CBP Makes Technical Corrections to Electronic Manifest Regs

U.S. Customs and Border Protection has issued a final rule, effective May 12, 2011, amending its regulations concerning the mandatory electronic transmission of inward foreign manifests for vessels transporting bulk and certain break bulk cargo to the U.S. to make several technical corrections, including removing obsolete language that refers to vessel carriers who do not transmit cargo declaration information electronically (non-automated carriers).

The following are highlights of the final rule:

Obsolete Language on Non-Automated Bulk/Break Bulk Carriers Removed

When CBP amended its regulations in 2003 to implement section 343(a) of the Trade Act of 2002 to require carriers to transmit advance cargo information electronically, CBP intended to state that all carriers were required to transmit cargo information to CBP electronically. However, CBP neglected to remove language in 19 CFR 4.7(b)(4) referring to non-automated bulk and break bulk vessel carriers.

In order to conform the regulation to the statute’s mandatory electronic transmission requirement for all carriers, this technical correction removes the obsolete reference to non-automated carriers from 19 CFR 4.7(b)(4). CBP notes that this change will have no practical effect since there are no longer any non-automated carriers. All carriers including bulk and break bulk carriers, have been filing cargo information electronically since at least 2004. (19 CFR 4.7 is available here.)

Regs on Transmission of Vessel Cargo Info Clarified, Updated

CBP’s final rule also makes several other changes to the regulations related to the electronic transmission of vessel cargo information to clarify the process and to update terminology, as follows:

• Language is added to 19 CFR 4.7(b)(2) to make clear that any change to a new electronic data interchange system approved by CBP to replace the Automated Manifest System (AMS) for transmitting cargo information will be announced in the Federal Register. This addition is made in anticipation of the eventual change from AMS to the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) system or to any other CBP-approved system that might follow for this purpose in the future.
• Several provisions in 19 CFR Part 4 improperly use the term “cargo manifest,” “manifest,” or something similar to refer to the “cargo declaration.” The cargo declaration is only one of several documents that comprise the manifest (see 19 CFR 4.7a). To alleviate confusion, and because “cargo declaration” (CBP Form 1302) is the correct term, CBP is substituting “cargo declaration” or something similar where appropriate. These changes are made in 19 CFR 4.7 (b)(3)(i), (b)(4)(ii)(A), 4.7(e), 4.7a(c)(2)(iii), 4.7a(c)(4), 4.7a(f), and 4.30(n).
• A few provisions in 19 CFR Part 4 reference the general cargo declaration transmission time requirement of 19 CFR 4.7(b)(2) without also referencing the alternative transmission time requirement for exempted bulk and CBP-approved break bulk carriers in 19 CFR 4.7(b)(4). This is corrected in 19 CFR 4.7a(c)(4)(xv) and 4.8(b).
• 19 CFR 4.30(n) pertaining to CBP’s withholding or delaying a permit to unlade due to the failure to transmit required cargo information is revised. This provision is outdated because it provides the option of presenting the cargo information in paper form. In the revised paragraph (n), CBP also is adding references to 19 CFR 4.7(b)(4) to make it clear that CBP may withhold or delay the issuance of a permit to unlade, or deny preliminary entry, for failure to transmit required cargo information, whether the information is due within the time frame specified in 19 CFR 4.7(b)(2) or (b)(4).
• The word “electronic” is added to the heading for 19 CFR 4.7, which now reads as: “Inward foreign manifest; production on demand; contents and form; advance electronic filing of cargo declaration.”

(19 CFR Part 4 is available here.)

CBP contact- George McCray (202) 325-0082