Is Maritime Security too Important to be Left to Professionals?

Aug 05, 2010, 1:19AM EST
Congress goes its own haphazard way

And so it goes, with politicians second guessing maritime professionals. This week's example is brought by House members Bennie Thompson, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Edward Markey and Jerrold Nadler, who are not exactly known for keeping up with maritime technology and developments.
They have given Homeland Security boss Janet Napolitano until August 17 to say why scanning of all containers cannot be done by July 2012. Their demand is actually more specific that that – detailed reasons have to be given for each of the hordes of foreign ports covered by the 2007 congressional directive.
“For the past three years, we have waited for DHS to take concrete steps to implement this provision, or alternatively propose legislation to amend the law. Neither has happened. We remain concerned about the significant homeland security risk to our nation as a result of the department’s continued inability to articulate a path forward in this important area.”
Nadler adds to this and brings in The Almighty to make his point. "I am extremely concerned that the Department of Homeland Security is dragging its feet and making insufficient efforts to meet the 2012 deadline for 100 percent cargo scanning, as mandated by Congress. If the mandate is postponed or, God forbid, ignored altogether, we are faced with the ongoing threat of a catastrophic breach of security in American ports. Despite the possibility that terrorists could smuggle nuclear, chemical or biological weapons into the country, we currently scan only a pittance of the millions of shipping containers entering our ports each year."
What puzzles industry insiders is that no concession is made for the somewhat pertinent fact that the X-ray scanning technology needed to zap all the 20 million containers coming into the country each year is not yet available.
Two bills have been proposed that recognize this, one that would allow “non-intrusive imaging equipment” or “radiation detection equipment” (rather than both, as presently stipulated) and pushing the start date to 2015; while the other suggests a risk-based approach. “The bill would eliminate the deadline for X-raying 100 percent of containers if the secretary of Homeland Security certifies the effectiveness of individual security measures [using] a layered security approach,” says the bill, which is backed by the American Association of Port Authorities.
Of course, it is too much to ask to get Bennie Thompson to get the lowdown from the maritime industry.
 
Report abuse



Bookmark this page to:Add to Faves Add to MyAOL Add to Simpy Add to Delicious Add to Live Add to Digg Add to Newsvine Add to Reddit Add to Multiply Add to Blogmarks Add to Yahoo MyWeb Add to Slashdot Add to Mister Wong Add to Spurl Add to Furl Add to Link-a-Gogo Add to Yahoo Bookmarks Add to Twitter Add to Facebook Add to Diigo Add to Mixx Add to Segnalo Add to StumbleUpon Add to Magnolia Add to Ask Add to Backflip Add to Terchnorati Add to Google Bookmarks Add to MySpace

Comments
Blog post currently doesn't have any comments.

Sign in

Latest blog comments

5/22/2012

Bob Condon
Joseph has hit the nail on the head, politics seem to overr...

5/16/2012

Colin Henthorne
Thanks for your response, Dennis. You are correct that the...

5/16/2012

Dennis Bryant
From its commissioning until 1957, the LABRADOR was a ship ...

5/15/2012

Colin Henthorne
LABRADOR was decommissioned in 1962. In 1987, as a Coast G...

5/11/2012

CAPT SANDEEP KALIA
Dear Editor, Compliments for a very well written article...

5/7/2012

Murray Goldberg
Hey John - I think you tried to give me your e-mail address...

5/7/2012

John Douglas
email address

5/2/2012

Martin Rushmere
I must add a clarification to this. I am referring to the a...

5/1/2012

Dennis Bryant
John, You are swimming against the tide. Dennis

5/1/2012

Murray Goldberg
John - thank you so much! Incredibly we are approaching 130...