GovernmentExecutive.com

A panel of port and cargo security experts on Monday discussed the challenges associated with dramatically increasing the amount of cargo bound for the United States that is scanned for weapons of mass destruction, and whether doing so makes sense.

Technology does not exist to guarantee that all cargo can be scanned in a timely and cost-efficient manner, experts said during a congressional briefing sponsored by Sen. Lincoln Chaffee, R-R.I., a member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

A senior aide to the panel's investigations subcommittee chairman, Norm Coleman, R-Minn., said it is not clear what the best solution is for ensuring that weapons of mass destruction are not slipped into the United States through cargo. The subcommittee recently concluded a three-year investigation that found major security gaps in cargo and port security.

The aide, who asked to remain anonymous, noted that the Homeland Security Department is developing advanced spectroscopic portals to scan cargo. "We're not sure when that's going to happen or if the technology is going to be there," the aide said.

The aide also highlighted a system used in the port of Hong Kong that scans all cargo moving through two lanes. But the aide said there are limitations to that system, such as no standard operating procedures.

Additionally, the Customs and Border Protection division does not review all images that the system generates. "There's a very real question as to whether CBP has the ability to look at all the images going through the system," the aide said.

The aide added that the cost of the system and who would pay for it remains unknown. It is unclear if trying to scan all cargo would affect trade with other countries. "There's a lot of questions out there." The aide said Coleman is not endorsing any specific scanning technology.

Elaine Dezenski, a former Homeland Security acting secretary for policy, said industry is being driven to develop new scanning technology by the belief that trade lanes will remain open in the aftermath of a terrorist incident to the cargo supply chain.

She said the government needs a system that can be "dialed up" or "dialed down" in security depending on threat and risk levels. She cautioned, however, that all stakeholders in the cargo and port security sector need to understand their responsibilities and the procedures for resuming trade if there is an incident.

She added that the government has to balance security concerns with the need for trade. "I'm not sure that we've come to the right solution on that," she said.

COMMENTS

• As it always seems to be with these stories, no matter where they might occur, there's never any testimony or comments reported from the men and women who actually use this equipment at the ports of entry. These "experts" have never dealt with the pressures (both internal and external) that go with trying to maintain a secure environment when the "business interests" must be kept satisfied. GovExec.com reader Posted June 16, 2006 9:30 PM
• Experts. Again here with port security, always part of the problem but never part of the solution. Meanwhile in Hong Kong, every day, every package and container . . . scanned. But of course that would be expensive and, as on Sept. 11 minus one, nothing's happened yet. Face it -- we just do not do pre-need planning. Here's a neutral sort of an example: The Denver Airport. Oh, it's too far away, it'll never be used, what we got is fine, it's way too big, the new baggage system won't work, it's way too expensive, etc. Look at it now. Dulles was exactly the same way and I would have cited that, but I was afraid that even Denver would challenge the memory of the reader. Richard Tedrow Posted June 13, 2006 2:01 AM