Organization of american states



Descargar 160.82 Kb.
Fecha de conversión11.04.2017
Tamaño160.82 Kb.

ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES

Inter-American Council for Integral Development

Inter-American Committee on Ports

THIRTEENTH MEETING OF THE OEA/Ser.L/XX.1.13

EXECUTIVE BOARD OF THE CECIP/doc. 26/12

INTER-AMERICAN COMMITTEE ON PORTS 29 March 2012

March 14, 2012 Original: Spanish

Lima, Peru

FINAL REPORT
THIRTEENTH MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD

OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMITTEE ON PORTS


(March 14, 2012, Lima, Peru)

CONTENTS

Page



    1. BACKGROUND 1




    1. PLACE AND DATE 1




    1. AGENDA 1




    1. OFFICERS OF THE MEETING 2




    1. PARTICIPANTS 2




    1. DOCUMENTS .3




    1. PROCEEDINGS 3




  1. Opening Session 3

  2. Preliminary Session of the Heads of Delegation 3

  3. First Plenary Session. 4

  4. Second Plenary Session … 7

  5. Special Session 12

  6. Closing Session 12




    1. ANNEXES 15




  1. ANNEX A: List of Participants 15

  2. ANNEX B: List of Documents 22

FINAL REPORT


THIRTEENTH MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD

OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMITTEE ON PORTS


(March 14, 2012, Lima, Peru)



  1. BACKGROUND

The Inter-American Committee on Ports (CIP) is an Advisory Committee of the Inter-American Council for Integral Development (CIDI), established by resolution AG/RES. 1573 (XXVIII-O/98) of the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (OAS, pursuant to Articles 77 and 93 of the Charter of the Organization of American States and Articles 5 and 15 of the CIDI Statutes.


The CIP serves as a permanent inter-American forum for the OAS member countries for strengthening cooperation in port sector development, with the active participation and collaboration of the private sector. In addition, the OAS has permanent Observer countries interested in collaborating in the achievement of its main objectives.
The executive body of the CIP is the Executive Board (CECIP), whose activities are carried out either directly or through subcommittees established for this purpose. The private sector participates through Technical Advisory Groups (TAGs), which are specialized bodies created at the initiative of several countries interested in examining a specific issue.
In response to the kind offer of the Government of Peru at the Twelfth Meeting of the Executive Board (Viña del Mar, 2011), CECIP adopted resolution CIDI/CECIP/RES. 11 (XII-11) in which it agreed to hold its Thirteenth Meeting in Lima, Peru, in 2012.



  1. PLACE AND DATE

The meeting was held at the Hotel Los Delfines in Lima on Wednesday, March 14, 2012.





  1. AGENDA

The following agenda was adopted (document CECIP/doc.2/12):




  1. Adoption of the agreements reached during the Preliminary Session of the Heads of Delegation

  2. Report of the Chair of the Executive Board

  3. Report of the Secretariat

  4. Report on the CIP Magazine

  5. Status of the CIP Special Port Program 2011

  6. Report on the Pilot Plan 2011

  7. Reports of the Chairs of the Subcommittees of the Executive Board of the CIP on their respective Work Plans 2011:

    1. Subcommittee on Policy and Coordination (Mexico)

    2. Subcommittee on Port Security and safety(United States)

    3. Subcommittee on Vessel Services (Argentina)

    4. Subcommittee on Cargo Services (Brazil)

    5. Subcommittee on Port Legislation and Investments (Uruguay)

    6. Subcommittee on Environmental Port Protection (Venezuela)

    7. Subcommittee on Women in Ports (Dominican Republic)

  8. Proposal by the Secretariat “Guidelines for a Strategic Vision of the Inter-American Committee on Ports: Fortifying the Inter-American Cooperation in Sustainable Port Development for Prosperity”

  9. Proposal of the CIP Action Plan 2012-13

  10. Proposal of the CIP Budget 2012-13

  11. Venue and Date of the XIV Meeting of CECIP 2013

  12. Meeting of the Technical Advisory Groups (TAGs)

    1. TAG on Logistics and Competitiveness

    2. TAG on Port Security

    3. TAG on Navigation Safety

    4. TAG on Environmental Port Protection

  13. Consideration of Proposed Resolutions

  14. Other matters



  1. OFFICERS OF THE MEETING

Chair: Raúl Fiorano (Argentina)


Vice-Chair: Rogelio Barsallo (Panama)
Coordinator: Frank Boyle (Peru)
Secretary: Carlos Mladinic (OAS)



  1. PARTICIPANTS

Delegations from the following CECIP member countries participated: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela. Delegations from the following OAS member countries also attended: Bolivia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines. In addition, Spain attended as an OAS Permanent Observer, as did the representative of PIANC (United States). The list of participants can be found in Annex A of this report (document CECIP/doc.26/12).




  1. DOCUMENTS

The list of documents from the meeting can be found in Annex B of this report (document CECIP/doc.1/12 rev. 1).





  1. PROCEEDINGS

The meeting consisted of an opening session, a preliminary session with the heads of delegation, two plenary sessions, a special session, and a closing session.




  1. Opening Session

This brief session began at 8:45 a.m., chaired by Mr. Raúl Fiorano, Alternate Representative of the Argentine Republic, representing Mr. Ricardo Luján, Under Secretary for Ports and Waterways and CECIP Chair. After apologizing for the absence of the Representative due to the change in government, Mr. Fiorano welcomed the delegations, praising the excellent logistical support and warm hospitality of the host country. He reminded those present about the brevity of the meeting and the need to obtain the opinions of the delegations with the aim of strengthening CIP operations, and then declared the meeting open.




