do want to note the presence of the U.S. Attorney, Tom
Heffelfinger, who is here. This hearing today will focus on
local perspectives and how folks are dealing. Our first witness
will give an overview from the Department of Homeland Security.
But I do want to note the presence of the U.S. attorney, who is
an important part of how we deal with these issues here. And I
have asked him--the record will be kept open, and I would like
the U.S. attorney, after listening to the testimony and
questions that are raised, to prepare a written statement that
we would insert into the record.\1\ I think that would be very
helpful.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Exhibit No. 3 appears in the Appendix on page 102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I especially want to thank my colleague, Senator Collins,
for joining us today. And Senator Collins is from Maine, very
much like Minnesota. They are both border States, and both have
their own great north woods. We began yesterday in an area with
lots of trees that look just like Maine. Minnesota and Maine
similarly share borders with Canada, and have airports that
service a number of international travelers, many of them
tourists. Seaports are bringing cargo containers bound for
locations throughout the region.
I also want to thank Senator Dayton, who will be joining us
later. I think Minnesota has a unique opportunity. Both Senator
Dayton and I serve on the Governmental Affairs Committee. And
rather than having voices that cancel each other out, Minnesota
has two strong voices on issues like this. And so it's good for
America and good for Minnesota. And would I note that although
we are from different parties, we have joined together already
on a number of issues, such as the Paul and Sheila Wellstone
Center for Community Building and the Torture Victims Relief
Authorization Act. And I look forward to working with my
colleague, Senator Dayton, on the Senior Center for Minnesota.
Current Federal law gives the Department of Homeland
Security little guidance on how to deal and distribute the
billions of dollars of domestic preparedness grants for the
State and local governments. Senator Collins has indicated, as
Chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee, and I want to
stress that to Senator Collins, she is my Chairman, that she
will mark up legislation to address this omission. She has put
forward a set of principles to guide this legislation, and I
agree with those principles, Madam Chairman.
She has also initiated a set of hearings before we begin to
draft legislation. And the hearing later this week will include
testimony from the Commissioner of Hennepin County. And I hope
that the testimony we hear today will contribute to this
process. And, again, I want to stress what a great pleasure and
privilege it is to have with me today the Chairman of the
Governmental Affairs Committee.
The events of September 11 continue to affect all of us. We
are all aware of the need to increase domestic security. The
main purpose of this hearing is to see how this is being done
at the local level, and specifically, right here in Minnesota.
And although border security remains a national issue, in many
ways, it is also a very local one. Homeland security is about
security at home. It's not just about Washington security, and
it's not just about Federal Government security, but security
right here in Anoka, International Falls, Rochester, and the
Twin Cities. And we always have to remember that it's those of
us at the local level, it's our first responders, that have to
deal with crisis. A chain is only as strong as its weakest
link. Increasing airport security in New York or Los Angeles
accomplishes very little if passengers can fly into Minneapolis
instead. Efforts to tighten border security traffic in
Washington State may merely divert traffic to International
Falls. And finally, increasing protection in the ports of
Boston or New Orleans is not very effective if ships are also
unloading in Duluth, and we don't deal with the issues in
Duluth.
Second, border security is a local issue, because, as I
noted before, we rely primarily on local officials as that
first line of defense. They are the ones that inspect
international traffic and respond to events. Our people, those
at the local level, need to have the training, equipment, and
information necessary to do their jobs. We need to make sure
that State and local governments find it easy to work with the
Federal agencies, and that any funding includes sufficient
flexibility to meet the specific needs of a particular area.
We all know the importance of increasing security, but it
is equally important to maintain relatively open borders.
Northern Minnesota depends heavily on tourism. Minnesota
businesses, including many Fortune 500 companies, are dependent
on the ability to import components in order to serve worldwide
markets. Their executives increasingly need to oversee
international operations. Specific facilities, such as the Mayo
Clinic, have seen dramatic reductions in the number of foreign
visitors. More importantly, a large degree of openness and
personal freedom is integral to our concept of the American way
of life that we have come to cherish. We will continue to
struggle with this need to increase security while minimizing
delays and disruption.
As a former mayor, I know that reality often appears very
different at the local level than it does far away in
Washington. Information can get stilted through layers of
bureaucracy. That is, it is important that we continue to have
events like this where we can hear directly from local
officials on their own turf. Today's witnesses represent a
broad range of agencies throughout Minnesota. They have been
asked to address a broad range of issues, including how secure
are our entry ports into Minnesota? What kinds of people and
cargo are involved? What are the challenges handling these
volumes? What has been the cost of handling these volumes? How
is border security being conducted now? What procedures are in
place? Who is responsible for what? What problems exist in
maintaining border security at an acceptable cost, both in
terms of government cost and delay at the border? What
improvements can be made in how different agencies coordinate
with each other and the private sector? Are local and State
officials getting the support they need from the Federal
Government, both in terms of advice and training and in terms
of money? And finally, how should Federal money be distributed
to the States and local governments, and are there problems
with using the money the way it is currently distributed?
I again want to thank everyone for coming today. I look
forward to the testimony. Now, I will turn to my colleague, the
distinguished Chairman, Senator Collins, for her opening
remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN COLLINS
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me
begin by thanking Senator Coleman for inviting me to come to
this critical hearing today, and to the great State of
Minnesota. It's been a real pleasure to be the Chairman of the
Committee that has jurisdiction over the new Department of
Homeland Security, and to work very closely with my colleague
as we wrestle with the new challenges of the post-September 11
world.
I must say, I'm just delighted that Senator Coleman is now
the Chairman of the prestigious Subcommittee, the Permanent
Subcommittee on Investigations. As a new Senator, he has
already distinguished himself as someone who is not only a
quick study, but also willing to listen to all sides and work
very hard to achieve a compromise that is best for everyone. In
fact, in an outstanding class of freshmen Senators, there is no
one who has gotten off to a faster start than Senator Coleman,
and it's been great to listen to him and to work with him.
I also want you to know that whenever we're discussing any
issue that has an impact on local government, that is always
the first question that Senator Coleman asks. He is very
attuned to what the impact of Federal actions are on State and
local governments. And I think that speaks to his former
experience as a mayor.
I also look forward to having Minnesota's other Senator,
Senator Dayton, join us this morning. Senator Dayton and I just
returned from a trip to Asia. I do have a slight cold, but it's
not SARS. [Laughter.]
We've been back for more than the 10-day incubation period
at this point. But I look forward to his contributions as well.
And I am very pleased that both Minnesota Senators serve on the
Governmental Affairs Committee, which I am privileged to Chair.
I know that the challenges facing Minnesota today in
homeland security are in many ways similar to the challenges
that my home State of Maine faces. We have a lot in common
besides cold winters and hockey. And I do want you to know that
I have blocked out all memory of last year's win by Minnesota
over the University of Maine in overtime. [Laughter.]
It was a painful experience to watch it on television. But
to show you that I truly have put that behind me, I want you to
know that I am rooting for The Wild tonight. I do support you.
We both--as Senator Coleman pointed out--share a border
with Canada. We both have important ports, we have
international airports, and those are among the vulnerabilities
that all of us are more aware of since September 11. On that
day, as we all know too well, the United States changed
forever. We no longer can believe that we are invincible or
invulnerable. We must not, however, become a Nation that is
willing to cut itself off from the rest of the world. And part
of our dilemma, as we seek to strengthen homeland security, is
to avoid actions that have a bad impact. We continue to be a
strong nation, but we also must be a wiser one, with a new
understanding of the realities that currently confront us, as
well as the challenges that await around the corner.
And a sample of our increased preparedness is taking place
today; the Department of Homeland Security is doing a joint
exercise in Seattle and Chicago that is going to involve
Federal, State and local officials, as well as our Canadian
neighbors. It's called TOPOFF 2. It's going to involve a
response to a weapon of mass destruction, a simulated response,
and the weapon is going to be a dirty bomb, which is something
that has been a concern for all of us.
I look forward to learning more today about how your State
has handled the escalating responsibilities that have come with
increased homeland security. We are here from the government,
and we are here to help you. And I think the best way we can do
that is by learning from you. What do you need from Washington?
How can we do a better job with the grant programs that are
available? Do you need more flexibility in how you spend
funding? Those are some of the issues that we will be
confronting today, and in subsequent hearings later this week
in Washington.
It's important that we always remember that if disaster
strikes, our citizens don't pick up the phone and call the
Washington, DC area code of 202. They dial 9-1-1. And that's
why the State and local response, those of you who are on the
front lines, is so important to our homeland; because homeland
security starts with hometown security.
Again, it's a great pleasure to join the Chairman of PSI
today for this hearing, and thank you for inviting me to be
here with you.
Senator Coleman. Thank you, Senator Collins. I would now
like to welcome the first witness of today's hearing, Ms. Anne
Lombardi, International Director of Field Operations, from the
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection and the Department of
Homeland Security. Ms. Lombardi, I want to thank you for your
attendance at today's hearing, and I look forward to hearing
your perspective on the efforts your department is making in
State and local agencies in the field.
Before we begin, pursuant to Rule 6, all witnesses who
testify before the Subcommittee are required to be sworn. At
this time, I ask you to please stand and raise your right hand.
[Witness sworn.]
Thank you, Ms. Lombardi, you may proceed.
TESTIMONY OF ANNE LOMBARDI,\1\ INTERIM DIRECTOR, FIELD
OPERATIONS, CHICAGO BUREAU OF CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION,
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
Ms. Lombardi. Chairman Coleman, Madam Chairman, Members of
the Committee, good morning. I want to thank you for the
opportunity to testify before you today. My name is Anne
Lombardi. I am currently the Interim Director of Field
Operations in Chicago, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Lombardi appears in the Appendix
on page 43.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My responsibility entails providing leadership for the
legacy agencies of Customs, Immigration and Agriculture Border
Inspections for all ports of entry in 11 States under my
jurisdiction, including the port of Minneapolis, Minnesota.
As you know, these agencies merged March 1, 2003, under the
Department of Homeland Security. While the traditional missions
of the respective agencies continue to be observed, we now have
to integrate their processes and systems to more effectively
and efficiently support one common mission that will serve to
enhance the security of our borders. Our collective priority is
to prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering into
the United States, while facilitating the flow of legitimate
trade and travel.
Please allow me to expand on a few of the strategies we use
to accomplish this goal. The Department of Defense has provided
National Guard support to Customs and Border Protection
counter-drug mission since 1999. There are an estimated 315
National Guard soldiers currently assigned to us in locations
throughout the country. In addition to the traditional counter-
drug mission, an additional 626 National Guard Soldiers
supported Customs and Border Protection's anti-terrorism
operations along the northern and southern border until a
sufficient number of full-time staff could be hired and
trained.
The deployment of National Guard personnel was significant
in securing our borders immediately after the events of
September 11. Due to their proximity to remote locations,
Border Patrol and State and local law enforcement agencies
assist as first responders to incidents that may occur in
remote locations where Customs and Border Protection operations
are not conducted 24 hours a day. Many of these locations, in
addition to being secured with bollards and gates, are
supplemented with remote video cameras and ground sensors.
On April 29, 2003, Secretary Ridge announced his commitment
to implement a new entry/exit system, called U.S. VISIT System.
That's the Visitor and Immigration Status Indicator Technology
System. U.S. VISIT System will be the structure for the entry
and exit system replacing the existing NCSR and National
Student Registration Programs. These databases will provide the
government with comprehensive arrival and departure
information, and it will expedite the entry of legitimate
travelers and residents, being able to concentrate on visitors
of--or individuals of interest.
We have expanded our borders with the Container Security
Initiative System, known as CSI. We use a lot of acronyms. One
example of partnering with other countries to combat terrorism
is under CSI, we identify high-risk cargo containers, and we
partner with other governments to prescreen these containers at
foreign ports before they are shipped to the United States. The
governments representing 18 of the top 20 ports have agreed to
implement CSI, and the governments with the remaining two
ports--where they are located have expressed support for the
initiative and a desire to participate. In addition, we have
our Custom-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism, known as C-
TPAT. It's a pilot program, which enables at this point nearly
3,000 participating companies, including importers, domestic
manufacturers, trucking firms and shipping companies, to take a
fast lane into the United States after taking steps to ensure
security in their cargo supply chain. We are now looking at
expanding C-TPAT to other entities, and we have started
validations on supply chain security measures reported by
existing C-TPAT participants.
Deployment of nonintrusive inspection technology is
continuing nationwide. This technology includes large scale X-
ray, gamma ray imaging systems, portable radiation monitors,
and a mixture of portable and hand-held technologies to include
personal radiation detection devices that greatly reduce the
need for costly, time consuming physical inspection of
containers, and they provide us a picture of what is inside
these containers.
