NRF slams SOS container scanning bill

NRF slams SOS container scanning bill    The National Retail Federation on Monday urged a congressional committee to reject legislation that would require 'scanning' of all cargo bound for U.S. ports, saying the term was not adequately defined and that the proposal could result in costly delays that would harm the nation's economy.
   'Efforts to require 100 percent scanning of U.S.-bound containers are operationally infeasible and would likely cause unacceptably high economic costs and disruptions to the nation's commerce,' said Steve Pfister, NRF senior vice president for government relations, in a letter to House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King, R-N.Y.
   H.R. 4899, the Sail Only if Scanned Act, or SOS Act, sponsored by Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., would require that 100 percent of cargo containers bound for U.S. ports be 'scanned' in foreign ports before being loaded on vessels headed to the United States. The measure is expected to be offered as an amendment to H.R. 4954, the Security and Accountability for Every Port Act or SAFE Port Act, sponsored by Rep. Daniel Lungren, R-Calif., during consideration by the Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday.
   The World Shipping Council outlined similar concerns with the bill in a letter to King last week.
   In the letter, NRF noted that the Nadler bill does not define the word scan, which could mean any number of things — a scan using X-ray equipment, a full gamma ray scan such as the Vehicle and Cargo Inspection System, or the Integrated Container Inspection System used in Hong Kong.
   The bill does not detail who would perform the scans and provide results to the Department of Homeland Security, does not address who would pay for the equipment required and its operation, and does not address health concerns for port workers if gamma ray inspections are used.
   'Supporters of the legislation often cite the success of the ICIS program in Hong Kong, but NRF argued that the program relies on business practices and investments made by Hong Kong terminal operators,' NRF said in a press release. 'The same practices and investments may not be practical at smaller, less prosperous ports in other nations.'
   Pfister's letter said that ports in Southeast Asia are particularly lacking the resources to handle Hong Kong-like inspections.
   'Efforts to unilaterally impose a similar scanning requirement at all foreign ports that process U.S.-bound cargo could lead to crippling delays because of lack of resources and capabilities among various ports,' Pfister wrote. Feeder ports such as those in Vietnam, Southeast and South-Central Asia and those in Africa 'simply do not possess the capacity to scan and screen large numbers of containers because of physical limitations and lack of resources,' Pfister wrote.
   If containers cannot be scanned at feeder ports, the legislation could effectively require that they be unloaded off a vessel, scanned and reloaded at major ports such as Hong Kong or Singapore before heading to the United States, NRF said.