The United States and the European Union were expected Friday to announce an agreement to recognize each other’s air cargo security procedures, putting an end to a costly duplication of security controls on the more than $130 billion in airfreight that crosses the Atlantic from Europe each year.
Under the terms of the accord, which was to take effect immediately, the Transportation Security Administration will accept a set of European rules on the screening of cargo and the maintenance of a secure supply chain for all airlines and freight shippers flying cargo and mail into or through the European Union.
Previously, only five of the 27 members of the bloc — Britain, Finland, France, the Netherlands and Ireland — signed bilateral air cargo security agreements with the United States.
“Airfreight is by definition naturally urgent,” Siim Kallas, the European transport commissioner, said in a statement. “Cutting out the duplication of security procedures will mean huge savings for cargo operators in terms of time and money.”
The debate over how best to screen air cargo for the presence of explosives or other threats dates to the terrorist attacks against the United States on Sept. 11, 2001.
While many American politicians have pushed for physical inspection of every parcel and pallet that enters an aircraft cargo hold — just as security screenings are required for all passengers — the global airfreight industry has argued that such an approach risks paralyzing a business that represents some 40 percent of the value of global trade.
Both the United States and the European Union sharply stepped up their cargo security measures after the Sept. 11 attacks, but the two sides adopted different approaches.
The Transportation Security Administration imposed strict protocols at the last point of departure to the United States — regardless of whether the cargo had been previously screened in another country — and required air carriers to guarantee that the cargo had been screened according to T.S.A. standards.
The European approach has focused on ensuring that cargo, once it has been screened at its point of origin, cannot be tampered with at any point along its route.
In practice, this required air carriers and shipping agents to physically separate cargo bound for the United States in airport warehouses for special processing involving not only duplicate sets of paperwork but also often a requirement that parcels be scanned by two sets of similar X-ray equipment to comply with the technical standards of both systems.
In most cases, the additional compliance costs were passed on to customers in the form of higher shipping rates.
The additional handling procedures also slowed shipping times. The divergence in approach also created expensive headaches after October 2010, when terrorists in Yemen used United Parcel Service and FedEx to try to ship hidden explosives to the United States.
The parcels were intercepted at airport cargo terminals in Britain and Germany. After that incident, the European Union added enhanced screening requirements for all cargo originating in third countries but continued to apply a one-stop screening policy to those goods.
The T.S.A., however, did not accept this approach as equivalent to its own, and airlines were faced with a barrage of emergency amendments to United States procedures. No fewer than 25 such amendments have been issued over the last 18 months, airline industry executives said.
“Carriers were forced to either comply — sometimes on very short notice — or to come up with an alternative procedure,” said Margreet Lommerts, manager for cargo and security at the Association of European Airlines in Brussels.
“It was extremely complicated. And if one airline’s procedure was accepted, it was difficult for others to say that they couldn’t apply it as well.”
Mutual recognition is expected to reduce costs and improve the speed and efficiency of trans-Atlantic shipments of goods ranging from electronic components to perishable foods and medicines.
The agreement comes after the announcement in mid-May that the T.S.A. had set a firm deadline of Dec. 3 for airlines to conduct “100 percent” screening for explosives of all cargo carried on passenger flights bound for the United States.
The mandate — part of a 2007 federal law that already applies to cargo loaded onto domestic flights and to planes leaving the United States — requires all passenger airlines to break down consolidated shipments and pallets to screen individual parcels before they are loaded onto flights headed for the United States.
According to the T.S.A., more than 80 percent of cargo on international passenger flights into the United States is screened, up from around 65 percent two years ago.
Helen Kearns, a spokeswoman for Mr. Kallas, the European transport commissioner, confirmed that the mutual recognition agreement “means that compliance with E.U. security rules also meets the U.S. requirement of 100 percent screening of air cargo.”
