-
Implementation Date: Explain
how the implementation process far the rule will work. Will all
manifests need to be filed starting after the 30-day implementation
period on December 27. Will Customs refuse certificates to unlade
cargo if manifest information is incomplete or not filed during the
80-day non-enforcement period? How will Customs conduct its
enforcement activities during the early stages of the rule's
implementation when it has no overseas personnel at most ports?
Answer:The effective date of implementation is
December 2. 2002. Carriers and/or automated NVOCCs
will be required to submit a cargo declaration 24 hours before cargo
is laden aboard the vessel for any vessel beginning the voyage on or
after December 2. 2002.
Return to Questions
-
Implementation as CSI and Non-CSI Ports:
How does the application of this rule differ between CSI and non-OSI ports? How will holds on
cargo from non-CSI ports be handled? Besides electronic messages
through AMS how will Customs notify origin ports of cargo to beheld or
examined?
Answer: Requirements for
implementation of the 24-hour rule at CSI and non-CSI ports will be
the same for Vessel AMS participants. For non-automated carriers at CSI
ports, paper manifests will be presented to U.S. Customs personnel at a
designated location in these ports.
For non-automated carriers at non-CSI
ports, paper cargo declaration must be presented to each port of
unlading in the U.S. 24-hours prior to lading in theforeign port.
Facsimiles and non-AMS electronic messages sent directly to
Customs are not authorized. Non-automated
vessel carriers may enlist the automated services of a Vessel Agent,
Service Provider, local Port Authority, or a business partner in the
U.S. The domestic party in receipt would deliver the cargo declaration
information directly to Customs. When a non-automated vessel carrier has
elected to submit a paper cargo declaration directly to Customs in the
United States, the non-automated carrier is responsible for ensuring
that complete cargo declaration information for each port of call in the
United States is submitted to each Customs location for review 24 hours
prior to lading at the foreign port.
For none—automated carriers that submit
a paper a manifest, the party designated to present the cargo
declaration to Customs will be the one to receive notifications from
Customs of any cargo holds.
Return to Questions
-
Confidentiality:
It appears that the only protection of business
confidentiality would be by Customs delaying the release of the
information. How does that prevent information from getting into the
hands of a company~ competitors or criminals?
Answer: The fact that information
is provided directly to Customs addresses the concern of NVOCCs wishing
to safeguard their client& information from competitors. Customs
will also be issuing a separate Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to expand
the list of parties who may file a biennial certification which would
allow those parties to file on behalf of the importer or consignee. This
separate Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is necessary, because comments
received on this issue were outside the scope of the original Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking dated August 8. 2002.
Customs is regulated by statute (19 USC
1431(c)) regarding confidentiality disclosures. Congress must enact any
changes to the statute.
Return to Questions
-
C-TPAT:
How will it be advantageous to be a C-TPAT participant under this rule?
Answer:
Customs expects that its partners in C-TPAT will provide the required
information under this rule as a regular part of their security-related
procedures. Accurate and timely cargo declarations are critical to the
delivery of the cargo release benefits that are part of C-TPAT
participation. While C-TPAT participants will not be excluded from the
advance reporting requirements, their participation in the program will
be taken into account during the targeting process.
Return to Questions
-
Canada/Mexico Shipments:
Please clarify whether the final rule applies to cargo shipped from a
foreign port to Canada or Mexico and then trucked or railed across the
border to a final U.S. destination. How will Customs address the concern
that cargo may be diverted from ocean carriers to truck or rail carriers as
a means of circumventing the rule?
Answer:
The final rule does not apply to cargo that is shipped to Canada or
Mexico and into the U.S. by truck or rail. Customs has targeting
personnel stationed at seaports in Canada and cooperation with Canadian
authorities has been excellent. If either Customs administration
suspected that goods were being routed in an attempt to evade scrutiny,
those goods would likely be treated as high risk.
Return to Questions
-
Containers at Dock:
In response to concerns from the trade that containers will have to be
delivered to a carder several days before lading. Customs has said that it
wants the information on cargo delivered earlier, not the
container. Will Customs mandate that carriers enter information about a
container on a manifest before the carrier has actually received the container?
