Archives For Port

KRA-Customs-Transit-Control

Kenya Revenue Authority Commissioner-General John Njiraini announces the implementation of a common customs and transit cargo control framework to rid Mombasa port of corruption

Four East African countries on Tuesday agreed to fast-track implementation of a common customs and transit cargo control framework to enhance regional trade.

Commissioners-general from the Kenyan, Ugandan, Rwandan and Tanzanian revenue authorities said adoption of an excise goods management system would curb illicit trade in goods that attract excise duty across borders.

They said creation of a single regional bond for goods in transit would ease movement of cargo, with taxation being done at the first customs port of entry.

The meeting held in Nairobi supported formation of the Single Customs Territory, terming it a useful measure that will ease clearance of goods and reduce protectionist tendencies, thereby boosting business.

Implementation of the territory is being handled in three phases; the first will address bulk cargo such as fuel, wheat grain and clinker used in cement manufacturing.

Phase two will handle containerised cargo and motor vehicles, while the third will deal with intra-regional trade among countries implementing the arrangement.

The treaty for establishment of the East African Community provides that a customs union shall be the first stage in the process of economic integration.

Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) commissioner-general John Njiraini said the recently introduced customs and border control regulations were designed to enhance revenue collection and beef up security at the entry points.

“At KRA, we have commenced the implementation of a number of revenue enhancement programmes particularly on the customs and border control front that will address security and revenue collection at all border points while enhancing swift movement of goods,” he said.

To address cargo diversion cases, the regional revenue authorities resolved that a joint programme be rolled out to reform transit goods clearance and monitoring processes. Source: DailyNation (Kenya)

Advertisements

APM Terminals has released drone footage of its Rotterdam Maasvlakte II terminal. The terminal set a loading record last month on the Madison Maersk with 17,152 TEU loaded, including ten high above deck stowage.

The facility launches the world’s first container terminal to utilize remotely-controlled ship-to-shore (STS) gantry cranes. The cranes move containers between vessels and the landside fleet of 62 battery-powered Lift-Automated Guided Vehicles (Lift-AGVs) which transport containers between the quay and the container yard, including barge and on-dock rail facilities.

The Lift-AGV’s also represent the world’s first series of AGV’s that can lift and stack a container. A fleet of 54 Automated Rail-Mounted Gantry Cranes (ARMGs) then positions containers in the yard in a high-density stacking system. The terminal’s power requirements are provided by wind-generated electricity, enabling terminal operations, which produce no CO2, emissions or pollutants, and which are also considerably quieter than conventional diesel-powered facilities.

The facility, constructed on land entirely reclaimed from the North Sea, has been designed as a multi-modal hub to reduce truck traffic in favor of barge and rail connections to inland locations.

Construction began in May 2012, with the first commercial vessel call in February 2015.

2015 and 2016 are the years of ramping up operations and refining the terminal operating system. The 86 hectare (212 acre) deep-water terminal features 1,000 meters of quay, on-dock rail, and eight fully-automated electric-powered STS cranes, with an annual throughput capacity of 2.7 million TEU.

At planned full build-out, the terminal will cover 180 hectares (445 acres) and offer 2,800 meters of deep-sea quay (19.65 meters/64.5 feet depth), with an annual throughput capacity of six million TEUs. Source: Maritime Executive

APM Terminals 2The Maersk-owned company APM Terminals has revealed it is investing about 14 billion kroner (US$2 billion dollars) into a new port in Bagadry, Nigeria, in what will be its biggest ever investment. The port will become the second-largest port in Africa – only surpassed by Port Said in Egypt – and is a clear signal that the Danish shipping giant’s terminal operator sees the African continent as a long-term hotbed for economic growth.

“We are currently purchasing property from the state and will start construction later this year. The port is scheduled to be completed in 2019,” David Skov, the managing director for APM Terminals in Nigeria, told Børsen business newspaper.

“Globally, it will be APM Terminal’s largest ever investment and marks a strategic shift to multi ports. It means we will supplement our own experience in container ports with the establishment of a free zone, an oil port and a bulk port, so in other words a complete port.”

