§ 70101. Definitions

§ 70101. Definitions

(1) The term “Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan” means an Area Maritime Transportation Security Plan prepared under section 70103(b).

(2) The term “cybersecurity risk” has the meaning given the term in section 2200 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002.

(3) The term “facility” means any structure or facility of any kind located in, on, under, or adjacent to any waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

(4) The term “National Maritime Transportation Security Plan” means the National Maritime Transportation Security Plan prepared and published under section 70103(a).

(5) The term “owner or operator” means—

(A) in the case of a vessel, any person owning, operating, or chartering by demise, such vessel; and

(B) in the case of a facility, any person owning, leasing, or operating such facility.

(6) The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating.

(7) The term “transportation security incident” means a security incident resulting in a significant loss of life, environmental damage, transportation system disruption, or economic disruption in a particular area. In this paragraph, the term “economic disruption” does not include a work stoppage or other employee-related action not related to terrorism and resulting from an employee-employer dispute.

(Added Pub. L. 107–295, title I, § 102(a), Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2068; amended Pub. L. 109–347, title I, § 124, Oct. 13, 2006, 120 Stat. 1900; Pub. L. 115–254, div. J, § 1805(b), Oct. 5, 2018, 132 Stat. 3534; Pub. L. 117–263, div. G, title LXXI, § 7143(d)(10), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3664.)

Editorial Notes

References in Text

Section 2200 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, referred to in par. (2), is classified to section 650 of Title 6, Domestic Security.

Amendments

2022—Par. (2). Pub. L. 117–263 substituted “section 2200 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002” for “section 227 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 148)”.

2018—Pars. (2) to (7). Pub. L. 115–254 added par. (2) and redesignated former pars. (2) to (6) as (3) to (7), respectively.

2006—Par. (6). Pub. L. 109–347 inserted at end “In this paragraph, the term ‘economic disruption’ does not include a work stoppage or other employee-related action not related to terrorism and resulting from an employee-employer dispute.”

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Regulations

Pub. L. 107–295, title I, § 102(d), Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2084, provided that: “(1) Interim final rule authority.—The Secretary shall issue an interim final rule as a temporary regulation implementing this section [enacting this subtitle and provisions set out as notes under sections 70104 and 70114 of this title] (including the amendments made by this section) as soon as practicable after the date of enactment of this section [Nov. 25, 2002], without regard to the provisions of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code. All regulations prescribed under the authority of this subsection that are not earlier superseded by final regulations shall expire not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act [Nov. 25, 2002]. “(2) Initiation of rulemaking.—The Secretary may initiate a rulemaking to implement this section (including the amendments made by this section) as soon as practicable after the date of enactment of this section. The final rule issued pursuant to that rulemaking may supersede the interim final rule promulgated under this subsection.”

Transfer of Functions

For transfer of authorities, functions, personnel, and assets of the Coast Guard, including the authorities and functions of the Secretary of Transportation relating thereto, to the Department of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 468(b), 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.

Maritime Border Security Cooperation

Pub. L. 115–254, div. J, § 1814, Oct. 5, 2018, 132 Stat. 3540, provided that: “The Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall, in accordance with law— “(1) partner with other Federal, State, and local government agencies to leverage existing technology, including existing sensor and camera systems and other sensors, in place along the maritime border to facilitate monitoring of high-risk maritime borders, as determined by the Secretary; and “(2) subject to the availability of appropriations, enter into such agreements as the Secretary considers necessary to ensure the monitoring described in paragraph (1).”

Integrated Cross-Border Maritime Law Enforcement Operations Between the United States and Canada

Pub. L. 112–213, title VII, § 711, Dec. 20, 2012, 126 Stat. 1581, provided that: “(a) Authorization.—The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commandant of the Coast Guard, may establish an Integrated Cross-Border Maritime Law Enforcement Operations Program to coordinate the maritime security operations of the United States and Canada (in this section referred to as the ‘Program’). “(b) Purpose.—The Secretary, acting through the Commandant, shall administer the Program in a manner that results in a cooperative approach between the United States and Canada to strengthen border security and detect, prevent, suppress, investigate, and respond to terrorism and violations of law related to border security. “(c) Training.—The Secretary, acting through the Commandant and in consultation with the Secretary of State, may—“(1) establish, as an element of the Program, a training program for individuals who will serve as maritime law enforcement officers; and “(2) conduct training jointly with Canada to enhance border security, including training—“(A) on the detection and apprehension of suspected terrorists and individuals attempting to unlawfully cross or unlawfully use the international maritime border between the United States and Canada; “(B) on the integration, analysis, and dissemination of port security information by and between the United States and Canada; “(C) on policy, regulatory, and legal considerations related to the Program; “(D) on the use of force in maritime security; “(E) on operational procedures and protection of sensitive information; and “(F) on preparedness and response to maritime terrorist incidents. “(d) Coordination.—The Secretary, acting through the Commandant, shall coordinate the Program with other similar border security and antiterrorism programs within the Department of Homeland Security. “(e) Memoranda of Agreement.—The Secretary may enter into any memorandum of agreement necessary to carry out the Program.”

