AIS Data Sharing-A tool of diplomacy

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by CDR Fran Cloe, USN, National MDA Coordination Office Executive Secretariat.


Bringing together politically, culturally, and financially disparate maritime nations to share maritime data requires a technology that is both flexible and universal-a simple tool that will help build trust and cooperation among all maritime nations. The Automatic Identification System (AIS) is such a tool. AIS is a shipboard system that transmits information such as vessel name, registration number, call sign, Maritime Mobile Service Identity (MMSI), position, course, speed, and other navigational information via VHF.

AIS data sharing is:

Simple. AIS data is non-classified and can be obtained and shared through inexpensive, off-the-shelf technology. A nation may join an AIS network by contributing AIS data via the Internet. In most circumstances, a new member can connect to a chosen network with simple written instructions or remote technical assistance.

Universal. Automatic Identification System transceivers and antennas can be easily obtained from marine stores or manufacturers worldwide. With a minimal investment from several hundred to several thousand dollars, even economically disadvantaged states are able to participate. The networks available to share AIS data are diverse and often open to any government willing to share its own data.

Flexible. Governments choosing to join established networks such as the Marine Safety and Security Information System or IALA-NET need only contribute data from one AIS receiver in order to receive all data contributed from other members. Many governments, however, choose to contribute multiple port cities, or their entire national network of receivers, in an effort to provide greater awareness. This flexibility allows a minimal financial investment for members new to information sharing. Additionally, governments can then use the global AIS picture for whatever purpose is most relevant to their situations.

Taking AIS to the Next Level
One other advantage of Automatic Identification System networks comes when regional partners build more advanced information exchanges. Italy's Virtual Regional Maritime Traffic Center began as an exchange of AIS, radar, and satellite data among Italian law enforcement, customs, and military agencies. It quickly developed into a cost-effective forum in which over 20 nations known as the "wider Mediterranean community" now share knowledge to pool resources and build maritime domain awareness.

Limitations
Despite the success of recent initiatives, there are still several arguments against the effectiveness of Automatic Identification System data sharing:

• Not all ships are required to carry AIS transceivers, and even ships that do carry the equipment can easily turn it off. However, this is balanced by the use of AIS as an anomaly detector.
• Automatic Identification System range is limited, and reception is usually no more than 25 miles. This is effective for coastal reception, but leaves the vast majority of shipping traffic out of range of the shore-based receivers. Both commercial and defense options exist to track this traffic via satellite or other means.
• AIS data sharing specifically encounters a proprietary barrier to sharing. Several maritime companies offer commercial AIS sharing for which they charge a monthly or annual fee. Legal issues may arise when a government offers the same data without fee or with a government subsidy. For this reason, it is currently restricted to sharing between governments.
• Culture or history may challenge AIS data sharing. Nations that historically have not cooperated with each other often find it difficult to move beyond traditional attitudes of isolation and control of information.

Looking Ahead
Global maritime information sharing is nearing the tipping point. While bilateral agreements remain important, "many-to-many" information sharing networks are overtaking them in value and importance.

De-centralized global grids, such as those that have facilitated the phenomenal growth of cellular phone service, tend to provide greater value to individual participants than can be provided by any single centralized hierarchal organization.

In the maritime community, AIS data sharing is gaining significant ground as a method by which to set the baseline for maritime information sharing. The simplicity, low cost, and accessibility of the system make it a diplomatic tool that allows nations to participate equally, and to derive real use for their specific needs.

As more maritime nations join AIS networks, they can begin to build more complex regional maritime exchanges, and ultimately, a global maritime exchange.
The resulting increase in global MDA will build trust and cooperation among all maritime nations.


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2010.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Maritime Domain Awareness Information Hubs—What are they, and what do they do?

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by Ms. Alice F. Dunn, Program Analyst, U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Domain Awareness and Information Sharing.

Achieving maritime domain awareness is a daunting challenge, especially in view of the vast community of stakeholders. To better connect to this global maritime community of interest, the National Concept of Operations for Maritime Domain Awareness called for creating “enterprise hubs” focused on cargo and people, critical infrastructure, vessels, and architecture.