APMT recently acted on its decision to invest $1.5 billion on the Port of Tema in Ghana, Africa, with the establishment of a Greenfield port outside of the existing facility and upgrades to the adjacent road network.

Artistic impression - Durban Dig-out Port

Artistic impression – Durban Dig-out Port

An international ports expert has expressed serious reservations about Durban’s proposed dig-out port. He said plans for a dig-out port should be put on hold, with efforts rather directed at maximising the existing facilities and potential at Durban Harbour.

International adviser and expert on port development Jamie Simpson, of Canada, has warned Transnet and the eThekwini Municipality against pursuing the dig-out port, saying the current port has to “keep going”. Simpson was a guest speaker at a ports and cities dialogue with Durban businesses, hosted by the municipality’s Edge (Economic Development and Growth eThekwini) at the Moses Mabhida Stadium yesterday. His point of view was supported by two other speakers.

However, Transnet group strategy general manager Irvindra Naidoo was adamant that the parastatal was forging ahead with the project, saying Durban was “running out of capacity” and had to expand.

Naidoo said: “The question was: ‘Okay, do we now go off somewhere else and develop a new maritime cluster around Richards Bay or somewhere else, or do we try to embed or strengthen the cluster… (by extending) the Durban port?’ That’s what this dig-out port really is about. It’s an extension of an existing cluster.”

The port, the continent’s busiest, caters for 2.6 million TEU (twenty-foot equivalent units) a year. These result in about 8 000 daily container-related heavy vehicle movements around the Bayhead area. Transnet has repeatedly said that the port will battle to provide the capacity for future demand.

Naidoo said with a dig-out port at the old Durban International Airport site, the containers could reach 8.2 million TEU by 2040, resulting in about 17 500 heavy vehicle movements daily in the South Durban Basin.

Simpson told the panel that the move “might not be a very good solution”. He said: “In view of the likely availability of financing – a lot of uncertainty – I think the port has to keep going and develop a capital investment plan and operational improvement plans to meet demand in the next five to 10 years.”

From there, he said, the parastatal could “weigh up” whether a bigger port “makes sense in view of market conditions… and availability of finance at the time”.

The first phase of construction of the dig-out port was expected to start between 2021 and 2025. A pre-feasibility study started in 2013. To read the full article click here! Source: iol.co.za

triple-e-maersk-worlds-largest-shipA Financial Times article reported Maersk’s Triple E Class (18,000 TEU) to be 26 percent more cost efficient than the current E class (15,000 TEU). – Wright, R (2011), Financial Times. ‘Big Ships: Container lines reach for scale’. Recent research into supply chain costs indicates that this is not obvious for the entire supply chain – Streng, M. (2012). Slow steaming: an economic assessment of lowering sailing speeds on a supply chain level’, Master Thesis Urban, Port and Transport Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam.

The capital cost per TEU moved has increased even considering the increase in slot size of newer larger vessels. Due to the increase in transportation duration, the capital costs and insurance of goods transported have gone up. Further cost increase could be accounted for in the increase in time to market. Fast moving goods (such as consumer electronics) that need longer to get from the world’s production centres to the markets is also a cost. Shipping lines are demanding ever shorter port stays in order to make the economies of scale work. The bigger the ship, the greater the cost of hours lost in port, and an increased port stay is a diseconomy of scale.  Port Technology have published the following article which should be useful for shippers, freight forwarders, port planners in better understanding the economics of international shipping and logistics – Mega ships: positive asset or terminals’ worst nightmare?.

Triple E Class Specifications - (AP Moeller/MAERSK Group)

Triple E Class Specifications – (AP Moeller/MAERSK Group) [Click to Enlarge]

Proposed Durban-Free State-Gauteng Logistics and Industrial Corridor Plan (SIP2)

Proposed Durban-Free State-Gauteng Logistics and Industrial Corridor Plan (SIP2)

Notwithstanding on-going discontent amongst industry operators in regard to proposed legislative measures mandating customs clearance at first port of entry, the South African government (GCIS) reports that work has already commenced on a massive logistics corridor stretching between Durban and the central provinces of the Free State and Gauteng. Most of the projects that form part of the second Strategic Infrastructure Project (SIP 2), also known as the Durban-Free State-Johannesburg Logistics and Industrial Corridor, are still in the concept or pre-feasibility stage, but construction has already started on several projects.