Deployment of portable radiation monitors is underway with
a total of 45 devices installed along various ports along the
northern border. While this technology is limited, it does have
the ability to detect anomalies and the presence of radioactive
material in containers and conveyances, depending on the source
of the material and the amount of shielding. These detection
devices allow inspectors to direct suspect cargo into secondary
examination areas for more thorough searches if there is an
initial positive reading. In this way, the vast majority of
goods and vehicles can pass through without the need for manual
inspection.
As more sophisticated screening devices are developed, it
will give Customs and Border Protection an even stronger
tactical edge in detecting nuclear material entering the United
States. A system is already in place at the port of entry at
International Falls for examining passenger vehicle trucks and
rail traffic. Within 30 days, an installation of a gamma ray
imaging system will be completed by the railroad bridge at
Ranier, and gamma ray imaging systems will also be installed at
the rail line systems at Noyes. Personal radiation detectors
have been employed for those who perform passenger screening.
And we conduct cargo examination, similarly equipped, and all
of the inspectors have been trained to properly use these
devices. We have also created Customs Area Security Centers,
which monitor by camera outlying crossings from these
designated centers. So in addition to bolstering our northern
border ports with bollards, gates, security lighting, video
security systems will be installed in all ports of entry to
monitor activity during nonoperational hours. And this live
video is monitored by a center which is manned 24 hours a day,
7 days a week, and uses the response from State, local and
border patrol personnel to address and identify illegal
crossings.
Today, there are two centers: One in Maine, and one in
Blaine, Washington, and soon there will be centers in Highgate
Springs, Vermont and Champlain, New York to cover additional
areas. Security gates have been installed at the ports of entry
at Roseau, Pine Creek, Lancaster and Noyes; ports that have
limited public hours. Installation of video systems and
lighting is progressing, and all land borders in Minnesota have
a 24-hour office presence, even during closed hours.
The Integrated Surveillance Intelligence System was
established to effectively monitor the integrity of U.S.-Mexico
and U.S.-Canada national boundaries for the purpose of border
patrol. The system uses data from components of surveillance
systems to provide controlled response, information
distribution, mapping and query results to support the U.S.
Border Patrol. This includes sensor and video data as they come
in from remote sites, providing appropriate responses. The
major component of this system is an intelligent computer-aided
detection system, unaided ground sensors, night equipment,
local positioning systems and remote video surveillance. And it
is the integration and management component of an electronic
surveillance of the northern border. Staffing to the northern
border has been increased significantly since the events of
September 11. In fiscal year 2002 and the beginning of 2003,
the number of new inspectors, canine officers and special
agents increased by 3,200 officers, of whom 775 have been
assigned to supplement the northern border. Border Patrol hired
2,500 agents in 2002, and as of 2003, a total of--February,
2003, a total of 560 Border Patrol agents have been deployed.
This is all part of the Smart Border Declaration, which was
announced between the United States and Canada in December
2001, which focuses on the secure flow of people, the secure
flow of goods, investment in common technology and
infrastructure to minimize threat and expedite trade, and
coordination and information sharing to defend our mutual
border.
In closing, the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection is
committed to continue and expand our counter-terrorism efforts
and improve our efforts to protect America, the American people
and the American economy. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify.
Senator Coleman. Thank you, Ms. Lombardi. I think we will
begin with 5-minute rounds of questioning, and I will start.
It was heartening to hear about the installation of gamma
ray imaging systems at the railroad bridge at Ranier. And I
know my source for the best place to fish. I could tell you a
lot of walleye stories right under that railroad bridge on many
occasions. I just want to talk about fishing in Minnesota.
Let me just ask a question about technology. You also
mentioned, for instance, biometrics at eQuest. Does that
include, for instance, up in International Falls, the air
service up there, how do you have biometrics at that operation,
and who does it, who manages it, who supervises it, who pays
for it?
Ms. Lombardi. Well, right now, there are several different
registration systems, and what we hope to do is integrate it so
that we will be registering all individuals, along with
biometric information, so that whenever they enter the United
States, whether it's through the border or an airport or
seaboard, that this database will be available, and we will be
able to find the people and assess their proper status into the
United States.
Senator Coleman. To kind of continue, if I can just take a
bigger perspective, you talked a little bit about homeland
security in Minnesota. The Department just got put together in
March, and I like to get a sense of who is in charge. In
Minnesota, who is in charge, who are the principle points of
contact of the State and local officials, many of whom are here
today.
Ms. Lombardi. OK. It has only been 2\1/2\ months. I have
been designated as the Interim Director of Field Operations for
11 States, including part of Minnesota. Part of it is under a
different director, to ensure that the northern border issues
are all dealt with in a uniform manner. We are truly what we
have adopted as our motto, ``One team, one fight.'' We have
integrated, and I have people behind me from Border Patrol,
from Legacy Customs, from Legacy Immigration, and we are
working together very closely to assure that we can address the
needs.
Our first mission, as of March 1, under Commissioner Bonner
was continuity of operations. We were to make sure that we did
our priority mission and our traditional missions, and that we
continued to operate while the myriad of issues regarding
logos, uniforms, unions, and all of the organizational things
were worked out. But we have been working very closely
together, and we are going to ensure that that continuity of
operations continues until we address all of the additional
measures and things that we have to do to truly unite and
leverage our resources. And I believe that's happening. We have
already had some new initiatives in terms of working jointly,
and I have been, for instance, from Chicago, I have been
working closely with FEMA and part of this TOPOFF 2, Chicago is
one of the sites. So we have truly been working together and
not letting the administrative issues and those kinds of things
deter us from continuing with our border security primary
mission.
Senator Coleman. And I know, recognize, that this is a new
entity, the Department of Homeland Security. And as we were
introduced on the way in, talked about who you are with now,
formerly known as.
Ms. Lombardi. Yes.
Senator Coleman. The artist formerly known as. But if I can
again break it down to a very local level, in Minnesota,
principal points of contact for these issues, are they with the
Chicago office, does the U.S. attorney play a role in that? Who
does the sheriff in Aitkin, Minnesota--if all of a sudden an
issue came up, who do they contact?
Ms. Lombardi. Well, I have behind me Mr. Cloud, who is the
Interim Port Director for Minneapolis. I have Mr. Shultens, who
is a Legacy Customs Port Director. I have Greg Schroeder from
Immigration Border Patrol, Legacy Immigration, and I have Wally
Schulte from International Falls. So we all work together.
There are different people in charge at different ports.
However, they either report to myself, or they report to Tom
Hardy in Seattle who is responsible for the entire northern
border tier from Duluth to Seattle, Washington.
Senator Coleman. And then one more question along that
line. How well are the border security activities integrated
with the anti-terrorism activities in--as I recall from my old
days as a mayor, before that as a prosecutor, we worked
together in a joint-Federal, State-Federal, anti-drug and anti-
terrorism task force. How well integrated are the border
concerns, or the activities of those, operating with these
joint task forces?
Ms. Lombardi. We certainly do participate in all of those.
I have joked about needing larger conference rooms than ever,
because we now have more and more people who are working
together, but whether it's State and local, whether it's FEMA,
whether it's Transportation Security Administration, Customs,
Legacy Customs, Immigration, whatever, and we have been
working, I think, more closely than I have ever experienced
before in terms of meeting on a regular basis, talking about
response capabilities, sharing information about resources and
capabilities, sharing information about technologies.
I personally feel that things are going as well as they can
go right now, and as we merge the agencies and deal with the
administrative things, I think we will just continue to
progress in our ability to provide effective, efficient border
security for the taxpayer dollar.
Senator Coleman. And I will direct that same question to
the local folks to get their perspective.
Last kind of area of concern. Can you talk about areas and
particular points of vulnerability that deserve special
attention as we sit here today, 3 months after you began your
existence? What are the areas of concern that you have as you
look at the Minnesota situation?
Ms. Lombardi. Well, I think we have tried to address the--
obviously, starting with ports of entry with the additional
gates, bollards, detection systems, etc. Obviously, with the
long border, the places in between the ports are always more
vulnerable. I sometimes joke about my area not having a land
border, but a liquid border. But certainly when you come to
Minnesota, sometimes that liquid border in the north is frozen,
so it's very easy to come across as a land border. So obviously
the efforts of the Border Patrol at the State and local system
are going to assist that, because that is such a large border,
and we do not want to shut down the border and put fences or
whatever, but we do want to protect it.
And I think that is the area we are always concerned with,
the places between the ports. Ports tend to be where the
legitimate traveller and trades people come through, and they
do their proper declarations. Obviously, the places in between
are the most vulnerable, which is why we are pursuing the
technology that we are with sensors, cameras, and we certainly
need the State and local support to respond, because these
places are very remote.
Senator Coleman. Great. Thank you, Ms. Lombardi. Senator
Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Director Lombardi, I want to follow up on the issue of border
security raised by Senator Coleman. In both of our States,
Minnesota and Maine, in the more rural communities that are
right along the border, it is not uncommon for families to be
split on both sides of the border, for people to cross the
border literally every single day, whether it's to shop or to
work. Now, in Maine where we're seeing the problem is with some
of the smaller border crossings being closed in order to
improve security, or they're being locked up at 4 p.m. on
Friday and not reopened until Monday morning, and I suspect
it's probably a similar problem in Minnesota and other States.
How are we going to strike the right balance so that we make
our borders more secure without interfering with the legitimate
commerce and crossing of people each day?
Ms. Lombardi. Well, I think we have to rely on several
different things. Obviously, staffing a port requires
resources. We need to do more with technology. We need to do
more with preregistration programs so that legitimate traveller
who goes back and forth three or four or five times a day can
get through the border legitimately, correctly, identified and
can move freely. Obviously, we want to make sure that we also
identify the people who are trying to use those remote ports
for illegal entry, and we need to monitor for diversions around
the port of entry and communicating between the ports.
It is a very difficult job to find that balance, but I
think the use of technology, the use of preregistered programs,
where people can provide us with all of the information that we
need to do, we can do the enforcement assessments on them in
advance, and then have some kind of technology system that will
allow them to enter more freely when we are not staffed at the
border.
Senator Collins. Thank you. That is the scenario that I
think we are going to have to keep working on. For example,
some of the border crossings in Maine that have been closed
have created real problems as far as for our woods industry.
Others have created emergency response issues, where the first
responders may be on the Canadian side of the border and the
gate is locked, they may not have the easy access they need to
the American side of the border. It's something that I hope we
can keep working with in the department.
Another issue that has come up repeatedly in our
conversations with State and local governments concerns the
communication between the new Department of Homeland Security
and the State and local officials. For example, at a hearing
that we held in Washington, where we had police and fire chiefs
from around the country testifying, each one of them said that
they learned we had elevated the threat to code orange from CNN
or from watching television, and not from the Department. What
do you think the Department needs to do?
I recognize the challenges of the largest reorganization of
government in more than 50 years. But what do you think the
Department should do in order to improve communications with
State and local governments and first responders?
Ms. Lombardi. I appreciate that CNN comment, because we do
have that situation sometimes. It also shows up on our website,
so it is more of an initial notification. But we have a system
of contact in calling, and all of the Customs and Border
Protection, all of the directors, are called by our Secretary
of Communications. We call our ports.
And it's, in effect, a calling tree of a variety of people
that we have identified as being in a needing-to-know,
including, as you mentioned, we have our ports in Canada that
we need to alert to the fact that the border situation is
changing, because, again, it's a shared border. We are trying
to make it a smart border, and we need to make our partners in
the other countries involved. I think lot of these issues will
be worked through over time. And I think the technology one,
the communications one, we will have to address. Certainly, we
are addressing it within the Department of Homeland Security.
We have a number of work groups who are talking about the
various communication systems, the legacy agencies, how can we
bring them together, how can we make sure that we coordinate.
We are sharing technology. For instance, we shared our Customs
Radiation Technology with Immigration.
We are working to improve our radio communications, so that
we are all on the same systems and being able to communicate.
And, again, that will extend to the State and locals as we can
make it work. And we will find ways to do it in the interim,
and we will find ways to do it in the long-run. But it's very
important that we be able to communicate with our counterparts,
because we all need to leverage each other's resources in order
to make sure this is truly what you call Hometown Security.
Senator Collins. Finally, I want to ask you about the
staffing of the northern border. For many years, the northern
border has received the short end as far as staffing of
Immigration officials; all of the focus was on the southern
border with Mexico and stemming the tide of the illegal
immigrants seeking to cross. And yet, if you look at our
northern border, it's so much larger, longer. It's in many ways
more of a challenge, as you pointed out when you were talking
about the waterways being frozen.