MDA Information Hubs. To date, four MDA information hubs have been established, one for each pillar or domain. These hubs identify key partners and inventory information resources and respond to GMCOI inquiries.

• MDA Cargo and People Hubs: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has been designated to lead the cargo and people hubs because it is very familiar with and has access to data pertaining to the maritime supply chain and international maritime crew and passengers. Analytical tools—such as the International Trade Data System/Automated Commercial Environment and other systems—are used to identify and respond to threats within the supply chain, and the national targeting center makes CBP uniquely equipped to support hub services.


• MDA Infrastructure Protection Hub: The Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Infrastructure Protection leads the coordinated national program to reduce and mitigate risk within the national critical infrastructure and key resource sectors to strengthen sectors’ ability to respond and quickly recover from an attack or other emergency.


• MDA Vessel Hub: The Office of Naval Intelligence and the Coast Guard Intelligence Coordination Center are the lead agencies, established to increase the awareness, availability, quantity, and quality of maritime vessel information. The vessel hub has responsibilities such as near-real-time vessel identification and tracking; near-real-time identification and tracking of vessels involved in non-threatening but illegal shipping operations; and near-real-time identification and tracking of uncooperative, non-emitting vessels.

MDA Architecture Management Hub. This hub assists the federal information sharing environment for the global maritime community of interest (GMCOI) by establishing national data and infrastructure standards and capabilities. It formulates the architecture, processes, and standards that facilitate information sharing. The Department of the Navy Chief Information Office is the designated lead agency. The hub was established to design and manage the overall enterprise architecture needed to facilitate net-centric sharing of maritime information. The MDA enterprise architecture will provide the standards and processes that will allow the information hubs and maritime community members to share information and services.

For more information:

The Maritime Domain Awareness Information Exchange: http://www.mda.gov/.

The National Maritime Domain Awareness Coordination Office: http://www.gmsa.gov/index.html.

Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2010.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Maritime Security—The National Maritime Intelligence Center

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by CAPT Paul Crissy, U.S. Coast Guard Reserve, National Maritime Intelligence Center Plans and Policy Staff.


The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 authorized the Director of National Intelligence to establish national intelligence centers to provide all-source analysis. In January of 2009 he established the National Maritime Intelligence Center to coordinate the efforts of the global maritime community of interest (GMCOI) with regard to information sharing.

As a result, it is an integrated capability where U.S. maritime intelligence requirements and all maritime security requirements, including military, criminal, economic, and national sovereignty issues, threats, and opportunities are considered in aggregate.

The NMIC’s goal is to create a “decision advantage” that confronts motivated, adaptive, and determined adversaries and focuses on threats and activities including:

• Illicit activities
• Gaps and seams
• Asymmetric threats
• Disruption of the global supply chain
• Extreme climatology
• Critical infrastructure interruption
• Environmental destruction
• Safety, security, and stewardship of the maritime environment

Synergistic Efforts
The NMIC’s key functions are coordinating and integrating maritime information and intelligence in support of national policy and decision makers, supporting maritime domain awareness objectives, and supporting interagency maritime requirements.

Its four functional areas and representative initiatives are collection integration, analysis integration, architecture, and information management and sharing.

What to Expect From Your NMIC
To ensure robust dialogue from stakeholders and ensure the greatest return on investment, the Director of the National Maritime Intelligence Center will continue to aggressively engage the GMCOI. Temporary and standing working groups and communities of interest such as the NMIC interagency working group, the maritime threat working group, and the interagency advisory group have been created to advise the NMIC director and bring together expertise from the intelligence community, the interagency and international communities, and industry to address matters of shared concern in the maritime domain.


For more information:
The Maritime Domain Awareness Information Exchange: http://www.mda.gov/.

The National Maritime Domain Awareness Coordination Office: http://www.gmsa.gov/index.html.

Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2010.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Interagency Information Sharing

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by LCDR Craig Wennet, Project Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Domain Awareness and Information Sharing.


In addition to other efforts and legislation, the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA) ensured that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would have a central role in the information sharing environment. The Coast Guard, as the largest DHS component and a member of the intelligence community, possesses a unique role in federal information sharing efforts.

Coast Guard Information Sharing Initiatives
Since 2007, the Coast Guard’s Information Sharing Executive Agent (ISEA) staff has visited Coast Guard sectors and subordinate units. Staff members speak with sector personnel and their port partners about their working relationships in maritime safety and security and gather information about information sharing and joint operations.

Visits are planned in coordination with several key Coast Guard and DHS stakeholders, including Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE). We interview a variety of partners at the federal, state, local, public, private, and occasionally international levels to gather information sharing best practices and recommendations for improvement.

General Findings and Recommendations
Primary sector collaboration venues include Area Maritime Security Committees, harbor safety committees, and numerous other committees or associations. In every port visited, the Coast Guard also plays a chairing or moderating role in local law enforcement or first responder associations, and is often the glue that holds them together, even when it is not the primary response or enforcement agency.

Since commencing our interviews in 2007, a consistent trend toward increased collaborative planning, joint operations, and joint training among the Coast Guard and its numerous partners has been apparent. Additionally, respondents shared concerns and provided many recommendations for improving operational collaboration and information sharing.

Next Steps
DHS published its information sharing strategy in July 2008, and the ISEA staff plans to introduce an information sharing strategy for the Coast Guard, incorporating what we have learned through visits and interviews with port partners.

One of the ISEA staff’s most important goals is to make the best practices and recommendations we have collected more visible within the Coast Guard. For more information on Information Sharing Executive Agent staff initiatives or to review our annual reports, please visit our Homeport or CG Portal sites:

• https://homeport.uscg.mil/infosharing
• https://cgportal.uscg.mil/lotus/myquickr/uscg-information-sharing

We invite you to share your information sharing success stories or recommendations with us at uscginformationsharing@uscg.mil.


For more information:
The Maritime Domain Awareness Information Exchange: http://www.mda.gov/.

The National Maritime Domain Awareness Coordination Office: http://www.gmsa.gov/index.html.

Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2010.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Lessons Learned—A Research Vessel’s Destructive Fire—Part 2

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine. Read Part I here.



Fire Investigation Survey
Investigators focused on the pipes in the dry storage room, which were part of the thruster exhaust piping loop, eventually discharging through the port hull in the thruster room.

During the examination of the fire scene, as debris was removed, investigators observed:

“… the remains of a mattress was found leaning against the bow thruster forward
exhaust pipe insulating blanket. All of the covering and filler material in the
mattress was consumed. Removal of debris from the floor area around the
starboard side of the forward bow thruster exhaust pipe uncovered the burned
remains of cardboard and paper product in the vicinity of the steel doubler
plate ring on the floor.”

Combustible Materials, Auto-Ignition
Investigators determined that a cotton mattress would have an auto-ignition temperature range between 490ºF and 750ºF. Once they determined that the bow thruster engine exhaust temperatures can reach up to 900ºF, investigators concluded that the fire was most likely caused by heat coming from the bow thruster engine exhaust pipes, which ignited nearby combustible items.

A Cautionary Tale
Though thankfully there were no lives lost as a result of this incident, the potential for tragedy was immense due to the explosive divers’ tanks, chemicals, and loaded fuel tanks on the vessel. In a stroke of luck, a crewmember happened to be walking by the area, allowing him to discover the fire in time to allow all crew and passengers to abandon ship.

We hope that the lessons learned from this casualty investigation will remind owners, operators, and crewmembers of the importance of proper storage of consumables and other combustible materials and to closely inspect their vessels for similar hazards.


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2010.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Lessons Learned—A Research Vessel’s Destructive Fire—Part 1

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by Ms. Daisy R. Khalifa, technical writer.


