HONG KONG RESPONDS ON SFI EXTENSION

UNCLAS HONG KONG 000733 SENSITIVE SIPDIS STATE FOR EAP/CM E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ETRD EWWT HK SUBJECT: HONG KONG RESPONDS ON SFI EXTENSION ¶1. (U) This is an action request. See paragraphs 2, 9, and ¶11. ¶2. (SBU) Summary and Action Request: In productive April 21 discussions on the future of Hong Kong's SFI pilot program, Hong Kong Government (HKG) senior officials proposed to SFI Director Todd Horton two options for a way forward. Option One would extend the SFI pilot an additional six months to a year, following a consultation period within the HKG and with the private sector. Option Two would effectively end the pilot program on April 30, 2009, as stipulated in the exchanges of letters between the governments of the United States and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Post seeks DHS/CBP guidance on our response to the Hong Kong Government by April 28. End Summary and Action Request. ¶3. (SBU) On April 21, Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, Secure Freight Initiative (DHS/CBP/SFI) Director of 100% Scanning Todd Horton, accompanied by SFI Program Manager Adam Wysocki, CBP Attach Richard Powell, and Consulate officers discussed extension of the SFI pilot program in Hong Kong beyond its April 30 expiration date with Hong Kong Trade and Industry Department (HKTID) Deputy Director General Vivian Lau. Senior officials from Hong Kong's Commerce and Economic Development Bureau (CEDB) and the Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department (HKCE) also attended. ¶4. (SBU) Lau asked Horton for a Washington update on SFI developments and the U.S. 9/11 Act of 2007, whereby Congress mandated that all U.S.-bound containers must be scanned at foreign ports by mid-2012. Horton noted that DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano approved on April 6 a DHS-internal memorandum calling for the adoption of a "risk-based approach" to deploying SFI systems. On April 1, CBP Acting Commissioner Jayson Ahern, in testimony to the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, stated that the mandate for 100 percent scanning of containers needed to be "thoughtfully reconsidered." Horton also reported that in late March, four major international terminal operators (APM Terminals - Netherlands; PSA International Pte Ltd. - Singapore; Hutchison Port Holdings Americas; DP World - Dubai, UAE) wrote to DHS Secretary Napolitano expressing agreement with a multilayered risk-based approach for improved cargo security of containers entering the United States. In their letter, the four operators stated support for an approach whereby they could charge a fee for cargo scanning and also recommended that scanning programs be implemented in ports that already have CSI or Megaports programs in place. In other developments, Horton indicated the Port of Busan, Korea commenced SFI operations on March 18, 2009, and that Government of Japan officials, interested in SFI operations to complement their Megaports program, had recently visited Busan. ¶5. (SBU) In response, Lau reiterated negative international sentiment toward the U.S. mandate to achieve 100 percent scanning for U.S.-bound containers by mid-2012. She claimed that members of the World Customs Organization (WCO) and the World Shipping Council, in particular, had responded negatively to Hong Kong's involvement with SFI and added that participation "hurts Hong Kong's reputation as a proponent of free trade." She also quoted from and took affront to a European press article that mischaracterized Hong Kong as a "high risk" port, due to its participation in SFI. ¶6. (SBU) On the extension of Hong Kong's SFI pilot, Lau stated that she had carefully studied the U.S. proposal for continuing the SFI pilot program in Hong Kong, provided to her by CBP Attach Powell the week preceding the April 21 meeting. Lau stressed that "the trade" continues to express concerns regarding the continuation of the SFI pilot program. Furthermore, the pilot phase of SFI in Hong Kong had been successful over its 18-month span, and every "pilot" must have some end point, Lau said. ¶7. (SBU) Given the fast-approaching April 30 termination date, the Hong Kong Government (HKG) has "insufficient time" to extend or roll over the existing SFI pilot agreement before its termination, said Lau. She indicated the HKG would need at least one month, possibly two, to reach internal consensus and brief "the trade," though she would work to minimize this timeframe. However, the SFI systems "would have to be shut down" until an agreement could be reached. ¶8. (SBU) Horton told Lau that to relocate the SFI equipment deployed in Hong Kong to other ports would cost more than to continue local operations, where USG, HKG, and Modern Terminals, Ltd. (the operator) had already made large investments. Further, any movement away from the current operational SFI status in Hong Kong would send a negative message. "Why stop a security program that is functional and operationally effective?" he asked. Horton agreed that SFI in Hong Kong is beyond the "pilot" stage and rather than extending the pilot for a specific duration (i.e., six months to a year),suggested that SFI cooperation in Hong Kong continue until one or both governments opted out of the program. Horton noted that other ports participating in SFI utilize existing Container Security Initiative (CSI) protocols to handle operational issues such as adjudication of alarms, eliminating the need for a renewed SFI agreement. Horton noted another possible option would be for the current SFI terminal operator in Hong Kong (Modern Terminals, Ltd.) to continue scanning operations and providing data on U.S-bound containers to CBP with or without the direct day-to-day participation of Hong Kong Customs, as is successfully done at the Port of Southampton, United Kingdom. CBP officers would then adjudicate alarms based on screen data and request assistance from Hong Kong Customs officials on a case-by-case basis. Horton stressed to Lau that a shutdown in systems operations while the two governments negotiated only a short extension to the existing SFI pilot agreement seemed unnecessary and undesirable and DHS might prefer to move the equipment to a port where the USG investment could gain longer-term returns. ¶9. (SBU) Lau reported that Hong Kong could not accept the notion of an informal, open-ended continuation of the SFI program (i.e., one not based on a written understanding),nor could it accept a program absent direct Hong Kong government participation. She summed up the discussion and offered two possible options for the SFI pilot in Hong Kong, going forward: Option One - The SFI pilot program would conclude as scheduled on April 30, 2009, pending an agreement to extend the existing arrangement. Once consultations conclude and an agreement is reached, the SFI pilot could be extended for a period of six months to one year, to allow CBP to collect additional scanning data. The scanning equipment would be shut down during the HKG's internal deliberations and consultations with "the trade," which Lau estimated could take "one to two" months. Lau undertook to minimize as much as possible the "consultations" period, but would need notification by DHS/CBP to go forward prior to the April 30 expiration date. She promised to engage "the trade" as soon as she is notified that the U.S. Government would accept this option. Option Two - The SFI pilot would conclude on April 30 as per the existing exchanges of letters of July 27, 2007 and April 29, 2008. The SFI scanning equipment would be shut down and CBP could re-deploy equipment from Hong Kong, thus concluding a successful 18-month SFI pilot project between the U.S. Government, the Hong Kong Government, and Hong Kong's private sector. ¶10. (SBU) Horton said he would pass the offered options to DHS/CBP leadership in Washington, DC for guidance on a way forward, and would report our response to Hong Kong immediately. For her part, Lau again assured she would expedite deliberations with "the trade" if Option One were chosen, but stressed the need for a response no later than April 30. Cargo scanning data collection could then resume under a new understanding. ¶11. (SBU) Action Request: Request Department/DHS/CBP provide decision no later than April 28 (WashDC time) on the preferred option from the two provided on paragraph 9. End Action Request. ¶12. (U) This cable was reviewed at Post by SFI Director Horton and CBP Attach Powell. DONOVAN