That certainly is the case in northern Maine. There used to
be a very vigorous smuggling of cigarettes back and forth in
winter months by people just crossing the frozen river. You
said in your statement that the number of inspectors, canine
enforcement officers and special agents, had increased by
3,200, of whom 775 had been assigned to supplement the northern
border enforcement activities. Does that suggest that we still
have an imbalance in the allocation of resources to the
northern versus the southern border?
Ms. Lombardi. As I indicated to you, Madam Chairman, I
started my career in the Boston region, which included your
State of Maine, and I have never seen such an influx of new
resources on the northern border as has occurred over the last
couple of years. For 2001, there were about 1,600 inspectors
and canine. In 2002, that jumped 2,114. We are currently at
2,563, and for the rest of this fiscal year, we are projecting
3,000. And hopefully in fiscal year 2004, that will increase to
3,500, approximately, and that includes Legacy Customs, Legacy
Immigration and Legacy Agriculture. So in a 3-year period, we
are seeing literally almost a tripling of the resources, and
that has, as you point out, in the past has not been the case.
But I think the concern, the threat, we always thought the
northern border in Canada was an alliance, and it was a free-
flowing trade.
We have the Free Trade of the Americas, going back to the
Canada Free-Trade Agreement and NAFTA, and now the Trade of
Americas. But certainly the terrorist mission has changed that
view in terms of the risk in the northern border, and all of
the legacy agencies in the Department of Homeland Security are
supporting a vigorous, aggressive hiring, training package,
and, again, leveraging each other's resources so we provide
appropriate coverage. But it has been unprecedented, and we are
continuing to keep those positions filled and trained and on-
site.
Senator Collins. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Coleman. Thank you, Senator Collins. We'll do one
short round of follow-up. There is one issue that I want to
raise, more perhaps as a State. And rather than the question
going to the larger focus of homeland security, not just the
border protection, but it's a follow-up to Senator Collins'
questions about communication between Homeland Security and
those of the State and local levels. I was mayor on September
11, 2001 and quite often there would be questions about
security concerns, levels of threat, that we would also read in
the paper. And folks would come to the mayor as the local
elected official, learning what's going on. And we simply
weren't in the loop. And I would hope, as one looks at the
issue of communication with State and local officials, that one
goes back to the elected officials who are often called upon to
respond to the concerns of the community, and that they somehow
be included. Mayors aren't sitting at those joint task force
meetings, local elected officials aren't sitting at those
meetings. But clearly, from the public perspective, they
represent government, and the government is something to them.
Governors may fit into that same situation. But I want to raise
that issue, and then follow it up with a question. When it
comes to a specific threat, if there is an issue about someone
who we believe is in the process of entering the country or on
the look-out for entering the country representing a potential
threat, can you give me a better sense of how folks on a local
level know that? What's the flow of communication to folks at
the local level to be part of this look-out part of using the
resources, the public resources that are available to deal with
threats?
Ms. Lombardi. Well, from my port of entry point of view, we
do have databases, we enter criteria, we have a national
targeting center that monitors. We have advanced passenger
information on many of these, especially in airports and
seaports. Land border is always more vulnerable because of
passengers coming up, and is right in front of you at that
time. And that's why I think this alliance on preregistration
programs is going to be important. But you are correct. We need
to work with State, local, the elected officials in those areas
to ensure that the entire community is involved. I certainly am
going to experience that personally in this next week during
the TOPOFF exercises. And I think this is only the second one,
and I think we learned many lessons from the first one. And I
think certainly as we continue to do these around the country,
we will learn lessons about integrating State and local elected
officials, as well as the Federal law enforcement community.
And certainly I would agree with you that is very important
that our communications not be insular to a department or to
the Federal Government, but that we need to be working in the
communities and working together.
And certainly I will take that message back to the
Department in terms of your concerns and how we do this and
make sure that we continue to address it. Obviously, we have
people locally who have good connections and good relationships
with State, local, and elected officials, and we will continue
to rely on that structure to ensure that we maintain the
communications at this point.
Senator Coleman. Last follow-up to that line of inquiry. It
has to do more with technology. Suppose that there was an alert
out for a Mr. X profile. If a State trooper operating outside
of the International Falls area, Minnesota, had stopped Mr. X,
would they have the capacity to know there was an alert out for
him? Do we have the ability for folks at the local level when
they stop somebody 15 miles from the border to say, ``Yes, we
are looking for a specific individual''?
Ms. Lombardi. Border Patrol works very closely with the
State and local, and they would be the conduit. If the
Department of Homeland Security knew of an individual, then
through the Border Patrol--well, first through our databases
and targeting system, ports of entry would know to be on the
look-out for this person. Border Patrol would then communicate
with their sheriffs' offices, State, and local to ensure that
they are aware of it, as well.
Senator Coleman. Thank you. Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Senator Coleman. Ms. Lombardi, thank you very much for your
testimony.
Ms. Lombardi. Thank you.
Senator Coleman. I would like to call our second panel of
witnesses at this time.
We now welcome our second panel of witnesses, Commissioner
Rich Stanek from the Department of Public Safety here in the
St. Paul area. Sheriff Patrick D. McGowan of the Hennepin
County Sheriff's Office. Rochester Mayor, Ardell Brede. And
finally, Paul Nevanen, who is the Director of the Koochiching
Economic Development Authority in International Falls,
Minnesota.
Gentlemen, I thank you for your attendance here. I look
forward to your testimony and hearing your unique perspective
on how your government agencies have had to respond to the
general need of increasing domestic preparedness, and how we at
the Federal level can do a better job of serving you. Again,
pursuant to Rule 6, all witnesses who testify in this
Subcommittee are required to be sworn in. At this time, I would
ask all of you to stand and raise your right hand.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Thank you. Commissioner Stanek, we'll proceed with your
testimony first, and then we'll hear Sheriff McGowan, and then
Mayor Brede and then Mr. Nevanen. And once we have heard all of
the testimony, we will be hearing questions.
TESTIMONY OF RICH STANEK,\1\ COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND
DIRECTOR OF HOMELAND SECURITY FOR THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, ST.
PAUL, MINNESOTA
Mr. Stanek. I am the Commissioner of Public Safety, and
Director of Homeland Security for the State of Minnesota, and I
appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today. The
fact that you are having this hearing here reflects your
commitment to homeland security not only on a national basis,
but at the State and local levels, as well. Because it is here
where homeland security begins.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Stanek appears in the Appendix on
page 47.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minnesota has been a national leader in terrorism
prevention and preparedness. In 1999, the Department of Public
Safety forwarded to the legislature an extensive report on
possible terrorism risks in Minnesota, and what our State would
do to respond, that leadership continues today. Senator Coleman
and I had a conversation recently. The Senator wanted to be
actively engaged in the homeland security issues and needs of
his State. And after our discussion, I decided to create a
Commissioners Public Safety Advisory Group. The leaders of
police, fire, emergency services, many of whom who are in the
audience today, will get together with me to offer suggestions
and advice related to Homeland Security. Minnesota's
congressional delegation is also invited to attend our meetings
to hear firsthand some of our homeland security issues, and
what it all means to our public safety professionals at the
local level. Homeland security is all about communication and
coordination. The advisory group will demonstrate that. Other
existing relationships in Minnesota are demonstrating high
levels of communication and coordination. The connection
between the State and our Federal partners is rock solid. We
are blessed in Minnesota with an FBI field office that is
inclusive and accessible, and a U.S. attorney who is engaged in
response of law enforcement needs. Our link to the Department
of Homeland Security is equally strong, with frequent updates
through Secretary Ridge on a regular basis. And we are thankful
for the Federal dollars that have come into Minnesota for
training, equipment and emergency preparedness exercises. And I
can assure you that we are not sitting on that money. We are
actively working with our county and local partners to get the
funding out the door and into the hands of the people who need
it the most, our first responders.
Well, we aren't just passing it along without a plan. In
Minnesota, we are working with our counties and cities on a
regional approach to fund the equipment and training. In
Minnesota, we are being smart with the money you are providing.
Inter-operable radio systems and integrated criminal justice
integration systems, such as Minnesota's own CrimNet, are key
to homeland security success. However, on behalf of our local
participants, I ask you to consider lifting some of the
restrictions and limitations on how that funding can be spent.
We would like flexibility to be able to pay overtime and
personnel expenses with the appropriations.
The magnitude of Minnesota's budget crisis cannot be
overstated. Public safety is a core function of Governor
Pawlenty's administration. Our local law enforcement and other
public safety officials are being asked to do more with less.
After all, equipment is great, but it's the people that make it
work. Every chief law enforcement officer and emergency manager
in Minnesota is making smart and creative decisions in how to
provide their services on a shoe string. Relaxation of the
limitations would help all of us make better decisions for the
safety of our citizens. We feel that through leadership we can
set a national example by continuing to make great strides in
public safety and homeland security in Minnesota, whatever the
future brings. Thank you, Senator Coleman, and Members.
Senator Coleman. Thank you, Commissioner Stanek. Sheriff
McGowan.
TESTIMONY OF PATRICK D. MCGOWAN,\1\ SHERIFF, HENNEPIN COUNTY
SHERIFF'S OFFICE, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA
Sheriff McGowan. Good morning, Senator Coleman. And Senator
Collins, welcome to Minnesota. It's a pleasure to have you
here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Sheriff McGowan appears in the
Appendix on page 49.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pleasure to be here today, and I appreciate the
opportunity to present a view of homeland security from a law
enforcement perspective. September 11 is certainly a date we
will all remember for the rest of our lives. We cannot change
the physical and emotional devastation that has rocked us all,
but we can learn from it. The new role and responsibility of
local law enforcement is a key element to homeland security. It
challenges our resources and our time. Today, fully one-third
or more of my time is spent dealing with homeland security-
related issues. I have become a realist in this process, and
realize we cannot prevent everything. But we can be prepared.
We in Hennepin County in Minnesota have been very fortunate
to have been ahead of the curve on much of the preparation for
terrorism. We have been members of the FBI's Joint Terrorism
Task Force since 2000, 18 months prior to September 11, and we
are proud of our proactive achievements. Our planning and
preparation for large-scale events has been ongoing since 1998,
and we have learned a great deal from a number of realistic,
coordinated drills and exercises. We know that for the first 72
hours of a major incident, local first responders will provide
the initial coordinated response. Our response will be the
cornerstone to an effective ongoing operation to save lives and
protect our citizens. However, we must be prepared for a
weapons of mass destruction array that could include
radiological, chemical, biological or explosive strikes. To
provide that kind of response, it is imperative that we have
the appropriate training, equipment and staff to handle each of
these potential threats.
This vital training and resource inventory is expensive and
must be ongoing. Even if you have the appropriate equipment, it
will be of little value if the parallel training is not
continuous. It is not unlike the way that each of us view our
personal vehicle. You know that you might have to change a tire
on your vehicle, and that is a skill necessary to just getting
back on the road again. But how often do you do this? Do you
even know where the jack is located, or how to access it? Many
of you simply couldn't perform this function so basic to your
driving needs. Public safety responders are no different. They
need to have ongoing training and updating on equipment
techniques, or they will be unable to perform a skill
efficiently when they must. Because this training and equipment
is expensive, and often has a shelf life of approximately 5
years, the allocation of resources needs to be thoughtful. We
cannot afford to equip and train every public safety responder
in every facet of preparation.
That is why the formation of Regional Response Teams
provides a sensible solution to meeting our public safety
response requirements as they apply to terrorism and weapons of
mass destruction. For example, in Minnesota, I would propose
the formation of five Regional Response Teams, regionalized
strategically, which would allow us to consolidate our
resources. These regional response teams would not only serve
as a primary response team in their own area, but could be
rapidly deployed to assist in other areas of this State as
needed. I often believe that Americans are great sprinters, but
we are poor marathon runners. As a nation, we respond initially
with courage, determination, and just true grit. However, we
have a tendency to have little taste for the long haul. I
strongly urge you to recognize that Americans' homeland
security issues are truly a marathon. We must not let our
determination to be prepared to respond to any assault on our
Nation to wane. We need ongoing funding to provide the training
and resources I have discussed. We need your continued focus on
and support of our cause.
Ladies and gentlemen, we must preserve the image of those
crumbling Twin Towers in New York, the Pentagon in flames, and
the Pennsylvania fields with the wreckage of a commercial
airliner and those lives lost within our national memory. Our
enemies struck the heart of our country. We must say, ``Never
again.'' The key, Senators, is your continued support of our
needs at the local level to help fund our new role in homeland
security. Thank you.
Senator Coleman. Thank you, Sheriff McGowan. Mayor Brede.