  1. Preliminary Session of the Heads of Delegation

The purpose of this session was to coordinate the different operational aspects of the meeting. After confirming that the number of attendees exceeded the requirement for a quorum, the Chair read the composition of CECIP and reminded the participants that while all CIP countries had a voice at the meeting, the vote was reserved for CECIP members.


Note was taken of the absence of Barbados, the Vice-Chair for CECIP operations according to the current rotation system. It was therefore proposed that Panama act in its stead and that they continue with the same system. The proposal was approved by the attendees.
Next, documents CECIP/doc.2/12, Draft Agenda and CECIP/doc.3/11, Draft Schedule were submitted for the consideration of those present and successively approved without observations.
The Chair then submitted the following matters for consideration:


  • Order of precedence: This was established, beginning with Peru, the host country, followed by the other member countries in Spanish alphabetical order.




  • Deadline for submitting proponed resolutions: This was set at 3:00 p.m.




  • Documentation: It was agreed that one set per delegation would be distributed in hard copy and that all the documents would be provided to participants on a CD at the end of the meeting.




  1. First Plenary Session

The first plenary session began at 9:10 a.m. and took up the following agenda items:


Adoption of the agreements reached at the preliminary session of the heads of delegation (Agenda item 1)
The Executive Board presented and endorsed the aforementioned agreements.
Report of the Chair of the Executive Board (Argentina) (Agenda item 2)
Mr. Fiorano presented the respective report, document CECIP/doc.5/12, describing the numerous activities carried out in 2011 in four areas, namely: strengthening of the port dialogue (two hemispheric conferences and one CECIP meeting), training of human resources (12 training events of differing length and content, covering the various areas of port operations and planning), technical cooperation and assistance activities, and publicity about and promotion of the Hemisphere’s ports (Secretariat’s magazine, newsletter, and advisory services).
Report of the CIP Secretariat (Agenda items 3, 4, 5, and 6)
Concerning item 3, the Secretariat presented document CECIP/doc.4/12, describing the activities carried out in 2011 in strict adherence to the CIP budget for the year and grouped under the four areas mentioned above. The Secretary thanked the member states and Spain for their cooperation in the training events and noted the large number of participants. He also underscored the priority role of training in CIP activities and the appropriateness of intensifying the sharing of experiences among the member states.
For item 4, the Secretariat presented document CECIP/doc.13/12, explaining that the contract with the publishing house for the publication of six issues in two years, signed on June 29, 2009, stipulated a print run of 3,500 copies per issue and the sum of $5,000 per issue to be paid to CIP. The contract was amended in August 2011, reducing the number of issues to five. In addition, the publishing house had sent a proposal to CIP to continue with the publication under new terms, which the Secretariat had circulated to the members of the Subcommittee on Policy and Coordination, pursuant to resolution CECIP/RES. 1 (XII-11), obtaining four opinions, one each from Argentina, Mexico, Panama, and Peru. Next, the Chair invited the representatives of the publishing house to give their views on the execution of the contract and proposal. The representatives expressed a desire for greater support from the editorial board and the member states to secure publicity for the magazine and distribute it.
This was followed by a series of comments about this agenda item. The delegations were unanimous about the excellence of the magazine. Brazil and Uruguay suggested that more current news items should be included, but Peru and Paraguay were of the opinion that CIP’s eNewsletter met that need and that the magazine was, rather, a complementary vehicle for the dissemination of more lengthy contents. In this same vein, Mexico pointed out the need to encourage greater member state participation in the drafting committee to guide the publishing house in the production of a magazine that genuinely reflects the interests of the CIP. Several delegations felt publication of the magazine should not be interrupted, especially in view of the delays in its distribution, while Nicaragua, on the other hand, stated the views of those who were satisfied with the timeliness of the distribution. Several delegations, Chile, Ecuador, and Argentina among them, were in favor of issuing a call for a new public tender that would include a fee with fixed and variable components and of renegotiating the extension of the current contract to guarantee the magazine’s publication for some 12 months until the public tender could be issued and a new contract awarded.
Regarding Agenda item 5, the Secretariat presented document CECIP/doc.15/12, which details quarterly the income and expenditures of the Special Port Program Specific Fund for 2011. The Secretariat explained that the program’s activities are strictly adapted to the available income and, thus, the budget lines for travel and contracts were the most affected. Member states were urged to pay their quotas punctually and provide for the financing of the activities planned.