Lessons learned from USCG casualty reports are regularly featured in Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine. These articles explore marine incidents and the causal factors, outline the subsequent U.S. Coast Guard marine casualty investigations, and describe the lessons learned as a result.

It is important to note that lives were lost in some of the marine casualties we present. Out of respect for the deceased, their families, and surviving crewmembers, we do not mention the name of any person involved.


In August 2006 the M/V Odyssea Voyager was heading back to port after a day’s work with research divers when the chief engineer, smelling smoke, opened the door to a storage room located directly above the bow thruster room and discovered flames on the port bulkhead.

He tried to extinguish the flames, but the fire soon engulfed the main deck. As heat, smoke, and flames spread through the vessel’s main and upper deck, all aboard abandoned the vessel in lifeboats and were retrieved by U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Pelican.

Two crewmembers suffered minor injuries, but fortunately there were no deaths as a result of the casualty.

Intense Fire
Because of the potentially explosive divers’ tanks, chemicals, and loaded fuel tanks, authorities did not actively fight the fire aboard the vessel. Coast Guard authorities and firefighters monitored the vessel fire for more than 24 hours after those aboard were evacuated. Even two days later, when authorities could finally board the vessel, one section was still hot, with small flames burning.

The vessel, which was salvaged for inspection, was a total constructive loss.

In part II, we will examine the cause of the fire.


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2010.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Interagency Solutions Analysis—The state of interagency MDA requirements

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by Mr. Hank Blaney, Policy Analyst, U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Domain Awareness and Information Sharing.


In the years following 9/11, a collection of federal agencies with major responsibilities for maritime domain awareness drafted the National Plan to Achieve MDA.

These partners recognized that a national investment strategy would be required to ensure that the government achieved effective MDA in a coordinated, efficient fashion. A first step, the 2007 Interagency Investment Strategy, compared tasks required for effective national MDA with current capability, determined where gaps existed, and made recommendations as to which departments should mitigate or eliminate these gaps.

As the interagency maritime domain awareness governance process matured and a new administration emphasized “whole-of-government” problem solving, the MDA Stakeholder Board directed the next steps in resolving national maritime domain awareness shortcomings—the Interagency Solutions Analysis (IASA). A team of MDA professionals drawn from throughout the federal government, the IASA Working Group:

Verifies and prioritizes maritime domain awareness gaps. MDA stakeholders have been active in the years since the interagency investment strategy was written, eliminating some of the gaps. Other entities have conducted somewhat similar studies and made their own conclusions concerning maritime domain awareness tasks or gaps. An interagency solutions analysis working group will join forces with two of the major efforts—the Department of Defense MDA Joint Integration Concept and the Navy’s MDA Capabilities-Based Assessment—avoiding duplication of effort while adding more resources and brainpower to the interagency team.

Recommends interagency solutions to mitigate or close the gaps. The Interagency Solutions Analysis working group will consider non-material solutions (changes in policy or procedures) as well as material solutions (new capability that must be bought or developed). The difficult part will come next—determining which agencies or organizations should be responsible to bring about the necessary changes, and estimating the cost of these improvements.

Provides strategic planning, budget, and acquisition documentation necessary to facilitate the improvements. The Department of Defense has probably the most robust requirements-to-budget system—the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS). In the absence of a formal interagency process to determine and share solutions to MDA gaps, the working group will utilize a JCIDS-like process for its planning documentation baseline.

The process will be modified as necessary to capture agency-specific requirements. At the same time the analysis is being conducted, there will be an ongoing process of updating the MDA Stakeholder Board and all major partners to ensure that all involved understand the process and there are no surprises when recommendations for funding are made.

Study Process
The process will begin by defining the scope of the analysis. The team must determine how much MDA is “enough” in each of the primary focus areas. Without imposing some reasonable limits, recommended solutions might easily prove to be “pie in the sky” and therefore not achievable in today’s budgetary climate.

Critical gaps identified by the interagency solutions analysis and other studies will be compared against existing doctrine and policy. The processes or capabilities required will not always require new technologies. Modifying regulations, breaking down illogical barriers between organizations, or re-orienting methods of doing business can result in dramatic improvements in information flow.

