USA Customs
Frequently Asked Questions
- April 16, 2004
Revised Questions: 50 - 24小时预报舱单制度已于2002/12/2实施,航商及无船公共运送人(NVOCC)需于货物在外国港口装载于船舶前,提交货物申报书。因此《美国通关服务》提供相关之常见问题集供贸易伙伴瞭解相关规定事项(请参阅英文说明),当内容有增加时亦将更新FAQ<常见问题集>之内容。
FAQs concerning the 24 hour advance manifest regulation (click the links below for details.)-
1. Enforcement Date
-
2. Requirement of NVOCCs on December 2, 2002
Q : Will Customs rethink its policy regarding NVOCC automation or extend the time period by which NVOCCs may automate?
Answer: Customs has not required that NVOCCs become automated, but has authorized the option of automation. The time frame given for NVOCCs to submit paper cargo declarations directly to U.S. Customs expired on February 2, 2003. This time frame will not be extended. There are several interim options for this segment of the trade to provide information in an automated format to Customs. These options are: Utilizing a service provider, a port authority, direct interface with U.S. Customs, or submitting paper cargo declarations to the carrier for input into AMS or for inclusion on the non-automated carriers cargo declaration. It should be noted that a direct interface with U.S. Customs requires a period of lead-time and therefore, companies may want to use one of the other options until their direct interface is completed.
Q : How can I get my manifest data electronically to U.S. Customs?
Answer: You may either utilize a service center or port authority to transmit data on your behalf or you may elect to develop a direct interface between your company and U.S. Customs. A list of those entities which have developed a Sea AMS interface can be found under the heading of Sea AMS Data Processing Services on the following Customs web site: http://www.customs.treas.gov/xp/cgov/import/
operations_support/automated_systems/ams/ Those companies electing to establish a direct interface must develop all the necessary records required by the module. AMS recognizes transmission of data in either the ANSI X12 (version 4010) format or the Customs Automated Manifest Interface Requirements (CAMIR) format. In addition, those users electing to develop a direct interface or purchasing a vendor's software package must successfully complete a 4 step test phase.
Q : What type of communication options are available to overseas parties looking to interface with CBP.
Answer: Those parties located overseas may choose to utilize frame relay/ MQ access via an affiliate within the continental U.S., a Value Added Network (VAN) with a global service or utilize a service center/ port authority. Many service centers can receive a user's data via the Internet and then pass to CBP.
Q : Does an automated NVOCC possess the same system capabilities as an automated carrier?
Answer: Automated NVOCCs are afforded the same AMS features as an automated carrier, such as auto arrival of the vessel, electronic request for permit to transfers (PTT), Second Notify Party designation and participation in the Paperless Master In-bond Program (AMS/MIB). -
3.Implementation at CSI and Non-CSI Ports
-
4. Trade Act of 2002
-
5. Confidentiality
-
6. Non-AMS Carriers
-
7. C-TPAT
-
8. COAC
-
9. Canada/Mexico Shipments
-
10. Containers at Dock
-
11. Liability
-
12. Bonds
-
13. Automation Outline
-
14. Paperless Master In-bond
-
15. Public Lists
Q : Will Customs make public a list of those NVOCCs who are approved for AMS manifesting and have obtained an International Carrier Bond?
Answer: Customs has posted a list of AMS carriers on the Customs web site. This document is continuously changing and cannot be used as 100% accurate. NVOCCs will not be authorized to transmit in AMS without an International Carriers Bond.
Q : Will Customs publicize what third party service providers are available to perform NVOCC electronic manifest filing in AMS, as vessel carriers may have difficulty performing this function.
Answer: A listing of 3rd party service providers can be found under the heading of Sea AMS Data Processing Services on the following Customs web site: http://www.customs.treas.gov/imp-exp2/auto-sys/ams.htm This document contains 2 attachments.
The first is a list of service centers, port authorities, and software vendors that presently have the capability to provide carriers/NVOCC's with an interface to U.S. Customs. The second is the Sea AMS Respondent Checklist that interested parties must complete. This one page document should then be faxed to the number provided (703) 921-7563 and a client representative will then be assigned to work with the company.
-
16. Earlier Security Screening for Transshipments
-
17. “Do Not Load” Procedures
-
18. Diversion to a Foreign Port
-
19. FROB
-
20. Paper Manifest Onboard
-
21. Coast Guard Rulemaking
-
22. AMS/Batch Filing
-
23. Perishables
-
24. Equipment Change
-
25. AMS Acknowledgement of Manifest Receipt
-
26. Manifest Discrepancy
-
27. Customs Operations
-
28. Vessel Sharing Carriers
-
29. Data Element #6 – Port
-
30. Data Element #7 – Cargo Description
-
31. Data Element #8 – Shipper's Name and Address:
Q : 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: Under this particular set of fact, 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. Therefore, the shipper an not acceptable entry for this data element.
This narrow question raises the more general issue of adequacy of the shipper description. Currently, the information Customs receives about the shipper is not helpful in making risk determinations. For example, identifying the shipper as a carrier, bank or importer does not provide Customs with useful information. Providing this type information will invite closer scrutiny and increase the likelihood that the shipment will be examined. However, the adequacy of the shipper description will not be the initial focus of Customs' enforcement of the 24 hour rule, although Customs may issue "do not load messages” for shipments where the shipper description is left blank.
-
32. Data Element #9 – Consignee and To Order Bills:
Q : 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 on the bill of lading. Please confirm.
Answer: CBP recognizes that for business and financial reasons “to order” must be placed in the consignee field. Therefore, CBP has decided that “to order” without corresponding information will be acceptable in the consignee field. However, when 'to order" is used in the consignee field the first notify field must contain the owner or owner's representative with the U.S. name and address.
CBP recognizes that for FROB cargo the actual consignee will not be located in the United States. Therefore, in such cases where the bill of lading is "to order" and FROB cargo the owner or owner's representative name and foreign address must be listed in the field.