For the report on item 6, the Secretariat presented document CECIP/doc.14/12, describing the procedure for the management and completion CIP committee and subcommittee tasks. The Secretariat noted that two activities selected for application of the pilot experience procedure were postponed and rescheduled for this year. The delegate of Peru stated that the statistics seminar would be financed by the Andean Development Corporation, while the Dominican Republic’s delegate confirmed that the seminar on women in port affairs would be held during the third quarter of this year due to the change in government that would take place in August.
Report of the Chair of the Subcommittee on Policy and Coordination (Agenda item 7 a. - Argentina)
The representative of Argentina, the Chair of the Subcommittee, presented the respective report, document CECIP/doc.6/12, describing the activities carried out in 2011 in strict coordination with the Secretariat of CIP. He expressed satisfaction at having quarterly financial reports that made it possible to align programmed events with the available resources and stated that two activities (conferences on dredging and environmental protection) were reprogrammed for this year. He thanked Spain for its valuable ongoing collaboration in the organization of the Ibero American Course in Port Management, traditionally held every October and now in its 15th year. The Permanent Observer made some comments about the experience gained with the repeated organization of the course, complementing document CECIP/doc.20/12, presented by the Chair. He then mentioned another activity that has become a permanent fixture, the Course on Port Terminal Management, held for the fifth time, with Santo Domingo as the venue (January 31 - February 11). The report on this activity, CECIP/doc.23/12 was presented by the delegate of the Dominican Republic.
Report of the Chair of the Subcommittee on Port Security (Agenda item 7 b. - United States)
The representative of the United States, Chair of the Subcommittee, presented document CECIP/doc.7/12, describing the activities carried out in 2011. He noted the greater connectivity between the parties interested in these issues through the website www.safeports.org, which contains up-to-date information in three languages (Spanish, English, and Portuguese) and promotes the portal for registered users (port safety officials). He added that contacts with international port security agencies had been intensified−for example, with the Inter-American Committee against Terrorism (CICTE) and the Business Alliance for Secure Commerce (BASC). He called on the member countries to update the information on the website with their specific regulations.
Report of the Chair of the Subcommittee on Vessel Services (Agenda item 7 c. - Mexico)
The respective report, document CECIP/doc.9/12, was presented by the delegate of Mexico and the Vice Chair of the Subcommittee, representing Jamaica. Several of the activities had suffered delays due to the slow pace of data collection (cruise tourism, seminar on river ports and waterways, study of connectivity in the Amazon basin). The conference on dredging was rescheduled for this year. Regarding advances in technology, the Argentine Naval Prefecture reported progress in the implementation of an automatic identification system for ships on the seacoast and rivers, this latter being of considerable interest to international users of these waterways.
Report of the Chair of the Subcommittee on Cargo Services, (Agenda item 7 d. - Brazil)
The representative of Brazil, Chair of the Subcommittee, presented the respective report, document CECIP/doc.8/12, describing the activities carried out in 2011. Among these he highlighted the Hemispheric Convention on Logistics and Cabotage, held in San Francisco, Campeche, Mexico (September 12-15) and the Seminar on Single Window, Logistics, and Competitiveness in Fortaleza, Brazil (November 22-25). Documents CECIP/doc.21/12 and CECIP/doc.19/12, containing a detailed description of these events, were presented by the delegates of Mexico and Brazil, respectively. The Chair made a brief reference to other activities already noted in item 7.a of the agenda and ended his comments with a mention of the Course on Port Management, held in Lima, Peru (June 13-17), whose report can be found in document CECIP/doc.22/12.
Report of the Chair of the Subcommittee on Port Legislation and Investments (Agenda item 7 e. - Uruguay)
The representative of Uruguay, Chair of the Subcommittee, presented document CECIP/doc.10/12, describing the activities carried out in 2011, a year essentially devoted to information gathering by topic (regulations governing ports, cabotage, financing, and infrastructure) and country (Uruguay, Peru, and Panama).
Report of the Subcommittee on Environmental Port Protection (Agenda item 7. f - Venezuela)
The representative of Venezuela, Chair of the Subcommittee, presented document CECIP/doc.12/12, describing the activities carried out in 2011, which were devoted to promoting the completion of Annex V of MARPOL, ascertaining the progress made toward compliance with the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments, and preparing port profiles and completing contingency plans for the control of oil spills. Questionnaires were prepared and distributed and are being collected.
Report of the Chair of the Subcommittee on the Participation of Women in Port Affairs (Agenda item 7.g – Dominican Republic)
The representative of the Dominican Republic, Chair of the Subcommittee, presented document CECIP/doc.11/12, describing the activities carried out in 2011. He stated that work continued on the preparation of a database on women’s activities in the port sector, the drafting of terms of reference for the “Port Woman of the Year” award, and the organization of a seminar that was postponed until 2012.
Since it was 11:15 a.m. the first plenary session was considered to be at an end and was followed by a break.