Looking Ahead
The Interagency Solutions Analysis team’s first round of recommendations will include the validated list of critical maritime domain awareness gaps, the best potential solutions, cost estimates, and the recommended lead department or agency to tackle the issue. Time will be allowed for feedback from all stakeholders. Then the report will be presented to the involved departments and, ultimately, the Maritime Security Interagency Policy Council.

The primary measure of success of the interagency solutions analysis should be development of implementable cross-agency solutions that will mitigate or solve the identified critical MDA tasks and related capability gaps. The current cooperation among these partners portends well for a successful venture.


For more information:
The Maritime Domain Awareness Information Exchange: http://www.mda.gov/.

The National Maritime Domain Awareness Coordination Office: http://www.gmsa.gov/index.html.

Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2010.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Maritime Domain Awareness Opportunities—Outreach to the global community of interest

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by CAPT Dale Ferriere, U.S. Coast Guard and National MDA Coordination Office Executive Secretariat.


Achieving maritime domain awareness (MDA) through effective outreach to the global maritime community of interest (GMCOI) requires an earnest appreciation for what MDA is, an understanding about cultural and budgetary influences that adversely affect information sharing partnerships, and a situational understanding concerning the diverse needs and requirements of each GMCOI member.

Checks and Balances
The National MDA Coordination Office (NMCO) Executive Secretariat is situated as a broker and catalyst to help build GMCOI partnerships and institutionalize information sharing, resulting in true maritime domain awareness.

The NMCO Executive Secretariat is a diversified national interagency office with experienced members assembled from the U.S. Navy, Coast Guard, Maritime Administration, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which allows a unique perspective with a tremendous amount of first-hand expertise in maritime operations and planning that includes understanding how MDA situational awareness is dependent upon listening, learning, partnering, and sharing.

Since the NMCO Executive Secretariat’s customer base includes representatives from various port facilities, coastal state navies, coast guards, fisheries, intelligence communities, military communities, marine environmentalists, municipal law enforcement agencies, port authorities, supply chain specialists, and the comprehensive maritime industry, diversity is critical for it to reach out to the greater global maritime community of interest.

Because staff members hold each other accountable, the NMCO Executive Secretariat creates a workplace culture that consistently works toward ensuring organizational objectivity and diversity. As a result, the office can be an honest broker to help arbitrate issues.

Defining the GMCOI
In order to achieve MDA, each member of the GMCOI has potential information to share among the other partners. Regardless if the member is a commercial or government representative, a symbiotic relationship exists when there is better maritime domain awareness.

The essential ingredients for MDA (collaboration, partnership, and information sharing) require that each member put aside any preconceived judgments, parochial interests, and other selfish leanings. MDA has no place for “turf wars.” Identifying common maritime domain awareness issues and objectives requires active participation by all parties.

By no means does building partnerships and achieving MDA mean giving potential “bad operators” a free pass. Rather, maritime domain awareness partnering means that those performing risk assessments need to look more closely at their criteria and processes in identifying how partnering with higher-risk maritime industries can create the opportunity for mutual and effective risk and threat mitigation.


For more information:
The Maritime Domain Awareness Information Exchange: http://www.mda.gov/.

The National Maritime Domain Awareness Coordination Office: http://www.gmsa.gov/index.html.

Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2010.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

The DHS Information Sharing Agreements Process and Tools

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by Ms. Irene Hoffman-Moffatt, Senior Policy Analyst, U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Domain Awareness and Information Sharing.


The “One DHS” policy acknowledges that although the Department of Homeland Security is comprised of multiple components, it is nevertheless a single unified entity. This policy replaces the former “need to know” criterion for information and intelligence sharing with the new “responsibility to share” model, in which no DHS component should consider another DHS component to be a separate agency for information sharing purposes.

Information Sharing Access Agreements
Information sharing and access agreements (ISAAs) are vehicles used to exchange, receive, and share information from external (non-DHS) parties.

