With the October revelation of a string of parcel bombs originating from Yemen and Greece and sent on cargo jets, various pundits are focused on cargo security and the threat of terrorists’ use of shipping containers as Trojan Horses.
Several major ports in Asia have purchased sophisticated cargo scanners, but continued local concerns about possible radiation exposure have stalled their use.
Our government says less than 1 percent of the 14.5 million containers discharged in our ports are actually scanned for terrorist threats at origin.
We are approaching a July 1, 2012, deadline for 100 percent inspection of cargo from overseas. The “solution” passed by lawmakers is to buy the scanners and place them overseas. Why should the U.S. do this? If an exporting country wants to sell its goods to us, let it provide the scanning and comply with our laws just as it has to comply with many other provisions, such as manifesting, customs declarations and various safety regulations.
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection rule known as 10+2, or the Importer Security Filing regulation, was implemented with the goal of enhancing the profiling and screening of shipments entering the U.S. It requires the collection and reporting of 10 items of data from importers or their agents. There are two mandatory basic reporting timelines that must be followed: The 10 items of data must be submitted at least 24 hours prior to the loading of a vessel; and shipping lines must submit two further items within 48 hours of vessels leaving port and sailing.
Logically, all shipments should be inspected at origin, using available sorting protocols supplemented by scanners. Stepping-up physical inspections at the destination would be akin to passing through airline screening after disembarking from your plane.