  1. Second Plenary Session

The session commenced at 11:45 a.m., chaired by Mr. Raúl Fiorano, representative of Argentina, who had proposed earlier that the attendees hold the meetings of the Technical Advisory Groups (TAGs) consecutively, rather than as parallel events. This would give the delegates an opportunity to participate in all the meetings and benefit from the presentations. The plenary agreed to this suggestion and also decided to eliminate the break to ensure that there would be enough time. It then continued with the schedule adopted.


Proposal by the Secretariat: Guidelines for a Strategic Vision of the Inter-American Committee on Ports: “Strengthening Inter-American Cooperation in Sustainable Port Development for Prosperity” (Agenda item 8)
The Secretary of CIP presented document CECIP/doc.16/12, detailing a series of major proposals to improve the work of CIP. He explained that current international trade barriers are not really tariffs, which are generally modest now due to the free trade agreements, but the operation and development of transportation networks and supply chains. Therefore, port investment and operating efficiency should be examined along with those of overland transportation networks and include complementary public and private participation to achieve efficient exports and imports.
He underscored the important role that the CIP will play, with its significant power to marshal involvement, and indicated where positive and negative experiences could be shared to improve transportation and port network operations. He stated that a vision, objectives, and five priority thematic areas in which CIP action should be concentrated had been chosen, namely: logistics, innovation, and competitiveness; port sustainability; port security; public policy, and legislation; and finally, tourism and ship services.
The proposal addressed several points: simplification of the CIP’s organizational structure−specifically, reducing the number of CECIP members from fifteen to eight, leaving a Chair, a Vice Chair, and the Chairs of five Technical Committees corresponding precisely to the five priority areas mentioned earlier; private-sector participation in the Vice Chairmanships of the TCs, which, moreover, would make possible an increase in income and, by extension, the potential activities that could be undertaken by private enterprises or specific ad hoc working groups created in CIP; the holding of short CIP, CECIP, and TC meetings for the discussion of themes for monographs already explored with leading writers in the specialties; strengthening of the port dialogue with the creation of CIPnet on the existing web portal to establish a clearinghouse with information on the potential and needs of CIP members; promotion of intensive use of video conferencing and e-documents at meetings, which could actually eliminate the need for in-person meetings of CECIP; and last, limitations on the number of resolutions, condensing them into just a few.
The proposal sparked a range of comments from the delegations. Panama, Uruguay, Venezuela, the Dominican Republic, and Nicaragua expressed their agreement on identifying TCs with thematic areas and proposed the addition of one more thematic area to address the issue of women in port affairs and corporate social responsibility. They explained that despite the considerable progress that ports had made in gender equality, they still had a long way to go; that a number of international organizations continued to prioritize this issue; and that the work of the Subcommittee on the Participation of Women in Port Affairs should continue until it was successfully concluded. Concerning corporate social responsibility, issues such as the interface between cities and ports and ILO labor standards could be addressed.
The delegation of Mexico suggested the due inclusion of such important issues as port fees and statistics. It remarked that while the proposal for working groups and video conferencing was doable, limiting the number of resolutions could keep some that are necessary to the national authorities for the organization of events from being addressed and result in a failure to duly recognize the support received from observer countries or other entities; finally, it expressed its firm support for private-sector participation, given the very positive experiences to date in the current TAG on Logistics and Competitiveness that it heads.
Venezuela, in contrast, cautioned against excessive enthusiasm for the private sector and proposed that its participation be examined on a case-by-case basis, since the public sector is developing the ports of La Guaira and Puerto Cabello. Brazil viewed the Secretariat’s proposal with satisfaction and, based on the experience to date, proposed that the meetings be complemented with business fairs; that the decision about the creation of working groups be exclusively that of the TCs and not the CIP, and that the thematic area of port sustainability be redefined as port management and environmental protection to clearly underscore the importance of management and issues such as operations, fees, statistics, and performance indicators for measuring port capabilities and efficiency.
Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic proposed that geographic balance in the composition of CECIP be maintained to take the major differences between members from the different regions of the Hemisphere into account.
Since it was 1:15 p.m., the session broke for lunch and the meetings of the Technical Advisory Groups, scheduled to begin at 2:15 p.m.
Meetings of the Technical Advisory Groups (Agenda item 12)
All the meetings had a similar format: the Chairs gave a brief introduction, mentioning only aspects that were not included in the reports presented by the Chairs of the subcommittees, and then invited the speakers to address current technical issues.
Logistics and Port Competitiveness
The meeting was chaired by Mr. Francisco Pastrana, representative of Mexico, who reminded those present of the composition of the Committee and its financial situation. His remarks were followed by two presentations.
The first was “An analysis of the elements of the supply chain to support competitiveness,” given by Mr. Antonio Moreno, a partner in ICAVE S.A. of Mexico, and the second was “Port logistics and convenience,” given by Mr. Gabriel Pérez of ECLAC.
Mr. Moreno focused his presentation on the requirements for operators of port container terminals. He explained that they are pressured by their clients (shipping lines, trucking companies, and cargo owners) to provide faster and cheaper cargo handling services in ever-changing settings, citing as an example the fact that Mexican port terminals used for cargo bound for Chicago are in competition with ports in California and others on North America’s eastern coast. He added that global supply chains are experiencing rising costs, while manufacturing costs continue to fall. Therefore, a close examination should be conducted of terminal capacity, consisting of the sum of the capacity of the component subsystems (wharf, storage yard, and gate), which have a high percentage of fixed costs. He offered some indicators of subsystem operating performance such as expected rates of return on investments designed to increase capacity, based on market maturity and country risk.
Mr. Pérez explained the modern concept of logistics, characterized by the inclusion of the logistics operator, such as public entities charged with implementing transportation, security, commercial facilitation, and other policies. He described the results of econometric studies that show a positive correlation between investment in transportation infrastructure and economic development and reductions in inequality and poverty. He then explained that logistics maximizes the use of transportation infrastructure, because it boosts economic productivity and competitiveness, describing scenarios indicating that a 10% reduction in transportation costs could result in a 21% increase in intrarregional trade, equivalent to $30 billion. He stressed the wide investment gap in Latin American ports, which do not permit access by large vessels with small cargos. He concluded his presentation by mentioning that planning should cover all scenarios and transportation alternatives for efficient logistics systems that contribute to economic development.
