07-20-2007, 12:22 PM
|
|
A Vote for ROI in Container Shipping Security
Issue #110 | July 20, 2007 | by Erik Wood
Last week I had the opportunity to join many of the inner circle of the RFID community at the U.S. Senate’s RFID Caucus luncheon hosted by the Senate’s RFID Technology Council (www.rfidtechcouncil.org). The third such meeting, since its inception last year, was on the topic RFID and port security.
After my 13 years in RFID, it felt truly special to see the Senate pay attention to our technology, especially with such serious implications. Cheers to Co-Chairs Senators Byron Dorgan (D-ND) and John Cornyn (R-TX) for founding the Caucus, and a special thanks to Senators David Vitter (LA), Bill Nelson (FL), Ben Cardin (MD), and Larry Craig (ID) for participating in the luncheon.
The meetings provide rich opportunities for industry and government officials to exchange ideas on viability of legislation on the topic. This is truly a meritorious goal, especially when it comes to port security.
I’m afraid we blew it.
It seems to me our gathering of presenters, panelists and all of us well informed audience participants left the wrong impression with these lawmakers. I suggested a floor mike for next time, because the audience had to shout out questions, which had to be repeated for the panelists to hear them. In retrospect, I wish I didn’t let the logistics stop me from saying my piece.
Everyone shared the conclusion that active RFID locks and seals are truly a secure solution for inter-modal container security, which was a pleasant surprise. That inspecting a container’s contents at a secured point of load or debarkation; sealing it with by tamper-proofing not just the lock, but the container itself, using sensors; and then checking the seal prior to U.S. delivery; is the panacea to the security problem.
Wrong Impressions Conveyed
With the use of Active RFID to secure containers assumed, 90% of the questions and commentary was on the topic of market drivers for adoption of the technology for security benefits. While all agreed that congressional mandates are not the way to go for an emerging technology in a free market society, the assembled panel seemed to argue that pure operation benefits for of RFID enabled containers will create the business case for shippers to buy and install security technology.
Many spoke of the value the U.S. Dept. of Defense sees, which uses data rich RFID tags for container supply chain logistics. I see several flaws in this perspective – the first being the Army is not a company with a bottom line. You can decide your own opinion of accountability in defense budgets.
Business is business. Like Tony Soprano, who reported suspicious dockside activity, we may try to do our patriotic deeds; but companies are not unilaterally going to implement more than they need for their own operational efficiencies. People wish they could help prevent terrorism; but it is not in their business plan. If we left the impression with the Senate representatives that a citizenship award and pat on the back was ROI enough for shippers to spend more than they have to – beyond direct cost-effectiveness – I fear damage may have been done.
What secure tags?
The most glaring missing piece associated with driving container security adoption solely through operational efficiencies, is that these RFID tags do not come equipped with the security features.
For example, while the current tags used by Savi Networks in ports, and by the DoD for in-transit, add an incredible amount of value with memory for a container manifest, neither have the functionality to seal and monitor the integrity of the containers. After all, it is in a container’s breach when drugs, people, and horrors like dirty nuclear bombs can be hidden.
Enhancing container security ROI
By 2020, the number of containers coming to the U.S. is predicted to double. Port operators care about moving goods and moving them quick, so the next ones can come through. Any aid speeding things along is of great value to them.
Although it may have been lost in the supply chain efficiency dialogue, there was a logical breath of fresh air provided by Chuck Schneider from NAVIS, a leading seaport logistics software company. He described how too much automobile traffic on local roads near the port of LA/Long Beach inspired the port to charge a fee for trucks arriving during peak daytime traffic hours. The result? Trucks shifted to nighttime pickup and delivery.
Chuck made the point that monetary incentives are the means to achieve desired goal. That is also why hundreds of miles of toll roads across America are being constructed, based on the premise millions of commuter will pay extra every day for the ability to move more quickly. I believe this is the way forward.
The answer is already on the table
It is not my idea; but doesn’t it make sense to use the carrot of Green Lane status to drive RFID based container security adoption? The appropriate incentive to drive RFID security adoption is probably contained in the CT-PAT legislation that already exists. This right of expedited passage for using the sensor-enhanced, secure RFID tag scenario above, would easily be worth the difference in tag costs.
These tags could not only detect tampering at the point of entry; but by adding a light sensor and/or others inside, attached to the tag on the outside, it could accomplish the goal of detecting entry from other than the container door.
It is my hope that through all of the nonsense about supply chain logistics driving security, Chuck’s story found fertile ground and resonated with the leadership in the audience.
|
