Friday Night Massacre—TSA Ramps Up Air Cargo Security Demands

     At the IATA World Cargo Symposium in Istanbul, Turkey, held March 7-10, Air Cargo Security was the hot button topic amongst most stakeholders who came to the meetings for dialogue and answers.
     But events in Washington, D.C. may have conspired to make discussion of security much like the wild weather over Turkey this week; everybody talks about it, but no one has the ability to do much to effect the inevitable outcome.
     On the eve of WCS, apparently just to make things interesting, TSA sent out another “Emergency Amendment” (EA) to international airlines consisting of some new cargo screening rules and regulations. The amendment indicated some major changes in TSA Cargo security rules going into effect as you read this on March 10, 2011.
     Some carriers received the announcement late last Friday afternoon, March 4, and early Saturday morning.
     “Over the weekend, we received notice that there are to be several changes in the way we conduct our security checks, with deadlines a couple days later whilst most top air cargo executives are en route to IST,” said one WCS attendee.
     “No one can doubt that TSA has best practices for security at heart,” said another conferee.
     “It’s just the ambush nature of a whole new set of edicts that demand compliance or else.”
     “The TSA notice was also viewed in some circles like some kind of ‘Friday Night Massacre’ delivered at a time when most stakeholders were at home over the weekend,” said yet another source.
     “But the worst part is that the rationale of TSA seems to go something like this:
     “‘We have a problem in our ongoing effort to insure better air cargo security.
     “‘We are not sure exactly what the problem is, but here are some more new rules on how you must conduct your business.
     “‘Now you prove to us that there is no problem or these rules are impossible to enact and maybe we will consider changes.’”
     You, dear reader, have probably noticed that very few people if any have gone on the record here.
     Well, be advised that everyone in air cargo lives with some fear and dread of TSA behaving as this 800-pound gorilla that really has its ticket punched to do as it pleases and goes about its business answering to someone other than the airlines whose very livelihood depends on moving the cargo.
     IATA may not have been much help either, although the agency did communicate some concern to the international airlines affected by this latest EA.
     In a letter obtained by FlyingTypers, IATA made some suggestions and apparently some phone calls, but essentially could do little more than to advise the carriers directly impacted to speak up and voice their concerns to TSA.
     “IATA has been expressing our concerns on this latest round of EAs on cargo to the White House, State Department, DHS, and TSA over the last several days,” the letter said.
     “We stressed that many of the problems we are experiencing could have been avoided and the operational impact lessened, had foreign air carriers been given the opportunity to review and comment in advance.
     “In our various conversations with the USG, and TSA,” IATA wrote, “we have been assured that the intent of the EA was to ease the burden on the industry of the EAs from the printer cartridge incident.
     “We are working to arrange a series of emergency calls for the international community with TSA and we expect these to take place in a few hours.
     “While IATA has delivered broad-based industry messages on the impact of the EA, your airline needs to bring specific concerns directly to TSA,” the letter concluded.
     Since everyone agrees security is job one in air cargo these days, consensus concerning best practices should be an ongoing dialogue rather than a sudden and unexpected set of new rules with the edict ‘comply or else,’ as occurred on March 4.
     So while IATA Cargo tiptoes around this latest security issue, it continues to choose to stash its power in these matters and a beleaguered industry is left to go it alone, with maybe future support of the fledgling GACAG that was only formed a couple of months ago at TIACA Amsterdam and barely has had time to get its feet wet.
     For the record, FlyingTypers reached out to both TSA and GACAG for comment.
TSA replied:
     "After last year's thwarted attempt by terrorists to ship explosives aboard aircraft headed to this country, TSA immediately took a number of steps to enhance security by tightening existing air cargo security for flights to the United States.
     “The terrorist threats we face are serious, and TSA continues to modify these precautionary measures based on the latest intelligence.
     "We are working closely with the air cargo industry and intelligence community to institute measures to keep the traveling public safe.
     “We will continue reviewing these procedures in light of the latest intelligence to stay ahead of our adversaries and keep the traveling public safe.
     "For security reasons, we cannot disclose specific details of security directives."
     There may be good reason for the obfuscation as there are so many events currently affecting critical parts of the world and not everything can or should be aired in public.
     Basically, taking the consensus of all comments, the problem with the TSA “Emergency Amendment” is that no one is clear on exactly what to do.
     Our best guess is that they (TSA) were trying to simplify things, but in fact confusion reigns right now around which x-ray to use and when to use it – or, when not to; for example, when is it better to use sniffer technologies and when that will not do, and whether it’s the airlines, the forwarders or the shippers themselves who are responsible.
     Rules and regulations once thought understood are changed without warning or consultation as air cargo is left spinning out of control with entirely new TSA parameters for security.
     For example, TSA directs that shippers need to receive specific communication from the airlines outlining the changes.
     But some airline people FT spoke to said that while communicating with their customers is not a problem, they are (at this point) unsure what should be the proper wording on the documents.
     Another problem is interpretation, which seems to be an ongoing obstacle with air cargo security.
     Each airline has its own interpretation of the rules and no one seems to be on the same wavelength, so the result is that most everyone, while attempting to do a good job with cargo security, often ends up spending lots of time and money, rather than just getting clear direction for a common standard.
     Everybody tries to fulfill what is possible while awaiting explanations and clarification from TSA.
     No one doubts that air cargo security needs to be more “us,” meaning private sector, and “them,” meaning government, all in it together rather than always “us versus them.”
     Maybe the TSA “Emergency Amendment” of this week will finally impact and empower air cargo to stand together to address the core issue here.
     Air cargo must stay the course for consensus, common ground and cooperation, and TSA needs to not only embrace but demonstrate a true inclusionary attitude to secure the air cargo skies.
     Everybody needs to get and stay on the same page as we move ahead.
     This week’s World Cargo Symposium and Conference have been overshadowed and rendered impotent by these developments.
Geoffrey/Ted

FT030811