Environmental Port Protection
The meeting was chaired by Mr. Juan Sansegundo, representative of Venezuela, who reminded those present of the composition of the Committee and its financial situation. He explained that a presentation was not in order given the preparations under way for the upcoming conference on port security to be held in Uruguay 90 days hence.
Port Safety and Security
The meeting was chaired by Mr. Gregory Hall, representative of the United States, who reminded those present of the composition of the Committee and its financial situation. He then presented an overview of the National Strategy for Global Supply Chain Security, explaining that the concept of global supply chain security has a different meaning for each of the many parties involved. Thus, the strategy is dynamic and flexible so that it can be implemented by all parties and it establishes very general common objectives. Therefore, documentary risk analysis to prevent accidents continues to be important, along with the leadership of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which maintains the www.dhs.gov/globalsupplychain portal, providing current relevant information.
Next, Mr. Juan Pozo of the National Port Authority of Peru gave the presentation “Implementation of the Port Security System in Peru.” He stated that while implementation continues to be guided by the ISPS Code, the experience gained has resulted in continuous improvements in the certification of new facilities (56 certified as of 2012, including the liquid gas terminal in Melchorita and multi-buoy terminals in other locations along the coast), audits, and the gathering of observations, and that that experience is used to advantage in training courses for staff. He reported that Callao has two small vessels devoted exclusively to the verification of compliance with ISPS standards and that this is complemented with security cameras mounted in strategic areas of the port.
The next presentation was given by Mr. Raúl Saldías de World BASC Organization Inc., who spoke about “The Development and Future of the Business Alliance for Secure Commerce (BASC).” Mr. Saldías noted that illegal activities, such as terrorism, smuggling, narcotrafficking, and the transport of stowaways are common today in ships and vehicles involved in legal activities and that this is what prompted the creation of BASC – an alliance of entrepreneurs that protects itself against illegal acts so that it can devote itself to business. Its activities complement those of the public authorities in several countries and international organizations such as the IMO, WMO, and ISO, and they later translate into measures such as CT-PAT, the 24-hour Rule, or the authorized economic operator rule. Mr. Saldías pointed out the advantages of joining BASC, which currently has over 2,500 select companies, since it facilitates access to certifications such as ISO 28000 or compliance with WMA standards, as well as the traceability of shipments. He concluded by mentioning that BASC’s success in the transportation sector has been recognized by the U.S. Customs agency, and the application of its methodology is now being expanded to the hotel industry and to combat money laundering.
Navigation Safety
The meeting was chaired by Mr. Raúl Fiorano, representative of Argentina, who reminded those present of the composition of the Committee and its financial situation as a result of the participation of the three associate members.
Next, Mr. Raúl Ramos of Argentina’s Naval Prefecture gave a brief presentation on the continuous improvement process applied to navigation security and safety activities on Argentina’s seacoast and waterways.
The second plenary session resumed at 5:00 p.m., still chaired by Mr. Raúl Fiorano, to address the remaining items on the agenda and continue the discussions from the morning.
Proposed CIP Action Plan 2012-13 (Agenda item 9)
Before describing this agenda item, the Secretary presented document CECIP/doc.24/12, describing the amendments to the CIP Rules of Procedure that will be necessary to implement the proposals described in the early hours of this session. He then went on to describe document CECIP/doc.17/12 “’Ports of the Americas: Strengthening Physical Integration and Hemispheric Cooperation for Prosperity,” which establishes the specific objectives and articulates with the thematic areas to strengthen regional integration and international trade. He proposed that the TAG action plans for each thematic area be prepared within 90 days so that the available resources can be duly identified. He stressed the need to engage organizations with complementary mandates and know-how, such as the AAPA, ECLAC, and COCATRAM.
Proposed CIP Budget 2012-13 (Agenda item 10)
The Secretary presented document CECIP/doc.18/12, which indicates an estimated income of $260,000 for 2012 and $270,000 for 2013. He noted that expenditures must not exceed these figures and that using resources from the special fund, as had been done in years past, was not in order. Thus, he explained, the budget for travel and contracts had been cut to strictly adjust these activities to the available income, calling on the delegations to ensure that any proposed activity is fully financed.
Next, he reopened the discussions on the significant changes proposed to improve the CIP and CECIP. The comments focused on the amendments to the Rules of Procedure, private-sector participation, the inclusion of new thematic areas, and geographic and linguistic balance in CIP activities.
In response to questions about the importance of the amendments to the Rules of Procedure, the Secretary reiterated that they were not very complicated and that there was no need to specify the number of TAGs, but that the number should respond to the needs of the delegations; the intent was to arrive at a number that would enable CECIP to operate effectively as an executive, not a deliberative, body. Thus, CECIP would in actuality replace the Subcommittee on Policy and Coordination.
The delegate of Paraguay expressed his full agreement with the idea of a case-by-case approach to engaging the private sector and, while public investment in ports predominated in Venezuela, the exact opposite was true in Paraguay, where, moreover, river ports handled the international traffic. The delegates of Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Suriname voiced similar concerns, as they had river navigation and ports. Bolivia and Peru noted the importance of both river and lake navigation, with the former expressing interest in sponsoring training activities in port-related issues. Colombia also expressed a desire to participate actively in the CIP after an extended absence and noted the importance of regulation for the efficient operation of port concessionaires, an aspect addressed in the Secretariat’s proposal.
The delegate of the United States stated his agreement with the Secretariat’s proposals. In particular, he noted the advantages of including the Chairs of the TAGs in CECIP to avoid a duplication of efforts and reports. Regarding river traffic and ports, he said that it would be better to include them in CIP’s activities, as his country did with matters related to ports and navigation on the Mississippi. Finally, he indicated that there should be more CIP activities for member states from the English-speaking Caribbean.
Place and date of the Fourteenth Meeting of CECIP (Agenda item 9)
It was agreed that future meetings of CECIP could be held by video conference, as the new tasks defined for CECIP include those that were formerly performed by the Subcommittee on Policy and Coordination; its meetings should therefore be held periodically.
Other matters (Agenda item 14)
The delegation of Uruguay confirmed that the Third Hemispheric Conference on Environmental Port Protection would be held in Montevideo from May 22 to 24, 2012. A video documentary described this port’s main traffic and facilities, as well as the development and environmental protection challenges that will be explored in the conference.
The session ended at 6:25 p.m.