These include:

  • the building of a R2,3 billion container terminal at City Deep
  • a R3,9 billion project to upgrade Pier 2 at the Port of Durban
  • R14,9 billion procurement of rolling stock for the rail line which will service the corridor.

Work has also started on the R250 million Harrismith logistics hub development to set up a fuel distribution depot, as well as on phase one of the new multi-product pipeline which will run between Johannesburg and Durban and transport petrol, diesel, jet fuel and gas.

The aim of these projects and others which form part of SIP 2, is to strengthen the logistics and transport corridor between South Africa’s main industrial hubs and to improve access to Durban’s export and import facilities. It is estimated that 135 000 jobs will be created in the construction of projects in the corridor. Once the projects are completed a further 85 000 jobs are expected to be created by those businesses that use the new facilities. Source: SA Government Information Service

Interested in more details regarding South Africa’s infrastructure development plan? Click here!

Siim Kallas - Europe’s ports must be better connected across the wider transport network.

Siim Kallas – Europe’s ports must be better connected across the wider transport network.

The following article featured in Port Stratetgy and penned by Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the European Commission in charge of transport policy, offers some sound views on how ports and regional networks ought to harmonise to ensure their competitiveness.

Europe’s prosperity has always been linked to sea trade and ports, which have great potential for sustaining growth in the years ahead. As gateways to the EU’s entire transport network, they are engines of economic development. And more cargo, cruise ships and ferries in our ports mean more jobs.

Europe depends heavily on its seaports, which handle 74% by volume of the goods exported or imported to the EU and from the rest of the world. Not only are they important for foreign trade and local growth, ports are the key for developing an integrated and sustainable transport system, as we work to get trucks off our saturated land transport corridors and make more use of short sea shipping.

Need to adapt

Even with only modest assumptions of economic growth, port cargo volumes are expected to rise by 57% by 2030, almost certainly causing congestion. In 20 years, Europe’s hundreds of seaports will face major challenges in performance, investment needs, sustainability, human resources and integration with port cities and regions.

So our ports need to adapt. Take the next generation of ultra-large vessels that carry 18,000 containers. Put onto trucks, these containers would stretch in a single line from Rotterdam to Paris. To accommodate them, ports need to provide the adequate depth, crane reach and shipyard space. There is also a growing need for gas carriers and gasification facilities.

Efficiency and performance vary a great deal around Europe. Many EU ports perform very well – take Rotterdam, Antwerp and Hamburg, which handle 20% of all goods. But not all ports offer the same high-level service. Port network connections and trade flows are well developed in northern Europe, but much less so the south.

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link: if a few ports do not perform well, it affects the sustainable functioning of Europe’s entire transport network and economy – which needs to recover and see long-term growth.

Preparing for the future

Ports must be prepared for the future. This means improving local connections to the wider road, rail and inland waterways networks; fully optimising services to make the best use of ports as they are now; and creating a business climate to attract the investments that are so badly needed if capacity is to expand, as it must do.

Unlike other transport sectors, there is almost no EU ports legislation, on access to services, financial transparency or charging for infrastructure use. Experience from the last 15 years shows that the market cannot solve the problem itself; the lack of equal competition conditions and restrictions to port market access are barriers to improving performance, attracting investments and creating jobs. We need to act.

Our proposal to review EU ports policy focuses on the ports of the trans-European Transport Network, which accounts for 96% of goods and 95% of passengers transiting through the EU ports system. Firstly, if ports are to adapt to new economic, industrial and social requirements, they must have a competitive and open business environment.

Freedom to provide services, with no discrimination, should be a general principle; although in cases of space constraints or public interest, the responsible port authority should ensure that decisions granting market access are transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Transparency of public port financing should also be improved, to avoid distortions of competition and make clear where public money is going. This will encourage more private investors, who need long-term stability and legal certainty.

