A practical solution to an impractical screening problem

When it comes to the screening and inspection of cargo, U.S.-based airfreight forwarders have become experts on the topic and its challenges. Physically screening 100 percent of air cargo on passenger flights to and from all U.S. airports has been one of the most monumental achievements in aviation since the Sept. 11 tragedies of 15 years ago. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), working under legislation that allowed the use of multiple methods, enlisted the industry to execute the enormous Congressional mandate of inspecting each piece of airfreight before departure.

While the effort has been successful, forwarders, along with their shippers and airline partners, learned many lessons in the costly screening of the comparatively small amount of cargo shipped on passenger flights. For maritime containers, however, the task is far more challenging.

In May of this year, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a request for information to solicit recommendations on how to meet the underlying objective of a 2006 law – the Security and Accountability for Every Port at 2006 (SAFE Port Act) – mandating 100 percent scanning of maritime containers bound for the United States. The act mandated a full implementation date by 2012, but that deadline has been extended every two years and remains unfulfilled despite some Capitol Hill lawmakers refusing to accept the same technical realities, which are as true today as they were 10 years ago.

In fact, since the SAFE mandate, only 3 percent of all maritime cargo is actually examined at the port of origin before sailing to the United States. Technology, in its current state, cannot practically perform the task on the 11 million maritime containers coming to our shores annually. Depending on this inefficient and impractical technology would slow the flow of global commerce and hurt our economy while not necessarily meeting the legislative objective of enhancing port security.

Recently, U.S. Representative Janice Hahn of California called for 100 percent scanning of maritime containers before they arrive in American ports, citing the risk of devices such as “dirty bombs” being smuggled into ports on ships. We agree with this concern, but scanning all containers, while seemingly simple, is an impractical approach to a complex challenge.

The National Retail Federation recently drafted a letter signed by almost 100 U.S. manufacturers, farmers, wholesalers, retailers, importers, agribusiness, distributors, and transportation and logistics providers, who expressed their support of the DHS decision to renew, for another two years, the extension of the deadline once again. The letter, also signed by the Airforwarders Association, expressed the belief that Congress needs to re-evaluate the SAFE Port Act’s 100 percent scanning mandate and focus on practical supply chain security solutions.

The screening of air cargo can be a time-consuming process because the technology used has not significantly advanced over the past few years. As an example, the TSA still has neither vetted nor certified a scanner capable of screening aircraft containers and pallets, which are much smaller than their ocean-going cousins and contain multiple commodities. Thousands of pieces must be screened individually in a tedious and resource-consuming process. The airfreight screening challenge, however, pales in comparison to the idea of scanning all of the ocean freight containers coming into the U.S.

The DHS, responding to the coalition letter, says it remains committed to advancing the law’s primary objective of protecting the nation against radiological and nuclear threats. While the number of containers physically scanned is low, a far greater percentage is screened using an efficient and practical multilayered, risk-based supply-chain security strategy. The approach employs risk-analysis systems that apply targeting rules to multiple sources of data for each container to determine which ones are high-risk or warrant closer examination.

The National Retail Federation coalition letter further points out that the statutory provisions mandating 100 percent container screening did not address key operational questions. These include the definition of “scanned,” who performs the analysis of each “scan,” who pays the capital cost of the scanning equipment, and whether or not the DHS has consent from foreign governments to implement such a mandatory regime within their sovereign territories. Most important, the letter asks the question about how the U.S. would respond if our trading partners insist on a reciprocal 100 percent scanning requirement for U.S. containerized ports.

Instead of going through this waiver process every two years, now is the time for the administration to recommend to Congress a comprehensive re-evaluation of the 100 percent scanning requirement. As the letter states (and we agree), this will provide a path forward that allows the DHS, industry and our trading partners to focus on real solutions to address any security gaps that remain in the global supply chain. Congress should consider the most important lesson learned from the air cargo industry is that risk-based, multilayered screening – not just dependence on impractical technology – is the most efficient way to keep our nation safe.

Join us for networking and discussion of logistics innovation at Air Cargo World’s new ELEVATE 2016 Conference, Oct. 10, in Miami. Click here for details.