-
33. Data Element #14 --Seals:
Q : Item (xiv) requires the “seal numbers for all seals affixed to containers.” We find no requirement in law that a shipper loading a container must seal the container. Nor can a vessel carrier confirm who affixed the seal when the container is stuffed. Only the shipper is in a position to do that. The carrier, however, can check the seal number when it receives the container.
What should a carrier if it receives a container from a shipper without a seal or discovers that the original seal has been broken or damaged?
Answer: essed that carriers, as the recipients of most loaded containers, are often not in a position to ensure the secure sealing of those containers. While that may be true, the sealing of containers is an essential element of a secure supply chain and remains a critical part of a carrier's commitment to C-TPAT. With respect to that commitment, the C-TPAT agreement for sea carriers reads, “The Carrier agrees to develop and implement, within a framework consistent with the listed recommendations, a verifiable, documented program to enhance security procedures throughout its supply chain process. Where the Carrier does not exercise control of a production facility, distribution entity, or process in the supply chain, the Carrier agrees to communicate the attached recommendations/guidelines to those entities.”
As noted above, even though a carrier may not “exercise control” over the sealing of containers, carriers that join C-TPAT are expected to promote effective security measures throughout the entire supply chain. That must include doing whatever a carrier can to ensure the sealing of all loaded containers and may require that the carrier work or negotiate with shippers, forwarders, and/or others to arrange for that sealing. Specifically, a C-TPAT carrier should consider the level of risk associated with an unsealed, mislabeled or tampered container and take appropriate security steps prior to the lading of that container. As discussed below, these steps could include applying a high security seal, requiring a shipper to verify the contents and add a seal, or refusing to lade the container. In addition, for those containers that are not sealed or the seal has been broken, a C-TPAT carrier should consider the container a vulnerability and work with the responsible parties (shippers/forwarders) to address that vulnerability for future shipments.
As Customs develops a C-TPAT agreement for foreign shippers (and enhances other agreements), Customs will, as appropriate, articulate the responsibility of other industry sectors for ensuring sealed containers.
Therefore, if the carrier receives a container where the seal has been tampered or the seal number does not match the shipping documents the carrier should notify Customs. This notification should happen as soon as the discrepancy is noted. If the discovery of the discrepancy is noted after receipt of the transmission of the bill of lading (within the 24-hour period) the carrier should notify Customs, but the 24-hour review start time will continue to be based on the transmission of the original bill of lading data.
The seal data field will not be Customs' initial focus in enforcing the 24 hour rule; however, the lack of a seal or a damaged seal on a container will pose a level of risk. Several options for addressing this risk are available to both C-TPAT and non-C-TPAT carriers and their trading partners. The first option, listed below, represents the highest level of diligence and therefore poses the lowest risk from a targeting standpoint. In the event that a container is delivered to a carrier facility without a seal, the carrier can undertake any of the following options:
· The carrier could examine and verify the contents of the container and place a new seal on the container.
· The carrier could request that the shipper verify the contents of the container and place a seal on the container.
· The carrier could seal the container without verifying the contents
· The carrier could refuse to load the container.
· The carrier could accept the container, but transmit information in AMS, which would indicate the status of the seal (no seal, tampered, or broken).
Customs will provide the capability in AMS to allow carriers/NVOCCs to transmit information in seal data field that indicates no seal, tampered seal or broken seal.
Q : It is not unusual for offshore customs authorities to inspect an export container just prior to vessel loading, and then affix a new seal. This will occur after the CF 1302 with the original seal number has been filed with US Customs. Under the Carrier and Super-Carrier Initiatives, carriers have procedures to track seal changes, and Customs follows-up on a case-by-case basis. Please confirm that this procedure is the way to address seal changes post - CF 1302 filing.
Answer: The carrier should notify Customs at the same location where they are submitting their cargo declaration. Additionally, carriers should try to obtain documentation that an export examination was conducted by a foreign agency. Customs has continually stated that if cargo declarations are amended or changed the 24-hour clock would begin from the date and time that Customs received the last transmission. If the carrier or NVOCC can provide documentation from foreign customs to the Customs port where the cargo declaration was submitted, the port may waive the requirement for a new 24-hour clock. -
34. NVOCCs:
Q : What appears clear is that Customs will require NVOCCs' cargo descriptions and house bill of lading information to be filed electronically in AMS:
· by the NVOCC itself obtaining a bond and becoming automated,
· by the NVOCC using a vessel carrier to file in AMS its cargo declaration and house bill of lading information for it,
· by the NVOCC using an automated NVOCC to file the information for it, or
· by the NVOCC using an automated third party filing service.
Answer:
Bullet 1 – In this example, the automated NVOCC will file their cargo declarations directly to U.S. Customs. This process is the same as the carriers who file directly to Customs. The additional requirement is that the NVOCC must place the contracting vessel carrier (meaning the vessel carrier issuing the bill of lading to the NVOCC), not the vessel operating carrier in the second notify party location. Each second notify party that is identified will receive messages from Customs every time a bill of lading has been changed, held and released. The identifiers included in the transmission are:
- SCAC - Bill of Lading #
- Vessel Name - Disposition Code
- Voyage # - Quantity
- Manifest Sequence # - Entry Type
- IMO # - Entry #
- Port of Unlading - Action Date and Time
- Date - Container #
Bullet 2 – Due to business and IT issues, Customs will work on this via COAC to develop clear procedures. However, Customs has been made aware of several carriers who have developed procedures to input the NVOCCs bills of lading. Hopefully, a best practices document would be distributed amongst the carriers.
Bullet 3 – In this example, the non-automated NVOCC must submit their cargo declaration information to the AMS NVOCC who is presenting the container to the carrier. The AMS NVOCC will input the cargo declaration as if it was their own. A freight forwarder or NVOCC can not be listed, only the designated shipper and consignee. Contracting vessel carrier must be listed as the second notify party.