Answer:
Customs is not mandating
that carriers submit cargo declaration information to Customs prior to
receiving the container. That is a business decision for the carrier to
determine. Many comments received stated that the container had to be
physically located at the foreign port (dock) in order for the carrier
to transmit the cargo declaration to Customs. Customs was clarifying
that, for Customs purposes, the container did not have to be physically
located at the dock for the carrier to transmit the cargo declaration to
Customs.
Return to Questions
-
Earlier Security Screening for Transshipments:
Some ocean carriers have expressed an interest in how
they could have security prescreening done by Customs before the first leg of a
voyage of a container that will be transshipped. For example, Carrier agrees to
transport a container from Karachi to LA. The first leg of the voyage is on
Vessel A from Karachi to Singapore. It is then loaded in Singapore onto Vessel
B that sails for LA. Under this regulation, the security screening is done
before Vessel B loads in Singapore. If there is a problem with the container,
it is now stuck in Singapore. Is there a way for a carrier to have the option
to have the security screening done at the first port of loading, so that if
there is a problem, the container will not begin the voyage until the problem
is addressed?
Answer:
Customs would eventually like to receive this information, but current
limitations in the AMS system does not allow for this type of
transaction. With the development of ACE, Customs will be looking to
accept this type of electronic information.
Return to Questions
-
Clearing “Held” Cargo:
When the ATS system identifies a container that warrants
inspection in a non-CSI port, what procedures will be used to inspect and
subsequently clear the container for loading aboard the vessel?
Answer:
Customs, carriers and customer will need to coordinate closely.
Return to Questions
-
How will Customs clear cargo that has been put on hold in CSI and non-CSI ports?
Answer: For those vessel carriers
that are not automated and at a non-OSI port, the paper cargo
declaration must be presented to each port of unlading in the U.S.
24-hours prior to lading in the foreign port. For non-automated carriers
that submit a paper cargo declaration, the party designated to present
the cargo declaration to Customs will be the one responsible to verify
that the containers are not on a Customs hold. They are responsible for
relaying this information to the vessel carrier in the foreign port.
Return to Questions
-
Diversion to a Foreign Port:
If cargo has been cleared to sail to the U.s. from a foreign port and the
vessel carrier decides to divert by dropping cargo in Freeport, Bahamas to load
aboard another vessel for subsequent entry to the U.S.; would the vessel
carrier be required to file another 24 hours advance manifest for that cargo?
Answer: This cargo would have to once again comply with the 24-hour rule.
Return to Questions
-
Canadian Destination Cargo:
What would happen if a carrier drops a
Canadian first port of call, and comes directly to the US with Canadian
destination cargo aboard that has not been subjected to the 24 hour
advance manifest filing obligation (ex. operational decision to bypass
Halifax due to North Atlantic storm)?
Answer: Carriers must notify U.S.
Customs at the designated first port of arrival as soon as they realize
they are not going to make the foreign port of call. Upon arrival in the
U.S. port the cargo declaration will be placed on hold until Customs has
had the opportunity to review the documentation, any examinations will
be conducted and appropriate penalties may be issued. If U.S. Customs
determines that this has become a common occurrence for vessels this
could eventually lead to denying the permit to unlade. Additionally,
U.S. Customs will notify the Coast Guard of the vessel with unmanifested
cargo that is scheduled to arrive.
Return to Questions
-
FROB: If a shipper changes the cargo destination
from FROB to a U.S. port afterthe vessel has sailed, can that be handled through a
manifest correction?
Answer: Yes, manifest corrections
will behandled as a manifest discrepancy. Since the cargo was FROB and
falls under the24 hour requirement, information would have already been
received 24 hours before lading. However, the shipment is subject to
screening and examination due to the change in the information.
Return to Questions
-
Perishables:
Many perishable commodities (e.g., bananas, pineapples) are harvested and loaded
within the 24-hour time window before vessel loading. Information (such as
final seal number, precise quantity, and container number) will be preliminary
24 hours before vessel loading. How should this be handled?
Answer (1): The majority of the data
elements should be known, the only unknown data
elements would be the exact piece count and weight. For these shipments
approximate piece count and weights should be given and can be amended.
Customs believes the shippers should be fairly close in their estimated
piece counts and weights due to the redundancy of the shipment.
