Steps Taken Include Port- Specific and Industry-Wide Actions

As a result of the lessons learned from recent natural disasters, port  authorities report taking many steps to mitigate vulnerabilities. Acting as a  forum for port officials to share their experiences with natural disasters,  these working groups were able to develop a manual focused on port  planning and recovery efforts. Ports that have not experienced problems as a result of recent disasters  but that are nonetheless susceptible to disaster threats have also  responded to these lessons learned by other ports. Ports Have Taken Steps to Improve Stakeholder Coordination

We found several examples of port efforts to improve stakeholder  coordination, including utilizing existing forums to coordinate disaster  planning, as well as realigning and enhancing their current plans. Federal Agencies Have Attempted to Help Ports Strengthen Recovery Efforts

Since the 2005 hurricane season, federal agencies have also taken steps to  help port authorities strengthen ports’ ability to recover from future  natural disasters. These efforts have focused on increased coordination  and communication with stakeholders and also on building stakeholders’  knowledge about federal resources for port recovery efforts. The Maritime Administration began  updating the guidebook after the 2005 hurricane season. For example,  district U.S. Army Corps of Engineers staff have (1) organized and chaired  yearly hurricane planning forums to which all ports in the region are  invited; (2) organized prestorm teleconferences for port stakeholders,  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Navy, and in some  instances, the media; (3) participated in the Coast Guard’s Partner  Emergency Action Team, which specifically address disaster  preparedness; (4) geographically aligned with the Coast Guard to better  facilitate coordination during an emergency; and (5) implemented  informational training on planning for hurricanes to ports and other  maritime stakeholders. DHS, which through the Coast Guard oversees the AMSCs, provides an  example of how to incorporate a wider of scope of committee activity. Port-Level Natural Disaster Planning Is Primarily Conducted Separately from Other Threats

Of the ports we visited, more than half developed plans for natural  disasters separately from plans that address security threats. In addition, port natural disaster plans are not reviewed by the Coast  Guard. Unified disaster preparedness planning requires  that all of the threats faced by the port, both natural and man-made, be  considered together. This is referred to as an all-hazards approach. The Coast Guard directs  the Area Maritime Security Committee to use MSRAM in the development  of the Area Maritime Security Plan. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11,  2001, the country has focused on enhancing its security measures, and  ports in particular have been targeted due to their vulnerability and their  criticality to the U.S. economy. To help ensure that ports have adequate understanding of maritime  disaster recovery resources, we recommend that the Secretary of the  Department of Transportation direct the Administrator of the Maritime  Administration to develop a communication strategy to inform ports of the  maritime resources available for recovery efforts. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

This report, initiated under the Comptroller General’s authority to  examine government operations, examines (1) the challenges port  authorities have experienced as a result of recent natural disasters, (2) the  efforts under way to address challenges from these disasters, and (3) the  manner in which port authorities prepare for disasters and the effect of  this approach on their ability to share information with port stakeholders  and access federal resources. To address these objectives, we focused much of our work on 17 U.S.  ports. Experience with recent natural disasters. To determine how port authorities plan for natural disasters and the  effects of that approach on information-sharing among port stakeholders  and access to federal resources, we reviewed port and federal disaster  planning documents collected from various port stakeholders at each of  the seven ports we visited in person.
Why GAO Did This Study

U.S ports are significant to the U.S. economy, handling more than 2 billion tons of domestic and import/export cargo annually. Since Sept. 11, 2001, much of the national focus on ports' preparedness has been on preventing potential acts of terror, the 2005 hurricane season renewed focus on how to protect ports from a diversity of threats, including natural disasters. This report was prepared under the authority of the Comptroller General to examine (1) challenges port authorities have experienced as a result of recent natural disasters, (2) efforts under way to address these challenges, and (3) the manner in which port authorities plan for natural disasters. GAO reviewed documents and interviewed various port stakeholders from 17 major U.S. ports.

What GAO Found

Ports, particularly those impacted by the 2005 hurricane season, experienced many different kinds of challenges during recent natural disasters. Of the 17 U.S. ports that GAO reviewed, port officials identified communications, personnel, and interagency coordination as their biggest challenges. Many port authorities have taken steps to address these challenges. Individually, ports have created redundancy in communications systems and other backup equipment and updated their emergency plans. Collectively, the American Association of Port Authorities developed a best practices manual focused on port planning and recovery efforts, as well as lessons learned from recent natural disasters. Even ports that have not experienced problems as a result of recent disasters, but are nonetheless susceptible to disaster threats, have responded to lessons learned by other ports. Additionally, federal maritime agencies, such as the U.S. Coast Guard, the Maritime Administration, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have increased their coordination and communication with ports to strengthen ports' ability to recover from future natural disasters and to build stakeholders' knowledge about federal resources for port recovery efforts. Most port authorities GAO reviewed conduct planning for natural disasters separately from planning for homeland security threats. Unlike security efforts, natural disaster planning is not subject to the same type of specific federal requirements and, therefore, varies from port to port. As a result of this divided approach, GAO found a wide variance in ports' natural disaster planning efforts including: (1) the level of participation in disaster forums, and (2) the level of information sharing among port stakeholders In the absence of appropriate forums and information sharing opportunities among ports, some ports GAO contacted were limited in their understanding of federal resources available for predisaster mitigation and postdisaster recovery. Other ports have begun using existing forums, such as their federally mandated Area Maritime Security Committee, to coordinate disaster planning efforts. Port and industry experts, as well as recent federal actions, are now encouraging an all-hazards approach to disaster planning and recovery. That is, disaster preparedness planning requires that all of the threats faced by the port, both natural (such as hurricanes) and man-made (such as terror events), be considered together. The Department of Homeland Security, which through the Coast Guard oversees the Area Maritime Security Committees, provides an example of how to incorporate a wider scope of activity for ports across the country. Additionally, the Maritime Administration should develop a communication strategy to inform ports of the maritime resources available for recovery efforts.