  1. Special Session

This session began at 6:30 p.m. and was chaired by Mr. Raúl Fiorano, representative of Argentina. There were two presentations: “The State’s Role in the Port System,” given by Mr. Juan Esquembre, and “Methodology of the Institutional Strategic Plan: the Case of the National Port Authority of Peru,” given by Mr. Arturo Monfort, both from the Fundación Valenciaport.


Mr. Esquembre opened his presentation noting the growing importance of institutional and environmental issues in the modern port management and development but remarked that the modern vocabulary is ambiguous. He proposed making it more precise by using simple, significant messages, as the largest ocean liner does when it indicates that “chartering a container ship should be as simple as purchasing a book on the Web.” For ports this means cheap, efficient services capable of adding value during transit through the port. This calls for joint action by both the private and public sector, the latter of which must be capable of designing and implementing adequate regulations for the sector. In this vein, the role of the port authority should be leadership to build a symmetrical relationship with port operators and public-sector agencies with port responsibilities that impact port efficiency. He concluded with proposals for adapting and upgrading the port authority human resources through competency-based management and coaching and mentoring.
Mr. Monfort began his presentation by reminding those present that the National Port Authority (NPA) is charged with planning, promoting, regulating, and overseeing the national port system. He explained that for the period 2012-16, the NPA decided to update its institutional strategic plan (PEI), focusing it on a three-pronged process: a strategic management system (SIGE), the “balanced score card” (BSC), and a specific coaching and training program. He went on to say that the PEI was aligned with the updated national port development plan, as determined by the components of the SIGE, the strategic objectives, and the indicators for measuring the proposed targets in a BSC. He pointed out the wise decision to develop computer software to support the PEI, described its key features and the user interface, and concluded with an outline of the training plan for using this tool, which includes training programs for two teams of half a dozen NPA staff in the port of Valencia.


  1. Closing Session

The closing session was held at 7:30 p.m. and chaired by Mr. Raúl Fiorano, Representative of Argentina, who proceeded to read the conclusions of the Chair about the discussions on improving the CIP and CECIP.


The conclusions are as follows: a) authorize the Secretariat to renegotiate the contract with the current publishing house to ensure publication of the CIP magazine for 12 months, during which time a new tender will be prepared; b) request the Secretariat to prepare a report within 60 days on the role of the CIP magazine in disseminating information about CIP activities, including an evaluation of the fixed and variable fee; improvements in the magazine’s distribution; the designation of country focal points; and quarterly, semiannual, or annual publication alternatives; c) there is a consensus on adopting the proposal for a nine-member CECIP, comprised of a Chair, two Vice Chairs, and six TAG Chairs; d) there is a consensus on defining six TAGs with the following names: i) logistics, innovation, and competitiveness, ii) sustainable port management and environmental protection, iii) port security, iv) public policy, legislation, and regulation, v) tourism, vessel services, and navigation safety, vi) the participation of women in port affairs and corporate social responsibility; e) upgrading the CIP Web portal and naming it CIPNet to disseminate current information on the priority areas, taking advantage of the member countries’ portals; f) implementing CIP activities, adjusting them strictly to the annual income received by the CIP.
Mr. Frank Boyle, representative of Peru, gave the closing remarks. He thanked the delegates for their contribution to these important discussions aimed at improving CIP activities to improve the international trade of the countries of the Hemisphere.
Following the brief closing ceremony, the National Port Authority invited CECIP’s delegates and the presenters at the special session to dinner at the Huaca Pucllana restaurant.



  1. ANNEXES:




  1. List of Participants

  2. List de Documents


ANNEX A

LISTA DE PARTICIPANTES / LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
I. PAISES MIEMBROS DEL COMITÉ EJECUTIVO/ MEMBER STATES OF THE

EXECUTIVO BOARD


ARGENTINA

Raúl Fiorano

Asesor


Subsecretaría de Puertos y Vías Navegables
Mario Ramos

Jefe del Departamento Sumarios de la Dirección de Policía Judicial

Protección Marítima y Puertos de la Prefectura Naval Argentina
Rodolfo González

Jefe de División

Protección Marítima y Prefectura Naval Argentina
Carlos Sposaro

Gerente de Seguridad Ambiental

Administración General de Puertos
BRASIL

Jorge Ernesto Sanches Ruiz

Coordinador General

Secretaría Especial de Puertos de la Presidencia de la República
Rogério Passos Caetano da Silva

División de Puertos e Hidrovias

Estado Mayor de Armada, Marina de Brasil
Fernando Alberto Gomes da Costa

Estado Mayor de Armada, Marina de Brasil


Rafael Vidal Botelho de Souza

Asesor Militar

Secretaría de Acompañamiento y Estudios Institucionales

Chile
Gloria Hutt Hesse

Subsecretaria de Transportes

Subsecretaría de Transportes
Alexis Michea Acevedo

Coordinador General del Programa de Desarrollo Logístico

Ministerio de Transportes y Telecomunicaciones
Rubén Castro Hurtado

Departamento Marítimo, Fluvial y Lacustre

Ministerio de Transportes y Telecomunicaciones
ECUADOR

Walter Segovia

Subsecretario

Subsecretaría de Puertos y Transporte Marítimo y Fluvial
Ivan Solorzano

Director de Puertos

Subsecretaría de Puertos y Transporte Marítimo y Fluvial
GUATEMALA
Gabriel Edgardo Aguilera Peralta

