FREE DOWNLOAD – C-TPAT COSTS & SAVINGS REPORT – 2011

- / N2N / – The 2011 C-TPAT Costs & Savings Survey (CSS) is a drill-down view of the detailed costs and savings experiences of a small sample of C-TPAT members. The CSS was developed and executed separately from the larger membership survey that was done in 2010. This approach was intended to enhance the response rate of the 2010 membership survey by simplifying it, and it was successful – the response rate to the 2010 membership survey was substantially higher than in the 2006 survey.

The tremendous range and detail of the experiences reported in the 2011 CSS illustrates very well the variety and scope of issues confronted by C-TPAT members. But this range also limits the generalizability of the results. For example, direct cost savings as a result of C-TPAT membership ranged from $50 to $52 million among the roughly one-quarter of respondents
who reported direct cost savings. Implementation costs ranged from $280 to $4 million among the three-quarters of respondents who said they incurred such costs.

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management.  Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.net.

The White House has released a report entitled NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN SECURITY.

- / N2N / – International trade has been and continues to be a powerful engine of United States and global economic growth. In recent years, communications technology advances and trade barrier and production cost reductions have contributed to global capital market expansion and new economic opportunity. The global supply chain system that supports this trade is essential to the United States’ economy and is a critical global asset.
Through the National Strategy for Global Supply Chain Security (the Strategy), we articulate the United States Government’s policy to strengthen the global supply chain in order to protect the welfare and interests of the American people and secure our Nation’s economic prosperity. Our focus in this Strategy is the worldwide network of transportation, postal, and shipping pathways, assets, and infrastructures by which goods are moved from the point of manufacture until they reach an end consumer, as well as supporting communications infrastructure and systems.

The Strategy includes two goals:
Goal 1: Promote the Efficient and Secure Movement of Goods – The first goal of the Strategy is to promote the timely, efficient flow of legitimate commerce while protecting and securing the supply chain from exploitation, and reducing its vulnerability to disruption. To achieve this goal we will enhance the integrity of goods as they move through the global supply chain. We will also understand and resolve threats early in the process, and strengthen the security of physical infrastructures, conveyances and information assets, while seeking to maximize trade through modernizing supply chain infrastructures and processes.

Goal 2: Foster a Resilient Supply Chain – The second goal of the Strategy is to foster a global supply chain system that is prepared for, and can withstand, evolving threats and hazards and can recover rapidly from disruptions. To achieve this we will prioritize efforts to mitigate systemic vulnerabilities and refine plans to reconstitute the flow of commerce after disruptions.

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management.  Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.net.

1) My company is too small to be C-TPAT Certified – The size of a company or the number of employees has no bearing on a company’s eligibility for C-TPAT Certification.  I’ve successfully assisted companies with as few as 3 employees.

2) Our company is a customs bonded warehouse and we handle a lot of international cargo.  That makes us eligible for C-TPAT Certification, right? – Wrong.  The largest factor in determining eligibility for C-TPAT Certification is whether or not the company has influence on cargo prior to it entering the U.S. (influence at the foreign factory, foreign trucking, foreign agent, etc.)  Most Customs Bonded Warehouses have nothing to do with cargo prior to it entering the U.S.

3) If our company becomes C-TPAT Certified and then later loses the certification U.S. Customs will penalize us. – Not True.  A company that loses its certification either by choice or because of non-compliance loses the benefits of being C-TPAT Certified, but U.S. Customs won’t treat you any differently than any other non-C-TPAT Certified company.  If a company has lost its certification due to security violations they may have some trouble because of those violations, but they would have had those problems whether they were certified or not.

4) I am an importer and my customs broker told me that being C-TPAT Certified is a big pain in the neck and could cause us trouble with U.S. Customs. – This simply isn’t true.  U.S. Customs loves for importers to be C-TPAT Certified because they have a high level of influence over the foreign factory where the containers are loaded.  Maintaining a C-TPAT Security Program shouldn’t take more than 2 or 3 hours a month for most small importers.  The truth is that Non-C-TPAT Certified customs brokers are afraid of losing their importer clients who become C-TPAT Certified because certified companies are encouraged to only use other C-TPAT Certified companies in their supply chain whenever possible.  It’s also less work for the importer if they use only C-TPAT Certified customs brokers because the screening process is much less work.  Non-C-TPAT Certified customs brokers realize that there is a strong possibility that they may lose a good customer if the importer becomes certified.  This also applies to Non-CTPAT certified NVOCC’s.

5) Having a C-TPAT Compliance program is just as good as being C-TPAT Certified. – Again, not true.  If a company is eligible for C-TPAT Certification, that is what they should do.  If they only go as far as being compliant without actually becoming certified they lose the benefits that come with being C-TPAT Certified.  Don’t get me wrong, being C-TPAT Compliant is a good thing for companies that aren’t eligible for C-TPAT Certification (domestic trucking, customs bonded warehouse, draymen, most 3PL’s).  I have helped many non-eligible companies to implement a C-TPAT Compliant program, so I understand the pluses and the minuses.  But if your company is eligible for certification (importers, NVOCC’s – International Freight Forwarders, Cross-Border Highway Carriers, Customs Brokers, some 3PL’s, some Foreign Manufacturers) you’ve already done 90% of what it takes to become C-TPAT Certified, so going the last mile makes good sense.

