Failure to prescreen air freight could mean added costs, delays
An Aug. 1 deadline looms for screening all U.S. cargo carried in passenger aircraft. If more shippers don't sign on to the government's prescreening program, chaos could ensue.
Mark Solomon joined DC VELOCITY as senior editor in August 2008, and was promoted to his current position on January 1, 2015. He has spent more than 30 years in the transportation, logistics and supply chain management fields as a journalist and public relations professional. From 1989 to 1994, he worked in Washington as a reporter for the Journal of Commerce, covering the aviation and trucking industries, the Department of Transportation, Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court. Prior to that, he worked for Traffic World for seven years in a similar role. From 1994 to 2008, Mr. Solomon ran Media-Based Solutions, a public relations firm based in Atlanta. He graduated in 1978 with a B.A. in journalism from The American University in Washington, D.C.
It is the supply chain equivalent of putting a square peg in a round hole: An industry built on speed of delivery is being forced to stop in mid-process and examine every piece of cargo before it is loaded into the bellies of passenger planes.
Starting Aug. 1, all shipments to be carried on passenger aircraft—3 billion pounds each year moving in U.S. domestic or export commerce—must be screened or physically inspected prior to loading. Compliance with that mandate may prove to be the air-cargo industry's biggest challenge of the post-9/11 era.
Ready or not?
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which oversees the program, said it is prepped for show time. "Both we and the industry are ready" for the Aug. 1 deadline, John Sammon, the Department of Homeland Security's assistant administrator, transportation-sector network management, said at a June 30 congressional hearing. "All segments of the cargo community are prepared, and we expect that [the Aug. 1 transition] will happen with little disruption."
But the industry has yet to walk the walk, and the path is littered with mines. On May 1, TSA announced that the industry had met a key milestone by screening three-fourths of all cargo transported on passenger aircraft. That cargo, however, probably represents the air freight equivalent of "low-hanging fruit."
The remaining 25 percent consists of multiple pieces that are shrink-wrapped on pallets or loaded into containers. Those are expected to be difficult to inspect without disrupting flight schedules and deliveries. The problem is that cargo must be examined at the individual piece level before it goes aboard a plane, and no government-approved technology exists to screen goods in palletized or containerized form. Unless the shipments have been screened before they reach the airport, the carrier will have to break down the pallet or container, examine the cargo, and then rebuild the unit load before moving it onto the aircraft.
In an effort to divide up the screening burden and avoid having mountains of unscreened cargo piling up at airports, the government created what it calls the Certified Cargo Screening Program (CCSP). Under this voluntary initiative, participants certified by the government—shippers, freight forwarders, airlines, and third-party facilities—would be authorized to screen cargo in their custody.
To date, there are 440 government-licensed forwarders enrolled in the program, as well as 60 independent screening facilities—informally known as "car washes"—that are certified to screen the cargo but may not deliver the screened cargo to the airlines.
But shipper enrollment has fallen short of expectations. As of mid-June, the TSA said 237 shippers had registered for the program. That's well below the thousands of shippers agency officials had hoped would be participating by that time.
The industry worries that a lack of significant shipper involvement will lead to chaos. Airlines fear they will be inundated with unscreened cargo that they will be obliged to examine. For their part, freight forwarders are concerned their shipper customers will dump the screening burden on them under the premise that it is part of the forwarders' job description.
Those concerns appear to be justified. A recent survey conducted by the Airforwarders Association found that 70 percent of shippers believe that forwarders should assume the responsibility for screening or inspecting shipments. "It has become very clear that the task of screening is going to fall largely on us," said Brandon Fried, the association's executive director.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) said at the June 30 congressional hearing that shippers' participation would need to increase sixteenfold by Aug. 1 to achieve TSA's goal of having each group bear an equal share of the screening burden. The watchdog agency questioned whether the industry could meet the deadline without the flow of commerce being impeded.
Despite the concerns, the forwarder survey found most respondents "cautiously optimistic" that the industry will be able to manage effectively through the mandate.
Slow on the uptake
Why have shippers been so slow to sign up for CCSP? Some say it's because they have no real inducements to participate. During the June 30 hearing, the GAO noted that shippers have neither regulatory incentives to join the program, which is voluntary, nor economic incentives to do so because the airlines have yet to impose significant screening costs.
Freight forwarder and airline executives call that flawed thinking. As they see it, a shipper's ability to control the screening and inspection of a shipment—rather than having someone else do it for them and risk damaging a fragile, high-value product—should be enough of an economic incentive to enroll in the program.
Shippers would also benefit from prescreening their cargo themselves because it would reduce the risk of having their shipments held up at the airport. Shippers already pay a premium for the speed of air transportation, so they should examine the "opportunity costs" they would incur if their cargo should miss a scheduled flight because the airline couldn't examine it in time, said Ken Konigsmark, senior manager, supply chain & aviation security compliance for the Boeing Co., a large air-freight shipper.
