COAC Subcommittee's Report to DHS on Performance Standards for a "Smart" Shipment Concept (Part III)

As part of its deliberations on "secure systems of international intermodal transportation," the MTSA Subcommittee was requested by DHS to consider the issue of performance standards for a "smart" container concept, as well as specific questions regarding deployment, cost-benefit considerations, and whether such standards should serve as a security baseline or should be considered as part of a voluntary or incentive based approach (i.e., as part of the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) or otherwise).

This is Part III of a multi-part series of summaries of the MTSA Subcommittee's report on its recommendations, and covers a portion "Deliverable 2: Secure Systems of Intermodal Transportation" regarding container security "smart" shipment technology.

(See ITT's Online Archives or 11/04/04 and 11/05/04 news, 04110405, and 04110510, for Parts I and II on the report.)

"Smart" Shipments (Rather than "Smart" Containers) - Recommendations

The MTSA Subcommittee outlined its recommendations of how the "smart" shipment issue should be addressed as follows:

Step 1. Seal verification should be required, "Smart" technologies not ready to be broadly deployed. As advocated in the MTSA Subcommittee proposal on seal verification, the government should require that all containerized cargo imported into the U.S. be subject to the proposed seal verification process. "Smart" technologies are not ready to be deployed in broad commercial practice in the near term. The debate on new technologies should not delay the implementation of measures to enhance the present state of in-transit container security.

Step 2. "Smart" Container Security Device (CSD) vision must be defined:

With respect to defining such a vision, the Subcommittee notes that:

A container cannot be made "smart" by simply adding a device to it and that the "smart shipment" system must address the characteristics of a particular shipment and the terminology should refer to "smart" shipments, not "smart" containers.

Shipper, importer and technology interest in "smart" shipments all involve shipment information that is detailed and proprietary, and outside the knowledge and control of the carrier.

It is not practicable to outfit 17 million plus containers with such "smart" systems.

The shippers interested in the "smart" shipment are either shippers of high value or very time sensitive goods. Not every shipper will want to incur the cost and implement the procedures necessary for a "smart" shipment. Different shippers will have different needs.

The government's interest in the "smart" shipment should be to test and deploy such systems on a significant scale, and to use the "smart " shipment to provide further definition and meaning to C-TPAT's "green lane" treatment. "Smart" shipments should get "green lane" treatment.

"Smart" Shipment - Outline of Suggested Standard

The MTSA Subcommittee states that to accommodate all these needs, it outlines in detail what it believes could be a "smart " shipment standard. Highlights of this suggested standard are as follows:

A "smart" shipment involves a cargo-centric device applied to a particular shipment by a C-TPAT shipper at its discretion that does not require a network of geographically fixed readers at numerous locations around the world, but instead is read globally by satellite or wireless technology.

The information system shall include the shipper's very specific cargo details, detection of entry into the container via any of the container's six sides, etc.

The information service centers that receive the data transmissions from "smart" shipments will provide the data to the shipper, not the carrier.

The government must determine what information events that are produced by the device, if any, that it wants to be notified of as a matter of course, and in what situations it is acceptable for the shipper or its agents to investigate and address any information events that arise.

The information service centers must meet standards acceptable to the government (perhaps a new C-TPAT category).

Because the reading of the devices is done remotely and not by the party with custody of the container, the carrier will not know, nor need to know, which shipments are "smart."

Carriers would be required to perform seal verification on all containers before vessel loading and the shipper must inform Customs which shipments are equipped with "smart" technology, so that any favored "green lane" treatment resulting from the device could be provided to such shipments.

The devices are not permanent parts of the container, but are recycled.

(¹ COAC's MTSA Implementation Subcommittee was formed at the request of DHS to advise it on the implementation of its obligations under MTSA in three areas of concern:

1. Performance standards for the physical security of intermodal containers;
2. Development and implementation of the "secure systems of transportation" mandate; and
3. Quantitative performance metrics to measure the success of specific DHS cargo security programs and to guide future efforts.)

The Subcommittee reported at the September 2004 COAC meeting that they were able to complete work (and issue this report) on only the first two (of the above three) areas of concern, to date.)

See ITT"s Online Archives or 09/21/04 news, 04092110, for previous BP summary regarding the September 10, 2004 COAC meeting.

See ITT's Online Archives or 07/20/04 news, 04072020, for previous BP summary regarding COAC's MTSA Implementation Subcommittee.

COAC's MTSA Implementation Subcommittee report and full COAC committee comments available by emailing documents@brokerpower.com.