Marine Log - July 2008 - (Page 6)

Nick Blenkey Senior Editorial Consultant Second Thoughts Congress boxes itself in he Congress, if it chose to, could repeal the law of gravity. That doesn’t mean we would all float into the air. The same thing with container security. The Congress, in its wisdom, has legislated that all containers destined for the U.S. be scanned prior to loading at the port of origin by July 1, 2012 (the legislation requires scanning for content as well as radioactive material). That is just not going to happen unless we either: 1. Accept a huge reduction in the number of international ports from which the U.S. accepts boxes; or 2. Allow “pretend scanning” by dubious people who may or may not have done a proper job. The Senate was pretty much told this at a hearing last month, but none of the witnesses was so impolite as to say straight out that the goal of 100% scanning is unattainable. If they had done so, it would probably been dismissed as yet another example of Bush Administration incompetence. The problem is, of course, that scanning of containers at foreign ports is largely a process beyond the control of any U.S. administration, competent or less so. The GAO has identified challenges in nine areas that are related to the continuation of the Secure Freight Initiative cargo chain security pilot program and the longer-term 100% scanning requirement: 1) Workforce planning: The SFI pilot program could generate an increased quantity of scan data. More CBP officers will be required to review and analyze data for participating ports. T 2) Host nation examination practices: The SAFE Port and 9/11 Acts require DHS to develop standards for the scanning systems, but CBP lacks information on host nation equipment and practices. 3) Measuring performance: CBP has had difficulties defining performance measures for its container security programs; therefore, it will be difficult to assess if 100% scanning achieves increased security. 4) Resource responsibilities: Neither the SAFE Port Act nor the 9/11 Act specifies whether the U.S. would bear the costs of implementing 100% scanning. 5) Logistics: Space constraints can require ports to place scanning equipment miles from where cargo containers are stored, and some containers are only available for scanning for a short period of time and may be difficult to access. 6) Technology and infrastructure: Environmental conditions can damage equipment and cause delays, and infrastructure capacity and equipment compatibility have presented difficulties in the SFI pilot program. 7) Use and ownership of data: Legislation specifies that scan data should be available to CBP officials, but the data are often generated and collected by foreign seaports and, in some cases, will require international agreements for transfer to CBP officials. 8) Consistency with risk management: International partners state that 100% scanning is inconsistent with accepted risk management principles and diverts resources away from other security threats. 9) Reciprocity and trade concerns: Foreign governments could call for reciprocity of 100% scanning, requiring the United States to scan cargo containers, and some view this requirement as a barrier to trade. Separately, the World Customs Organization last month released the findings of an independent study it commissioned by the University of Le Havre. This study finds that while scanning technology is expected to be up to the challenge by the U.S. target date of 2012, and some of the larger and more advanced ports could be ready for implementation, there are many unknown factors that may hinder the application or effectiveness of the legislation. The cost of infrastructure and equipment, port risk management, hiring and training staff, the ability to monitor, interpret and assess every image in a timely manner, are some the areas identified as problematic. Due to these complex factors the effectiveness of applying the blanket approach of 100% scanning to ensure the security of shipments is questionable, the study shows. The WCO says it will “focus on engaging its Members and other Customs and trade stakeholders in order to explore various options that will enable the WCO to offer the U.S. positive counter-proposals that will meet its needs and result in the 100% scanning legislation being repealed.” It will be a tough sell. nblenkey@sbpub.com 6 MARINE LOG JULY 2008 www.marinelog.com http://www.crowley.com http://www.marinelog.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Marine Log - July 2008

Marine Log - July 2008 Contents Editorial Second Thoughts Update Inside Washington Coastal Shipping Communications Paints & Coatings WISTA’s Jeanne Grasso Showcase Newsmakers Tech News Contracts Events Website Directory ML Buyer's Guide ML Marketplace Tech Talk Gulf Coast Headliner

Marine Log - July 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.