albeit temporarily - in 2001, after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the U.S. At that point the USPS shifted a large volume of the mail contracts it had with passenger carrying airlines to FedEx Express airline, an all-cargo shipper. The smaller pieces of mail have come back to passenger carrying airlines via contracts awarded in 2006 that are still in force. In 2007, the USPS was able to procure permission from the U.S. Congress to allow foreign flag carriers to bid for airmail contracts, as well, suggesting that the organisation expects to be using passenger carrying airlines for mail transport for some time to come. That said, the question of how it is screened for security remained, even as passenger carrying airlines bumped up against the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) 1 August 2010 decree that 100% of all cargo carried in passenger airline holds be screened. The legislation, signed during. President G.W.
Bush's administration in 2007, was designed to close a vulnerability in the passenger airline system that was well- known. Passengers and their bags were being thoroughly screened and randomly searched for incendiary devices and contraband that could be used to damage or destroy aircraft, but very few of the pallets full of computers, fresh
“...25% of all USPS mail travels via passenger carrying airlines today, and some 46% of all mail worldwide is handled, at some point, by USPS...”
flowers, live animals and yes, even sacks of postal mail were ever checked for potential air security threats. And that was nearly 20 years after Pan Am 103 was brought down over Lockerbie, Scotland by a bomb in the forward hold of the aircraft. The legislation allowed for a ramping up period of three
years, and airlines and freight forwarders have worked diligently the world over, mostly hand-in-hand, with TSA, to achieve the admirable goal of being able to scan, by piece, all of the cargo going into the holds of aircraft in the U.S. Currently, 100% of cargo flying on narrow-body, single-aisle passenger-carrying aircraft in the U.S., is screened at the piece (not pallet) level; and this includes the mail. The passenger security impact of this screening is
significant: although these aircraft carry only 25% of domestic air cargo on passenger aircraft, they account for approximately 95% of domestic passenger flights in the U.S. More importantly, these flights carry more than 80% of all passengers on flights originating in the United States. TSA put in place a multi-layered, high-tech, industry-
cooperative approach, utilising surprise cargo security inspections called ’strikes’, covert testing, security directives and 100% screening at 250 smaller airports. Thirty percent more inspectors were hired, and canine teams, as many as 600, by best estimates, are now deployed and working to sniff out explosive devices and materials before they are placed in or near passenger aircraft. But that cargo is not, for the most part, screened
by TSA or the airline at the airport. According to TSA spokespeople and its website, “We understand that there is simply not sufficient capacity or space to meet this [100%] requirement without carrier delays, cargo logjams, and increased transit times. Therefore, TSA has established a multi-dimensional strategy to reconcile the requirements of the mandate, the security needs of passengers, and the needs of a U.S. economy that relies on an air cargo industry.” TSA developed a system called the Certified
Cargo Screening Program (CCSP) and the Indirect Air Carrier (IAC) Screening Technology pilot program. Shippers, freight forwarders, and hauling companies by the hundreds have submitted to TSA inspections, employee background checks, and extensive investment in screening and scanning equipment in order to be certified to pre-screen and securely haul cargo to the airport
A UP aey a aees cmag 26 SS sft wrns a pin
ramps, which are considered by TSA to be secure environments. Cargo coming from these Certified
Register now for FREE instant access to ASI online by visiting
www.asi-mag.com August 2010 Aviationsecurityinternational
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75