Bullet 4 – In this example, if the non-automated NVOCC elects to submit their cargo declaration information to a Service Provider or Port Authority to transmit to U.S. Customs, then the non-automated NVOCC must obtain an International Carriers Bond. The vessel carrier must be listed as the second notify party.
-
35. Data Element Requirements for Vessel Carrier
Q : The vessel carrier does issue bills of lading to its NVOCC customer. Is there any information that a vessel carrier must include on its CF 1302 regarding containers it is transporting for an NVOCC that is filing in AMS?
Answer: NVOCCs that become automated will be required to submit a completed cargo declaration to Customs. The automated NVOCC must include the vessel carrier that has contracted with the NVOCC as the second notify party. If the vessel carrier is transmitting the cargo declaration to Customs for a non-automated NVOCCs the NVOCC must provide complete cargo declaration for all bills of lading to the vessel carrier. The carriers will input the information under their own bills of lading.
Q : To whom and when would information pursuant to cargo examinations be made available?
Answer: Holds and subsequent removal messages will be sent to the party that transmitted the manifest data to Customs through AMS and also to any parties designated for secondary notification. For carriers that submit paper cargo declarations, the party presenting the cargo declaration to Customs will receive the notifications.
Q : The Comments to the regulation state that “the vessel operator is only responsible for ensuring that the automated NVOCC's Standard Alpha Code (SCAC) … is included on the Customs Form (CF) 3171 that is presented to Customs.” The CF 3171, however, is not filed prior to vessel loading, but as the Comments state, “48 hours prior to arrival in the United States”.
Answer: For vessels that arrive in the United States, Customs only receives one CF 3171 per port that includes reporting all SCAC codes for that vessel. The arriving vessel is responsible for supplying this information to Customs, since the vessel carrier is the second notify party they must inform the vessel operator of all SCAC codes transported on the vessel. The vessel carrier must notify the automated NVOCC of any changes they made to the cargo that was manifested by the NVOCC (overages/shortages).
Q : How should bills of lading be handled if a vessel drops its last foreign port of call before departing to the United States, do the bills of lading have to be amended?
Answer: No, if a vessel drops their last foreign port of call before departing for the U.S. then the CF 3171 must reflect this. The bills of lading do not have to be amended in vessel AMS.
-
36. Second Notify Party
Q : It is essential that a vessel carrier know of any hold messages regarding an NVOCC's box before vessel loading commences. It seems clear that a vessel carrier which is chartering slots would list the vessel operator in this situation. It is assumed an automated NVOCC would be required to list the vessel carrier with whom it has contracted. Is this correct? Would it have to also list the vessel operator if the vessel carrier is a slot charterer, or is the communication to the vessel operator in that case the responsibility of the slot charter?
Answer: The automated NVOCC would be required to list the vessel carrier as the second notify party. If a container is denied lading at the foreign port, Customs will notify the automated NVOCC, and it will be the NVOCCs responsibility to make the necessary notifications.
Q : Is it correct that the Second Notify Party field must “be completed” by the NVOCC to include the vessel carrier transporting the box, and that without this field completed, the NVOCC's filing will be incomplete and not accepted?
Answer: The second notify party will be a required field for NVOCCs, and they must list the vessel carrier as the second notify party.
Q : What is required from an IT/systems perspective to ensure that all NVOCC Second Notify Party listings will result in any “hold” notices for the NVOCC's cargo being effectively transmitted via AMS to the vessel carrier before vessel loading?
Answer: All AMS participants are required to test their system with the Office of Information and Technology before they are allowed to transmit data in AMS.
Q : What information is the Second Notify Party given other than access to Customs “hold” messages? Will container number and NVOCC SCAC code (or other identifier) be included in Second Notify Party information?
Answer: The second notify party will receive messages from Customs every time a bill of lading has been changed, held, and released. Customs is currently evaluating the programming it would take to limit the information that is sent to second notify parties. The identifiers included in the transmission are:
- SCAC - Bill of Lading #
- Vessel Name - Disposition Code
- Voyage # - Quantity
- Manifest Sequence # - Entry Type
- IMO # - Entry #
- Port of Unlading - Action Date and Time
- Date - Container #
Q : Does Customs have a program to inform NVOCCs, especially oversees NVOCCs, how to become AMS and bond compliant within 90 days?
Answer: Presently, the Office of Information and Technology has a defined implementation program for automating carriers in AMS. These same requirements will be used to automate NVOCCs. Customs utilizes the Federal Register and Shipping Organizations, the carriers should be distributing information to their foreign shippers advising them of the new requirements.
-
37. Co-loading
Q : Is the master NVOCC the responsible filing party for all bills of lading in a co-loaded container?
Answer: Customs is defining the term "master NVOCC" as the party responsible for presenting the container to the vessel carrier. An automated master NVOCC will be the responsible filing party for all parties that are not automated. A non-automated master NVOCC will be responsible for providing paper cargo declaration to the carrier for all parties that are not automated.
Q : If all the NVOCCs in a co-loaded box are “automated”, can each NVOCC file the information needed from its own bills of lading in AMS?
Answer: Automated Master NVOCC will be responsible for all paper cargo declarations. Any automated NVOCC that is co-loading must file directly to Customs in AMS. Non-automated NVOCC must provide the cargo declaration information to the master NVOCC to transmit the information to Customs. Non-automated NVOCC will not be authorized to present their cargo declaration to the vessel operator, when co-loading with an automated master NVOCC.
Non-automated master NVOCC must submit the cargo declaration for all non-automated parties co-loading within the container to the vessel carrier for input into AMS. Automated NVOCCs that are co-loading, will be required to transmit their cargo declaration to Customs in AMS. All automated parties within the container must include the contracting carrier as the second notify party.
