Two years after the terrorist attacks of 11 September, is the world about to learn what the implications were for cargo security procedures? Air cargo security has been in limbo since the 11 September attacks. In contrast to the passenger side of the business - where federal screening of baggage became an early priority - or sea freight - where a requirement for information to be provided 24 hours before departure was introduced earlier this year - air cargo policy has remained in confusion.
Indeed, until Admiral James Loy took over at the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in 2002, air cargo managers complained that they had not been consulted on the issue at all.
There are now signs of movement, however. Over the past year, US airline bosses and airport cargo managers have reported that the TSA has been listening, but they still refuse to talk on the record about what is being discussed.
In October, the US Customs and Border Protection Agency was also due to publish a final version of its rules on advanced manifesting, while various bills were going through Congress aimed at providing a legal framework for air cargo security. The rest of the world was watching and waiting to see what Washington would decide.
One initiative the TSA has undertaken is the creation of a centralised database of 'known shippers' - companies which are certified as being regular and bona fide users of air cargo. Since 11 September, all cargo carried in the belly of passenger aircraft must either be from known shippers or be x-rayed. The definition of a known shipper has also been strengthened to include certain standard criteria.
One flaw that remains in the system, however, is that to date certification of known shippers is still carried out by forwarders. Joel Ditkowsky, chairman of the airline committee of the JFK Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association, voices a widespread industry objection to this. 'Forwarders and airlines are not enforcement people,' he says. 'We are not qualified to say who is or is not a security risk.'
Nor, he points out, is it clear what the liability of a forwarder might be if a shipper that it had certified put a bomb on an aircraft. 'All of this should be handled by government agencies,' Ditkowsky says, a move that he hopes 'will happen sometime in my lifetime'.
But the TSA is not the only game in town. Earlier this year, the US Customs agency published what became known as the 'straw man' proposal, suggesting that the contents and origin of all international air cargo shipments should be notified to it 12 hours before take-off in the case of regular cargo, or eight hours for express. The proposal mirrored a 24-hour notification rule that was about to be imposed on sea freight.
Notification uproar
The proposal provoked uproar in the air cargo industry, with express operators in particular saying it would kill their business. Customs withdrew the proposal, but intimated that some kind of prior notification would be necessary. Its compromise idea, published on 23 July, was for notification four hours before arrival for imports and two hours before departure for exports. It is this rule that was expected to be confirmed, after a public consultation period expired, in October.The industry seems to accept that four hours is as good as it is going to get. 'We have a number of concerns around its practical application, but electronic information and profiling is the way forward, so we are happy to work to achieve that,' says Phil Sims, director of cargo at IATA. 'But is this the best system? Time will tell. The devil will be in the detail.'
Some are already pointing out flaws in the proposal. Carl Soller, specialist in customs and trade issues with New York lawyers Hodgson Russ, points out that there is little point in knowing that a shipment is a possible security risk once the aircraft is in the air.
He also questions who will provide the information to customs. 'The suggestion is that forwarders or airlines will submit it, but at present there is no legal obligation on either to supply accurate information. It would make more sense if customs brokers or importers provided the information. They already provide the exact same details to customs prior to the release of shipments on arrival. Rather than re-inventing the wheel, we should just get them to submit it earlier.'
Data consolidation
Not surprisingly, various technology organisations are already thinking about the same problem. Jean-Yves Cap, managing director of Traxon, the Air France and Lufthansa-owned EDI network that links forwarders and airlines in Europe, suggests that it would be the best organisation to consolidate such data. Some of the more detailed manifest data required would come from forwarders, he points out, but it would be airlines that know precise arrival times.
Meanwhile, Cargo 2000, which is looking at process improvements for forwarders and airlines, has approached the US authorities to suggest that it might act as a gatherer of data
But why become mired in all this information? Ed Markey, a Democratic member of the House of Representatives from Massachusetts, thinks there is a simple answer: screen all belly cargo. He describes the known shipper programme as 'the current excuse for allowing commercial cargo to be carried on passenger planes without physical screening'.
To this end, Markey laid down an amendment to the Homeland Security Appropriations Bill now before Congress mandating the x-ray screening of all belly cargo. It was defeated twice, but has now been reintroduced to a separate anti-terrorism measure being considered by the House Intelligence Committee.Markey exemplifies the air cargo industry's worst nightmare. Since 11 September, its biggest fear has been just such a requirement for all belly cargo to be screened. The consensus among air cargo managers is that this would decimate the air cargo industry and bring the high value end of world trade to a grinding halt. Objections include a lack of x-ray equipment that can screen whole pallets or containers, and that investing in such equipment would be hugely expensive. Compulsory x-raying would also radically affect procedures for handling consolidations and transit cargo.
Sims expresses the industry hope that the risk from Markey has been averted. 'There is now a lot more informed opinion that recognises that this is more complex than just asking if we should screen or not,' he says. Set against that is Markey's seeming determination to keep his idea alive, and the fact that in one market at least - Latin American shipments into Miami - all cargo is already x-rayed due to drug concerns.
From the industry's point of view, a more benign bill is S165, the Air Cargo Security Act, or Hutchison Bill, which is going through Congress. A tidying-up exercise which sets down the parameters and deadlines for the TSA's cargo responsibilities, it calls for an enhanced known- shipper programme, and extends security provisions to freighter operators. The bill passed the Senate in May, and is now the subject of discussions between the House and Senate.
Political clout
Sims sees the bill as a good thing, putting pressure on the TSA to act. Soller is not sure either Hutchison or Markey will ever become law. 'I wouldn't be confident either bill will go anywhere in its current form, though I think Hutchison has more political clout,' he says.
When this legal limbo will be resolved is anyone's guess. Meanwhile, the air cargo industry in the rest of the world is left wondering what the final rules will be, and is waiting to implement its own security plans.
Of course, there is also the possibility that a terrorist incident could blow all these proposals out of the water. There was a worrying case in September when a young American air freighted himself from Newark to Dallas, via several cities in the midwest. The incident gave ammunition to legislators such as Markey who suspect that anything could be air freighted anywhere under the current regime. Defenders of the set-up say the incident proved the system works - as a shipment from an unknown shipper, the container the young man hid in was flown on freighters.
If it had been a bomb that blew up an aircraft over an American city, that would have been little comfort, however. But as the USA and the world is slowly learning, balancing security and world trade is no easy task.
PETER CONWAY LONDON
Source: Airline Business
