Bill Overview
Title: CTPAT Pilot Program Act of 2021
Description: 2021 This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to carry out a pilot program that assesses whether allowing certain entities to participate in the Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (CTPAT) would enhance port security, combat terrorism, prevent supply chain security breaches, or otherwise meet the goals of CTPAT. Such entities are (1) non-asset-based third-party logistics providers that arrange international freight transportation and are licensed by the Department of Transportation; or (2) asset-based third-party logistics providers that facilitate cross-border activity, are licensed or bonded by specified federal agencies, and execute logistics services using their own warehousing assets and resources. The bill requires the Government Accountability Office to report on the effectiveness of CTPAT.
Sponsors: Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals working in or with third-party logistics providers
Estimated Size: 850000
- The CTPAT program involves security improvements for logistics providers that handle international freight.
- Non-asset-based third-party logistics providers arranging international freight might benefit from or be affected by enhanced security protocols.
- Asset-based third-party logistics providers involved in cross-border activities will also be impacted as they might need to comply with new security measures.
- If the pilot program is implemented successfully, it could enhance port security and prevent supply chain security breaches, impacting national security agencies and the logistics industry broadly.
Reasoning
- The CTPAT Pilot Program Act of 2021 targets the logistics sector, specifically impacting third-party logistics providers both asset-based and non-asset-based.
- Given the importance of logistics in international freight, and the roles of these providers in cross-border activities, the policy can have significant implications for operations.
- The budget constraints suggest that while initial evaluations will occur, widespread implementation or large operational changes in all organizations won't happen immediately.
- Direct impacts are likely to be seen on employees of these logistics companies as well as indirect effects on customs and port authority workers.
- Simulating a diverse set of individuals who work in or with these logistics businesses will showcase the potential impacts more holistically—ranging from none to high based on their roles.
Simulated Interviews
Customs Officer (New York City, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I expect the pilot program to increase my workload initially as new procedures are trialed.
- If successful, it could lead to more streamlined operations and improved job safety due to better security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Logistics Coordinator (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 36 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our company could benefit from the CTPAT certification, enhancing trust with clients.
- I am concerned about potential disruptions during the pilot implementation but optimistic of long-term benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Warehouse Manager (Chicago, IL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might require adjustments in our warehousing protocols, which is inconvenient but necessary.
- In the long run, I see benefits in better security and possibly faster processing times.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Freight Truck Driver (Houston, TX)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Initial changes might slow down our delivery times, affecting my income negatively.
- If successful, the policy can increase security, making my job safer and more reliable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Small Business Owner (Miami, FL)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about potential costs and our ability to comply with the CTPAT requirements.
- Could improve our reputation and customer trust if we meet the new standards.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Supply Chain Analyst (Seattle, WA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving security through CTPAT can reduce disruptions we've faced in the past.
- Implementation challenges are expected but the benefits could outweigh them.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired Customs Official (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 60 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having seen previous attempts at improving security, I'm skeptical about the pilot efficacy.
- Better port security is always beneficial in the long-term, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Logistics Consultant (San Diego, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy implementation could increase demand for my consultancy services.
- Challenges for clients might translate to more business for me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
International Logistics Manager (Detroit, MI)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- CTPAT might streamline processes which are currently cumbersome due to varying security standards.
- Potential for initial issues during pilot but hopeful for smoother operations later.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Port Security Specialist (Dallas, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could enhance security but might initially complicate coordination with logistics providers.
- Expecting initial teething problems but hopeful for long-term security improvements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $13000000)
Year 2: $8000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $11000000)
Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 5: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 10: $-1 (Low: $-1, High: $-1)
Year 100: $-1 (Low: $-1, High: $-1)
Key Considerations
- The necessity for international freight logistics providers to adapt to new security protocols.
- Possible resistance or slow adoption by smaller logistics providers due to cost constraints.
- The reliability and effectiveness of the pilot program structure.