On charging for using infrastructure, where there is no uniform EU model, port authorities should be more autonomous and set charges themselves. But this must be done based on objective, non-discriminatory and transparent criteria. Ports should also be able to reduce charges for ships with better environmental performance.

Staying competitive

We also plan to help our ports stay competitive by cutting more red tape and administrative formalities to boost their efficiency even further. As in many other economic sectors, staffing needs in ports are changing rapidly and there is a growing need to attract port workers. Without a properly trained workforce and skilled people, ports cannot function. The Commission estimates that up to 165,000 new jobs will be created in ports by 2030.

Modern port services and a stable environment must also involve modern organisation of work and social provisions. Many countries have reformed and the benefits of doing so can be clearly seen. Experience in Member States which have implemented ports reforms show that open and proper discussions between the parties involved can make a real difference. So we want to give this a chance first, over three years, to see what can be achieved. If that does not produce results, we will have to consider taking action.

To stimulate resource-efficient growth and trade, Europe’s ports must be better connected across the wider transport network. They must make sure they are able to develop and respond to change. This is what the European Commission aims to achieve, for the long-term benefit of the ports sector, local business and the environment. Source: Portstrategy.com

 

Computer-generated imagery of what the Walvis Bay North Port will look like when built. Image courtesy Namport.

Computer-generated imagery of what the Walvis Bay North Port will look like when built. Image courtesy Namport.

Far from simply developing a new container terminal, Namport could be bringing forward plans to build an ambitious new port at Walvis Bay to accommodate an expected increase in container and other traffic in the near future.

Originally intended as a long-term proposal for the Port of Walvis Bay, the plans may have to be brought forward and, coupled with finance that could come from China, the Namibian port is set to become a real rival for business in the southern and central African region.

According to reports in The Namib Times the cabinet has discussed and in principle given the go-ahead to create a new harbour on the northern side of the existing port. It said the new harbour is part of Namport’s strategy of positioning Walvis Bay as the premier port in the region. The plans will require dredging of a deep entrance channel and excavating the land to clear space for the new deepwater basin along with 10 kilometres of quayside for ships to berth.

If it was necessary to have proof that this development has the potential of shaking up the southern African region, it came in the form of a warning given yesterday by Transnet Chief Executive Brian Molefe at a community briefing session in Durban, in which he said, while justifying the need for the Durban dig-out port to go ahead, that if it was delayed or not built then Durban would lose out to other African ports. As an example he cited Walvis Bay where he said ambitious plans to build a large container port had been given the go-ahead. Source: Ports.co.za

Old Durban airport - site for new Dig Out Port (Picture credit: ACSA)

Old Durban airport – site for new Dig Out Port (Picture credit: ACSA)

Transnet has concluded the first in a series of early stakeholder engagement sessions with local organisations on the proposed Durban dig-out port project. If built, the new port will be to the south of Durban on the site of the former Durban International Airport and 15 minutes by car from the existing port. It has been proposed that it will consist of 16 container berths, three Ro-Ro berths for the automotive business, and several oil and product tanker berths.

The engagement sessions just concluded form an integral part of the project’s concept phase which includes the development of a Sustainable Port Development Framework (SPDF) that will inform all future designs as well as operations. Transnet commenced with high-level technical and environmental studies in 2012 as part of the proposed Durban dig-out port project process. The current concept phase is scheduled to conclude in July this year, and comprises the generation of a number of technical design options.

The engagement sessions involved key representatives from local business, property, environmental and civic associations who met in order to comment on a discussion document which was distributed to them in mid-February 2013. The discussion document included important information on the background to, and process involved in, validating the viability of constructing a major container port on the site of the old Durban International Airport.

The sessions were held at various public venues and were facilitated by an independent sustainability consultancy. All feedback obtained during the engagement sessions was captured and will be factored into the development of the SPDF which will ensure the effective implementation of sustainability objectives throughout the life cycle of the proposed port project.

