CBP Petitioned to Amend its Advance Electronic Information Definitions of Shipper and Consignee for Inbound Ocean Cargo

Specifically, these four trade groups have petitioned CBP to suspend, reconsider, and amend the December 5, 2003 final rule in two respects:

Definition of shipper for inbound ocean cargo -amend 19 CFR 4.7a(c)(4)(viii) to indicate that the only shipper entities to be reported are those that appear on actual bills of lading under established law and commercial practice; and

Definition of consignee for inbound ocean cargo - revise 19 CFR 4.7a(c)(4)(ix) regarding the requirements for providing consignee information on "to order" shipments and to remove inappropriate references to master and house bills of lading.

Definition of Shipper in 19 CFR 4.7a(c)(4)(viii)

According to the petitioners and the text of the December 5, 2003 final rule, the shipper's information for inbound ocean cargo is listed in 19 CFR 4.7a(c)(4)(viii) and states that the inbound ocean cargo declaration must contain as a data element:

"(viii) The shipper's complete name and address, or identification number, from all bills of lading. (At the master bill level, for consolidated shipments, the identity of the Non Vessel Operating Common Carrier (NVOCC), freight forwarder, container station or other carrier is sufficient; for non-consolidated shipments, and for each house bill in a consolidated shipment, the identity of the foreign vendor, supplier, manufacturer, or other similar party is acceptable (and the address of the foreign vendor, etc. must be a foreign address); by contrast, the identity of the carrier, NVOCC, freight forwarder or consolidator is not acceptable; the identification number will be a unique number assigned by CBP upon the implementation of the Automated Commercial Environment)."

However, the petitioners are asking CBP to revise this regulation in one of two ways:

1. Revert to regulation as it existed when the 24-hour rule was implemented. That the language of 19 CFR 4.7a(c)(4)(viii) revert to the version that appeared in CBP's October 31, 2002 24-hour final rule for inbound ocean cargo.

(Pursuant to the October 31, 2002 final rule, 19 CFR 4.7a(c)(4)(viii) had read as follows:

"(viii) The shipper's complete name and address, or identification number, from all bills of lading. (The identification number will be a unique number assigned by U.S. Customs upon the implementation of the Automated Commercial Environment)." )

1. Amend the regulation as proposed by petitioners. Alternatively, the petitioners are requesting that CBP amend 19 CFR 4.7a(c)(4)(viii) to read as follows:

"(viii) The shipper's complete name and address, or identification number, from all bills of lading. (For Non Vessel Operating Common Carrier (NVOCC) shipments, whether consolidated or not, the identity of the NVOCC is sufficient at the master bill of lading level; for bills of lading associated with non-NVOCC shipments, and for each house bill of lading for NVOCC shipments, the shipper on the bill of lading must have a foreign address; the identification number will be a unique number assigned by CBP upon the implementation of the Automated Commercial Environment.)"

(The petitioners note that because all of the requirements embodied in this suggested text were part of the proposed rule, the petitioners believe that CBP may, consistent with the Administrative Procedures Act, make the requested clarification without the need for additional notice and comment. The petitioners further state that they believe that good cause exists to proceed without notice and comment in the interest of timely publication of a security rule that is understandable and enforceable.)

Definition of Consignee in 19 CFR 4.7a(c)(4)(ix)

According to the petitioners and the text of the December 5, 2003 final rule, the consignee information for inbound ocean cargo is listed in 19 CFR 4.7a(c)(4)(ix) and states that the inbound ocean cargo declaration must contain as a data element:

"(ix) The complete name and address of the consignee, or identification number, from all bills of lading. (For consolidated shipments, at the master bill level, the NVOCC, freight forwarder, container station or other carrier may be listed as the consignee. For non-consolidated shipments, and for each house bill in a consolidated shipment, the consignee is the party to whom the cargo will be delivered in the United States, with the exception of "FROB" (foreign cargo remaining on board). However, in the case of cargo shipped "to order of [a named party]," the carrier must report this named "to order" party as the consignee; and, if there is any other commercial party listed in the bill of lading for delivery or contact purposes, the carrier must also report this other commercial party's identity and contact information (address) in the "Notify Party" field of the advance electronic data transmission to CBP, to the extent that the CBP-approved electronic data interchange system is capable of receiving this data. The identification number will be a unique number assigned by CBP upon implementation of the Automated Commercial Environment).

The petitioners suggest that this regulation could be clarified by amending the first two sentences of the parenthetical to read as follows:

"For NVOCC shipments, whether consolidated or not, the NVOCC may be listed as the consignee at the master bill of lading level; for bills of lading associated with non-NVOCC shipments, and for each house bill of lading for NVOCC shipments, the consignee is the party to which the carrier or NVOCC will deliver the cargo in the United States, with the exception ... (remainder unchanged)."

In addition, the petitioners state that the "to order" requirement in the consignee information provision in the December 5, 2003 final rule is potentially inconsistent with the language on "to order" shipments in Customs 24 Hour Rule FAQs (32) and the preamble to the December 5, 2003 final rule, as the text of the final rule seems to state that the "to order" party must be named, while FAQ 32 and the preamble suggest that the words "to order" alone are acceptable. The petitioners state that they are seeking clarification of this inconsistency.

Petitioners Request Enforcement of Shipper and Consignee Definitions Based on October 2002 Final Rule

The petitioners conclude by requesting that during the pendency of CBP's review of this petition, its enforcement of the December 5, 2003 final rule as it applies to the definitions of shipper and consignee be based on the language of the October 31, 2002 24-Hour final rule.

Petition available via email or fax by emailing staff@brokerpower.com.