Answer (2): Current procedures shown
in the CAMIR document should be used. The CAMIR is located on the Customs web
site along with Customs Directive 3240-075, Vessel Automated Manifest System, that is available to the
trade community. Current acceptable down time is 2 hours; however, it is
within the port director's discretion to allow more than the recommended
2 hours if circumstances warrant. Carriers whose systems are down for
extended periods of time should notify their client representative and
refer to the procedures outlined in the directive on how to submit paper
cargo declaration information to Customs. Customs has made the Customs
Directive available on the Customs web site. Please continue to monitor
the Customs web site (www.customs.oov) for Information related to the
24-hour rule.
Return to Questions
-
AMS Acknowledgement of Manifest Receipt:
After the carrier submits the manifest, Customs
currently returns an acceptance message that confirms receipt of the manifest data, quantity of BLS accepted,
and quantity of BLs rejected. Can vessel carriers expect to receive this same
message for manifest information submitted under the 24-hour regulation?
Answer:
Yes, procedures will be the same. The carriers will receive these same messages.
Return to Questions
-
How will manifest receipt message relate to NVOCC
cargo, and what information will the vessel carrier will receive regarding the
NVOCC's filing?
Answer:
The information that the vessel operating carrier receives today for
automated slot charters will be the same information that the vessel
operating carrier will receive. Please refer to previous answer.
Return to Questions
-
Manifest Discrepancy:
Does Customs have any forecasted- time when the new rules
will be proposed for manifest discrepancy reports?
Answer:
Within 30-days of publication of the final rule (October 31. 2002) the
proposal for manifest discrepancy will be out of the Customs office to
the Department of the Treasury.
Return to Questions
-
Customs Operations:
Will Customs be manned 24/7 to process all manifests and provide the necessary hold
responses?
Answer:
Customs will provide the carriers with a designated location at CSI and
local Customs ports to submit paper cargo declaration. The designated
location will be a secured area with date and time stamp clocks.
Carriers and NVOCCs that do not receive a hold message within the
24-hour time frame after presentation of the cargo declaration will be
allowed to load the cargo.
Return to Questions
-
Will Customs establish a communication channel/help line for carriers?
Answer: Carriers currently have
designated Customs personnel or a designated office that they contact to
assist them.
Return to Questions
-
Data Element # Precise Description:
Please clarify what is meant by a precise description" of the merchandise. Are
descriptions such as "men's, leather boots," "women's cardigan," "plastic toys," or ink powder"
sufficiently precise? In the case of chemical compounds and mixtures, are formulas
necessary? What might be the repercussions for importers if the entered classifications and the
manifest classifications using the FITS designations are not identical?
Answer:
Some examples of precise cargo description am: "men's leather
shoes" (as opposed to "footwear"); "women's cotton pants" (as opposed to "apparel"); "computer
hard drives" (as opposed to "electronics"); and "automobile brakes" and "glass windshields for
automobiles" (as opposed to "auto parts"). Although a formula is not necessary for chemical
compounds, the chemical name is required.
Absent fraud it is not anticipated that
the importer would incur penalties in these situations. Customs will
work with the carrier to correct errors and through post audits we will
be able to notify carriers that certain cargo descriptions are not
precise. If it is determined that the carrier is consistently submitting
conflicting information and Customs has routinely notified the carrier
of this problem, penalties can be assessed. When there is conflicting
information, the importer should notify the shipper of any incorrect
classifications to ensure it is corrected future submissions.
Return to Questions
-
Data Element #8: Shipper's Name and Address:
Freight forwarders may contract with carriers under FMC service contracts as "agents for
various shippers. Is it correct that the name and address of the actual shipper, and not the
name and address of the freight forwarder, must be used? If the forwarder appears "as agent
for" the shipper, is it correct that the shipper should be the second named party?
Answer: The name and address of the actual shipper must be used. The second notify
party is to allow parties that are automated with Customs to receive electronic
information concerning the shipment.
Return to Questions
-
Data Element #9: Consignee and To Order Bills:
Item (ix) provides that for "to order" bills of lading, where there is no
consignee, this information item should include the name of the cargo
"owner or the owner's representative". The regulation does not state
any limitation or definition of who an "owner's representative" can
be. so we assume it does not require a name or address in the United States,
and can be whoever the shipper states onthe bill of lading. Please confirm.
Answer: The owner or the Owner's representative will require that a U.S. name and
address be provided.
Return to Questions
