9/11 raises security for oil tankers on the Delaware River
Posted on Sun, May. 25, 2003 By Jennifer Lin The Philadelphia Inquirer Staff Writer
In the deep channel of the Delaware River, hulking tankers with names like Agamemnon and Ophelia haul more than a million barrels of crude oil a day from Venezuela, Nigeria, Canada and the North Sea.
Oil tankers dominate the river, but since 9/11, the safety of those vessels along 120 miles of waterway has become the focus of the most intensive port security mission since World War II.
Although Houston and New Orleans handle far more crude, Philadelphia holds a geographic niche, importing and refining more oil than any other East Coast port. Recently, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security labeled the Delaware River a "high threat" port.
The biggest fear here is that a terrorist attack on an oil or chemical tanker could shut down the river and interfere with refinery operations that supply the Northeastern states.
The seven refineries in the Philadelphia region process enough crude to meet a third of the oil demands for the vast market from Washington, D.C., to Maine.
"If you damage the capability of the Delaware River system to refine oil, you'd have a significant impact on the overall economy and not just Philadelphia's," said John Veentjer, a former captain overseeing the U.S. Coast Guard in Philadelphia.
Or, as homeland security expert Stephen Gale, with the Foreign Policy Research Institute, put it: An attack here could create "an economic choke point."
Last Tuesday, the nation raised its homeland security warning to "Code Orange." But even with the ongoing state of alert since 9/11, the nation's 361 ports remain dangerously exposed to the threat of terrorist activity.
On the Delaware River, the maritime industry has identified weak points in security. The local Coast Guard station is running more patrols and boarding more vessels. Shippers are developing new ways to track cargo, vessels and crews. And the port authorities, usually rivals, are working as partners to combat terrorism.
But the task of building an effective, tighter security shield, not only for the Delaware River but for all ports, far exceeds the funds available from private and public sources.
The federal government is spending $367 million for security projects - for all 361 U.S. ports.
This month, the homeland security department kicked in another $75 million for "high threat" ports, with $6.4 million promised to Philadelphia for Coast Guard operations as well as grants to the maritime trade.
But even with that extra money, the total federal dollars for port security are well below the $6 billion that the Coast Guard has estimated it will cost to improve security for vessels, terminal facilities and port operations.
Any disruption in the maritime trade on the Delaware River - the 10th-busiest port in the country - could jeopardize more than $19 billion in imports and exports, as well as $1.5 billion in local wages, revenues and taxes, according to local port authorities.
Stretching from the sandy anchorages of the Delaware Bay to the swift, rocky waters off Trenton, the Delaware River port system is one of the most challenging in the country to secure.
In addition to refineries, the waterway has eight major bridges and the nation's second-largest nuclear power station in Salem, N.J. Of the 38 terminals on the river, 14 receive oil or chemical tankers. And recently, military cargo started moving through the Packer Avenue Marine Terminal.
Adding to river traffic is the flotilla of weekend pleasure boats. Small craft speed up and down the river or anchor outside the shipping channel, making it hard to distinguish a possible attacker from a boater dashing to a waterside bar.
"Even though this is a modest-sized port, there is a lot that makes us vulnerable," said Gale, the terrorism expert.
Protecting the oil and chemical tankers that ply the Delaware River is the responsibility of the Coast Guard, whose mission has changed radically since 9/11.
For the Coast Guard, the task of policing the nation's waterways has eclipsed all other missions such as search and rescue operations and drug interdictions, according to a recent report by the U.S. General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress.
The result is the Coast Guard is stretched too thin, the GAO said, lacking the manpower, vessels and funds to be all things to all people.
The aging fleet in Philadelphia, including two tugboats, a 175-foot cutter, and a handful of patrol boats, was not designed with homeland security in mind, former Coast Guard officers explain.
"Some of the assets they are working with are pathetic," said Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R., N.J.), chairman of the House subcommittee on Coast Guard and maritime transportation. "There are cutters commissioned in World War II, and while their helicopters may look shiny and new, they have a tremendous number of operational hours on their airframes."
On the Delaware River, the Coast Guard has had to turn to local law enforcement units to help patrol sections of the waterfront and rescue boaters. This winter, it asked the Camden Fire Department not to put its fireboat in dry dock in order to respond to rescues.
"Before 9/11, about 2 percent of our missions were port-security related," said Capt. John Sarubbi, who has headed the Coast Guard's Philadelphia operation since June. "Right after 9/11, that number jumped to 60 percent of what we do on a day-to-day basis."
Sarubbi said the local Coast Guard command has called up more than 100 reservists and stepped up patrols by boat, car and helicopter.
It also started a port security committee to address the terrorism threat, bringing together FBI agents, state troopers, police, and firefighters with river pilots, oil terminal operators, security experts, and port officials.
"If you measure success in terms of the number of patrols you do on the river, it doesn't paint the whole picture," Sarubbi said. "You've got to use information, intelligence... and you have to be partners. That's how I'm approaching it."
Today, every vessel that enters the Delaware River must notify the Coast Guard 96 hours in advance, listing its crew, cargo and previous port calls. Agents for the Coast Guard, FBI and CIA analyze the information to decide which "high interest vessels" the Coast Guard should board and escort to destinations.
Nationally, the Coast Guard has boarded more than 2,000 vessels for security reasons since Sept 11. On the Delaware River, about 90 high-interest vessels, mostly tankers, were boarded in the 20 months since the attacks.
Sarubbi said a boarding team is put on the bridge and in the engine room to gain "positive control" of vessels. This is done, he said, to "make sure a vessel is not taken over by the crew or some unscrupulous individual and used as a weapon."
Terrorists in the Middle East already have shown an interest and capability for striking maritime targets.
On Oct. 12, 2000, a small boat carrying explosives slammed into the USS Cole off the coast of Yemen, killing 17 U.S. sailors. Two years later, on Oct. 6, 2002, a French supertanker, the Limburg, was rammed near Yemen, dumping 90,000 barrels of oil.
Fears of a disaster like the Cole or Limburg weigh heavily on the Delaware River port community. Last month, the local Coast Guard command and law enforcement officials walked through what would happen if there was an attack like the Cole bombing on the Delaware River. Two other terrorist drills are scheduled for later this year.
A participant of the first Coast Guard exercise said the drill revealed how easily a terrorist in a small boat could pass suspicion and hit a target.
"A fast boat going down the river - no one would even make a call. It would just be a pleasure boat on the river," the participant said.
In one of the few positive outcomes of 9/11, the specter of terrorism has forced the fractious Delaware River port community to work together.
"We've never had the cooperation that we do now," said William Boles, security manager for the Port of Wilmington. "We're getting along as a region and forgetting about our own turfs."
If there's an attack, he said, "we'll all suffer."