Embajador de Guatemala en Peru


MÉXICO
Francisco Pastrana
Director de Finanzas y Operación Portuaria
Dirección General de Puertos de México
PANAMÁ
Rogelio Barsallo

Director General de Puertos e Industrias Marítimas Auxiliares


Autoridad Marítima de Panamá
Meredith Pinedo

Jefa del Departamento de Control y Cumplimiento de Puertos

Autoridad Marítima de Panamá
María Luisa Villegas

Asistente Ejecutiva del Administrador

Autoridad Marítima de Panamá

PARAGUAY
Adrian Vaesken

Director


Administración Nacional de Navegación de Paraguay
Jhancy Sanabria Barrios

Asesora de la Presidencia en Relaciones Internacionales

Administración Nacional de Navegación y Puertos

PERÚ

Frank Boyle

Presidente del Directorio

Autoridad Portuaria Nacional
Gerardo Pérez Delgado

Gerente General


Autoridad Portuaria Nacional
Eusebio Vega Bueza

Director de Planeamiento y Estudios Económicos


Autoridad Portuaria Nacional
Jacqueline Santolalla Huerto

Jefa de la Unidad de Relaciones Institucionales

Autoridad Portuaria Nacional
REPÚBLICA DOMINICANA
José Lozano

Subdirector Ejecutivo Internacional

Autoridad Portuaria Dominicana
Juan Carlos Montas Artero

Presidente

Comisión Presidencial Para la Modernización y Seguridad Portuaria (CPMSP)
Ángel José Taveras

Director Administrativo y Financiero


Comisión Presidencial Para la Modernización y Seguridad Portuaria (CPMSP)
Roberto Reyna Tejada

Director Técnico

Comisión Presidencial Para la Modernización y Seguridad Portuaria
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Greg Hall

Director, Office of International Activities

Maritime Administration, US Department of Transportation

Carla Menendez

Alternate Representative

United States Mission to the OAS
URUGUAY

Juan José Dominguez

Vicepresidente

Administración Nacional de Puertos
Edgardo Amoza

Director del Departamento Jurídico

Administración Nacional de Puertos
Ana María Copello

Jefa de Relaciones Internacionales

Administración Nacional de Puertos
VENEZuELA
Luis Rodríguez

Presidente

Instituto Nacional de los Espacio Acuáticos
Manuel Fernández

Jefe de la Oficina de Asuntos Acuáticos Internacionales

Instituto Nacional de Espacios Acuáticos
Juan Sansegundo

Gerente de Puertos

Instituto Nacional de los Espacios Acuáticos
José Briceño

Especialista 2 PBIP/SHA

Ministerio del Poder Popular para Transporte y Acuático y Aéreo


  1. OTROS PAÍSES MIEMBROS DE LA OEA/ OTHER OAS MEMBER STATES


BOLIVIA
Wilfredo Valdivia

Jefe de la Unidad de Políticas Marítimas

Dirección General de Intereses Marítimos, Fluviales, Lacustres y Marina Mercante
Rafael Quiroz

Jefe de la Unidad de Puertos y Vías Navegables

Dirección General de Intereses Marítimos, Fluviales, Lacustres y Marina Mercante
COSTA RICA
Urias Ugalde Varela

Presidente Ejecutivo

Instituto Costarricense de Puertos del Pacífico (INCOP)
Héctor Arce Cavallini

Subdirector General

División Marítima Portuaria
COLOMBIA
Sandra Milena Rueda Ochoa

Coordinadora del Grupo de Infraestructura para el Desarrollo Portuario y la Logística

Ministerio de Transporte
EL SALVADOR
Juan José Giammattei

Director Ejecutivo

Autoridad Marítima Portuaria
Rene Ernesto Hernández Osegueda

Director Presidente

Autoridad Marítima Portuaria
Salvador Anibal Osorio Rodriguez

Director

Autoridad Marítima Portuaria
NICARAGUA

Virgilio Silva

Presidente Ejecutivo

Empresa Portuaria Nacional
José Santos Genet Barberena

Gerente de Coordinación y Gestión de Puertos

Empresa Portuaria Nacional
SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES
Bishen M. John

Port Manager

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Port Authority
Godfred Pompey

Council Member

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Port Authority


  1. PAISES OBSERVADORES PERMANENTES DE LA OEA / OAS PERMANENT OBSERVER STATES


ESPAÑA
Santiago Montmany

Jefe del Departamento de Cooperación

Puertos del Estado



  1. ORGANIZACIONES INTERNACIONALES / INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

Comisión Económica de las Naciones Unidas para América Latina CEPAL
Gabriel Pérez

