CBP Asked to Clarify Date of Arrival Definition as East and Gulf Coast Port Strike Begins

The strike began just after midnight on Oct. 1 when the International Longshoremen’s Association walked off the job at East and Gulf coast port terminals affiliated with the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX). The two parties have been unsuccessful in negotiating a new labor contract to replace the old one that expired Sept. 30 (see 2409300054). About 36 ports along the East and Gulf coasts representing more than 40% of containerized goods coming into the U.S. are expected to be affected, according to ocean freight rate analytics platform Xenata.

CBP has said that business will continue as close to usual, with CBP still planning to uphold the 15-day rule for cargo unlading, according to Susan Thomas, executive director of Cargo and Conveyance Security in CBP’s Office of Field Operations.

CBP is also advising that all necessary manifest updates, port of unlading adjustments and inbound movements must be promptly reported, with any changes to the port of entry updated in ACE, Thomas said on the call. Importers and carriers are also encouraged to submit entry documentation prior to cargo arrival to expedite processing; carriers are also encouraged to consider alternative routing vessels to non-impacted ports to minimize delays, according to CBP.

The agency is also monitoring the impact on vessel traffic, including where vessels and cargo are being diverted, Thomas said. CBP on Sept. 30 issued a cargo systems message detailing guidance for parties that are awaiting vessels that have cargo intended for unlading at East Coast and Gulf Coast ports (see 2409300060).

Trade members on the call urged CBP to better define date of arrival for entry purposes, especially when a vessel is not within port limits but is anchored outside of the port. They also wanted to know how and if a change to that date of arrival definition would impact the 15-day general order date, as this also affects the timing of paying duties.

One caller wanted to know whether the date of arrival is based on what the carrier says in the manifest of the Customs database or whether the date is when the cargo physically lands on the dock.

“That’s the question: which date do we adhere to because we don't see the day that you say is [the arrival date] until after the event,” the caller said.

Another question was how CBP will handle cargo if it has been cleared in one port but is moved to another.

In response to the confusion, another caller suggested that CBP define its position on date of arrival given the arrival date for vessels as defined in 19 CFR Part 4 and the arrival date for entry of merchandise as defined in 19 CFR Part 141.

CBP said it would issue further guidance on many of these questions, although questions about whether Customs-cleared cargo can be retrieved from the ports will need to be addressed by individual terminal operators.

A few callers asked about how CBP would handle cargo for Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) members.

CBP said in addition to the information provided in an Oct. 1 cargo systems message, C-TPAT members should receive the benefits that have been accorded to them as the ports reopen, although how the port handles the tiers will depend on the port’s situation.

Another question was whether importers should add the ACE cargo release without the entry summary, which could matter if a container is stuck on a vessel for a long time but the duty is due within 10 days.

CBP responded that parties submitting entry documentation without an entry summary may request a time of entry as described in CBP regulations, otherwise the time of entry will be the time that the appropriate CBP officer authorizes the release of the merchandise or any part of the merchandise covered by the entry documentation.

As the trade community awaits answers from CBP on date of arrival questions, ILA President Harold Daggett outlined some of the group's demands.

“We are now demanding $5 an hour increase in wages for each of the six years of a new ILA-USMX Master Contract,” Daggett said in an Oct. 1 release. “Plus, we want absolute airtight language that there will be no automation or semi-automation, and we are demanding all Container Royalty monies go to the ILA.”

Meanwhile, Republican leaders of relevant committees in the House and Senate and business groups, including the National Retail Federation and the National Association of Manufacturers, called on the president to intervene and stop the strike, or criticized him for not doing so.

"Collective bargaining is the best way for workers to get the pay and benefits they deserve," President Joe Biden said. "I have urged USMX, which represents a group of foreign-owned carriers, to come to the table and present a fair offer to the workers of the International Longshoremen’s Association that ensures they are paid appropriately in line with their invaluable contributions. ... Now is not the time for ocean carriers to refuse to negotiate a fair wage for these essential workers while raking in record profits. My Administration will be monitoring for any price gouging activity that benefits foreign ocean carriers, including those on the USMX board."

A separate White House release from earlier Tuesday said Biden directed his team to convey that both sides need to return to the bargaining table and negotiate a contract "fairly and quickly." The release also said Biden's Supply Chain Disruptions Task Force would be meeting every day to address potential disruptions.