Maritime Security: Substantial Work Remains to Translate New Planning Requirements into Effective Port Security Page: 20 of 57
This report is part of the collection entitled: Government Accountability Office Reports and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
All Plans Undergoing
Individual Review Had
Deficiencies that Affected
Final Approvalat the plans will occur when inspectors arrive to ensure that the plans
have been implemented.17
For plans submitted under option A, the Coast Guard established a
comprehensive review and approval process that relies on contractors
with security planning expertise to review and evaluate the plans. Plans
move through a two- or three-stage process, depending on whether they
are for vessels or facilities. In stage I, at least two contract personnel
independently reviewed the plans to ensure they contain material covering
all required items such as measures for access control, responses to
security threats, and drills and exercises to train staff and test the plan.
Plans passing this stage move to stage II, where comprehensive
assessments are conducted as to whether the plans address all of MTSA's
requirements. Vessel plans are approved once the Coast Guard determines
they have passed this stage II review. Facility plans continue on to a stage
III review, in which the local Coast Guard marine safety office verifies the
information in the security assessment against the facility's physical
characteristics and determines whether the plan is adequate to meet
security needs. This last stage may include an on-site visit, but if
conducted, this verification review is not the same as the post-July 1
compliance inspection for determining whether the facility has
implemented the plan. Facility plans are approved once the Coast Guard
determines they have passed this stage III review.
This review and approval process flagged problems. Every one of the more
than 6,400 facility and vessel plans submitted under this option had
deficiencies that needed to be revised before the plan could be approved.
As table 1 shows, of the 2,913 facility plans and 3,505 vessel plans
submitted under option A, more than half were still undergoing the
detailed review as of June 2004. Most of these plans still in review were
facility security plans.'7The Coast Guard has issued guidance to Captains of the Port to encourage them to
"engage" with users of option B to review their progress prior to July 1, 2004. However,
these users are not required to agree to these reviews.GAO-04-838 Maritime Security
Page 16
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
United States. General Accounting Office. Maritime Security: Substantial Work Remains to Translate New Planning Requirements into Effective Port Security, report, June 30, 2004; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc299170/m1/20/: accessed April 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.