TESTIMONY OF ARDELL F. BREDE,\1\ MAYOR OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA
Mr. Brede. Thank you, distinguished Senators, and good
morning. I am Ardell Brede, the Mayor of Rochester. For 4
months, I've been mayor, so much of this is new to me. But
thank you for the opportunity and the invitation to express our
concerns and the impact to our community.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Brede appears in the Appendix on
page 51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rochester is unique in the sense that it's perhaps impacted
more greatly than other cities of comparable size within the
United States, due to its makeup. The city has a major medical
Mayo Clinic and high-tech community, IBM, Pemstar and a number
of other high-tech companies. And it's also home to an
international airport. And because of those particular
features, we are considered a listed target of terrorist
activities. Because of that, greater security for those
facilities are needed, and this comes from more patrol in those
areas, thereby reducing the available patrolling for other
neighborhoods within the community, since there are no other
resources allocated for this purpose.
For this morning's testimony, I received information from
the Rochester City Administrator, the police and fire
departments, the Mayo Clinic, Olmstead County Public Health
Department, as well as our sheriff of Olmsted County. In a
separate report, the Rochester International Airport will be
presented in the next panel by Mr. Leqve.
The police department estimates it has the equivalent of
eight FTE's at the airport, which is funded by the Federal
Government. But as of May 31, that funding will be eliminated,
and they will become an additional local cost. The present
Federal reimbursement amounts to $15,000 a month. However, that
is only covering the hourly wages, and none of the other
associated costs, such as benefits. Those costs are borne by
the city.
Since September 11, there's been an increased volume of
calls to the fire department because of suspicious substances.
All of those require additional trips out to them, and, with
again, no additional resources. It requires the hazmat team to
respond. And currently, with the State budget crisis, some of
those funds may be cut, which will then create greater
concerns. At the Mayo Clinic, they have developed rapid Anthrax
and smallpox DNA tests. Those tests dramatically shorten the
waiting time for authorities to determine if suspicious
substances are contained in these harmful elements. The Mayo
Clinic did all of that with little or no financial support, and
all of them involved huge amounts of staff time.
The global economy is weak, and specifically from the
Middle East--fear of travel in different ways, the delays in
processing of visas--prior to September 11 it was about a 1-
week time for processing a visa. That actually went up to about
11 weeks, and now, fortunately, is down about 4 to 6 weeks. But
an international patient who has a medical condition that
warrants them coming to the Mayo Clinic, a 4- to 6-week delay,
they're going to find their treatment and care elsewhere. And
it is estimated for every dollar that would be spent at Mayo
Clinic by these patients, it equates to another $2 in the
community. Also, as a payment mechanism, those patients pay
full dollar, where our Medicare patients and other patients
have some sort of discount. The international patients have
dropped by 23 percent, although, again, in this year, 2003, we
have seen an increase of patients coming from Europe, Latin
America, and Kuwait. But it still is a concern. And
anecdotally, since the war with Iraq, we have seen somewhat of
a quieting of international activity with some cancellations
and rescheduling. But no major change or dramatic change.
We are looking forward to the partnership between the
University of Minnesota and Mayo on a biotechnology
partnership, and I think that's just another area that we will
be concerned about, the resources that are needed for security.
We have met with the Olmsted County Public Health Services. We
do have a Joint Emergency Management Committee, and I have been
a part of that, and it is one of the things that needs to be
updated, because many of those emergency plans really didn't
contain anything on terrorism. And fortunately, we received a
small grant that we were able to secure somebody to help us
update, that's in the process as we speak.
From the sheriff and also from the police department, they
have talked of the 800 megahertz communication system that is
needed, and funding of that, whether it's from the State or
Federal monies, but has not come forward enough that it can be
implemented yet. So I believe that's the level of my comments
at this time.
Thank you.
TESTIMONY OF PAUL NEVANEN,\1\ DIRECTOR, KOOCHICHING ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, INTERNATIONAL FALLS, MINNESOTA
Mr. Nevanen. I really appreciate this opportunity to talk
about Homeland Security from a small town, front-line
perspective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Nevanen appears in the Appendix
on page 52.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Falls is a small community, about 6,000
people, 300 miles north of here. It is also situated about
midway along the northern border. It stretches across a major
border, as well as it's a major border crossing for vehicular
traffic as well as a major railport. It is the third busiest
railport in terms of trains and containers. We have seen a
continued growth in terms of both vehicular and train traffic,
and as well there has been a shift in the country of origin for
a lot of the incoming rail traffic. Now we are seeing an
increase in the Pacific Rim and Middle East.
Our area's economy, much like northern Maine, is driven
primarily by the paper industry, as well as tourism. Cities and
counties need to have a strong partnership, and I am echoing a
lot of the sentiments of the folks here, with Federal and State
Governments to help deal with lagging economy, a loss of jobs,
and other issues of national security. Homeland security
becomes, as you mentioned with hometown security, one person,
one block, one Main Street. It is what makes the difference in
people's lives. That is what shows people that government can
work and does work at the local level. The headlines may come
from Washington or St. Paul, but elected officials from the
communities, like International Falls, are having to solve the
problems and help make life a little bit better in their
communities.
As cities and counties in northern Minnesota face some of
the tightest budgets in years, Federal help to spur economic
growth becomes more crucial than ever. International Falls
faces many potential challenges daily as a direct result of a
number of border crossings.
We are desperately in need of funding for homeland security
situations. Our first responders are very dedicated
individuals. Regularly they are asked to give more and more
time to become the highly trained unit that they are. We expect
our volunteers to act and respond like well-oiled machines.
Well, Senators, these well-oiled machines require fuel, and we
ask both the State of Minnesota and the Federal Government to
help us with that requirement. The State of Minnesota has
responded thus far with a mobile decontamination chamber for
International Falls. It helps respond to situations. And
currently we have a grant application into FEMA for a Mobile
Incident Command Center that will be utilized with the
decontamination chamber. But all of this equipment requires
additional training. The costs associated with emergency
preparedness have doubled since September 11 as a result of
that additional training. Anthrax, weapons of mass destruction,
biological and chemical weapons, are all new terms that have
been become common language since September 11. Our
firefighters now have to be trained in all areas of response,
even the unknown types agents of terrorism regularly employ.
Suicide bombings could happen anywhere, and we have to be
prepared. State and Federal law enforcement personnel also need
and undergo training that continues to evolve to cover an ever-
expanding set of emergency scenarios.
For those front-line communities, like International Falls,
the key is planning, preparedness, and having the necessary
tools. Aside from the mobile decontamination chamber, another
item that helped address these needs is the recent placement of
the Rail Vehicle and Cargo Inspection System, the VACIS, in
Ranier beside International Falls. The VACIS now allows the
protection personnel to scan a much higher number of containers
immediately as they cross into the country, whereas in the past
they sampled a much smaller sampling.
From a training perspective, the community has kind of
taken a proactive approach. And what we have done is we have
looked at this influx of Federal employees and the need for
training, and we have an initiative now that we would like to
have International Falls serve as a training center for
northern border security issues. We have done a needs
assessment with all of the Federal agencies and the locals, and
it's been well received. But there is an increased need in
training. And we think that International Falls is situated
geographically, and because of the other assets there, is in a
perfect location to do that. So we have put in a Federal
appropriation--applied for a Federal appropriation to further
this initiative. But all of these efforts have required a
gradual increase of communication and cooperation among all of
the participants; local, State and Federal, and that's not
always an easy task. And I have been very impressed and
encouraged by the professionalism and the amount of cooperation
that everybody has shown to date. So I am very encouraged. And,
again, I thank you.
Senator Coleman. Thank you very much, Mr. Nevanen.
And just before we begin the questioning, I just want to
comment how impressed I am with the quality of the panel.
Commissioner Stanek has been a police officer, a Minneapolis
police officer. He has been a State legislator. Sheriff McGowan
has been a State legislator and law enforcement person. They
know these issues. Mayor Brede, like you, I have been on the
job just a couple months, but to have a city like Rochester,
which is an international city, and yet it's not a New York,
not a Chicago.
And Mr. Nevanen, as I sit here and listen to a town of
5,900 be worried about Anthrax and weapons of mass destruction,
and having again spent time in The Falls, and seeing the border
traffic, and the immense demands placed on the local level. And
I know who they are. I can't tell whether it's a Democrat or a
Republican, but I know that he has got some things that he has
to deal with to protect the people of his community. So there
are some big needs. And I am glad, by the way, that the VACIS
system--just last week International Falls was informed they
would be getting one of those systems, so I think we are making
headway. Let me turn to the questions.
Commissioner Stanek, kind of following up with my question
in the first round here, the communications, you mentioned in
your testimony CrimNet. I am interested in the ability of that
State trooper that comes under your jurisdiction who stops
somebody along the road right outside let's say International
Falls or Baudette or Warroad or one of those areas, what kind
of capacity do they have today to be tied into any national
roads, and what can we do to improve that?
Mr. Stanek. Well, Mr. Chairman, a couple of ways. One,
CrimNet is the State of Minnesota's Integrated Justice
Information System, and it will allow local enforcement, as
well as corrections and judiciary, to share information across
many disparate databases. Things that we cannot do now, but I
think the public just seems to think that we can do.
Specifically in terms of how well that State trooper up North
knows if someone on a watch list or something else, there are a
couple of ways. We get information on a pretty regular basis
from the Federal Department of Homeland Security through NLETS
messages or BOMA messages. If they are looking out for someone,
they will send it to the State of Minnesota, we will distribute
it back out to local enforcement and Minnesota's first
responders.
And then the second way, Mr. Chairman and Members, is the
State of Minnesota ties the expiration of a driver's license or
State identification card to a temporary visitor in this
country. So someone who comes to our country and visits for 3
weeks, 3 months, we do not issue them a Minnesota driver's
license, or, really, that gateway identification card. It has
an expiration status on it so that local law enforcement can
pick up the phone, contact the Immigration Service 24 hours a
day, and find out if someone is wanted or what action they
would further like local law enforcement to take.
Senator Coleman. What is the status of CrimNet right now?
Mr. Stanek. The status of CrimNet right now is with the
third year of a 6-year building phase, it has finally come on-
line in terms of the backbone which it has been built across
Minnesota. And now some of these disparate information systems
from local law enforcement and others are finally coming on-
line. We are always in need of additional funding. We believe
CrimNet is a model nationally. We have spoken with Secretary
Ridge about this. We have spoken with Director Mueller and
Attorney General Ashcroft and his folks, and I think they see
the promise of what CrimNet has to offer, both not only on a
State level, but on a national level in terms of information
and intelligence sharing.
And Mr. Chairman and Members, I would just add that if
someone asked me what homeland security was 20 months ago,
homeland security were two independent words that didn't mean
much in and of themselves. Today homeland security is all about
intelligence, information sharing, emergency preparedness.
CrimNet is intelligence and information sharing.
Senator Coleman. Thank you very much, Commissioner.
Sheriff McGowan, I am very interested in your Regional
Response Team concept. I can tell you that in discussions I
have had with some of my colleagues, the comment is made that
not every community, for instance, needs a bomb dog. Not
everyone. Talk to me about where we are at. What has to be done
to make that a reality? How do you make that work?
Sheriff McGowan. Mr. Chairman, I think what it takes is for
people to forget the turf battle. Realize we have an infinite
number of requests with finite dollars, and we've got to be
smart how we use them. And I think a Regional Response Team for
us, if I were to look at one, I would say in Minnesota, I would
look at one within Ramsey County, to serve that portion of the
metropolitan area; one in Hennepin County; one up in the North
either in Duluth, or Itasca, somewhere across there, northwest
of St. Cloud; and South down beyond Rochester. We have got to
realize, we have got to share resources. And, as you said, how
many bomb dogs can we have? How many bomb robots? And in
preparing for an explosive attack, buying a bomb suit is
entirely different from a Level A suit to enter a hot zone
either as a result of a chemical or biological attack. So what
we've got to figure out is how many pieces of equipment can we
have? And as I said, don't forget, the shelf life on most items
are only about 5 years. I hope we never have to use them. But
if we do, we've got to make sure that the equipment is new,
people are trained in it, know how to use it.
And Mr. Chairman, I would say the same thing for funding on
the Federal level. The Federal Government will not be able to
fund everyone across the United States every year. Take the
United States, perhaps divide it into five funding regions.
Form within those funding regions ongoing funding every year,
so within those regions, they can replace their existing
equipment. They can make sure that money is available.
Training dollars. We have got to have money to backfill
staff--when I send a man or a woman to training for 8 hours
during the day, I've got to still have somebody to do that job.
Or if it's their day off, I've got to compensate them somehow.
I need money to be able to train our people. And I think it's
critical. We forget that we can't give somebody a piece of
equipment once and expect them to become an expert. And, as I
said, our ability to respond and use this, and without notice,
is the key to our success.
Senator Coleman. Sheriff, I look forward to working with
you on this Regional Response Team concept.
One follow-up question about training, flow of dollars. How
is it working for you today? Is it working for the State, or
block grants, working with the feds?
