Skip navigation
sponsored by 

New port-screening requirement divides D.C.

All U.S.-bound ships must be inspected; some argue law will disrupt trade

Image: L.A. port
A patrol boat guards the Port of Los Angeles in July. A new law sets a five-year deadline for inspecting 100 percent of U.S.-bound ships, but acknowledges the technology may not be ready to do so.
Damian Dovarganes / AP
Video: Security  
Col. Jack Jacobs asks: 'If not know, when?'
Oct. 10: Retired Col. Jack Jacobs talks about his new memoir, "If not know, when?" as well as the strain this financial crisis will have on the wars the U.S. is fighting in the Middle East.

  Economy in Turmoil
Gut Check America

Has your job been affected by the economic turmoil gripping the U.S.? Click here to share your story.

  Photo features  
  More
Curfew Imposed In Kashmir Ahead Of Independence Protest
Getty Images
  The Week in Pictures
From celebrations to curfew, people around the world share their moments.
Image: Resdients in a tent city for the homeless
Getty Images
PhotoBlog
View and discuss the pictures and issues that caught our eyes.
updated 6:40 p.m. ET Aug. 23, 2007

WASHINGTON - The specter of a nuclear bomb, hidden in a cargo container, detonating in an American port has prompted Congress to require 100 percent screening of U.S.-bound ships at their more than 600 foreign starting points.

The White House and shippers maintain that the technology for scanning 11 million containers each year doesn’t exist, and say the requirement could disrupt trade. Current procedures including manifest inspections at foreign ports and radiation monitoring in U.S. ports are working well, they contend.

Nonetheless, President Bush earlier this month signed the measure into law, praising its shift of funds to states and cities at higher risk of terrorism attack and saying he will work with lawmakers to ensure the cargo screening provisions don’t impede commerce.

Story continues below ↓
advertisement

Scanning containers at their point of origin in other countries is a highlight of that law, intended to fulfill recommendations of the 9/11 Commission for safeguarding the United States from terrorist attack. It sets a five-year deadline for having the system in place but — recognizing the technology might not be ready — gives the Homeland Security secretary the authority to extend that deadline by two-year increments.

“If a terrorist manages to conceal a weapon of mass destruction in a shipping container, it must be discovered long before that container reaches our shore,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in support of the measure.

Reward higher than cost, Democrat argues
Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., a chief proponent, said the costs and complexity involved in the new system pale beside the devastating effect of a nuclear attack launched from a big city port. “The truth is, we cannot afford not to do it.”

The White House issued a statement strongly opposing the scanning requirement, saying it was “neither executable nor feasible.” Opponents warned that it could cause huge backlogs at the nation’s seaports, which handle some 95 percent of goods coming into the country.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff says “it would be wonderful” if all containers were inspected before they left foreign ports. “But it’s got to be done in a way that reflects reality and also reflects the fact that we’re not the only players in this pool.”

Industry groups that lobbied against the 100 percent screening asked whether Congress intends to cut off trade with small-volume ports that can’t install the needed technology. They also warn of foreign governments retaliating by requiring U.S. ports to set up the same inspection regimen.

“You have to have the permission of all these foreign points,” said James Carafano, a defense expert at the Heritage Foundation. “There are a lot of people around the world who are going to be really teed off about this.”

White House approach
The Bush administration argues that its current risk-based, layered approach to port security is a success. That approach has several main components:

  • Under the Container Security Initiative, teams from Customs and Border Protection now review manifests at some 50 ports covering more than 80 percent of the container cargo shipped to the United States. Containers identified as high risk are subjected to X-ray and radiation scanning. Markey argues that this is nothing more than a paperwork check that relies on descriptions of content supplied by shippers. Less than 5 percent of containers get scanned, and only a fraction of those are opened up and inspected.
  • Homeland Security, together with Customs and Border Protection, has set a goal of screening, by the end of 2007, close to 100 percent of all containers entering the country by sea for radiological and nuclear material, using what are called Radiation Portal Monitors.
  • Under a pilot program called the Secure Freight Initiative, created in a port security bill passed last year, Homeland Security is testing high-volume scanning at six ports in Pakistan, Honduras, Britain, Oman, Singapore and South Korea.

The program should give some indication of the practicality of the 9/11 Act provision, which requires containers to undergo both a radiation check and a scan with nonintrusive imaging such as X-rays that might locate highly enriched uranium or other materials that don’t emit a lot of radiation.

Homeland Security’s Domestic Nuclear Detection Office also plans to award up to $1.2 billion over the next five years to develop and acquire a next generation radiation monitor for land and sea cargo known as Advanced Spectroscopic Portals.


  MORE FROM SECURITY  
  
Security Section Front
 
Add Security headlines to your news reader:
 

Sponsored links

Resource guide

Get Your 2008 Credit Score

Find a business to start

Try for Free

Search Jobs

Find Your Dream Home

$7 trades, no fee IRAs

Find your next car