In the September 7th edition of the Financial Times we were treated to this slant:

“ARLINGTON, VA – PRNewswire – In a letter to every member of the Senate, the Supply Chain Security Coalition today called for passage of strong port security legislation, but expressed the united opposition of the business community and key stakeholders in the supply chain to so-called ‘100 percent scanning’ amendments, calling such amendments unrealistic, a diversion of resources, and potentially damaging to the U.S. and global economies. The Coalition represents some of the largest and most knowledgeable stakeholders in the supply chain system, including the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA).

“The Senate debate, expected to begin today, follows passage in May of cargo and port security legislation, the SAFE Ports Act (H.R. 4954), by the House of Representatives by a vote of 421-2.

“‘RILA and other Coalition members hope that the Senate bill closely resembles the House bill. We took an active role in advocating for the final House bill that builds on the multi-layered, risk assessment model currently used by the Department of Homeland Security and which has worked to keep our ports safe for the past several years,’ explained Allen Thompson, RILA’s vice president for supply chain policy.

“‘At the same time, our letter outlines the strong opposition to unrealistic 100 percent scanning proposals,’ continued Thompson. ‘Amendments advocating such proposals could potentially decrease security by forcing containers to sit for extended periods of time, putting them at greater risk of tampering, and would divert resources away from the current successful risk assessment approach. In addition, such a mandate has the potential to significantly impede the flow of commerce and damage the U.S. and global economy.

“The letter from the coalition states, ‘According to the World Shipping Council, when the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP) currently scans questionable cargo, it takes 1-3 days to release that container back into the stream of commerce. With 11 to 12 million containers entering the U.S. every year, it is obvious that a mandate of 100 percent scanning has the potential to do significant damage to the flow of goods and to the U.S. economy.

“The letter calls on the Senate to authorize further additional testing and evaluation of scanning technology …”

You read that right. The letter stated that “… it takes 1-3 days to release that container back into the stream of commerce.” When our patented system is in place there would be no need to remove any container from the stream of commerce. Our system assures uninterrupted 100% scanning of containers, with existing technology, and would, in fact, obviate “further additional testing and evaluation of scanning technology”. [Besides, if RILA is so sure we don’t need 100% scanning, why are they recommending “further additional testing and evaluation of scanning technology”?]