Sheriff McGowan. It works both ways, Mr. Chairman. And I
would say if there is a way to, first off, catalog what dollars
are available through homeland security for what purposes, I
mean, there's a variety of dollars when you look at whether
it's the cops' office, whether it's through the Office of
Domestic Preparedness, whether it's through Homeland Security,
where do local officials--where do we go, to what internet
site, to see what money is available through the Federal
Government for what purpose? If it's for communications inter-
operability, where do I find out where that grant is applicable
to and how much is available? If it's for equipment and
training, where do I find that? So that would be critical for
us to be able to--in terms of training dollars, we're right now
in the process of through the State of Minnesota receiving some
grant money. There will be round two of grant money. We had
needs in Hennepin County--and Senator Collins, Hennepin County
is the largest county within the State; 25 percent of the State
population resides within our county, and it is home to our
international airport, the Mall of America, our stadiums for
our Minnesota Twins, Minnesota Timberwolves. Minneapolis is the
hub of the downtown metropolitan area, along with St. Paul. And
I would say that we need to have those dollars come on a
regular basis.
We were forced to cut out about a million dollars' worth of
equipment that we need here that we have not yet received
funding for. Although we are getting a million dollars' worth
of equipment. That has to go, just within Hennepin County, to
provide for fire, emergency medical response, law enforcement.
And those dollars are--when you start talking about training
and so forth, Senator, they're very much appreciated, but they
need to come on a regular basis. Because, as I said, we can't
train once or twice a year and provide the coordinated response
that our citizens expect from us and that we as law enforcement
professionals want to provide to our citizens.
Senator Coleman. Thank you, Sheriff.
Mayor Brede, kind of following up on the line of
questioning about flow of dollars, I remember as a mayor at
times being concerned about the block grant concepts, and
saying, ``Hey, we would like the dollars to come directly to us
at the local level.'' Can you talk about that, though,
practically? Is it easier for you to access stuff working with
friends right here at the State, working with Commissioner
Stanek and his folks, or would you prefer a more direct line of
contact between local municipality and Homeland Security?
Mr. Brede. Well, we have enjoyed both, but I think the
local connection with the State would be preferred.\1\
Certainly right now, the budget concerns within the State, with
our local government aid, et cetera, is a major concern. But we
have had a good relationship with the various commissioners on
various fronts. So I think we would prefer that. I wanted to
say, when you mentioned Rochester is an international city, a
recent article in the local paper indicated that one out of ten
people in Rochester was born outside of the United States. And
so it's not only the visitors that are coming in, those people
then are concerned about their security while being here. And
just quickly, too, thank you for your staff coming down a
couple months ago, led by Erick Mische to talk with both our
county people and the city folks. But I think we've had good
relationships with the various government agencies that we need
to deal with.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Exhibit No. 4, Mayor Brede advised that he has changed his
position on this matter and provided a clarification, which appears in
the Appendix on page 108.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Coleman. Thank you very much. Let me follow up that
last question to Mr. Nevanen. At the very local level, you
mentioned a number of times in your presentation needing
Federal funding, homeland security-related situations, whether
it's goods or whether it's training. How do you access what you
need? I take it there is not a single on-line website that says
if we need dollars for this, this is where we go. At a very
practical level, the local level, when you are looking at the
need for increased training, who do you call?
Mr. Nevanen. Well, that's a good question, and especially
in the context of the budget problems that we are experiencing.
Right now, it's been a two-pronged approach, wherein the locals
have approached the State of Minnesota for those two assets.
And we also look to the feds for some additional. But at this
point in time, it's difficult. We are trying to envision what
we are going to need, and then come up with the dollars to do
that. And right now, those questions still remain unanswered.
Senator Coleman. I hope that we can, as a result of this
hearing and others, help answer that question. And I think
that's really important.
Thank you, Mr. Nevanen. Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Mr. Nevanen, I want to follow up on the question that
Senator Coleman just asked you. You mentioned in your testimony
that your costs for homeland security, I think, have doubled
you said. And that's quite a burden for a community fewer than
6,000 people. How have you coped with those additional costs,
and can you give us some idea of whether you have received
funding from the Federal Government to help offset the
increased costs?
Mr. Nevanen. From a local perspective, it's gone from
$40,000 to $80,000, which is very significant. And like some of
the other panelists have mentioned, you have to do things--
everybody is asked to do more with less. But we have reached
out to the State of Minnesota, and they have helped to some
degree. But those needs are not going to go away.
Sheriff McGowan mentioned the need for annual dollars for
training, and to have the equipment, but to be trained on it,
be proficient with it. And to continually answer the landscape
is evolving all of the time, and needs to be evolving. To
anticipate those and then pay for them is going to be a very
big challenge, especially given the budget constraints that we
are all working under. So it's going to be--I don't know if
it's spaghetti feeds or what that's going to get us there, but
it's going to be a need for real resourceful people.
Senator Collins. I think your comments are so important,
because it reminds us that it's not only the major metropolitan
areas that have challenges for homeland security, but a border
community such as yours, and the many small communities in
Maine similarly are facing real challenges that are going to
cost real dollars. And part of my goal is to make sure that
funding formulas recognize that it isn't just population that
determines threat or vulnerability.
I was interested, Sheriff, in your comments about the
myriad of grant programs for inter-operability. For example, we
have found that there are five separate Federal grant programs
that provide money at the State and local level, with the goal
of making communications equipment compatible. And as far as we
can tell, there is no coordination among those five Federal
programs.
I would like to ask you two questions. First--and I'm going
to ask all of you this. Would it be helpful to have a single
place within the Department of Homeland Security where you
could go for information on all kinds of homeland security
assistance, whether it's administered by the Department of
Homeland Security, or whether it's like the COPS program, which
may be administered elsewhere, or the FIRE program, which I
guess is going to be brought into the new department. But would
it be helpful for you to have one-stop shopping, if you will?
And second, inter-operability is a major problem. We
learned that on September 11. I would be curious from all of
you what the status is in Minnesota of your communications
equipment. Can your fire departments talk to your police
departments? Can your municipal police departments communicate
effectively via radio with your State troopers, your sheriff
departments? What's the state of that?
We'll start with you, Sheriff, and then go to the
Commissioner.
Sheriff McGowan. Mr. Chairman and Senator Collins, the
answer to your first question, one-stop shopping. Yes,
emphatically.
Second, inter-operability. I've got a personal interest in
this, Senator. In 1989, in another life, I served as a State
Senator, and I put the first $500,000 into a bill to study the
feasibility of an 800 megahertz radio system. Today, in 2003,
that system has come to true fruition. We are implementing--the
sheriffs--Hennepin County Sheriffs' Office, Senator Collins,
provides dispatch service for 21 law enforcement agencies and
19 fire departments. We could not talk before with our
colleagues in Minneapolis. We could not talk with the other
disparate PSAPS or public safety answering points within our
own county. Today, we can do that. The State has built and
funded the backbone system for an 800 megahertz radio system.
While it started off initially in the nine-county metro area,
and actually, we added two counties, Isanti and another county,
because that was considered the metropolitan area for the
Minnesota State Patrol. So we started there. And today we are
implementing an 800 megahertz radio system. It is going to
provide us the inter-operability that we need, because there
isn't any of us as first responders that do not realize that
communications is a key to success. We can plan all day long,
we can have the best plans, we can have the best equipment. But
if we cannot communicate, we can't execute.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Sheriff.
Commissioner, did you have any comments on those two
issues?
Mr. Stanek. Yes, Mr. Chairman and Senator. I guess I'm the
one on behalf of Minnesota who is responsible for putting an
inter-operable radio system statewide. Within Hennepin County,
800 megahertz has come to fruition. You take it from 1989 to
2003, that 14-year span, it's taken us a long time to get this
far. But my job is to move into the rest of Minnesota, and I am
committed to doing that over the next several years. There are
a number of pieces of legislation winding their way through the
Minnesota legislature, and hopefully that winds up a week from
today. And if, in fact, those bills and authority come to
fruition, you will see the statewide inter-operable radio
system become a reality statewide, not just in Hennepin County.
But, again, as I talked about earlier, homeland security,
intelligence, information sharing, emergency preparedness; but
the one thing that ties them all together is the inter-operable
radio systems.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Commissioner. Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Brede. Well, I would applaud the Commissioner to say,
``Let's get moving on that.'' Because our sheriff has made it
very clear to me, as well as our police department, that we
have an old analog system that right now is starting to die.
It's gone beyond its life. And you can't replace them; there
are no parts for it. So you are in a situation that we need the
new digital system, the 800 megahertz, and the money isn't
there to move into that. So you kind of hinge from both ways
from an old system that is dying and a new one.
When we had our joint emergency committee meeting, I asked
about that, and all of the parties said, ``Well, our current
system works great when nobody uses it.'' [Laughter.]
But the minute you have to have two or three or more start
talking to one another, it just gets bogged down, and you just
can't. So anything we can do to move that along would be great.
And certainly, the one-stop shopping, I think my previous
career was with the Mayo Clinic, and we have done that with
trying to make it easier for patients to get in, and I think
that's the way to go. Anything we can do so that there is one
number to call or one site to visit would be applauded greatly.
Senator Collins. Mr. Nevanen.
Mr. Nevanen. Senator, on the first point, the one-stop
shop, I, too, would echo that. I would absolutely applaud that.
Anything we can do in that regard.
Second, from my perspective in talking to the various
levels, small towns have always had to be resourceful, just
because of limited resources. And I think we sometimes get
caught up in technology, and technology is very sexy, and they
are answering and helping in a lot of ways. But from our
perspective, I think a lot of it is just relationships, and
making sure that various levels are working together. And from
what I have seen demonstrated, I mean, certainly the technology
is needed, and the other items that these folks have spoken to
is needed, but that the cooperation and the communication
between the various agencies remains strong. Because that's
really the key, I think, from the small-town perspective.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Coleman. Thank you, Senator Collins, and thank you
gentlemen.
We're going to call upon our next panel of witnesses. I
will go to panel three, but before we get started, we expect
Senator Dayton to come around 10 a.m. or thereafter. And when
he comes, we will give him an opportunity to make his opening
statement. We may interrupt questioning.
We welcome Captain Ray Skelton, the Environmental and
Governmental Affairs Director of the Duluth Seaway Port
Authority. Steve Leqve, Rochester Airport Manager. Michael
Curry, Director of Security for the Canadian Pacific Railway in
Minneapolis, Minnesota. And finally, John Hausladen, President
of the Minnesota Trucking Association here in St. Paul,
Minnesota.
Gentlemen, I thank you for your statements. I look forward
to your testimony this morning on how you are dealing with the
need to tighten transportation security or maintaining the
ability of legitimate traffic to move quickly. Pursuant to Rule
6, all witnesses who testify before the Subcommittee are
required to be sworn. At this time, I would ask all of you to
please raise your hand.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Thank you, gentlemen. I understand that Senator Dayton has
arrived, and I think what we will do is we will have Captain
Skelton go first with his testimony, then hear from Mr. Leqve,
followed by Mr. Curry, and finish up with Mr. Hausladen.
And as with the last panel, after we have heard all of your
testimony, we will then turn to questions.
TESTIMONY OF RAY SKELTON,\1\ CAPTAIN, U.S. MERCHANT MARINE
(RETIRED), ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS DIRECTOR, DULUTH,
AND DIRECTOR OF SECURITY
Mr. Skelton. Good morning. For the record, my name is Ray
Skelton, Captain, U.S. Merchant Marine, retired. I am the
Environmental Governmental Affairs Director in Duluth, and
since September 11, the Director of Security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Skelton appears in the Appendix
on page 54.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As is the case of most ports, with very few exceptions,
there are some ports that do have their own police departments,
some ports that do have very large security forces. They're the
exception, not the rule, except for a mere handful, such as New
York, Los Angeles, Long Beach, the huge container ports. We do
not have the facilities or the ability to generate funds for
security purposes. In the port of Duluth, it is the world's
largest seasonal port. We also rank number 17 in the United
States, and overall. The situation there, however, is one of
limited security requirements in general. The reason for that
is that we are primarily a bulk port. How much security is
required for a pile of taconite or a pile of stone? So we do
have limitations.
However, we do have some difficulties, in that we do have
49 miles of shoreline in our harbor. We also have 29 active
docks spread out over that 49 miles. We secure or are beginning
to secure that very difficult situation.
Just to go back a little bit, in our port, we had some
heads-up warnings prior to September 11, which served us well
at that time. In 1992, we had a thing we called a Toxic
Tuesday. I've got to start checking my time, here. Usually have
clocks everywhere. Toxic Tuesday was a large spill that went
into the river from the rail car, and large clouds of benzine-
laden--large benzine-laden air came over the city of Duluth,
and we were forced to literally evacuate the city of Duluth. We
were completely unprepared for that event. Things went well.