Q : If each NVOCC can file, does the vessel carrier need to know how many NVOCCs are obliged to file in AMS for a container it is loading and transporting, and how would it know this? Will each co-loading NVOCC have to list the vessel carrier as the Second Notify Party for its filing to be acceptable?
Answer: The automated NVOCCs will be required to give complete cargo declaration information for all bills of lading and have the vessel carrier as the second notify party. AMS will not notify the vessel carrier of how many NVOCCs have filed in AMS for a container. If this information is requested or needed by the vessel carrier it would not be captured in AMS. Many carriers have developed a form for automated NVOCCs to complete which will indicate the total bills of lading and bill of lading numbers in the container.
Q : The commentary states that if a non-automated NVOCC is co-loading with an automated “master” NVOCC, the non-automated NVOCC “must fully disclose and present the required manifest for their cargo to the automated NVOCC who would be required to present this information to Customs via vessel AMS.” If the non-automated co-loading NVOCC does not want to give its bill of lading information to the master NVOCC (a potential competitor), but comes to the vessel carrier to file its cargo declaration information via AMS, do the regulations permit this or is the AMS filing only to be done by the automated NVOCC?
Answer: No, please refer back to previous answers provided in question B.
-
38. Consolidations:
Q : A “US Customer”, places an order with “Foreign Vender” located in England. “Foreign Vender” takes the order and advises that they will produce and ship the goods from their “Factory” located in Italy. The “Factory” produces the goods, and advises “Foreign Vender” that they are ready for shipment. “Foreign Vender” prepares shipping instructions and selects a local England NVOCC to move the goods directly from “Factory” in Italy, to Customer in the US. The terms of shipment are under a Line of Credit, between the “Foreign Vender” and “US Customer”.
Who should be shown as the Shipper on the Master Bill of lading if no House bill is involved? If a House Bill is involved, the Master will reflect the “Foreign NVOCC” as shipper to their “US NVOCC” office as the consignee. The House Bill will reflect the actual “US Customer” as consignee. Should “Foreign Vender” or “Factory” be shown as the shipper on the House Bill?
Answer: The shipper should be, either "Foreign Vender" or the "Factory". Although, CBP would like to have the most detailed information on the shipper available, for targeting purposes, CBP will accept either party as the shipper until we can clearly identify the term shipper to the trade. The consignee will not be the "US NVOCC" office, it should be the actual "US Customer".
Q : A “US Customer” advises their NVOCC that they are purchasing several orders from several venders, and want them to collect the goods and ship them under one House Bill. The “US NVOCC” relays the various venders' information to their “Foreign NVOCC” office for cargo collection. The “Foreign NVOCC” picks up all the goods from 3 different venders and prepares a House Bill of Lading. Since there will be three different venders, who should be shown as the shipper(s)?
Answer: For each shipment that does not contain the same shipper and same consignee information it must be identified on its own bill of lading. For example:
1st bill of lading - 1st vendor or factory is the shipper - U.S. customer is the consignee
2nd bill of lading - 2nd vendor or factory is the shipper - U.S. customer is the consignee
3rd bill of lading - 3rd vendor or factory is the shipper - U.S. customer is the consignee
Each shipment will be identified in AMS under their own NVOCC bill of lading but, in most cases, listed in the same container.
Q : Will CBP allow multiple shippers on one bill of lading? If so, what is the proper format for the bill of lading? Will CBP accept multiple manufacturers I.D's on one bill of lading in lieu of separate addresses?
Answer: CBP will not allow for multiple shippers or multiple consignees on one bill of lading. For every shipper/consignee relationship a separate bill of lading must be created.
Q : Will CBP allow for an in care of party to be referred to in the shipper and/or consignee field?
Answer: CBP will accept the name of the in care of party to be referred to in the shipper and/or consignee field, along with the actual shipper and/or consignee name and complete address. An example of this would be "Consolidator X on behalf of shipper A, with the complete address of the shipper A".
-
39. Clarification of time of transmission of cargo declarations:
Q : The regulations seem to indicate an inconsistency regarding the required time of transmission of cargo declaration information when vessel carriers transmit the information and when automated NVOCCs transmit the information. For vessel carriers, CBP must receive from the carrier the vessel's cargo declaration information or a CBP-approved electronic equivalent 24 hours prior to the lading of cargo on the vessels, and for automated NVOCCs, the cargo declaration information merely needs to be transmitted 24-hours prior to lading of cargo. Is this correct?
Answer: The regulations issued on October 31, 2002, do set forth an unintended inconsistency, which is being corrected by an amendment to the regulations published in the Federal Register on January 14, 2003. This correction clarifies that the 24-hour period prior to loading begins from CBP receipt of the information. The information is transmitted to CBP and must pass system edits and validations with a receipt message back to the transmitter to be considered received. To make this clear, CBP has published a technical clarification to the rule in the Federal Register on Tuesday, January 14, 2003.
Q : I realize I must provide my manifest information to CBP at least 24 hours prior to my container being loaded on the vessel to take it to the United States, but must I wait until after my shipment (or shipments) has been loaded into the container and the container closed and sealed, or may I transmit the manifest data prior to loading and sealing the container?
Answer: CBP requires the cargo declaration data to be sent 24 hours before the goods are loaded on the conveyance which will carry them to the United States. The regulation does not require that the goods already be loaded and placed in a sealed container before the cargo information is reported. If there is a data quality issue for goods on one shipment within a consolidated container which cannot be resolved timely, that shipment may be removed before loading the container on the vessel. CBP will request assistance from foreign customs services as appropriate whenever a security concern is raised about a shipment.
-
40. Geographic Reach:
Q : Does the 24 hour prior to loading rule apply to all geographic locations, like Puerto Rico, the Caribbean and other short haul locations?
Answer: Puerto Rico is within the Customs territory of the United States and is included in the definition of "United States" in the Tariff Act; so the rule does not apply to containers leaving Puerto Rico destined directly to another U.S. port. However, it does apply to cargo destined to Puerto Rico.