Along with promoting the long-term sustainability and operational excellence of the port, the framework also seeks to integrate environmental and social principles into the planning process. The series of engagement sessions, which will continue throughout the project’s lifespan, will also form part of the Department of Transport’s requirement for engagement during the strategic level environmental assessment as part of the legislative requirement for the promulgation of the port.

The process of moving from the current concept phase through the pre-feasibility and feasibility phases, and finally to actual implementation is anticipated to take approximately four years. The next phase, which is the pre-feasibility phase, is expected to proceed in July this year when the viability of the preferred design option will be thoroughly investigated.

The proposed port forms a key pillar of Government’s Strategic Integrated Projects (SIPs) to upgrade the Durban-Free State-Gauteng Freight Corridor (otherwise known as SIP2 in the National Infrastructure Plan). Source: Ports.co.za

The supply of proven port executives is drying up. Credit: Off beat Mum

The supply of proven port executives is drying up. Credit: Off beat Mum

Indeed the pool of experienced business expertise is in short supply and dwindling towards extinction. The following article published by Port Strategy reveals a pattern not only affecting employment trends in the international port business, but one which exists in just about every other industry of the international supply chain, the Customs included.

Successive years of hammering home the crewing ‘crisis’ message have firmly ingrained the matter on our minds: red alert, a dearth of qualified seafarers is about to bring the industry to its knees. However, that record has been re-played for at least the last two decades and the anticipated crisis has yet to materialise.

But there is a more pressing employment crisis in our very own backyard, if recruitment specialists are to be believed. With the growth of terminals coming on a pace, there is a demand for C-level executives with a proven track record in bringing start-ups to life. However, by definition this is a very select pool of individuals and these individuals can only be stretched so far.

Years ago, the industry would have handled CVs with regular eighteen month hops to pastures new with extreme caution: ‘a lack of commitment’… ‘ambition over loyalty’… ‘chasing the buck rather than the ambitions of the job’. Yet now, browse some port chief executive profiles and eighteen months could be considered a long term commitment as these sought after individuals jump from one top hot seat to the next to bring terminals up to speed in a matter of months rather than years.

Many are very successful, so perhaps I shouldn’t knock their career drivers. However, the whole exercise demonstrates how very reliant we are as an industry on an elite group of port positioning gurus.

With global container port throughput expected to grow by an average of around 7.5% a year over the next six years, how are we going to find the top brass to steer these terminals on the right course?

A specialist recruitment head-hunter recently confirmed to me that we are facing a challenge. It is already difficult to find the right people for positions that can often be in inhospitable environments, expecting them to uproot family and move lock, stock to a new country and culture.

And if we can find enough of these magic-makers, is the industry willing to pay for their worth? In a word, no, my recruitment colleague tells me. This is simple economics: the pot of suitable candidates contracts, the salary they can command goes up.

Port authorities and global operators need to wise up to the fact that not only is it becoming increasingly difficult to source talent – with no sign of improvement any time soon – but they will need to dig deeper if they want to win over that talent before another operator sweeps them off the available list. Source: Portstrategy.com

cargo-container-shippingThe Ports Regulator of South Africa will soon announce anew port tariffs structure that will include a cut of about 40% in the tariff on exported containers. This step is part of the Transnet National Ports Authority‘s strategy to reduce South African port charges, which are seen as among the highest in the world, because it erodes the competitiveness of South Africa’s exports.

This announcement was made during a colloquium on the impact of administered prices on the manufacturing sector. The purpose of the colloquium was to get all the stakeholders together to try and find a solution to the challenges. It had become clear that the stakeholders did not have a regular opportunity to engage on the issue of administered prices.

In addition to the new tariffs, the authority is proposing a reworking of its tariff structure, which if accepted by the regulator, will see higher charges for bulk commodities, up to 68%. South African port tariffs were at least 8.7 times more than the global average for containers and 7.4 times the global average for automotive cargo.