All of the various agencies pulled together immediately. We
brought the Minnesota State Highway Patrol and some additional
people up to give assistance to us. Things went well,
incredibly well, when considering the lack of preparedness.
Oklahoma City, 1993, gives us our second heads-up that we
were indeed vulnerable. Fortunately, again, the FBI headed up a
team and used the loose-knit organization that we created after
the 1992 benzine spill as a regional security team. The
analysts that went through the process of determining what
level of risk was at the port and what the requirements were,
we just sort of let it sit, but maintained certain levels of
communication and tried to maintain an accurate list of
designated people from the various agencies.
On September 11, I'm not sure that we were the first area,
first major port to have a regional security meeting, bringing
in all Federal agencies; State, county and local, but on
September 12, we held our first formal meeting of the Regional
Security Team.
Senator Dayton, certainly--should I just pause?
Senator Coleman. Why don't we do this? Why don't we pause
here, finish for a couple of seconds, let him catch his breath.
Mr. Skelton. Certainly. Poor Senator Dayton has been
subjected to me before, so I can just pick up right where I
left off, Senator.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR DAYTON
Senator Dayton. I would just say briefly, Senator Coleman,
that you are a brave man to position yourself between two
Senators who just came back from Beijing, China.
Senator Coleman. Both of whom, by the way, have the
sniffles.
Senator Dayton. The feeling of knowing I could clear a room
with just one cough. [Laughter.]
We have a serious homeland security issue in Minnesota
today. We have to make sure The Wild win the second game of the
series.
Seriously, I want to thank you, Senator Coleman, most of
all for convening, and putting together this hearing. And also
you, Senator Collins, the Chairman of our Committee for being
here and honoring us with your presence.
I am sorry that I am late. I committed to the Freeman
family, before knowing about this, to be at the Humphrey
Institute to commemorate Orville Freeman's life, career, and
share with them a proclamation to be put in the Congressional
Record to commemorate his distinguished service to Minnesota.
So I apologize. But I'm glad I'm here now.
Senator Coleman. Senator Dayton, we are thrilled to have
you here with us. I mentioned when we began this hearing what a
positive thing I think it is in Minnesota to have in this
Committee and in the ag committee two voices in Minnesota. And
I think some of the instincts early on said we were going to
cancel each other out. And I think, early on, the experience
has been just the opposite on a number of issues with regard to
both of these Subcommittees, an ag committee, whether it was
dealing with renewables, or this Committee, dealing with
homeland security, that we have had two voices speaking out
very loudly, understanding what the needs are in this community
and joining together. So I greatly appreciate your presence and
participation in this hearing today.
Senator Dayton. Well, I would be glad to come anyway, but
when you are a Member of the Minority and the Chairman of the
Subcommittee and Chairman of your full Committee are both
calling your presence, you really try to show up. [Laughter.]
Or you run your own series of risks. [Laughter.]
Senator Coleman. Well, again, thank you for being here.
With that, Captain Skelton.
Mr. Skelton. Senator Dayton, fortunately had to--what was
it, 3 weeks ago you had the hearing in Duluth? So he has
already been through this. I'm surprised you didn't wait until
after I was done before you came.
We left off at September 12 when we had our first Regional
Security Meeting. There were over 150 individuals at that first
security meeting. Up through the first of 2002, we held weekly
meetings, and it was all a matter of partnering, information
sharing, intelligence sharing, and it was headed up by our
local FBI director.
Concurrently, we started the development of what we
referred to as a Port Security Team. Now, when we deal with a
seaport, we are starting to deal with two specific areas. And
when I say ``specific areas,'' it gets difficult, because a
port in itself isn't interfaced between those two areas. We
deal with the Department of Homeland Security. We think they
are doing an excellent job with the airports, with the
Transportation Security Agency (TSA). We think that as they
start coming to the seaports, they will give tremendous assist
to us, because we simply do not have the capacity to provide
security; TSA must provide that security for us. But also, we
deal with the U.S. Coast Guard, so we have two areas of
responsibility. We have the Homeland Security Department, and
then we also have, although it is part of the Homeland Security
now, the U.S. Coast Guard, specific maritime responsibilities.
We are right in the middle of that. So trying to keep track of
a multitude of security of the Department of Defense, Homeland
Security, and, of course, our main security levels, which we
mentioned very well. And we have had those for a long time,
although one no longer exists.
If we could get to a coordinated effort, where--and I don't
know what the new color-coding system really does, because I
deal primarily with maritime issues, we don't see a lot of
change. But if we jump from our site level, things happen very
rapidly. And the partnering that is going on in our region is
working very well. Now, when we go to our Transportation
Identification System, we'll have two types that we will deal
with. The Transportation Workers Identification credential,
which is handled on a Federal overall level, because the
international traffic we get through is just fine. We also have
an MMD, or Merchant Mariner's Document, that deals with our
maritime security that are in the process of being reissued
now. And then we have the biometric coordinated between the two
systems so we don't have mass confusion. That would be
excellent. I understand some of the cards that are being looked
at now have the potential for three different biometrics in
that card, which would be enough to compensate across all of
the environments in the maritime community.
Just in closing, I have a couple--I will deviate quite
considerably from my prepared statement, but just a couple of
things in closing. The partnership between industry and
government has played an integral role in both imports. They
need not only to maintain, but to enhance. The maritime system
capacity has never been greater. Analysts project the
transportation demands for goods and passengers will double in
20 years and triple in 50 years. We face challenges related to
the issues of homeland security. If there ever should be a
terrorist incident in one of our ports, U.S. systems will come
to a screeching halt, subjecting our country to economic
paralysis. A mere glimpse of the potential impact occurred in
last year's labor dispute with U.S. West Coast ports, which
according to analysts, cost the U.S. economy $1 billion per
day. Security is the No. 1 issue at our ports today. Congress
has made additional allocations for these ports.
However, we are keeping in mind that the roughly $200
million designated for ports is far less than 5 percent of what
is going to be required, according to the U.S. Coast Guard.
Seaports clearly deserve as much funding and attention as air
borders, as borne out by recent key recommendations on the
Council of Foreign Relations, that urged, ``Recalibrate the
agenda for transportation security. The vulnerabilities are
greater, and the stakes are higher within the sea and land than
commercial aviation.'' Now, I ask you to take note, the
administration budget, which was released February 3, includes
no money for port security. We would urge you to add money in
the budget for seaport security. Thank you very much.
Senator Coleman. Thank you, Captain Skelton. And without
objection, we will have your entire written testimony entered
as part of the record.
Mr. Skelton. Thank you. There's other issues in there that
I couldn't get in in 5 minutes.
Senator Coleman. It will all go on the record. Mr. Leqve.
TESTIMONY OF STEVE LEQVE,\1\ AIRPORT MANAGER, ROCHESTER
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA
Mr. Leqve. Senator Coleman, Senator Collins, and Senator
Dayton, thank you for the opportunity to be here. For the
record, my name is Steven Leqve, General Manager of the
Rochester International Airport. But I might add, as the past
Chairman of the Minnesota Council of Airports, and State
representative for AAAE, the American Association of Airport
Executives, I would like to make some comments not only
pertaining to Rochester, but collectively from airports that I
have talked not only within the State of Minnesota, but also
outside the State as well. And I have some positive comments to
make as it pertains to the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Leqve appears in the Appendix on
page 61.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At least it has been our experience, locally, as well as
other airports, once again, as I said I had talked with, about
the implementation of the TSA and how very well it has gone
within the State of Minnesota and nationally. It has gone
extremely well for the size and the undertaking that we were
forced to deal with. The public feedback that we have received,
not only in Rochester, but collectively, as well, has been very
positive. So that we can be very thankful for, as well. The
comfort level of the traveling public is back. The relationship
between the TSA in Rochester and the Rochester Airport company
employees has been very positive as well. So we have some very
well-trained, very professional people that we are dealing with
at our location. All positive signs.
However, the one thing that I would like to see a change
in, at least over time, is the authority to the local TSA work
force. Additional authority passed on to those individuals when
things are levied down from the Federal Government in terms of
mandates, that the local Federal security directors who are
responsible for their facilities, who understand and know the
facilities, the one-size-fits-all concept does not work in this
industry. All airports land and take-off airplanes, but all
airports function differently, and the structure is different.
And the Federal security directors, if they had more ability
and more authority in the implementation, not jeopardizing
security in the end result would be extremely beneficial. And
that is basically a comment that is shared nationally, as well.
And we see it at our facility in Rochester.
The termination of the reimbursement for law enforcement
officials at the security checkpoints or at the airports I
think is a negative move in the industry. Typically, your
category X, 1, and 2 airports, your larger airports across the
Nation, have police departments and security personnel in
place. Your category 3 and 4 airports do not. Rochester and
Duluth are category 3, but the rest of the airports outside the
Minneapolis International are all category 4. I can tell you
from experience in talking with airline personnel, as well as
the traveling public, the law enforcement--their being at the
airports, if you will--presence, I'm sorry, that's the word I
was looking for, has been a very positive thing. In the case of
Rochester, not that we're anymore unique, but quite frankly, we
do have a lot of unique activities almost on a daily basis.
High-profile people move through our community daily. Quite a
bit of international activity, not all commercial. A fair
amount of that is private, as well.
Having that kind of presence at the airport, I think, is
extremely important, and I think moving away from that, where
we are into a 15-minute response time to security check points
in the event of a mishap is something that is just truly not
workable. So funding needs to be in place, at least for both
sizes of the airports that do not have those individuals or
staffing on-site to handle that. As I said, your category X, 1,
and 2, most of them do have their own law enforcement in place.
I might just close by also saying that when mandates come
down to airports that would require physical changes to
facilities, we really truly need to have funding in place. And
not the airport entitlements program. In other words, the AIP
program. The airports need to have that program preserved, as
well for infrastructure improvements and just ongoing
maintenance to our facilities.
Senator Coleman. What's the AIP program?
Mr. Leqve. The Airport Improvement Program through the FAA.
And with that, I thank you very much.
Senator Coleman. Thank you very much. Mr. Curry.
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL CURRY,\1\ DIRECTOR OF SECURITY, CANADIAN
PACIFIC RAILWAY, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA
Mr. Curry. Mr. Chairman, Senators, my name is Mike Curry.
I'm with the Canadian Pacific Railway. And with me today are
John Apitz, Councel for the Minnesota Regional Railroad
Association, and Phil Marbut, who is Canadian Pacific Railway's
Manager of Dangerous Goods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Curry appears in the Appendix on
page 62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's an honor to appear before your Subcommittee today to
discuss matters of homeland security as involved in the
industry, and I would like to offer a broader perspective of
our industry regarding the efforts it's already undertaken to
improve security. Railroads are vital to the national economy,
the national defense, and public health. Seventy-four percent
of all freight goes by rail, including 60 percent by electric
utilities. The chemicals used to purify the nation's water
supplies and fertilize our crops move by rail. And railroads
provide critical support to the Department of Defense's
Strategic Railcar Network, STRACNET, which includes 30,000
miles of rail line, and provides the backbone for the movement
of DOD shipments. The railroad network of tracks, bridges and
terminals presents a huge security challenge. It includes about
130,000--this is nationally, better than three times the length
of the interstate highway system. Much of it is in isolated
areas. Fencing is neither practical nor effective. Furthermore,
securing our infrastructure is only one part of the railroad
security challenge. Securing the operations of our railroad
adds the further challenge of anticipating unplanned
occurrences while trains are en route.
When America came under attack on September 11, the
railroad industry responded rather swiftly, working closely
with local, State and Federal authorities, and utilizing their
own police forces, railroads increased inspection and patrols,
restricted access to key facets, briefly suspended movement of
particular freight in the New York areas, and changed certain
operational practices as anti-terrorist measures. And because
enhanced security has become a long-term necessity, the board
of directors of the Association of American Railroads, made up
of the CEOs of North America's major freight railroads and
Amtrak, as well, established a mandate to ensure that the
railroads would be more secure each day. Using CIA and national
intelligence community best practices, five critical action
teams--with the involvement of some 150 rail industry security
and intelligence personnel--were established to scrutinize
different aspects of the railroad system. The rail security
task force developed a comprehensive risk analysis and security
plan that establishes four alert levels, and describes a
progressive series of actions to thwart terrorist threats to
national railroad personnel and facilities. It also includes
additional measures to be applied in areas of operations,
information technology, communications, and security. Some of
the actions taken since September 11 include increased cyber
security, restricted access to railcar location data--on-line,
that is--spot employee identification checks, increased
tracking and inspection of shipments, and use of new encryption
technology for selected data communications, as well as
increased security of physical assets and increased employee
training to ensure that the industry has more than 200,000
employees serving as the eyes and ears for our security effort.