The 24 hour rule does apply to all containers leaving all other U.S. possessions and territories, such as Guam and the Northern Marianas, destined directly to a U.S. port.
No exceptions have been made to the timeframe for the rule for any geographic location.
-
41. Bulk and Break Bulk Cargo:
Q : My exemption was for a period of 180 days and my expiration date is soon approaching. Do I have to reapply for another temporary exemption?
Answer: Carriers who have received temporary exemptions from the 24-hour rule will not be required to reapply at the end of the 180-day period. Temporarily exempt carriers will receive written notification of their application status 20-30 days prior to the expiration date. This correspondence will explain the details of the exemption process as it affects them individually. CEA numbers will remain the same for ease of transition.
In general, all exempt carriers will receive a notice for one of the following decisions:
· a full exemption (initial research complete, no expiration date)
· an extension of their current exemption (further research required or more information necessary and temporary exemption extended)
· a denial (decision and appeals process will be explained to carrier)
Q : What is considered bulk cargo?
Answer: For the purposes of the 24-hour advanced manifest rule only, the following definition will be used for bulk cargo:
“Homogenous cargo that is stowed loose in the hold and is not enclosed in any container such as a box, bale, bag, cask, or the like. Such cargo is also described as bulk freight. Specifically, bulk cargo is composed of either: (A) free flowing articles such as oil, grain, coal, ore, and the like which can be pumped or run through a chute or handled by dumping; or (B) uniform cargo that stows as solidly as bulk cargo and requires mechanical handling for lading and discharging.”
Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Border Targeting and Analysis (BTA) has determined that the following list of commodities and commodity types can be classified as bulk cargo. To be classified as bulk, this cargo may not be containerized and must be easily identifiable as laden on the vessel. Any bundling of the following commodities must only be for the purposes of securing the cargo. This list may be changed and updated as deemed appropriate by CBP.
· Coils of steel and other metals
· Rails of steel and other metals
· Wire rods of steel and other metals (may be coiled or flat)
· Ingots of metal (precious or otherwise)
· Round bars of steel or other metal
· Deformed Bars/Rebars (of metal)
· Plates (of metal)
· Billets (of metal)
· Slabs (of metal)
· Pipes (of metal)
· Beams (of metal)
· Tubes/Tubing (of metal)
· Angles, shapes and sections (of metal)
· Sheets (of metal)
· Expanded metal
· Flat bars (of metal)
· Strand wire (of metal)
· Sawn Timber/Lumber as a commodity (not as packaging material)
· Paperboard/Fiberboard/Plywood as a commodity (not as packaging material)
· Paper products as commodity (wood pulp, newsprint and paper rolls and not as packaging material)
· Certain perishable goods, not in boxes, bags or containerized, and not frozen, but laden and stowed in a way similar to other types of bulk cargo (includes seafood and produce).
· Blooms (similar to “billets and of metal)
· Anodes/Cathodes, in sheets only (may be corrugated)
Q : What is considered break bulk cargo?
Answer: Break bulk cargo will be defined as cargo that is not containerized and that cannot be classified as “bulk” cargo under the above definition. For example, new and used vehicles will be classified as break bulk cargo. Although uniform in nature, vehicles have identifying marks (such as a Vehicle Identification Number, or VIN). One necessary aspect of bulk cargo is fungibility. The presence of a VIN removes that component from the shipment of new or used vehicles.
It is important to note that the difference between bulk and break bulk is based not only on the type of cargo, but also on the way in which the cargo is stowed or loaded. For example, bananas stowed loosely in a hold (not in boxes or containers) will be considered bulk. Palletized boxes of bananas loaded directly into a hold (but not loose or containerized) will be considered break bulk.
Q : How do I apply for an exemption from the 24-hour rule filing requirements for break bulk cargo?
Answer: A carrier of break bulk cargo may apply for an exemption from the 24-hour rule filing requirements. Exemption requests should be mailed to:
Customs and Border Protection
Border Targeting and Analysis, Room 5.4-D
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20229.
Generally, exemption processing takes approximately two to three weeks for a complete review.
The following information should be supplied in order to be considered for an exemption (per 19 CFR 4.7(b)(4)(ii)(A)): The carrier's IRS number; the source, identity and means of the packaging or bundling of the commodities being shipped; the ports of call both foreign and domestic; the number of vessels the carrier uses to transport break bulk cargo, along with the names of the vessels and their International Maritime Organization numbers; and the list of the carrier's importers and shippers, identifying any who are members of C-TPAT (Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism). Customs and Border Protection reserves the right to request any additional information it deems necessary and appropriate to ensure adequate compliance with 19 CFR 4.7 (b)(4) and to perform necessary national security risk analysis.
NOTE: Any cargo stowed in containers, including containers referred to as “ship's convenience,” will be considered general cargo. No such containerized cargo will be exempt from the manifesting reporting requirements. For example, palletized boxes of bananas (not loose or loaded directly into a hold) stowed in shipping containers will be treated the same as all containerized cargo requiring information to be submitted 24 hours prior to loading.
Q : Updated Contact Information (Break Bulk Exemption Only)
Answer: Beginning June 15, 2003, all correspondence regarding exemption amendments, questions or concerns must be sent to:
E-mail (preferred): 24hour.exemptions@dhs.gov
Phone: (202) 927-6060
Fax: (202) 927-1435
Please ensure that all e-mails and phone calls clearly reference “24 Hour Exemptions” and the Customs Exemption Application number, if assigned. Written correspondence may be mailed to the same address as listed earlier in FAQ #41.
-
42. Missed Voyages:
Q : If information on a container has been transmitted 24 hours prior to lading on the vessel and the 24 hours have expired without the carrier receiving a “hold” message from Customs, but for some reason the container misses the sailing of the vessel, will Customs require an additional transmission 24 hours before loading that container?