Transnet’s CEO said the shift in the tariff burden was aligned with the government’s manufacturing growth strategy. The mining sector had been hugely subsidised by a tariff structure weighted in favour of raw exports, at the expense of the manufacturing and agricultural sectors. Department of Trade and Industry has also welcomed the expected tariff reduction, saying it would be a major boost for exporters. 

One would therfore like to believe that these tariff reductions will be extended to agriculture and agro-processing. Hopefully ocean carriers will not see this as an opportunity to increase their tariffs!

The Maher Terminal at Port Elizabeth has been cleared for danger after a radiation scare prompted a security response.

The Maher Terminal at Port Elizabeth has been cleared for danger after a radiation scare prompted a security response.

Misleading? No its Port Elizabeth – USA! Customs officials had suspicion about a shipping container that they were examining. An abnormally high radiation reading was detected, but CBP, FBI, the Port Authority of NY/NJ and other law enforcement officials initiated protocols to isolate and verify the source of the alarm.

According to New Jersey’s Star-Ledger, a Port Authority official said the container was filled with recycled paper, and a metal wire that bound the paper was the source of a positive reading for Caesium-137, a radioactive isotope formed during nuclear fission.

After review and confirmation from CBP’s Laboratories & Scientific Services, the container was deemed safe. The situation was resolved in less than two hours. Customs officials took control of the container and were moving it to a secure location.  Lengthy lines of trucks were at a standstill waiting to exit the port facility as the investigation was underway. At least 15 emergency response vehicles were on scene, along with various officers. Source: Maritime-Executive.com

In an interview with The Maritime Executive, Peter Kant, executive vice president for Rapiscan Systems informed that the primary business of a port is serving as a hub for water-borne commerce and all of the logistics that entails, with each port competing for the business of shippers and container operators. Every investment made by a port authority, from a crane to a dredge to a security checkpoint, must be based on how this activity will not only position the port to current customers, but how it will affect the attraction of future customers.

Increasingly, however, these investments are including more and more security needs, from container scanning equipment to operator training to security architectures. Security, and in particular security screening, is not the core business of a ports authority, but compliance with national and international guidelines demands that certain security standards be met, or losing customers will be the last of a port authority’s worries.

But even though security screening is an absolute necessity, many ports are looking to get out of the security game altogether. But will the departure from security make ports less secure…or could it actually enhance cargo scanning operations?

The Heavy Burden of Screening
As mentioned earlier, port authorities are not experts when it comes to security, especially a task as granular as cargo screening. It’s not just about a “mean guard and a magnet” when it comes to screening anymore, and this especially holds true to the world of maritime cargo. First, the right technology must be installed, a solution that can effectively analyze cargo for potential contraband or threats, both conventional and radioactive. Then, a port authority must determine the best location for the screening checkpoint, and oversee the construction of the location, both in terms of port impact and traffic optimization.

Next come the installation and calibration of the scanning technology, as well as the hiring and training of security operators. The authority must also establish a workflow for what happens when a container is flagged – what requires a manual inspection? Who approves such an operation? What remediation must take place after the fact?

The fact of the matter is, cargo scanning isn’t just about putting containers through an X-ray machine. It’s much, much more than that, and consumes enough time that establishing and running a checkpoint can adversely affect port business.

But there is an easier way to run cargo screening operations. Port authorities are experts in maritime commerce, so why shouldn’t they turn to experts in security screening to run cargo scanning operations?

Cargo Scanning-as-a-Service
Rather than trying to become cargo screening experts overnight, port authorities can take advantage of a major trend in the overall security world: security-screening-as-a-service. Essentially, port operators form a partnership with an experienced security screening solutions provider, tasking the provider, not the port, with the onus of establishing and running a cargo scanning checkpoint.

Other than the obvious benefit of freeing the port authority from the security logistics headache, why turn to cargo screening as a service? For one, 100 percent screening in the United States has not gone away…at least not yet. But even if the requirements on cargo entering the USA are loosened, port screening for contraband is not going to decrease – in this economic climate, governments want to ensure that everything that can be taxed is taxed. This is a nightmare scenario for port authorities to deal with, but one with which screening solutions provider are comfortable. With their experience in the field, these providers can find the right equipment and checkpoint set-up to be as thorough and detailed as needed when it comes to cargo scanning, ensuring that not only are potential threats detected, but any contraband can be swiftly dealt with by the appropriate authorities.