With military action against Iraq, the industry has taken
additional security steps, including real-time monitoring and
additional surveillance of designated trains, increased
security of certain rail yards, increased inspection of track,
and coordination with customers to tighten control of supply
chain logistics. These and similar steps are being taken at
international rail crossings to secure shipments into the
United States and neighboring countries. The challenge before
our sector of the transportation industry is similar to that
facing others--how to assure security of our transport system
without seriously hindering the efficient flow of rail
commerce. However, while our rail network is vast, securing the
transportation of massive quantities of freight across the
Nation requires the cooperation of authorities at the national,
local and State level on a daily basis. We need to be able to
better communicate among ourselves before, during, and after a
critical incident. And we need to plan and rehearse our
response long before and not after one occurs. We need to share
information amongst ourselves and have a mutual understanding
of capabilities and restraints of each section's response.
Freight railroads remain in constant communication with the
U.S. Department of Transportation security personnel, the FBI,
the National Security Council, and with State and local law
enforcement officers. The industry also has in place plans to
respond immediately to threats to the transportation network.
The Railroad Security Plan is a living document, because the
risk assessment process is a continuous one. As conditions
warrant, that plan will be updated, revised and strengthened--
and it has been. The national industry is committed to moving
forward aggressively to ensure the security of its
infrastructure and continued service to the Nation.
Senator Coleman. Thank you very much, Mr. Curry. Mr.
Hausladen.
TESTIMONY OF JOHN HAUSLADEN,\1\ PRESIDENT, MINNESOTA TRUCKING
ASSOCIATION, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA
Mr. Hausladen. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Good morning,
Senator Dayton. Welcome to Minnesota, Senator Collins. My name
is John Hausladen, President of the Minnesota Trucking
Association. Thank you for the chance to talk today about truck
transportation, border security, and homeland security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Hausladen with attachments
appears in the Appendix on page 65.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will give you a brief overview of truck crossings over
the border, and then focus on two issues today; one is cargo
theft, and the other is the trucking industry's anti-terrorism
action plan that we developed.
First, border security. I think, to put things in context,
we should note there are about 750,000 entities who are
registered with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration. The American Trucking Association estimates
about 500,000 are actively engaged in transportation of
freight. Long story short, there's a lot of folks operating
trucks around here, and hauling freight across borders, and
NAFTA has certainly increased that.
The implementation of NAFTA, which grew U.S. trade with
Canada from about $210 billion annually in 1993 to $379 billion
in 2002, has, as you can imagine, concurrently increased cross-
border truck traffic. According to the Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection, the southbound crossings at the U.S./Canada
border have increased during that same 9-year period from about
5 million to 7 million. And given this explosion of cross-
border traffic, processing speed becomes a major issue,
particularly at the crossings on the eastern half of the U.S.
and Canada.
Now, we heard some things earlier that we want to applaud.
We continue to urge them to be used. The use of the gamma ray
systems for inspection, where you can take a picture and look
inside is very good, very helpful. We think the implementation
of the C-TPAT systems that provide preclearance are very
important. But one of the things, when I talk to my members
about border crossings that they suggested was, ``It's
interesting, these tend to be at rivers, tend to be at bridges,
yet we have big trucks in a small space, and now we are
physically trying to inspect these big things. And is there a
way to remove some of this commercial vehicle enforcement and
inspection further back from the gateway to possibly help, or
get them through to the other side and further away?'' There
are literally bottlenecks that commercial vehicles create that
we may want to take a look at.
The second issue is cargo theft. The highjacking of
trailers and their contents remains a major security concern
for the trucking industry. Cargo theft has increased. This is
an amazing figure, 30 percent nationally, over the last 3
years, now mounting to between $12 and $20 million annually in
losses. And while the high-jacking of a trailer full of high-
end electronics like DVD players going to Best Buy may not get
us worried from a security perspective, a high-jacked trailer
full of hazardous materials takes on a whole new meaning since
September 11. And unfortunately, cargo theft has routinely been
a low priority for local law enforcement. Why? Well, truck
trailers are, by their very nature, mobile. And they cross
jurisdictions. You take this dynamic, and an already
overburdened law enforcement, and it's easy for local law
enforcement to avoid taking ownership of a theft. We must work
to change the mentality that says, ``Well, it's probably out of
my jurisdiction already, there's probably nothing I can do
about it, let someone else worry about it.'' We have seen that.
But now, with the security concerns that have come forward, we
have to pay closer attention. What we recommend is a more
aggressive response to cargo theft by local law enforcement and
angencies like the FBI which is critical to closing this
significant gap in our homeland security system.
And last, our response as an industry to the terrorist
threat. The trucking industry has developed its own anti-
terrorism action plan. It was created by a partnership, and you
have heard that a lot today, a partnership of 65 State and
national industry groups, including the Canadian Trucking
Alliance, so it is international, with one clear goal, to
prevent the use of trucks as a weapon. It's a tall task. I
would like to submit a copy of that plan for the record, and
that's been provided to your staff.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``The American Trucking Industry's Anti-Terrorism Action
Plan,'' May 2002, appears as an attachment to Mr. Hausladen's prepared
statement which appears in the Appendix on page 67.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Coleman. Without objection, it will be entered into
the record.
Mr. Hausladen. Thank you. The key component of our plan is
the recruitment and training of professional truck drivers to
help them take ownership of security within their own ranks. We
identified the need to specifically train professional truck
drivers in how to recognize, observe, and then report potential
terrorist operations. Highway Watch, a long standing program
between the ATA and the Federal Safety Administration, was
identified as an ideal means to launch such an effort and
accomplish the other technical objectives placed in our anti-
terrorism action plan. With the potential pool of 3 million
truck drivers, and these are professionals, on the road every
day, they are a community out there. The trucking industry
launched an effort to secure funding to enable these objectives
of the plan to train them to be the eyes and the ears, if you
want: A neighborhood watch on wheels.
Well, thanks to the three of you, through the Supplemental
Appropriations Bill, you did appropriate $20 million to expand
the Highway Watch Program. But unfortunately, the
Transportation Security Administration has yet to release those
funds. Now, if I accomplish nothing else today, it would be to
impress upon you the need to expedite the release of those
funds and put them to work, protecting our vital truck
transportation system.
Two topics, I won't go into detail, but are certainly
equally important are hazmat regulations and how transportation
of that is regulated, and a plethora of new rules, which,
frankly, to the small trucking company trying to learn and
manage and train is very challenging. And second, just kudos to
the Minnesota State Patrol for their training of local law
enforcement on how to profile what trucks to inspect.
In conclusion, let me say that when it comes to major
truck-related security issues, technology will be a useful
tool, but perhaps not the most critical. The trucking industry
believes that our true success in defeating terrorism depends
on making sure that people know what to look for, and as you
have already highlighted, how and where to report it. Again,
thank you for the opportunity.
Senator Coleman. Thank you very much, Mr. Hausladen.
Two observations before we begin our round of questioning.
I can assure you that we will go back and check with the TSA
about the funds, and certainly if the Chairman of the
Governmental Affairs Committee makes a request like that,
people respond. And the Chairman of the Subcommittee will make
a request, and it will be done in a bipartisan way. So we will
go back and take a look at that.
Second, when you mentioned the concern about cargo theft,
and that tends to be a focus, I did note the U.S. attorney was
writing that down. I would hope in his comments to this
Subcommittee, which will be included as part of the record,
that we do address the focus that we're giving today, and what
we can do to improve that.
The observation I have with this panel together as I have
on a personal level, not just as a Senator, but also as a
citizen, I think about issues of homeland security. I have
concerns about the enormous truck trafficking, the incredible
amount of rail volume. The concerns of a category 3 airport as
really an international airport, or in their reference to
Duluth, a port that is a huge port.
I have two questions for the panel: First, if you could
address--are you confident as we sit here today of your ability
to meet the threat of terrorism? Are you confident today? And
second, on the other side of the question is really an economic
question. As we do improve the measure of security, my concern
is about the continued vitality of our economy, that will keep
traffic moving. We've got to keep international visitors coming
to Rochester, have got to keep these ports moving. Are there
areas where efforts are too restrictive on the economic side?
Are we doing things that are slowing things up unnecessarily?
With that, I'll go in reverse order. Mr. Hausladen.
Mr. Hausladen. Well, first of all, I think the trucking
industry is like every industry; in the process of figuring out
how to do things. We do think the Highway Watch Program is
going to be great. And when we rolled it out to truck drivers
and said, ``What do you think about this, if we train you and
work with law enforcement and give you tools,'' they were
ecstatic. Because, unlike a lot of moms and dads, it's hard to
give back to the community. They're gone all of the time. But
they view the road as their work place, and they are creatures
of habit. They know what looks normal, they know what looks
abnormal. There's a lot of chatter on the CB and the
truckstops. And if we train them on what is unusual and what to
report, we have a tremendous Army. We have America's trucking
Army out there to do that job.
I think on the second question about vitality, again, when
I called members and polled them on what is happening in the
borders today, we see a difference. If you are a truckload
carrier, who are hauling truckloads, they're moving very
efficiently. There has not been a significant decrease in the
amount of--or increase in the amount of time it takes to get
through. If you are hauling less than a truckload, where it's a
pallet of this and a pallet of that, or there's mixed loads,
during the time it takes to do the inspection it has gone up
about 25 percent. So a mixed bag of good news and bad news.
Because, overall, I would just harken back to the issue about
the economy. If heaven forbid, there was another terrorist
attack and a truck was involved, we know that every truck would
be stopped. After September 11, we saw the City of Minneapolis
literally close its borders and inspect every truck going in.
That's a problem. Because we know that in grocery stores, we
only have so much food. If this went on for an extended time,
we're going to affect vital basic services. Again, our State
Patrol, the Commercial Motor Vehicle Division, did a great job
working with the City of Minneapolis and talked about what kind
of trucks to look for, how to inspect. I think that sort of
training, using Minnesota as a model and taking that
nationwide, would be a tool to help keep the engine of the
economy rolling.
Senator Coleman. Thank you very much. Mr. Curry.
Mr. Curry. Am I confident that we are able to meet the
threat of terrorism? I'm confident we're doing the best we can
with the resources that we have. But we could use more, and
those resources cost. I don't know what our availability for
access to the funds would be from the government. I understand
there are a number of bills that have been presented in
Congress since September 11. And what the status of those are
and what the fall-out is as far as money, money coming down for
security, for money interest in railroading, I can't say.
As far as restrictions, we have enjoyed a decent
relationship with the Border Patrol, with Customs. We are
involved in Detroit, not here in Minnesota, but in Detroit, the
Integrated Border Enforcement Team. The restrictions--I guess I
would have to reserve judgment, because we are scheduled to
receive here in Minnesota, as well as four other crossings,
VACIS machines, and we'll have to see how that works out, if
traffic's held up.
Senator Coleman. Great. Thank you very much. And Mr. Leqve.
Mr. Leqve. OK. In terms of confidence, I don't think there
is any question that within our airport system we are doing a
better job, more professional. I think technology is going to
continue to play a huge role in our industry. As to how we
screen people and luggage and freight, I don't think there is
any question. And so as far as restrictive, I think once again,
over time, I don't think we're being too restrictive now.
That's not what I am hearing from the traveling public. As I
indicated earlier, I think that's all been quite positive. But
we're doing a better job. Can we do a better job? Sure. And we
will, with the use of more trained personnel. And, once again,
technology is going to play a huge role, I think, in this
industry.
Senator Coleman. Great. Thank you very much. Captain
Skelton.
Mr. Skelton. There is a broad array of issues when we start
dealing with the level of confidence or dealing with our
vulnerability or overall risk. The way I would have to answer,
rather than going into the details of it, is I would say,
because of the advanced preparation work that has been done on
both the Federal, State, and local level, that our confidence
level is actually quite high. Are we vulnerable? Yes, we are
highly vulnerable. Forty-nine miles of waterfront is not
securable. You just can't do that. I'm sorry, you could, but
you would be spending billions of dollars to do it. And we
don't have that type of--I'm sorry, I shouldn't impose a
number, because I don't know what it would cost to do that. It
would be unreasonable. So overall confidence level, I think in
our commuters and in our ports, they're quite high.
Restrictions. Not yet. We have not experienced severe
restrictions, but we haven't gone to marine security level, or
mar-set level 3 yet. Should we go, we are dealing with specific
threats. Should we go to mar-set level 3, I am concerned that
we would have restrictions. There are national standards set
there as to what is required of the U.S. Coast Guard response
and the FBI response. If possible, we must keep the
decisionmaking process on security requirements local. Our
local marine safety office, we usually call them the Captain of
the Port is fully capable of making security decisions for our
port and region. Second, the District Coast Guards formed what
they call the Waterways Forum.
