40452 Prepared by the World Bank Technical Team, August 2, 2005 A Pilot Terminal in Gaza A. The Concept 1. It is proposed to establish a pilot joint terminal for clearance of outbound articulated trucks leaving Gaza for destinations in Israel or to Israeli Gateways. This terminal would use mobile scanners in a shared, layered clearance process. Initially it would be designed for through trailer movement with tractor exchange but could be converted to through truck movement. 2. The clearance procedures would involve three layers, as follows: a) An initial scan using a Gamma backscatter device suitable for identifying persons or large threats. This would be operated on the Palestinian side, with dual monitors for use by both Palestinians and Israelis. b) A second scan using a 6MeV X-Ray scanner to identify smaller-sized threats. This would be operated on the Israeli side and used to scan loaded containers. c) Physical inspection, conducted on the Israeli side, if anomalies appear on the second scan. 3. The operating sequence would be as follows: On the Palestinian side---The rig would enter the Palestinian gate according to an appointment system. At the gate, vehicle documents and those of the driver would be checked, and the vehicle would proceed to the scanner row. The trailer/container would be scanned and would move to the evaluation queue. The information from the scan would be evaluated by Israeli security to determine if any significant threat were present. If so, the rig would be turned back after an exchange of information between Israeli and Palestinian security. If not, the Palestinian tractor would be changed for an Israeli one and the rig would proceed to the Israeli side of the joint terminal. On the Israeli side---The vehicle documents would again be checked. If the container/trailer was empty, then the rig would proceed to the exit gate. If loaded, then a second scan would be performed. The rig would then wait for the evaluation to be completed. If the results were satisfactory it would proceed to the exit gate. Were there any anomaly, the truck would be directed to the physical inspection facility, where saw- tooth docks would permit quick access to the rig and the use of forklifts to assist in unloading. 4. The initial facility could be established at a new cargo crossing area, possibly in the Erez area. Alternatively, this facility could be developed within an existing crossing such as Karni; since it would operate separately, though, it would need a dedicated area. The construction cost should be less than US$5 million. A 6 MeV X-Ray scanner is a standard unit and in some cases 1 is available from inventory for around US$1.5 millioneach. Gamma scanners can be rented. The joint terminal should be a relatively open facility, permitting both sides to coordinate effectively and to establish perimeter security. With staffing needs minimal and with free-standing scanners, relatively few structures are required. 5. A layout for such a facility is shown in Figure 1, and typical processing times are given in Table 1. With coordinated management and a 16-hour operating day, this facility would have a processing capacity of about 275 loaded trucks, or 400 empty trucks, or some combination of the two. 6. The benefits of this configuration are as follows: a) It could become operational within 6 months; b) There would be continuous truck flow; c) Staffing requirements would be minimal; d) The Palestinianside would share the burden of providing terminal security; e) Coordination between the security services would be enhanced; and f) The facility would not require much space. 7. Perhaps the most important feature of this facility is that it would provide an upgrade path based on the development of trust and through shared responsibility and practical coordination. The facility would start out without the management problems faced in Karni today, and with a new security regime. It would benefit from new efforts to introduce supply chain security, including pre-scheduling, coordination and the application of risk management techniques (e.g. preferential treatment for shippers with track records, specialization for loaded and empty containers). 8. If successful, the pilot terminal could be converted to a permanent one. The mobile scanners could eventually be replaced by a higher throughput, higher resolution fixed/relocatable scanner. This new scanner could then be located on the Palestinian side, with dual monitors. In this permanent configuration, Palestinians would assume much of the responsibility for security, and the time needed to pass through Israeli checks would be minimal. This configuration would also allow for the introduction of through truck movements. 9. The pilot terminal would also offer a configuration that could be replicated on the West Bank-Israel border crossings. Current West Bank terminal designs are not intended for through movements and are not currently conducive to an efficient flow of trucks. Since they are also relatively land-intensive, the pilots could be incorporated within them, and on the 1967 borders. One key current issue is that existing terminal plans are designed for unilateral operation, requiring the development of complementary facilities on the Palestinain side of the border. 2 Table 1: Processing Times (minutes) Stage Loaded, Loaded, Empty Uninspected Inspected Check In 2 2 2 Initial Queue 3 3 3 Initial Scan 2 2 2 Evaluation Queue 10 10 10 Tractor Exchange 1 1 1 Check In 3 3 3 Scan 3 3 Evaluation Queue 12 12 Physical Inspection 25 Check Out 1 1 Total 41 66 25 Figure 1: Terminal for Outbound Articulated Trucks 120 meters EXIT CONTROL I N S P E 25 Min C T I O 12 Min N 80 meters 3 Min GATE 3 Min CONTROL 90 meters 10 Min 80 meters 3 2 Min