In a statement, John S. Pistole, the T.S.A. administrator, hailed the agreement, saying it would “ease the burden on industry” as well as “strengthen security by ensuring that we share information and work together toward our common interests.”
nytimes.com
Under the terms of the accord, which was to take effect immediately, the Transportation Security Administration will accept a set of European rules on the screening of cargo and the maintenance of a secure supply chain for all airlines and freight shippers flying cargo and mail into or through the European Union.
Previously, only five of the 27 members of the bloc — Britain, Finland, France, the Netherlands and Ireland — signed bilateral air cargo security agreements with the United States.
“Airfreight is by definition naturally urgent,” Siim Kallas, the European transport commissioner, said in a statement. “Cutting out the duplication of security procedures will mean huge savings for cargo operators in terms of time and money.”
The debate over how best to screen air cargo for the presence of explosives or other threats dates to the terrorist attacks against the United States on Sept. 11, 2001.
While many American politicians have pushed for physical inspection of every parcel and pallet that enters an aircraft cargo hold — just as security screenings are required for all passengers — the global airfreight industry has argued that such an approach risks paralyzing a business that represents some 40 percent of the value of global trade.
Both the United States and the European Union sharply stepped up their cargo security measures after the Sept. 11 attacks, but the two sides adopted different approaches.
The Transportation Security Administration imposed strict protocols at the last point of departure to the United States — regardless of whether the cargo had been previously screened in another country — and required air carriers to guarantee that the cargo had been screened according to T.S.A. standards.
The European approach has focused on ensuring that cargo, once it has been screened at its point of origin, cannot be tampered with at any point along its route.
In practice, this required air carriers and shipping agents to physically separate cargo bound for the United States in airport warehouses for special processing involving not only duplicate sets of paperwork but also often a requirement that parcels be scanned by two sets of similar X-ray equipment to comply with the technical standards of both systems.
In most cases, the additional compliance costs were passed on to customers in the form of higher shipping rates.
The additional handling procedures also slowed shipping times. The divergence in approach also created expensive headaches after October 2010, when terrorists in Yemen used United Parcel Service and FedEx to try to ship hidden explosives to the United States.
The parcels were intercepted at airport cargo terminals in Britain and Germany. After that incident, the European Union added enhanced screening requirements for all cargo originating in third countries but continued to apply a one-stop screening policy to those goods.
The T.S.A., however, did not accept this approach as equivalent to its own, and airlines were faced with a barrage of emergency amendments to United States procedures. No fewer than 25 such amendments have been issued over the last 18 months, airline industry executives said.
“Carriers were forced to either comply — sometimes on very short notice — or to come up with an alternative procedure,” said Margreet Lommerts, manager for cargo and security at the Association of European Airlines in Brussels.
“It was extremely complicated. And if one airline’s procedure was accepted, it was difficult for others to say that they couldn’t apply it as well.”
Mutual recognition is expected to reduce costs and improve the speed and efficiency of trans-Atlantic shipments of goods ranging from electronic components to perishable foods and medicines.
The agreement comes after the announcement in mid-May that the T.S.A. had set a firm deadline of Dec. 3 for airlines to conduct “100 percent” screening for explosives of all cargo carried on passenger flights bound for the United States.
The mandate — part of a 2007 federal law that already applies to cargo loaded onto domestic flights and to planes leaving the United States — requires all passenger airlines to break down consolidated shipments and pallets to screen individual parcels before they are loaded onto flights headed for the United States.
According to the T.S.A., more than 80 percent of cargo on international passenger flights into the United States is screened, up from around 65 percent two years ago.
Helen Kearns, a spokeswoman for Mr. Kallas, the European transport commissioner, confirmed that the mutual recognition agreement “means that compliance with E.U. security rules also meets the U.S. requirement of 100 percent screening of air cargo.”
In a statement, John S. Pistole, the T.S.A. administrator, hailed the agreement, saying it would “ease the burden on industry” as well as “strengthen security by ensuring that we share information and work together toward our common interests.”
nytimes.com
No comments:
Post a Comment