CBP Updates its Inbound "Vessel Mode" FAQ on Advance Electronic Cargo Information Requirements
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has issued a revised version of its frequently asked questions (FAQ) and responses on its final rule requiring, among other things, the advance electronic presentation of information for inbound vessel cargo.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
CBP has added two new FAQs (25 - CBP Generated HOLDS and 26 - "Split" Bills of Lading).
New FAQ 25 - CBP Generated "HOLDS"
In response to a question, CBP states that in the case where a "1C" general examination message is received via the Automated Manifest System (AMS) for a shipment, and subsequently a "HOLD" message is received, the carrier shall not deliver the cargo.
CBP states that the "1C" status notification message is generated as the result of selectivity processing or CBP manual posting and is only a provisional notification based on an entry filed by, or on behalf of, the importer of record. According to CBP, the "HOLD" message takes precedence over the "1C" message and other movement authorization messages in all cases.
CBP states that the carrier is liable for the unauthorized delivery if it releases the goods without CBP authorization. The cargo cannot be released until all "HOLDS" are removed and the carrier receives a release message via AMS.
New FAQ 26 - "Split" Bills of Lading
In response to a question about how a carrier documents a "split" bill of lading once a vessel sails, CBP states that it recognizes that under certain circumstances, certain cargo information data elements may change after the vessel sails when:
- part (or all) of the shipment was sold while the vessel was enroute to the U.S. port of discharge,
- the consignee has requested that the carrier divert part of the shipment to a different port of discharge, or
- the carrier sailed inadvertently leaving part of the shipment either in the port of loading or in an intermediate port (during repositioning of containers).
CBP states that these circumstances require the carrier to change the container information and piece counts (and if the cargo was sold, consignee information) after the cargo was loaded in the foreign port.
CBP states that it has requested Vessel AMS programming changes to allow for a split bill of lading identifier; however, until programming is available, carriers must utilize the description field to indicate a split bill of lading.
The original bill of lading must comply with all data elements mandated by the 24&8209;Hour Rule and the Trade Act of 2002. In order to identify these situations the carrier must perform the following:
- the original bill of lading must be amended to reflect the correct piece count (reduced) and the carrier must place the term "split bill" and reference the new bill of lading number on line one of the description field,
- when transmitting electronic cargo information for the new bill of lading number, the carrier must place term "split bill" and list the original bill of lading number on line one of the description field, and
- the piece counts for the amended bill of lading and the new bill of lading must total the piece count of the original bill of lading.
CBP states that carriers will not be allowed to utilize the split bill of lading procedures to "mask" the true consignee at the time of loading. Port Directors may require documentation from the carrier substantiating the sale/diversion of the cargo to determine if a penalty will be issued. CBP states that it will take action against carriers found misusing the above&8209;described split bill of lading procedures.
CBP's revised "vessel mode" FAQ (dated 08/12/05) available at