Answer: If the container information was initially transmitted in compliance with the 24 hour rule and was not issued a do not load message, the container would be allowed to sail on the next scheduled voyage without requiring a new 24 hour period, provided that:
· The original bill of lading is deleted from the original vessel.
· The bill of lading is input on the second vessel without any changes to the bill information with the exception of the changes required to the transportation/voyage data.
· The next scheduled voyage must be within 24 hours of the previous departure time. If this is not the case, a new 24 hour time frame will be required prior to loading on the second vessel.
In all cases the cargo declaration must be amended to reflect the deletions and additions of the bills of lading that were deleted or added to a voyage.
-
43. RecordKeeping:
Q : What are the recordkeeping requirements for carriers and NVOCCs?
Answer: The 5 year statutory mark (19 U.S.C. 1508), as implemented under section 163.1(a)(2)(i) of the regulations (19 CFR 163.1(a)(2)(i)). This regulation imposes a 5 year retention requirement on parties involved in "Any importation, declaration or entry".
-
44. Entry/Entry Summary:
Q : Proper reporting of NVOCC bills of lading on entry/entry summary.
Answer: It has come to our attention that there is some misunderstanding by the import brokers and importers on how to report NVOCC ocean bills of lading on Entry/Entry Summary.
Under the new 24-hour manifesting rules, NVOCCs have been allowed to participate in the ocean automated manifest program. Automated NVOCCs are required to transmit their traditional house bills of lading as master bills using their own SCAC codes. These bills are being handled in AMS exactly the same as slot charter bills, or vessel sharing agreement bills. If an NVOCC is an operational AMS participant, it is imperative that brokers and importers report those bill of lading numbers as master bills of lading on their Entry/Entry Summary transmissions and documentation. Do not report them as house bill numbers and do not report any bill numbers issued by the actual carrier.
In addition, use the NVOCC SCAC as both the issuer and carrier codes, do not report the actual carrier's SCAC in either location.
Failure to properly report automated NVOCC bills of lading will result in the creation of AMS shell records, and may cause delays in obtaining release of freight.
-
45. AMS Programming Change:
Q : The following programming changes have been made by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to further facilitate the movement of cargo on multiple levels of the supply chain.
Answer: Input to CBP - TS309/MI
Changes were applied to the Automated Manifest System on Saturday, March 22 to allow for the usage of the qualifiers "OB" (Ocean Bill of Lading) and "BN" (Booking Number). In addition the appropriate reference identifier should be supplied.
Output from CBP - TS350/MR
In conjunction with the changes that were made on Saturday, March 22, the Automated Manifest System will echo back one "OB" or "BN" Qualifier as well as, the reference identifier the CAMIR R02 and X-12 TS350 X4 segment.
Additionally, to effectively utilize the programming changes that were made, it is suggested that the qualifier of "OB" and the reference identifier should reflect the contract carrier's ocean bill of lading. This would allow the ocean carrier's bill to be referenced in a B04 record for each one of the NVOCC's bills sent in AMS. This would assist trade members in linking the NVOCC bills of lading to the bill of lading issued by the ocean carrier (not in AMS) once they receive the SNP information. NVOCCs that do not reference and/or do not provide an accurate ocean bill number in their AMS transmission may experience delays in the release of their cargo.
-
46. AMS Releases:
Q : What does CBP consider as appropriate documentation for proof of release of cargo?
Answer: As a vessel AMS participant, CBP has stated that the receipt of the 1C message in AMS indicates the official authorization for the release of cargo. For those rare instances when the carrier and/or terminal operator questions the NVOCC's release of cargo a copy of the AMS release message should be the only document required. This will also be accepted by CBP as proof the carrier released the cargo with official CBP authorization. It should be noted that this is the exception, not the rule. NVOCCs are required to place the contracting carrier's SCAC in the SNP field for every bill they submit in AMS and in every amendment made to the bill. Carriers must ensure that their systems are able to receive the SNP designation.
-
47. Permits to Transfer (PTT):
Q : Prior to the 24 hour rule, PTT were issued at the master bill level by a carrier, CFS, CES or other facility in order to move containers off of the pier and to break down consolidated shipments for entry. Under the 24-hour rule what is the proper procedure for filing a PTT on container with multiple bills?
Automated Master NVOCC
Answer:CBP is defining the term "co-loading" as two or more NVOCCs loading cargo in the same container. An automated master NVOCC co-loading with non-automated NVOCCs is responsible for the AMS transmission of the entire container. In this instance the master NVOCC has two options to file the PTT for all the bills of lading.
1) The automated master NVOCC must file a PTT in AMS for each bill of lading. In addition, the master NVO bill should include the contracting carrier in the SNP field and reference the ocean carriers bill in the B04/N9 record so that the carrier will receive and recognize the electronic authorization in AMS. The contracting carrier can then authorize the movement with the terminal operators. The NVOCC must also provide the contracting carrier with a list of all the bill numbers in the container.
2) TThe automated master NVOCC must apply in advance with CBP for a Blanket PTT at each port of discharge. A Blanket PTT must be created for each specific CFS that they intend to use. The blanket PTT must contain a signature from the CFS before CBP will approve it. Once the Blanket PTT is approved, the NVOCC will be responsible for providing a copy of the approved Blanket PTT to the contracting carrier(s). For all cargo that is moved on the approved blanket PTT, thereafter, the NVOCC will be responsible for the filling of a paper PTT indicating all NVOCCs bills of lading numbers that are co-loaded in the container and referencing the ocean carrier's bill of lading. A copy of the PTT must be presented to the carrier and to CBP. CBP will consider the blanket PTT as authorization to move the cargo unless a hold has been placed on a bill in the container.
Q : Automated Master NVOCC co-loading with only other automated NVOCC(s).
