U.S. Rep. Hahn renews call for 100 percent cargo container scanning

By Jeff Berman, Group News Editor
November 11, 2015

While a focus on 100 percent container scanning has faded into the background to a degree in recent years, that by no means suggests it is gone and forgotten either.

That was made clear by U.S. Representative Janice Hahn (D-CA) at a late October House hearing on the prevention and response to a dirty bomb attack at a U.S. port in which she called for 100 percent scanning of cargo at U.S. ports.

“When people ask me what keeps me up at night? A dirty bomb at the Port of Los Angeles,” said Hahn at the hearing. “Since 9/11, our nation has strengthened aviation security but our ports have not received the same scrutiny and remain incredible vulnerable to what could be a devastating attack.”

Even though 100 percent scanning was mandated by Congress in 2006 as part of the SAFE Port Act, Hahn said that only 3 percent of cargo is currently being scanned today even though dirty bombs may be smuggled into ports on cargo containers on ships.

The 100 percent container scanning mandate requires U.S.-bound maritime cargo containers to be scanned by radiation detective equipment and non-intrusive imaging systems at foreign ports prior to the cargo being loaded onto a vessel, as per the language in the SAFE Port Act. The bill added that this law is designed to prevent radiological and nuclear terrorism by denying terrorists the ability to transport radiological/nuclear weapons via one of the more than 12 million maritime containers that enter the U.S. annually from more than 800 global ports. This mandate initially directed DHS to have 100 percent scanning implemented by 2012 while authorizing DHS to extend the deadline for two years and renew the extension in additional two-year increments if at least two of six statutory conditions existed.

At the October hearing, Dr. Gregory Canavan, Senior Fellow, Los Alamos Laboratories, said that while even though it has been said that 100 percent scanning would be too time-consuming, technologies could be implemented that would not impede the flow of commerce.

And to that end Rep. Hahn has introduced legislation entitled the SCAN Act, which calls for a pilot program for 100 percent scanning and test its practicality at two United States-based ports. She explained that there is a major need for this as major U.S. ports are vulnerable because they lack a recovery plan in the event of an attack and without a recovery plan, she explained at attacked port could be out of commission for a long period and heighten the impact on the economy and make a targeted port a more appealing terrorism target.

While container scanning is Congressionally mandated under the SAFE Port Act, it remains less than welcome by supply chain stakeholders.

This was evident in a June 2014 letter from 70 organizations, including distributors, farmers, importers, manufacturers, retailers, transportation and logistics providers, and wholesalers, to Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson. The letter, which was spearheaded by the National Retail Federation, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the World Shipping Council, praised a letter Secretary Johnson penned to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs Chairman Tom Carper, which included his decision to renew the extension of the deadline for full-scale implementation of 100 percent scanning of U.S.-bound maritime cargo containers for another two years.

“DHS finds that in 2014, the conditions and supporting evidence cited in in the 2012 deadline extension continue to prevail and preclude full scale implementation of the provision at this time,” wrote Johnson. “[T]he use of systems that are available to scan containers would have a negative impact on trade capacity and the flow of cargo. Additionally, systems to scan containers cannot be purchased, deployed, or operated at ports overseas because ports do not have the physical characteristics to install such a system.”

Johnson added that after a review of the nation’s current port security and DHS’s short term and long term ability to comply with 100 percent scanning equipment that DHS’s ability to fully comply with the unfunded mandate of 100 percent scanning is highly improbable, hugely expensive, and not the best use of taxpayer resources to meet port security and homeland security needs.

Among the alternative action items he has instructed DHS to do for complying with the mandate’s underlying objectives are: increase scanning abroad; improve targeting; engage stakeholders; and address other political vulnerabilities.

The letter sent to Johnson fully endorsed the current risk-based strategy employed by DHS, saying it is the “right approach to enhance global supply chain security,” adding that “Congress needs to repeal the mandate and focus on practical supply chain security solutions.”

It also pointed out that the container scanning provision is impractical and does not improve security, and were it to be implemented it would have a very negative impact on global commerce and create conflict with the governments of foreign trading partners, many that have voiced opposition to the requirement in the past.

NRF Vice President for Supply Chain and Customs Policy Jon Gold said in a previous interview that this mandate is replete with challenges that make it very difficult to put it into place.

“We think more emphasis needs to be placed on the risk-based approach DHS has in place right now,” he said. “It is a better way to go when looking at supply chain security. There are no 100 percent guarantees, but the risk-based approach is the best one. We believe the mandate should be repealed so we can focus on the real issues and gaps in supply chain security and address them.”

Industry stakeholders have told LM that CBP, the trade community, and virtually all foreign governments agree that 100 percent scanning of containers coming in to the U.S. is a bad idea, citing how the technology is expensive and unproven, the volumes are prohibitive, and the global infrastructure is inadequate to implement such an ambitious goal.  They added that it would create a dangerous false sense of security and explained that the layering of risk based and flexible methods like CSI, C-TPAT, and ISF are the most effective way to address the very real and ever-changing risks within the global supply chain.

Albert Saphir, president of Bradenton, Fla.-based ABS Consulting, said that while Hahn’s legislation does not have bad intentions, from a practical perspective the 100 percent screening of inbound cargo would bring commerce to a complete stop, coupled with the costs to the U.S. economy being massive. He added that the risk-based approach that the U.S. government is deploying seems to be working fairly well, with the caveat that it will never be perfect.