LINER CARRIERS QUESTION PROPOSED ADVANCE MANIFEST RULES

LINER CARRIERS QUESTION PROPOSED ADVANCE MANIFEST RULES    Liner carriers generally support U.S. Customs’ efforts to improve its supply chain security oversight, but the agency’s recently proposed advance manifest filing rules leaves them with many questions.
   The proposed rule would require ocean carriers and non-vessel-operating common carriers to file manifest details to Customs 24 hours prior to loading in a port overseas.
   “We recognize that the cargo manifest has become a document that is used by the government to prescreen cargo for national security reasons,” the World Shipping Council said in its Sept. 9 filing of comments to Customs. “It was not designed for this purpose and has some limitations in this regard.”
   “We nevertheless recognize that currently the government does not feel that it has better information systems for this task, and thus the industry would like to cooperate to the extent practical,” added council, which represents liner carriers. “It is essential, however, that the role, the limitations, and the ramifications of the manifest be kept in mind.”
   One of the biggest concerns for carriers under the proposed advance manifest rules is how to efficiently meet the 24-hour filing requirement prior to loading. The council said this would most likely require carriers to receive cargo documentation from overseas shippers from 24 to 72 hours prior to preparing manifests for filing.
   The council said it would also need assurance from Customs that it would provide ample notice of which containers would require inspection. To do this, Customs would also have to operate a cargo manifest analysis system and communications center 24 hours a day. “If Customs does not inform the carrier of a ‘hold’ until after loading has begun or after sailing, the resulting costs, delays, and service failures can be quite substantial,” council said.
   The council said it’s also unclear on how Customs’ proposed advance manifest rules would cover other prevalent operational aspects of international liner shipping, such as empty containers, overbookings, corrections and freight remaining on board while in U.S. ports.
   In addition, the council questioned the inclusion of bulk and breakbulk shipments in Customs’ proposed advance manifest filing rules. “Because bulk and most breakbulk cargo is not concealed like containerized cargo, there should be less inherent security risk, and because such operations cannot realistically submit accurate cargo manifests until after loading has concluded, we request that the Customs Service not include bulk and unsealed breakbulk shipments in this proposed rulemaking,” the council said.
   The council, however, supports allowing NVOs to file manifest data to Customs, but it wants the agency’s assurance that NVOs are responsible for the accuracy of their data and not the ocean carriers.
   The council also believes Customs should exempt low-risk shipments, Customs-approved pre-inspection services, and shippers with supply chain security programs approved under the Customs’ Trade Partnership Against Terrorism program from the proposed advance manifest rules.
   “If carriers and shippers incur the substantial costs and delays that this proposal would produce, and Customs is unable to reliably and promptly identify and communicate in ample time before which cargo shipments require inspection or further review, this entire exercise would be an unjustifiable and costly mistake,” the council said.