Unidad Servicios de Infraestructura


PIANC - USA

Lillian Almodóvar

Senior Manager




  1. INVITADOS/GUESTS


Arturo Mulinas Monfort

Fundación Valenciaport


Juan Esquembre

Fundación Valenciaport


Ariel Armero

Editor


Revista CIP/OEA
Agustín BARLETTI

Editor


Revista CIP/OEA
Carlos Sagrera

Consultor Ambiental Portuario

International MarConsult


  1. SECRETARÍA DE LA REUNIÓN / MEETING SECRETARIAT


Carlos Mladinic

Secretario


Carlos Cañamero

Consultor


Andrés Rengifo

Consultor


Danner Moscoso

Consultor


Berenice Gómez

Consultor


Violeta Gutiérrez

Consultor




ANNEX B
LISTA DE DOCUMENTOS/ LIST OF DOCUMENTS


Número del documento/

Document number

Título/Title1

Idioma2

CECIP/doc.1/12 rev. 1


Lista de Documentos / List of Documents

Textual

CECIP/doc. 2/12 rev. 1

Temario / Agenda

E

I

CECIP/doc. 3/12 rev. 1

Calendario / Schedule

E

I

CECIP/doc. 4/12

Informe de la Secretaría CIP 2011 / 2011 Report of the CIP Secretariat

E

I

CECIP/doc. 5/12

Informe del Presidente del Comité Ejecutivo 2010-2011 (Presentado por la Delegación de Argentina) / Report of the Chair of the Executive Committee 2010-2011(Presented by the Delegation of Argentina)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 6/12

Informe del Presidente del Subcomité de Política y Coordinación (Presentado por la Delegación de Argentina) / Report from the Chair of the Subcommittee on Policy and Coordination (Presented by the Delegation of Argentina)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 7/12

Informe del Presidente del Subcomité de Protección y Seguridad Portuaria (Presentado por la Delegación de Estados Unidos) / Report from the Chair of the Subcommittee on Port Safety and Security (Presented by the Delegation of United States)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 8/12

Informe del Presidente del Subcomité de Servicios a las Cargas (Presentado por la Delegación de Brasil) / Report from the Chair of the Subcommittee on Cargo Services (Presented by the Delegation of Brazil)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 9/12

Informe del Presidente del Subcomité de Servicios a las Naves (Presentado por la Delegación de Jamaica) / Report from the Chair of the Subcommittee on Vessel Services (Presented by the Delegation of Jamaica)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 10/12

Informe del Presidente del Subcomité de Legislación e Inversiones Portuarias (Presentado por la Delegación de Uruguay) / Report from the Chair of the Subcommittee on Port Legislation and Investments (Presented by the Delegation of Uruguay)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 11/12

Informe del Presidente del Subcomité de la Mujer Portuaria (Presentado por la Delegación de República Dominicana) / Report from the Chair of the Subcommittee on Women in Ports (Presented by the Delegation of Dominican Republic)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 12/12

Informe del Presidente del Subcomité de Protección Ambiental Portuaria (Presentado por la Delegación de Venezuela) / Report from the Chair of the Subcommittee on Environmental Port Protection (Presented by the Delegation on Venezuela)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 13/12

Informe de la Revista CIP / Report of the CIP Magazine

E

I

CECIP/doc. 14/12

Informe de Plan piloto de nuevos procedimientos para la gestión y cumplimiento de tareas del Comité y Subcomités del CECIP / Pilot Plan of new procedures for tasks management and compliance with the tasks of the Committee and Subcommittees of the CECIP


E

I

CECIP/doc. 15/12

Estado del Programa Portuario Especial de la CIP 2011 / Status of the CIP Special Port Program 2011


Textual

CECIP/doc. 16/12


Propuesta de la Secretaría “Lineamientos para una Visión Estratégica de la Comisión Interamericana de Puertos: Fortaleciendo la Cooperación Interamericana en el Desarrollo Portuario Sostenible para la Prosperidad” / Proposal of the Secretariat “Guidelines for a Strategic Vision of the Inter-American Committee on Ports: Strengthening Hemispheric Cooperation in Sustainable Port Development for Prosperity”

E

I

CECIP/doc. 17/12


Plan de Acción de Lima 2012-2013 /Proposal of Lima Action Plan 2012-2013

E

I

CECIP/doc. 18/12


Propuesta de Presupuesto de la CIP 2012-2013 / Proposal of CIP Budget 2012-2013

E

I

CECIP/doc. 19/12

Informe Final: Seminario de Ventanilla Unica, Logistica y Competitividad (Fortaleza, Brasil) / Final Report: Seminar on Single Window, Logistics and Competitiveness (Fortaleza, Brazil)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 20/12

Informe final: XVI Curso Iberoamericano de Gestión Portuaria (Madrid, España) / Final Report: XVI Iberoamerican Course On Port Management (Madrid, Spain)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 21/12

Informe final: Primera Conferencia Hemisférica sobre Cabotaje (Campeche, México) / Final Report: First Hemispheric Conference on Regional Short Sea Shipping (Campeche, Mexico)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 22/12

Informe final: Seminario: Curso de Gestión Portuaria (Lima, Perú) / Final Report Course in Port Management (Lima, Peru)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 23/12

Informe final: V Curso de Gestión de Terminales Portuarias / Final Report: V Course on Port Terminals Management

E

I

CECIP/doc. 24/12


Modificaciones Propuestas al Reglamento de la Comisión Interamericana de Puertos (CIP) / Draft Amendments to the Rules of Procedure fo the Inter-American Committe on Ports (CIP)

E

I

CECIP/doc. 25/12

Lista de Participantes / List of Participants

Textual

CECIP/doc. 26/12

Informe Final / Final Report

E

I



1 Título registrado en el idioma original.

2 E= español, I=inglés, F= francés, P= portugués




Compartir con tus amigos:


La base de datos está protegida por derechos de autor ©bazica.org 2019
enviar mensaje

    Página principal