1 / 11

U.S. Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation Issues

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

bern
Download Presentation

U.S. Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation Issues

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. U.S. Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation Issues 7 October 2009 Intertanko NAP Houston, TX

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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)

  5. 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.

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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?

  11. THANK YOU – QUESTIONS?

More Related