We have a Subcommittee on security that is going to make an
attempt to address the Great Lakes Navigation System. The
reason for that is overseas vessels entering our system are
inspected first at Montreal. And there are--the less beyond
that, the lesser crew changes or changes in members of the
vessel itself. The security risk is really very limited. And we
already have the system in place where those people that are
from questionable origin or they have questions about their
citizenship, they are referred to as detainees, the vessels
that are required to post the guard. So we haven't experienced
extreme restrictions yet, but if things get out of hand or they
decide on a national level, they could get out of hand very
rapidly.
Senator Coleman. Thank you very much. With that, I will
turn to Senator Dayton.
Senator Dayton. Thank you. I'll defer to the Chairman of
the Committee. We call them chairs now in Minnesota. And I
don't know if we need to refer to them as Leaders of Peace----
[Laughter.]
Senator Collins. Whatever is politically correct. But thank
you for your graciousness. I just have a few questions.
Mr. Hausladen, the TSA recently issued new regulations
requiring background checks on commercial truck drivers in
order for them to be certified to carry hazardous waste. Could
you share with us your views on those new regulations?
Mr. Hausladen. We have a couple concerns as an industry.
One would be the turnaround time it's going to take to conduct
the background checks because of the flow into the State, up to
the feds, back. And what we get back, basically, is going to be
whether they are approved or not to haul hazardous materials.
But as employers, we will know nothing about if they're
rejected, why they are rejected. The industry would like,
actually, more access to the information obtained from criminal
background checks, because not only in the hauling of hazardous
materials is it important, but in the hauling of anything, it
is very important. You want to make sure we are putting safe
drivers on the road.
I think the other issue, with background checks in general,
and Mr. Skelton referred to that, we now have a variety of
different types of background checks and I.D.s that drivers may
potentially have to have, depending on where they are going.
And if they are hauling intermodal or going to a port, they may
need multiple checks and I.D.s. We prefer one transportation
worker I.D., that if you get all of the multiple stamps on it,
you are eligible to go on whatever facility that's needed,
because if it's a good background check, it should serve all of
them.
Senator Collins. Thank you. Captain Skelton, there was a
study released recently that suggested the Coast Guard was
being stretched too thin in the wake of September 11, and that
it was unable to perform some of its traditional fisheries
enforcement and other duties because so many of its resources
have been diverted to Port Security. Could you share with us--
since you're right there on the front lines--your observations
about the Coast Guard's ability to handle all of the new
responsibilities that it has?
Mr. Skelton. Thank you, Senator. The U.S. Coast Guard has
requited themselves admirably since September 11. As the Coast
Guard was assigned additional responsibilities, such as the war
on drugs, some war interdiction processes, there was no
additional funding for--traditionally the Coast Guard was voted
to 25,000 people. And as a matter of fact, I would like to
thank the three of you personally, because now with the
increased authorization, or the removal of the cap, the 35,000
managing skills of the U.S. Coast Guard, now they have a
chance. With the additional funding that was given for the U.S.
Coast Guard, now they have a chance. However, right now they
are stretched so very thin. When we were at security level 2,
there are increased requirements for security nationally when
you go in a public hearing. The details--and I would be very
happy to host anyone up to the port of Duluth to go through it
in detail. Their manning has been just exhausted. The return of
marine security level 1 happened on a very timely basis,
because we were running out of manpower. So it's going to take
some time to put out an additional 10,000 Coast Guard
personnel. It's going to take time to train them. It's not
going to happen overnight. And I would be happy to talk to the
ninth district and the Coast Guard headquarters and relate the
information as to what they feel the timing of that is. But
right now, they are stretched very thin, dangerously thin, and
I'll get that information as to exactly how long it's going to
take them.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Coleman. Thank you, Senator Collins. Senator
Dayton.
Senator Dayton. Senator Collins, after less than a year of
being on the Committee, the discussion was on what to give to
the Coast Guard. I realized then, with Senator Stevens being
the Ranking Member and now the Chairman of the Senate
Appropriations Committee and the Senior Member of the
Governmental Affairs Committee, that the primary purpose of the
U.S. Coast Guard is to ferry the citizens of Millaca back and
forth at taxpayers' expense. [Laughter.]
But when you said, Captain, that the cost of securing 49
miles of coast line would be prohibitive, which I agree, it
would be, I wondered then how many miles of the coast line of
Maine would also have to be secured.
Senator Collins. Many more.
Senator Dayton. So I would like to follow up with the
question that Senator Coleman asked you. What really is the
scale and scope of this challenge, and how do we provide the
kind of security that all Americans want without interfering
and totally delaying transport and trade?
In your industry, what percent of the cargo is actually
physically inspected at international crossings? If it's not a
hundred percent, and I suspect it's not, is it close to a
hundred percent? How much time delay would physical inspections
of all cargo add to the system? Let me start with you, Captain.
Mr. Skelton. Senator, we do actually have the information
relating to that. Prior to September 11, 2 percent of the cargo
entering the United States was fiscally inspected. We're
dealing in container traffic here at this point, because
nationally, bulk cargos, you just stand there and watch as it
is being loaded or unloaded. It's not a matter of a security
issue. But the container traffic, they estimated that prior to
September 11, 2 percent was the inspection level. In the last 2
years now, they're up to 4 percent. To go to 100 percent would
take some rather vast increases in technology ability so they
could do it rapidly without completely crippling the ports. The
Customs Trade Partnership is working very well. Even though
there are cargos that are not being physically inspected, as an
indication of the trucking industry, if they are full container
zones.
Senator Dayton. So a full increase, from 4 percent to 100
percent would mean 25 times more inspections.
Mr. Skelton. Yes, sir.
Senator Dayton. Thank you.
Mr. Leqve. Quite frankly, we don't have a lot of
international cargo that travels in and out of our facility.
Most of that is handled by Federal Express and Airborne. And
those items are actually cleared at their main base before it
actually arrives.
Senator Dayton. Any indication on how much?
Mr. Leqve. I couldn't tell you. I'm sorry.
Senator Dayton. Mr. Curry.
Mr. Curry. I don't know for a fact, but it's nothing more
than 2 percent. However, with the vehicle and cargo inspection
system, the VACIS machines being installed, we expect that
there will be an increase to the level of confidence of the
cargo that is coming through.
Senator Dayton. You can get one that International Falls
has at the end of it.
Mr. Curry. Our crossing, the crossing at Noyes, as well.
Senator Dayton. Thank you. Mr. Hausladen.
Mr. Hausladen. Senator, no, I do not have a number. The
percentage, I do know it's a small percentage at this time.
Also as a function of the threat level, there's less that's
going on now. And, as we said, the gamma ray systems are very
good, but I think it's a matter of triaging freight, too. If
you have freight that goes back and forth regularly like logs,
that's a different commodity than if you have a sealed cargo
container coming across. So you have focused resources on those
freight pieces that are perhaps most suspect.
Senator Dayton. In all, the point we are trying to make is
just now relatively few inspections are actually being done,
and the need to do many more. If the same time, more means we
would really be prohibiting the flow of goods into our country.
I appreciate your comments about the Transportation Security
Agency, because the government seldom gets kudos for doing
anything well these days, and in my own observation and
experience, and also from talking about this with passengers,
flight attendants, airline pilots, and Senators about their
personal experience, flying in and out of our airports. I think
all agree the professionalism, the quality, and the consistency
of inspections from site to site around the country has greatly
improved. I think that is very important to the traveling
public.
But I wanted to go back to your concern about the funding
for the law enforcement at airports of your size. Can you
verify for me exactly where the funding comes from? Is it
Federal? And what would need to be added or removed?
Mr. Leqve. OK. Thank you, Senator. Yes, currently the
funding is coming through the TSA. And that is due to sunset at
the end of the month, at the end of May.
Senator Dayton. That's regular funding--is it prorated, or
is this a special appropriation?
Mr. leqve. Actually, the communities actually have an
agreement, a reimbursement agreement, that is in place with the
TSA. And once again, that will go away at the end of May. As I
indicated earlier, the category X'es, 1's and 2's typically
have law enforcement on staff. Whereas, in our case, we do not.
I think it's important to maintain that type of level, and a
couple of reasons why. One, it's been well received by the
community. And I think as well as providing security, we want
the traveling public to feel secure, as well.
Two, if the threat level were to change from its current
yellow to orange, that is a requirement under today's
guidelines that we must have law enforcement on-site at the
security checkpoint. So we always run that risk. I hope that
will not be the case, but nevertheless, if it is, at least we
have things in place, and so we are complying with the
regulations as they exist and as they tend to come out of
Washington. I think it's very essential. At least your category
3 airports, funding is available during air carrier operations.
Some of your category 4 airports, they may have four or five or
three operations a day. Maybe just providing funding during
those time periods would be very helpful, as well.
Senator Dayton. On behalf of the local officials and the
airport manager at International Falls, a mandate and very real
expenses have been placed upon them as well. So thank you.
And just a last question, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Collins
has really been terrific about getting the chance for local
officials to comment about the inefficiencies that exist in
funds provided by Congress that are not being made available or
existing barriers, hurdles, in terms of the application and
approval process. And I know, Madam Chairman, you helped carry
this subject in Washington. And it would be a great chance to
hear that you are speaking to these people. Since Senator
Coleman is certainly not in the Minority party in the Senate,
he doesn't realize that when you are, and especially when your
party is not the administration, that you don't have quite the
same impact with your own phone calls that the two of you will
have. So I will put myself in a separate category. But
seriously, you really are in positions of great influence. And
I will do my best, as well.
But if there are any further elaborations or blanks you
want to fill in, or suggestions, these are good people to talk
to. And I will start with the other end. Mr. Hausladen.
Mr. Hausladen. I think I have adequately covered it, with
one exception, and that is food transportation is sort of a
different animal. It's not in boxes, generally. At a certain
point, it's coming out of the field. And again, in talking to
some of our members, we do have significant cross-border
traffic of food in various stages, and this is a new priority
for the Federal Government for inspection. And I guess the
question is, this is such a new area, do we need to treat food
somehow differently? We want to protect it, we want to make
sure it's not contaminated, but it's morphing; it's always sort
of changing form. And before we get hard and fast in how we
regulate that, let's make sure the food manufacturers, the
companies like the General Mills based here in Minnesota, let's
get operations people involved in some of that discussion.
Thank you.
Mr. Curry. Well, I echo the comment. When you brought that
up, the border folks that handle the port of services may be
aware of the hearing here today. They mentioned that the FDA
has recently taken a keen interest in food stuffs moving in the
country across the border. And we have had for some time an
arrangement by which Customs is able to extract from our
commuter systems information on the manifests of materials that
are coming across. FDA is in the initial stages of discussing
this, but if the FDA is looking for some other special
treatment, their own information is available. If they could
somehow work through Customs, with Customs, they get into that
same system, which would take care of it, but I think their
talk is scheduled.
Senator Dayton. My time is being trailed. Others, can you
comment?
Mr. Leqve. We have covered everything, and I appreciate the
opportunity.
Mr. Skelton. In the Ag Department, of course, the Port of
Duluth is responsible for approximately 4 million metric tons
of grain per year in movement through the port. They're being
transshipped, or shipped directly overseas. Our security
concerns in that area are more on domestic levels, some
interruption in that process than in that transfer, because
once the ship is sealed up, it's quite safe.
Senator Dayton. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you for your leadership, and thank you for inviting me to this
hearing today.
Senator Coleman. Thank you very much, Senator Dayton. We
are very much on time. This hearing is scheduled to end at
11:30; we will adjourn at 11 a.m.
First, on the issue about food transportation, I think it's
a very important one. It may require an independent focus.
Unlike tons of taconite, we consume food in this country. And
with the potential to wreak havoc with biological and chemical
agents and the ability to detect, that is something that
clearly we have to make sure that we are focusing on and having
the right resources and the ability to focus at the local level
to deal with it.
I do want to thank all of the participants. I think all of
these panels have been very helpful, and I believe I speak for
Chairman Collins and Senator Dayton in that regard. It's always
good for us who work in Washington to go back home to listen to
folks at the local level, because you are the ones who have to
make it happen. So very appreciative.
And then to my colleagues, Chairman Collins, thank you very
much for taking time in your very busy schedule to be part of
this hearing. And to my friend and colleague across the aisle,
Senator Dayton, I thank you for being here.
I do have several staff who are here. Can the staff raise
their hands? The reason I do that, if folks have additional
information or questions, please contact staff and let them
know. We will keep the record open until the end of the week
for the purpose of accepting further comments and a statement
from the U.S. attorney.
So with that, I want to thank you all for coming, and this
hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11 a.m., the Subcommittee adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7907.066