Waterside Security of Especially Hazardous Cargo

Pub. L. 111–281, title VIII, § 812, Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 2995, provided that: “(a) National Study.—“(1) In general.—The Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall—“(A) initiate a national study to identify measures to improve the security of maritime transportation of especially hazardous cargo; and “(B) coordinate with other Federal agencies, the National Maritime Security Advisory Committee, and appropriate State and local government officials through the Area Maritime Security Committees and other existing coordinating committees, to evaluate the waterside security of vessels carrying, and waterfront facilities handling, especially hazardous cargo. “(2) Matters to be included.—The study conducted under this subsection shall include—“(A) an analysis of existing risk assessment information relating to waterside security generated by the Coast Guard and Area Maritime Security Committees as part of the Maritime Security Risk Analysis Model; “(B) a review and analysis of appropriate roles and responsibilities of maritime stakeholders, including Federal, State, and local law enforcement and industry security personnel, responsible for waterside security of vessels carrying, and waterfront facilities handling, especially hazardous cargo, including—“(i) the number of ports in which State and local law enforcement entities are providing any services to enforce Coast Guard-imposed security zones around vessels transiting to, through, or from United States ports or to conduct security patrols in United States ports; “(ii) the number of formal agreements entered into between the Coast Guard and State and local law enforcement entities to engage State and local law enforcement entities in the enforcement of Coast Guard-imposed security zones around vessels transiting to, through, or from United States ports or the conduct of port security patrols in United States ports, the duration of those agreements, and the aid that State and local entities are engaged to provide through such agreements; “(iii) the extent to which the Coast Guard has set national standards for training, equipment, and resources to ensure that State and local law enforcement entities engaged in enforcing Coast Guard-imposed security zones around vessels transiting to, through, or from United States ports or in conducting port security patrols in United States ports (or both) can deter to the maximum extent practicable a transportation security incident; “(iv) the extent to which the Coast Guard has assessed the ability of State and local law enforcement entities to carry out the security assignments that they have been engaged to perform, including their ability to meet any national standards for training, equipment, and resources that have been established by the Coast Guard in order to ensure that those entities can deter to the maximum extent practicable a transportation security incident; “(v) the extent to which State and local law enforcement entities are able to meet national standards for training, equipment, and resources established by the Coast Guard to ensure that those entities can deter to the maximum extent practicable a transportation security incident; “(vi) the differences in law enforcement authority, and particularly boarding authority, between the Coast Guard and State and local law enforcement entities, and the impact that these differences have on the ability of State and local law enforcement entities to provide the same level of security that the Coast Guard provides during the enforcement of Coast Guard-imposed security zones and the conduct of security patrols in United States ports; and “(vii) the extent of resource, training, and equipment differences between State and local law enforcement entities and the Coast Guard units engaged in enforcing Coast Guard-imposed security zones around vessels transiting to, through, or from United States ports or conducting security patrols in United States ports; “(C) recommendations for risk-based security measures to improve waterside security of vessels carrying, and waterfront facilities handling, especially hazardous cargo; and “(D) identification of security funding alternatives, including an analysis of the potential for cost-sharing by the public and private sectors as well as any challenges associated with such cost-sharing. “(3) Information protection.—In carrying out the coordination necessary to effectively complete the study, the Commandant shall implement measures to ensure the protection of any sensitive security information, proprietary information, or classified information collected, reviewed, or shared during collaborative engagement with maritime stakeholders and other Government entities, except that nothing in this paragraph shall constitute authority to withhold information from—“(A) the Congress; or “(B) first responders requiring such information for the protection of life or property. “(4) Report.—Not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of this Act [Oct. 15, 2010], the Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall submit to the Committees on Homeland Security and Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of the study under this subsection. “(b) National Strategy.—Not later than 6 months after submission of the report required by subsection (a), the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall develop, in conjunction with appropriate Federal agencies, a national strategy for the waterside security of vessels carrying, and waterfront facilities handling, especially hazardous cargo. The strategy shall utilize the results of the study required by subsection (a). “(c) Security of Especially Hazardous Cargo.— [Amended section 70103 of this title.] “(d) Definitions.—For the purposes of this section, the follow[ing] definitions apply:“(1) Especially hazardous cargo.—The term ‘especially hazardous cargo’ means anhydrous ammonia, ammonium nitrate, chlorine, liquefied natural gas, liquiefied petroleum gas, and any other substance, material, or group or class of material, in a particular amount and form that the Secretary determines by regulation poses a significant risk of creating a transportation security incident while being transported in maritime commerce. “(2) Area maritime security committee.—The term ‘Area Maritime Security Committee’ means each of those committees responsible for producing Area Maritime Transportation Security Plans under chapter 701 of title 46, United States Code. “(3) Transportation security incident.—The term ‘transportation security incident’ has the same meaning as that term has in section 70101 of title 46, United States Code.”

Risk Based Resource Allocation

Pub. L. 111–281, title VIII, § 827, Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 3004, provided that: “(a) National Standard.—Within 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act [Oct. 15, 2010], in carrying out chapter 701 of title 46, United States Code, the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall develop and utilize a national standard and formula for prioritizing and addressing assessed security risks at United State ports and facilities on or adjacent to the waterways of the United States, such as the Maritime Security Risk Assessment Model that has been tested by the Department of Homeland Security. “(b) Use by Maritime Security Committees.—Within 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall require each Area Maritime Security Committee to use this standard to regularly evaluate each port’s assessed risk and prioritize how to mitigate the most significant risks. “(c) Other Uses of Standard.—The Secretary shall utilize the standard when considering departmental resource allocations and grant making decisions. “(d) Use of Maritime Risk Assessment Model.—Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall make the United States Coast Guard’s Maritime Security Risk Assessment Model available, in an unclassified version, on a limited basis to regulated vessels and facilities to conduct true risk assessments of their own facilities and vessels using the same criteria employed by the Coast Guard when evaluating a port area, facility, or vessel.”

Watch Lists for Passengers Aboard Vessels