U.S. Transportation Worker Identification Credential

(TWIC) Implementation Issues

7 October 2009

Intertanko NAP

Houston, TX

OVERVIEW

Review of basic requirements Application process to obtain a

TWIC “Acceptable” visa categories The issue Chronology of dialog with U.S.

government agencies – issue status Impacts - comment and discussion

BASIC REQUIREMENTS – WHERE & WHAT, WHOM & WHEN?

Where & What? Secure areas of U.S. vessels w/MTSA VSP Secure areas of U.S. facilities w/MTSA FSP Unescorted access to TWIC holders only at the

option of the facility Whom?

U.S. licensed/documented seafarers must have a TWIC

Anyone desiring unescorted access as above When – fully implemented by 15 April 2009 TWIC implementation experience to date – many

facilities reluctant to provide escorts

APPLICATION PROCESS

Application – appear in person at contractor (Lockheed/Martin) run TWIC Center in U.S. port areas with appropriate “documentation”

Documentation requirements on TWIC web site: U.S. Citizen Non-citizen, immigrant/work status Non-citizen, non-immigrant status – various employment authorizations

or passport and visa on “Acceptable Categories” list Relevant U.S. government agencies

U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) – field enforcement Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Department of State (DOS)

DOCUMENTATION: NON –IMMIGRANT VISA ACCEPTABLE CATEGORIES (49 CFR 1572.105)

(1) B-1/OCS Business Visitor/Outer Continental Shelf;(2) C-1/D Crewman Visa;(3) H-1B Special Occupations;(4) H-1B1 Free Trade Agreement;(5) E-1 Treaty Trader;(6) E-2 Treaty Investor(7) E-3 Australian in Specialty Occupation;(8) L-1 Intracompany Executive Transfer;(9) O-1 Extraordinary Ability;(10) TN North American Free Trade Agreement; or(11) Another authorization that confers legal status, when TSA determines that the legal status is “comparable” to the legal status set out in paragraphs 1-9.

THE ISSUE Non-U.S. citizen industry shore staff requiring access to vessels through

MTSA regulated terminals – superintendents, CSO, crewing managers, ISM and other auditors, etc. use B-1or B-1/B-2 visas. These are not on the “Acceptable Categories” list.

Applications supported by B-1 and B-1/B-2 visas and payment accepted at TWIC centers but notice received 1 month later of IDTA and denial with 60 day appeal period before FDTA. “…you pose or are suspected to pose a security threat…unable to verify

your immigration status” So - many applications put on hold pending resolution

Began dialog with USCG and TSA to consider acceptance of B-1 and B-1/B-2 as “comparable” to other visas

DIALOG - U. S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES - 2008

Began dialog with USCG and TSA staff in early March 2008 Submitted proposal to TSA and USCG late March 2008:

Add B-1/B-2 to the “acceptable” list, or Develop B-1/ “maritime” visa designation and issue TWIC with

supporting letter from employer as “comparables” Strong support from Intertanko, BIMCO, Chamber of Shipping of

America (CSA), General Maritime, OSG, AET, Anglo-Eastern, UK P&I – twelve letters of support written to TSA

Continued dialog with USCG and TSA through end of 2008 as USCG, DHS and TSA considered various options

USCG very supportive of industry need during this time

DIALOG - U. S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES - 2009

Meeting with USCG senior policy makers, 6 January 2009 North Star, Intertanko, CSA, GMM, OSG, Blank Rome

Same group met with DHS/TSA senior policy makers, 23 January 2009 after USCG arranged meeting

Provided post-meeting submission on 18 February to USCG, DHS and TSA to answer questions, re-state earlier “comparables” proposal variation

March: DHS discussion with DOS to develop B-1 “maritime” designation

While still awaiting further response from DHS, TSA and DOS, informal indications are that this is not evolving

DIALOG - U. S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES - 2009

Met with Coast Guard newly assigned senior staff on 23 September and briefed on situation

Interagency “Terminal Access Work Group” forming – USCG, CPB, TSA, DOS so Coast Guard putting this issue on the agenda to determine next steps

Chamber of Shipping and BIMCO meeting with DOS week of 12 October and requesting DOS visa representative attend to pursue “maritime” annotation issue

IMPACTS & CONCERNS, POST 15 APRIL 2009

Generally no person denied entry if they “pay” for an escort - $200 - $3000

TWIC “escort services” developing, such as seafarer welfare organizations, agent provided escort, taxi drivers, etc.

One P&I organization pulled surveyors out of US, some ship managers minimizing need for surveyors to visit ships in US

Concerns – Cost impact and possibility of a TWIC only access “lockdown” if security incident occurs or threat level increased

Comment and discussion: What have NAP members experienced?

THANK YOU – QUESTIONS?