"To the supply chain professional, time is as important as cost," he said.
Art Arway, who heads security for the Americas for Deutsche Post DHL, which owns the world's biggest air forwarder, said shippers are taking a big chance by not joining CCSP and certifying their security processes. "The airlines have said they will accept certified cargo first and then [screen] as they are able," he said. "Shippers will definitely run the risk of missing an airline's cutoff" if their cargo reaches an airport unscreened, he added.
In for a rude awakening
Although some shippers may have hesitated to join CCSP out of concerns about cost, forwarders say such fears are overblown. The cost of participating in the CCSP program varies widely by industry sector, they say, and while forwarders are likely to face significant expense, shippers are apt to get off relatively lightly.
What makes participation so costly for some forwarders is the equipment they have to buy. To accommodate large volumes of cargo, some might end up building stand-alone screening areas, complete with X-ray or explosives trace detection (ETD) machines that identify high-risk cargo. The cost could range from $30,000 to $500,000 per facility, depending on the quantity and sophistication of the equipment, according to Fried of the Airforwarders Association.
At the June 30 hearings, Mike Middleton, executive vice president of Secure Global Logistics, a Houston-based integrated logistics company, told lawmakers that his firm had spent about $400,000 on equipment, staff training, and implementing security measures to comply with the inspection mandate. And the tab can run much higher. Arway said Deutsche Post DHL spent millions of dollars in 2009 to purchase ETD machines after deciding that X-ray equipment produced too many false positives.
Shippers, on the other hand, may not have to go to such lengths. Many shippers already examine their shipments as part of their daily manufacturing processes and have security equipment installed and inspection procedures in place. In some cases, joining the CCSP could be as simple and inexpensive as erecting a fence around an open area and having it designated a certified screening facility, according to Fried.
"Shippers face very little cost in getting certified. The challenge is that they're not registering," he said.
That could be a big mistake. Shippers that haven't registered for the program or made other arrangements to have their freight prescreened could be in for a rude awakening next month, when new fees and requirements kick in. For example, American Airlines on Aug. 1 will double its security charges for goods it is required to screen. It will also add two hours to flight cutoff times for unscreened cargo, meaning the goods must hit American's docks six hours before the flight's scheduled departure, according to Dave Brooks, head of the airline's cargo unit. However, for cargo that has been screened or inspected before it reaches the airport, the airline will keep the four-hour cutoff times and waive the additional screening fees, he said.
Lest anyone think that American's policy is an anomaly, Arway offered a warning. Virtually all U.S. airlines will follow the carrier's lead—if they haven't already, he said.
A tangled web of cargo security rules
The story of air-cargo security is, in reality, two stories.
The first has largely been written. On Aug. 1, all air cargo scheduled to fly from any U.S. airport in the lower decks, or "bellies," of passenger planes must be screened or inspected before being allowed on board. The law covers all domestic cargo as well as export shipments flown by U.S. or foreign-flag carriers.
The second has yet to play itself out. It involves the screening or inspection of cargoes departing foreign airports bound for the United States. It is a complex, tangled affair involving issues of national sovereignty and paranoia. And it may take several years to write.
The 2007 law requiring the screening or inspection of U.S. belly cargo also set an Aug. 1, 2010, deadline for the examination of all air-freighted goods loaded on passenger planes at foreign airports. However, meeting that deadline would prove to be impossible, due to the difficulty in harmonizing multiple security regimes.
Several months ago, administration officials discussed the possibility of setting a Dec. 31, 2010, deadline to meet the mandate. That, too, was quickly withdrawn. At a congressional hearing on June 30, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which oversees the cargo security program, said it would take about three years to achieve 100-percent examination of inbound belly cargo. Currently, about 62 percent of all inbound cargo is being inspected before loading, according to TSA estimates.
For U.S. and foreign governments, the first order of business may be to resolve the "Catch 22" that currently exists in the global security net. Many of the United States' trading partners have supply chain security programs in place. However, they are unwilling to share information about those programs with other countries—including the United States—because of their sensitive nature. The TSA has said that unless it gains access to the details of foreign governments' screening provisions, it cannot determine if they meet U.S. requirements, and thus cannot recognize them.
The back-and-forth between governments means that the international air supply chain may find itself dealing with multiple security programs for some time to come. For example, in the case of cargo flying from Germany to the United States., the goods may be subject to two screening programs, one complying with German requirements, the other meeting the U.S. standards.
TSA and its umbrella agency, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), said they are working with international regulatory bodies like the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as well as individual governments to develop harmonized standards for cargo security. Through cross-sharing of information, DHS and TSA hope to identify nations with security programs with requirements that are similar to the United States'.
TSA also said it is exploring with the Bureau of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) the possibility of using CBP's Automated Targeting System to collect information on inbound cargo before the plane departs the origin airport. TSA said the program will allow it to perform what it called "baseline threshold targeting," enabling it to better identify high-risk cargo that should be subjected to further screening.
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."