All ISAAs are subject to mandatory compliance review by the originating DHS component and the Information Sharing Coordination Council, comprised of action officers from various DHS components.

ISAA Repository
The ISAA Interim Repository is a database of more than 700 information sharing and access agreements between DHS and its external partners. It is a useful resource for exploring the breadth of existing DHS external partnerships, identifying existing agreements that satisfy current data needs, or to use as templates for future agreements. It’s currently maintained by the Office of Intelligence and Analysis Information Sharing and Collaboration Branch.

Soon, components will be able to perform searches independently using the Data Architecture Repository within the DHS Enterprise Architecture Information Repository. This web-based application will house the ISAAs along with other data assets, providing a searchable tool for the entire department.

ISAA Methodology Guidebook
The most current resource regarding information sharing and access agreements and the One DHS policy is the ISAA Methodology Guidebook. It presents appropriate policies, responsibilities, procedures, and other information needed to develop, coordinate, approve, execute, catalog, and negotiate disputes involving ISAAs.

To obtain a copy, contact the DHS Office of Information and Analysis Information Sharing and Collaboration Branch at isaa@dhs.gov, or call (202) 282-9400.


For more information:
The Maritime Domain Awareness Information Exchange: http://www.mda.gov/

The National Maritime Domain Awareness Coordination Office: http://www.gmsa.gov/index.html

Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2010.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Breaking Down Barriers—Managing successful information sharing

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by CAPT David F. Sanders, JAGC, USN, Legal Counsel, National MDA Coordination Office Executive Secretariat.


Effective information sharing employs a combination of collection, storage,
dissemination, and analysis, resulting in an understanding of what is happening, and what it means.

Trust is the underpinning of information sharing. Systems security must be inherent in information transfer to merit trust. Participants in the information flow must trust and be trusted in the proper protection of information and sources. Sharing information, therefore, dispels any notions of secrecy, opens the curtain of government operation, engenders public confidence, and reinforces the concept of ownership by the people.

First, government must make information available to the public. Secondly,
government must be positioned to receive information from the public. Finally, government must effectively share information “within the castle.”

The “push-button” expectation for instant information demands instant action and instant sharing. Juxtaposed thereto are various barriers that can stall or prevent successful information sharing.

Barriers to Information Sharing
While each type of barrier hinders the proposed sharing, not all barriers are bad. Therefore, the goal is not to eliminate barriers, but to manage those barriers effectively.

Natural Barriers: The first “natural” barrier to information sharing is that individuals may have a tendency to work alone. To overcome this tendency, measures of success must encourage, recognize, and reward information sharing and teamwork, not penalize it.

Additionally, the concept of “information is power” and holding, hoarding, or manipulating information accruing to the public benefit cannot be tolerated.

Bureaucratic Barriers: While serious information sharing efforts are underway within government, they are not yet institutionalized. There must be a clear mandate to share, an acceptance of the practice to share, and reinforcement of the policy and practice via education, evaluation, recognition, and reward.

Legal Barriers: There are myriad legal barriers to information sharing. An efficient new barrier resolution plan must include a formal procedure to resolve information sharing disputes, modeled after prevailing alternative dispute resolution practices, including identifying a final arbitrator with the authority to resolve the dispute.

Administrative Barriers: These impediments include classification of information and resulting restrictions on transferability. This barrier can be resolved through uniformity of classification, a common understanding of the applicability of the classifications, and a common-sense approach to initial classification application to information.

Technical Barriers: Technology in itself is not a barrier to information sharing; barriers are those restrictions placed upon technology. Barrier management must begin in the design of the technology system that delivers the information.

The Goal
Management of barriers to information sharing is a systemic problem that requires a comprehensive and coordinated approach, beginning with a clear federal mandate to share information to the greatest extent possible and permissible under law and regulation.


For more information:
The Maritime Domain Awareness Information Exchange: http://www.mda.gov/.

The National Maritime Domain Awareness Coordination Office: http://www.gmsa.gov/index.html.

Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2010.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.