Answer: Each automated NVOCC must file a PTT in AMS for each bill of lading. In addition, the master NVO bill should include the contracting carrier in the SNP field and reference the ocean carriers bill in the B04/N9 record so that the carrier will receive and recognize the electronic authorization in AMS. The contracting carrier can then authorize the movement with the terminal operators. The Master NVOCC must then also provide the contracting carrier with a list of all the bill numbers for each NVOCC in the container.
The master NVOCC will also have the option as outline in FAQ above 47, A, 2.
Q : Non-Automated Master NVOCC
Answer: If the master NVOCC is not automated the carrier will be the party transmitting the non-automated NVOCC(s) cargo declarations to CBP in AMS. The carrier will be responsible for the PTT authorization. If the non-automated master NVOCC is co-loading with automated NVOCCs the automated NVOCCs are required to submit their PTT(s) in AMS to the same location as the PTT(s) filed by the carrier. The automated NVOCC will also place the contracting carrier in the SNP field and reference the ocean carrier bill in the B04/N9 record so that the carrier will receive and recognize the electronic authorization in AMS. The master NVOCC will also be required to notify and provide the contracting carrier with a listing of all the bills in the container for automated NVOCCs.
-
48. General Order:
Q : What is General Order (G.O.) merchandise?
Answer: Merchandise is considered G.O. merchandise when it is taken into custody of the port director and deposited in a G.O. warehouse at the risk and expense of the consignee for any of the following reasons:
- Whenever entry is not made within the time period provided by law
- Whenever entry is incomplete because of failure to pay estimated duties
- Whenever the port director feels entry cannot be made for want of proper documents
- Whenever the port director believes that merchandise is not correctly or legally invoiced
- Whenever, at the request of the consignee or owner of the vessel or person in charge of the vehicle in which merchandise is imported, any merchandise is taken possession of by the port director after the expiration of 1 day after entry of the vessel or report of the vehicle.
Q : What are the NVOCC's responsibilities in reporting G.O. eligible merchandise?
Answer: Any merchandise or baggage regularly landed but not covered by a permit for its release shall be allowed to remain at its place of unlading until the fifteenth calendar day after landing for direct landing. No later than 20 calendar days after landing, both Customs and a G.O. warehouse must be notified of the presence of unentered merchandise. Failure to do so may result in a penalty not to exceed $1,000 for failure to notify Customs, and a liquidated damage assessment not to exceed $1,000 for failure to notify a G.O. warehouse ( 19 CFR 4.37(a) for vessel, 19 CFR 122.50(a) for air, and 19 CFR 123.10(a) for land). NVOCC's will be required to perform the notifications to both Customs and a G.O. warehouse. If there are multiple G.O. warehouses within a port, the NVOCC will contact the G.O. warehouse of their choice. NVOCC's will not be required to physically transfer merchandise to the G.O. warehouse.
Q : What happens if the merchandise moves inbond?
Answer: If a shipment is sent inbond, the G.O. time period begins once the inbond shipment reaches its destination port. For example, a shipment is unladed in Long Beach on the 1st. It is sent inbond to Kansas City on the 4th. The shipment is arrived in Kansas City on the 8th. The G.O. time period begins on the 8th. If entry is not made on the merchandise, it will become G.O. eligible on the 23rd.
Q : How are G.O. notifications made?
Answer: The Carrier/NVOCC is required to notify both Customs and a G.O. warehouse of their choosing in writing by any appropriate Customs authorized electronic data interchange system. The preferred method is via fax.
Q : Which CBP office are G.O. notifications sent to, and how can I obtain a list of G.O. warehouses?
Answer: G.O. notifications are sent to the CBP port in which the merchandise is physically located. The local CBP port can also provide the names of all G.O. warehouses operating in the port.
Q : What if there are no G.O. warehouses located in a port?
Answer: Certain ports do not have active G.O. warehouses. In this instance, merchandise would be held under constructive G.O. at the carriers' premises. In this case, the NVOCC would notify Customs of the presence of unentered merchandise and notify the carrier that the shipment is under constructive G.O.
Questions regarding the G.O. process may be directed to Timothy Sushil at (202) 927-0564 or TIMOTHY.SUSHIL@customs.treas.gov
-
49. Duplicate Multiple Bills:
Q : There are some cases where carriers are transmitting bills of lading in AMS for Automated NVOCCs and duplicate bills of lading are created on the same shipment.
Answer: Carriers that are transmitting bill of lading information in AMS for automated NVOCCs should stop that practice immediately, for they are in violation of the 24-hour rule. The automated NVOCC is responsible for filing in AMS, placing the contracting carrier's SCAC in the SNP field and referencing the carriers master bill (not in AMS) in the transmission. Carriers should be programmed to receive all referenced data in FAQ 36 , when placed in the SNP field.
-
50. Posting Vessel Arrival in AMS:
Q : Is the NVOCC responsible for posting the vessel arrival in AMS?
Answer: No, the carrier is responsible for the vessel auto arrival function in AMS and should do so in a timely manner.
-
51. Consolidators:
Q : How should cargo from consolidators be manifested in AMS by carriers/NVOCCs?
Answer: Consolidators are in the business of consolidating cargo for one consignee from multiple vendors, as opposed to NVOCCs who consolidate cargo for many shippers to many consignees. CBP has authorized NVOCCs to participate in Sea AMS, but not consolidators. Since, CBP has not yet defined "Shipper" and Consolidators were not addressed in the 24-hour final rule, in the interim, CBP will accept the Consolidators complete name and address in the "shipper field". The Consolidators name and/or address should not appear in the consignee field.
-
52. New Bill Type:
Q : Is CBP looking at programming changes to AMS to allow automated NVOCCs to transmit bill of lading data to CBP directly and to allow vessel carriers to provide transportation related functions (e.g., vessel arrivals and in-bond processing) as they had prior to the implementation of the 24-hour rule? In other words, can AMS be programmed in such a way that a carrier could perform the same services on behalf of automated NVOCCs that they performed before the 24-hour rule?
Answer:
The new NVOCC bill type:
‧ Is required 24 hours before lading of cargo on to vessel.
