100% Scanning Bill, A Misguided Effort?

The legislative law passed by the US government mandating a 100% scanning requirement for all US-bound maritime cargo at all foreign ports is still far from being implemented. The 100% scanning law is a precautionary initiative to prevent a repeat of the 9/11 attack through “bomb in a box” threats that pose as harmless maritime cargo and unknowingly transported by shipping lines into the US. The bill was given a deadline of July 2012.

However, European Union members resolutely refused to commit to 100% scanning at foreign ports, indicating that doing so would: require extensive financial resources, cause delays to necessary maritime trade, divert EU security priorities and become a potential trade barrier. The US law was also expressly unilateral.

Scanning all cargo containers would require efficient container management software that would include non-intrusive imaging software and radiation scanning equipment for large scale operations, sophisticated technologies that are currently unavailable or extremely expensive and unproven.

Instead of the US security law, the EU proposed multi-layered risk management solutions that would have less detrimental effects on global maritime transport and trade compared to the 100% scanning law.

EU suggested improving the integrity of all cargo and freight containers throughout the whole transport cycle. This would require shipping solutions software that improved worldwide supply chain security for all international maritime freight transports.

Even as the deadline approaches, the CBP (Customs and Border Protection) and DHS (Department of Homeland Security) are still resisting implementation of the mandate, stating that the bill is a “misguided” effort and that implementing it was not feasible.