Brokers, Software Developers Concerned About Delay of ACE Implementation for Several Entry Types

“Moving all these different entry types at the last minute, with one day to do some testing, is really leaving very little time for the trade to feel comfortable,” said Fany Flores-Pastor, director-R&D compliance systems at Descartes, a software developer. The delay came as somewhat of a surprise to those interviewed, notwithstanding the high-level participation of some in the Trade Support Network, a body formed to advise CBP on its automation efforts, including ACE.

For affected entry types, the trade community will now be forced to go without the critical period during which problems can surface and adjustments can be made without affecting the movement of cargo. For example, after it does initial testing of programming and processes in CBP’s “certification” environment, Livingston International has been running live trials for entry types for which ACE is already available, said Travis Hull, director-business services at Livingston. For some ACE deployments, the live trials might only include a few clients or a few scenarios before being expanded once any kinks are worked out, he said.

Live production has sometimes been “the most valuable learning experience,” said Hull. Although employees may be trained, “we’re all doing it for the first time,” and “everything is not all perfectly worked out” for both Livingston and CBP, he said. “There’s a learning curve.” In the worst cases, whether because of coding or other issues, Livingston has been able to revert to the legacy ACS system so the issue is “not holding up legitimate business at the border,” said Hull. “With the new plan, there’s a little concern that, although we can still participate in the cert environment and test our software and our communications with customs ahead of” the Nov. 1 deadline, “we can’t do any piloting before the mandatory cutover,” he said.

The delay for quota entries could spill over into other areas of ACE implementation for customs brokers. For example, quota merchandise may also regulated by the Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Agriculture. That means brokers will only be live filing newly-required PGA message set data from importers of such merchandise once quota capabilities are deployed in ACE on Oct. 31, drastically cutting down on time for live testing of the processes and systems they will need to develop to obtain the data from these importers and have their importer clients get the data from upstream suppliers.

The delay affects some software developers’ implementation plans too. Integration Point had been taking a staged approach to bringing its clients online, rather than allowing all to file in ACE at once, said Melissa Irmen, senior vice president-products and strategy. “Once you’re in a live environment, it’s not uncommon to find things that didn’t surface in the certification environment,” she said. Integration Point had hoped to bring on its clients in a “controlled way,” hoping to manage the process “more smoothly,” said Irmen.

That staged approach will now be impossible for the delayed entry types, said Elizabeth Connell, Integration Point vice president-product management. The delay “will force us to take all of our clients who do these entry types over all at once,” she said. “Now it will be more of a flip of a switch.” The fallback for those that encounter bugs or other issues on Oct. 31 and the days that follow will be filing on paper, said Connell.

With filers and software developers now facing an extremely short deadline, testing in CBP’s certification environment becomes all the more important. The agency announced the deployment on May 20 of “the majority of all code needed” for Nov. 1 “for testing by all trade filers” in the same CSMS message that announced the delay for quota entries, including a schedule of deployments in the certification environment and live production as an attachment (here). “CBP strongly recommends trade filers work with their Client Reps to test new and existing entry and entry summary capabilities” in the certification environment “to ensure they are ready well in advance” of Nov. 1, it said.

However, the certification environment has its own issues, and won’t be sufficient to achieve the necessary level of testing, said Flores-Pastor of Descartes. Not all statuses and scenarios seen in the outside world are available for certification testing, and with CBP updating its certification environment three times every week the system could prove unstable, with updates invalidating what developers and filers have already tested, she said. The certification environment may also be insufficient to test changes to business processes that filing in ACE will require. “It’s not going to be enough to feel comfortable,” said Flores-Pastor.

Despite potential problems caused by the delay, all indications are that CBP continues to be resolved to meet its Nov. 1 deadline. “I think the only thing that would impact the Nov. 1 deadline would be if the trade and CBP felt there was a need to have more testing performed,” said Connell, noting the grace period granted by CBP for implementation of ACE Air Manifest (see 1504300015). CBP did not immediately comment on the effect of the delay on its Nov. 1 deadline.

A CBP official has recently indicated that the agency is looking into a way to move up deployment of the delayed entry types to give filers and developers time to test. “My understanding is” that CBP “will look to see if we can put a validation in,” said Vincent Annunziato, who manages IT in the CBP ACE Business Office, on May 28. That means if there is quota listed on the entry, if it’s with any of the entry types, “it will reject it.” If that validation is added, “then my dream” is to “get all these entries out ahead of time” to allow for earlier use, he said while speaking at an ACE seminar held by the Pacific Coast Council of Customs Brokers and Freight Forwarders in Tacoma, Washington.

But as it currently stands, the short window for testing only increases the necessity for filers to develop “robust” testing and “go live” plans, said Hull. Filers need to have procedures in place for testing software, educating staff, and educating clients, he said. “Meanwhile, we are marching to their date. We’ve got no choice,” said Hull. “There’s a lot of work to do between now and then.”