100% cargo inspection regime becomes a reality

100% cargo inspection regime becomes a reality One hundred percent scanning of ocean containers and air cargo on passenger planes is coming to a foreign port or airport near you.
   Late last week the Senate and House passed by wide margins a uniform bill implementing the unfinished homeland security recommendations of the 9/11 Commission in 2005. Although widely opposed by industry groups, Democrats who now control Congress for the first time in a dozen years were able to act on their charges that the Bush administration and Republican lawmakers had not done enough to protect against terrorists.
   Under the legislation, the Department of Homeland Security must implement a system within five years to scan all cargo at foreign ports for weapons of mass destruction. It could grant two-year extensions to ports that need more time to comply. All cargo booked on passenger planes would have to be scanned within three years. The White House has indicated President Bush will sign the bill.
   Industry groups argued that the scan-all provisions were not actually recommended by the 9/11 Commission and that the technology is not available yet to accommodate fully automated inspection regimes.
   Air cargo, for example, comes in all sorts of sizes and there is no simple machine that easily X-rays all types of shipments.
   In the ocean port environment, DHS is conducting a demonstration program at a handful of overseas ports to test the ability to image contents and scan for radiation on each entering container without causing shipping delays. Many foreign governments and companies are skeptical that the approach will work because it would require humans to analyze the images of thousands of shipments per day — personnel that are not in place today. Simply storing the images for later review, they argue, defeats the objective of screening out threats before arrival.
   The U.S. Chamber of Commerce in a letter to members of the House Friday said the measure “would cripple commerce without significantly improving security.”
   It went on to say that “mandating 100 percent scanning would impose a unilateral mandate on our trading partners, and could result in reciprocal or retaliatory requirements being placed on American exporters. If foreign governments are unable or cannot afford to comply (i.e. less-developed nations) trade with that country would effectively cease.”
   The largest U.S. business organization also objected to a provision that would create government-sanctioned standards for private sector preparedness for natural and man-made disasters. It argued that giving companies flexibility based on their size and business models to implement voluntary best practices based on their unique risk factors is better than a “one size fits all” approach for security and infrastructure protection.
   “The standards approach would in many instances add confusion and regulatory complexity to already-heavily regulated industries,” it said.
   The National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America and the Airforwarders Association said they took heart from language that calls for “screening” rather than automated or physical inspection of air cargo. Expanding the use of explosives trace detection, explosives detection systems and explosives detection canine teams is a better approach than simply relying on X-ray systems, they said. The bill also authorizes the Transportation Security Administration to use a certified shipper program for screening air cargo on passenger planes.
   “We remain concerned about the reality involved in the implementation of such an expansive new program in the amount of time allotted, as well as the lack of appropriated funds by Congress for this effort,” said NCBFAA President Mary Jo Muoio.
   The bill also authorizes new security assessments and measures for freight railroads and trucking as well as increased funding for the Transportation Security Administration’s surface transportation and rail security efforts.
   Congress also required DHS to maintain two databases about critical infrastructure, including a priority list of assets that should be protected.