Going with an experienced screening partner can also add radiation detection capabilities, a growing problem in the world of maritime commerce. Radioactive materials, either improperly labeled or being shipped as contraband, can shut ports down for days and are impossible to detect via conventional cargo screening technologies. By utilizing screening-as-a-service, however, port authorities can place this additional burden on the solutions provider, which has the experience and the right capabilities to detect radiation alongside conventional contraband and threats.

Training of security operators is another headache that cargo scanning as a service eliminates for the port. The difference between a major international incident and millions of dollars in fines can hinge entirely on the competency of a security screening operator. Do port authorities really want to be responsible for the skills of these professionals, especially when it’s in a field far outside of their comfort zones?

With cargo scanning as a service, training falls into the lap of the solutions provider, a task with which they are well familiar. Because they have built, installed and maintained the security technologies selected, these organizations best understand how to train professionals on the ins-and-outs of analyzing scanned images and detecting potential threats and contraband.

The service also gives ports a major competitive advantage, as a well-designed, specially-staff cargo scanning checkpoint makes the entire security process far easier for customers to deal with. Throughput is often increased, meaning that cargo makes it to its end destination more quickly and with fewer roadblocks, a paramount concern for shippers everywhere. Even a few hours delay can be costly, especially when perishable goods like imported produce are involved.

The Real World
Perhaps most importantly, cargo-scanning-as-a-service is not a pipe dream or some theoretical solution for ports. It’s already in practice and being used by some of the largest customs and port operations in the world.

The Ports Authority of Puerto Rico, for example, utilizes cargo-screening-as-a-service from a customs perspective, ensuring that no contraband is entering the island through its major ports. By enlisting an outside, specialized security solutions provider, the Port has increased throughput without sacrificing the integrity of its customs or security operations.

The Mexican Customs Authority has also turned to a wide-ranging cargo-screening-as-a-service solution for their operations, both land-locked and maritime. The major project has just recently been undertaken, but ultimately the vast majority of Mexican ports will soon be turning to screening-as-a-service when it comes to cargo, freeing the ports to focus on the business, not contraband detection.

Detecting threats and contraband via maritime cargo is not going to get any easier. If anything, smugglers, criminals and terrorist organizations are becoming more and more clever when it comes to getting illicit goods, weapons and hazardous materials across national borders. Port authorities trying to stay one step ahead of these issues are in for a struggle, as other aspects of the port business suffer.

Keep the port operator’s attention where it belongs (on the port) and let specialized experts handle the cargo scanning burden. It’s proven, it works, and it’s the best way forward to maritime prosperity and safety. Source: The Maritime Executive

Nothing like giving stakeholders fair warning of impending fines. Given that the authorities appear to have agreed on ‘all details’ except the cost, lets hope the latter aspect does not come as a nasty surprise when the single window system becomes operational. One would think that price/cost would be one of the first criteria for consideration and approval, not the last.

The government plans to impose penalties on importers who fail or delay to lift their cargo from the port in Mombasa in the ongoing reforms to de-congest the port. Transport minister Amos Kimunya said this is part of the measures being drafted to ensure the port operations are not slowed down by deliberate delays by importers.

“This will encourage people to quickly remove their cargo from the port as soon as it cleared by the authorities” Kimunya told the KPA annual summit in Nairobi on Wednesday. He said this is aimed at reducing the 40 per cent extra cost to consumers, caused by inefficient flow of goods from ports of entry.

The penalties come ahead of the single window system which is expected to facilitate fast and easy flow of export and exports through a seamlessly interconnected platform. According to the chairman of Kenya Trade Network Agency Joseph Kibwana, the single window implementing agency, all the details of the project have been agreed on, except the cost.

Implementation of the first phase for sea and air manifest will start in June 2013 to be followed by the second and third phases in six months intervals. Source: The Star (Nairobi)