‧ Requires detailed information (house level) in order for CBP to effectively target.
‧ Will require that the SCAC of the Master VOCC be included in the Secondary Notify Party (SNP) field (B02/M11).
‧ Requires the inclusion of the "OB" qualifier and the Master VOCC ocean bill number (SCAC and up to 12 alpha/numeric characters) in the Reference Identifier (B04/N9).
‧ Is designated by a code of "N" in the CAMIR B01 record and "30" in the M1109 of the X12 format.
‧ FROB cargo will be identified by a code of "P" in the CAMIR B01 record and "32" in the M1109 of the X12 format.
‧ When the NVOCC bill matches with the contracting carrier Master VOCC bill on-file in AMS, a "1Y" message will be sent to the NVO and the bill will be closed.
‧ All entered release messages/ PTT's/ inbonds and entries will be done at the Master VOCC bill level.
‧ When the Master VOCC is transmitting data on behalf of a non automated NVOCC they will also use the new NVOCC bill type codes. NOTE: The "1Y" disposition code will not be returned to the MVOCC in this scenario.
‧ The Master VOCC will utilize their own SCAC when reporting the NVOC bill of lading number.
The new Master VOCC bill type:
‧ Is required 24 hours before lading of cargo on to vessel.
‧ Is created by the contracting carrier to identify the Master VOCC bill that covers both automated NVOCCs bills of lading and NVOCC bills of lading type created by the carrier on behalf of non-automated NVOCCs.
‧ The new Master VOCC bill type code of "M" will be sent in the CAMIR B01 record and "28" in the M1109 of the X12 format.
‧ FROB cargo of the Master VOCC will be identified with the bill type of "O" in the CAMIR B01 record and "31" in the M1109 of the X12 format.
‧ In-bond cargo of the Master VOCC will be identified with the bill type of "29" in the M1109 of the X12 format. NOTE: CAMIR does not require a unique bill type as the in-bond code is reported in position 49 of the B01 record.
‧ Will contain very generic information, as it is the NVO house bill that contains the "rich" data.
‧ Carriers will also continue to transmit the regular bills that they send today for non-NVOCC cargo.
‧ Carriers will continue to receive the disposition code of "69" (bill on-file message) when the NVO bill of lading is accepted in AMS.
‧ Vessel arrivals, PTT's at the port of unlading as well as the in-bond move to destination will be at the Master VOCC level.
‧ Entries will be made against the ocean carrier bill as they did before the 24-hour rule.
‧ The "DO NOT LOAD" and "O.K TO LOAD – RELEASE OF DO NOT LOAD" (disposition codes "6H and 6I") can be sent to all bill types. [Note: When a “6H” or “6I” has been posted to the MVOCC bill of lading, all associated NVOCC bills of lading will receive the status notification as well.]
Subsequent In-bond and Permit to Transfer (PTT):
‧ CBP will also support use of the subsequent in-bond and PTT concepts.
‧ All movements will be against the vessel carriers' bill of lading.
‧ The Subsequent In-Bond capability (ii or 357-transaction set) will support conventional or paperless "V" numbers and NVOCCs with type 2 bonds may use the transaction set.
‧ This transaction set may be used to initiate an in-bond movement at the in-land destination port or initiate the primary In-bond move at the first port of conveyance arrival if the MVOC elects not to establish the In-bond status.
‧ The SCAC of the entity invoking the ii/357 will automatically be placed in the SNP field of the MVOCC bill of lading and therefore they will receive the in-bond authorization "1J" and all associated status notifications.
‧ The permit to transfer (TO1 or 356-transaction set) could also be used at the bill of lading level for PTT movement authorization.
‧ The Secondary Notify Party (SNP) fields will be expanded from two to eight, per bill of lading. The first two SNP's will continue to be reported in the B02/M11records and additional SNP's will be reported via the N00/N1 records. To designate additional SNP's you will be required to complete 3 fields.
‧ Service centers and port authorities will now be able to identify which client has been nominated to receive status notifications via the return of the "SNP" and the SNP identifier (SCAC or FIRMS) in the (B04/N9) of the RC/350 transaction set.
‧ With the use of these new bill types, brokers will once again file entries against the Master Vessel carrier's bill of lading.
‧ MVOCC's must be able to provide the NVOCC with the ocean bill of lading number in advance so that they may include it in their transmission. NVOCC's need to dialogue with their contracting carrier's to ensure that this information can be provided prior to implementation.
The special bill requires programming and business practice changes by CBP and the trade. CBP anticipates having its programming changes completed by late October 2003. Until all the necessary changes have been made and tested to implement the special bill proposal, the automated NVOCCs and vessel carriers must follow the procedures spelled out in the FAQ's until these programming changes are in place. There will not be a phased in approach to the use of the special bill. On the date determined, everyone must begin to use the new codes (i.e., 28, 29, M, N, etc.). It is envisioned that the programming will be moved to PRODUCTION in early January 2004. -
53. New requirement from CBP: add indicator for Split B/L
Q : What is the new requirement from CBP regarding the indicator for split B/L?
Answer: According to USCS new regulation, for all the USA bound shipments, all the agents should put an indicator for USCS to identify the split B/L when the B/L has been split after initial loading. Thus, please kindly put the indicator(reference code qualifier) "SP" & "the original B/L No." at Record-80(reference) for the split B/L from now on in order to make the correct AMS filing.
RECORD QUALIFIER CODE LEVEL VALUE 80 (Reference) SP Consignment Original B/L NO
Example: The Original B/L A123456789 has to be split into two B/L A123111111 and A123222222 after the filing for A123456789 has been made to AMS. The code and value for these three Bs/L should be as follows,B/L NO. Qualifier Code Value(original B/L No.) AI Request to USCS A123456789 X X AI Revise A123111111 SP A123456789 AI Add A123222222 SP A123456789 AI Add