Though an IOC concept of operations has required some time to articulate given the Coast Guard’s staffing demands and other priorities, it was taking shape and rolling out to a large number of ports through the summer of 2011. Along with the operational concept, a software tool, which will facilitate it, is being introduced as well.

The tool is called “WatchKeeper” – a Web-based information sharing and management system. WatchKeeper facilitates information exchange across multiagency port partners, the “coalitions” that are the focus of the IOC concept. The software provides federal, state, and local maritime and land-based authorities around a port with a common operating picture, shared operational schedules, and archived information generated by regular coordination meetings.

As of August 2011, WatchKeeper has been delivered to 12 ports and is in use by other government agencies including CBP. The adoption and operation of WatchKeeper is a crucial part of achieving full IOC capability. At least 30 ports nationwide that have begun to adopt the IOC concept of operations are said to have attained initial operating capability, the addition of WatchKeeper to their toolset will move them closer to final operating capability

One of WatchKeeper’s greatest strengths is its ability to function as a virtual information and coordination tool, not dependent upon a central location. Any authorized personnel within a particular port coalition can log in to WatchKeeper using a Coast Guard Common Access Card or VeriSign card over a secure Internet connection. Thus port security partners in disparate locations can have a common operational picture complete with information on incoming vessels, actions scheduled by participating agencies, the availability of various assets and intelligence on specific threats.

The software has proven beneficial even in ports with physical IOCs like Charleston. Charleston is the 11th largest customs district in the United States, a port of major commercial and military importance.

Cmdr. John Priebe of Sector Charleston explained that though personnel in the Seahawk IOC can literally tap each other on the shoulder, WatchKeeper has further improved their joint effectiveness. Each morning at 9:30 a.m. SeaHawk partners, including local law enforcement, the CBP, and the Coast Guard, meet inside the IOC. They review the latest WatchKeeper information, using the software to vet incoming vessels.

WatchKeeper draws on information from the Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement database, which offers vessel-specific details such as port of origin, cargo, crew, and ship characteristics. The information is available on vessels 96 hours prior to port entry.

“It helps us develop a risk picture,” Priebe said. “We assess the risk associated with every one of the vessels that we vet. The other great thing about WatchKeeper is that it’s a historical tool. Not only does it record what the Seahawk IOC does with the vessel but also what was done at previous ports. When it leaves our port the [next] destination port can see what we’ve done with the vessel.”

The details might include whether the vessel was inspected and by which agency, whether there were any associated security or environmental irregularities, and what paperwork had been filed. WatchKeeper can alert an IOC to any number of situations that call for a coordinated response.

Hypothetically, a Liberian-flagged grain ship might be coming directly to Charleston from a port that the SeaHawk IOC targets as high risk. All coalition partners would be informed of the vessel’s imminent arrival. Such a scenario would trigger the CBP to perform an “admissibility check” and likely an enhanced boarding. If the vessel in question was a first-timer to the port, Charleston’s Metro Marine unit would launch and perform an enhanced harbor patrol around the ship during which it would also photograph and upload the images to WatchKeeper. If the ship turned out to be a high-interest vessel for the service, then a Coast Guard smallboat would likely be dispatched for a boarding.

Though each of the steps above might be followed, the IOC concept of operations is focused on eliminating duplication of effort where possible. WatchKeeper abets the goal by keeping all parties informed and when its Mission Asset Scheduling Interface component is added, it will allow all parties to view each other’s schedules. In a 2010 interview, Adm. Robert E. Day Jr., assistant commandant for Command Control, Communications & Information Technology and the director, Coast Guard Cyber Command, highlighted the joint scheduling benefits offered by WatchKeeper.

Day pointed out that in years past various agencies would board ships for inspections sequentially. The Coast Guard would board and inspect, followed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and then CBP. A ship might be moored for four to six hours during these three visits. With the ability to view each other’s schedules, these agencies now coordinate and typically board and execute their respective inspections at the same time. As noted above, IOC coalition members jointly decide which ships they target.

Priebe admitted that prior to forming the IOC, Sector Charleston had no idea what CBP for example, had planned for a particular day or whether they intended to board and inspect the same vessel the Coast Guard had selected. WatchKeeper facilitates such coordination when agency personnel are not collocated but being able to reach and touch your counterparts has its advantages too.

“Having a face to go with a voice is key,” Priebe said. “It was demonstrated during this hurricane [Irene]. We were able to walk up to the next doorway and ask, ‘Hey CBP, what are you guys doing for your hurricane preparations?’ They’d just lean back and tell us this, that, and the other. It’s very productive having people right here who you’ve already established relationships with.”

Some ports have developed their own joint operations/planning processes that share most of the features of an IOC. They include San Diego, which has stood up its own Maritime Unified Command or MUC. Essentially an IOC by another name, San Diego’s MUC operates via its own operational planning process and has appropriated its own resources. The approach is similar to one taken in Houston by the CBP, which has stood up its Houston Area Maritime Operations Center (HAMOC). HAMOC meets weekly and its participating agencies keep abreast of each other’s operations via IOC-type coordinated planning.

The bottom line, April stressed, is that anywhere a coalition meets in a certain port can be a center. Likewise, an agency other than the Coast Guard may host the meetings of federal, state, and local authorities to generate coordinated planning and to buy-down risk in a particular port given all the assets on hand. Each port is different. Different geography, maritime movements, nearby installations/institutions, and authorities dictate the planning and operations necessary in that port.

The differences explain why IOC concept of operations is being advanced as a framework, not a detailed operational scheme. Interagency cooperation is high in most all ports but coordination is fledgling in many ways Coast Guard officials acknowledge. WatchKeeper will be essential in advancing cross-agency coordination but there must be cultural change as well. Providing a framework and a level of standardization promises to improve these processes nationwide. The service has sought advice from the DHS Information Sharing Governance Board and has encouraged coalitions in each port to determine what information may be shared among agencies. The process is making headway but must often go through legal counsel associated with the various agencies in each port. Though it does not yet exist, a national-level information sharing agreement would significantly speed the process and act as a guideline for all port coalitions.

In the meantime, the IOC concept is being practiced and tested every day in each of the ports. Continuous refinement and possible future WatchKeeper enhancements including sensor fusion capability will move America’s port security providers toward a more effective unity of effort.

This article was first published in Coast Guard Outlook: 2012 Edition.