6) My company is an NVOCC, but we can’t get C-TPAT Certified because we don’t have a warehouse… we only process paperwork. – All NVOCC’s are eligible for C-TPAT Certification as long as they meet the other criteria.  Having a warehouse neither helps or hinders the process.  I have helped many NVOCC’s to obtain C-TPAT Certification, some with warehouses and some without.  Every NVOCC that we have set out to get certified has been successful in obtaining the certification.

7) I heard that when you’re C-TPAT Certified CBP conducts surprise visits.  This would be very disruptive to my business.  – I have never heard of CBP conducting a surprise visit for C-TPAT purposes.  Here’s how the process works: No agent visit is required to be approved for C-TPAT Certification.  Companies are certified based on review of their security profile on the CBP Portal and review of supporting documentation and evidence of compliance that is also uploaded to the portal.  The Certification process usually takes 2 to 3 months.  It can happen in as little as one month (I had this happen once) or it can go longer than 4 months.  There are some waiting periods involved where the applicant can do little or nothing to hasten the process.  After Certification the CBP is supposed to conduct an on-site validation survey within one year.  It’s not unusual for it to take even longer than a year.  The CBP agent (Supply Chain Security Specialist – SCSS) makes an appointment with the company, usually 1 to 3 months in advance.

Jeff Platts is the president of Combination Sales, Inc., a consulting firm that specializes in assisting companies with C-TPAT Certification, C-TPAT Compliance and ITAR (international Traffic in Arms Regulations) Compliance.  Jeff can be reached at jeff@combinationsales.com or 714-788-1531

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management.  Contact us at: contact@nation2nation.net.

DOWNLOAD C-TPAT_PORTAL RELEASE 65 UPDATE

- / N2N / – On November 12th, 2011 a new release of the C-TPAT web portal will be deployed. The new release adds many new functions for the trade including a rewrite of the “Validation Response” page. Also included is an adjusted scorecard which is viewable after the completion of the validation response process. More information about the new page and the response scorecard can be found at www.cbp.gov/CTPAT.

Some Key Points of the new release are:
• Response to trade feedback on the validation scorecard – give trade credit for response actions.
• Validation Response page rewritten to differentiate treatment of Actions Required and Recommendations for adjusted score.
• A partner is now asked if they implemented a recommendation or not. If not, credit for that recommendation is not added to the score

Also included in the new release is an Adjusted Scorecard
• Built off the Validation Scorecard.
• Returns partial points for Actions Required and Recommendations that are resolved in the Response Process.
• Returns full credit for all Best Practices.
• C‐TPAT CANNOT generate an adjusted score for previous responses.

Included is a new Response Page
• Recommendations are now treated differently than Actions Required. Partners are asked if they have implemented the recommendation? Yes or No details are required about the implementation or the lack thereof.
• Partners will now be asked to upload “Evidence of Implementation” to the Response page and criteria section.

DOWNLOAD C-TPAT_PORTAL RELEASE 65 UPDATE

- / N2N / - The Department of Homeland Security’s Private Sector Resources Catalog has been completely updated and reorganized to ensure that you and your organization can quickly and easily find all the resources that you need.  The first catalog to be targeted specifically towards private sector partners and encompassing the entire Department, this document collects the training, publications, guidance, alerts, newsletters, programs, and services available to the private sector across the Department. Recognizing the breadth and diversity of the available resources as well as the Department’s continually evolving work, this catalog will be updated regularly to publicize new resources and increase private sector awareness.

In order to face the new threats and evolving hazards of today’s security environment, we must develop and maintain critical homeland security capabilities at all layers of our society. We all share the responsibility to build all-hazards preparedness and resiliency into our way of life. As outlined in the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report, this enterprise approach is composed of multiple partners whose roles and responsibilities are distributed and shared among a broad-based community with a common interest in the public safety and well-being of America and American society.

Here are some of the topics covered in the newly revised catalog:

• Preventing Terrorism & Enhancing Security
• Bombing Prevention
• General Physical Assessment Tools
• Hazardous Materials Transportation Security
• Mass Transit & Rail Security
• Nuclear Security
• Land Transportation
• Terrorism Prevention
• Securing & Managing our Borders
• Trade Facilitation
• Enforcing & Administering our Immigration Laws
• Safeguarding & Securing Cyberspace
• Cybersecurity assessment Tools
• Ensuring Resilience to Disasters
• Disaster Response Laws & Regulations

pso-private-sector-resource-catalog-3 FREE DOWNLOAD
Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management.  Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.net.

pso-private-sector-resource-catalog-3 FREE DOWNLOAD

- / N2N / – As a C-TPAT (Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism) consultant I often get inquiries from companies about the subject of C-TPAT Certification.  Here’s an inquiry I received recently, followed by my reply.

THE INQUIRY:

We are a non asset based 3 PL company working out of Canada. One our major U.S. customers is updating their records & have asked if we are C-TPAT certified. From the information that I have 3PL’s can not get certification. Is that correct?

MY REPLY:

Your company probably is not eligible for C-TPAT Certification for 2 reasons:

1) Except in the case of some manufacturers, having an office staffed in the U.S. is a requirement.

2) U.S. based 3PL’s are technically eligible for C-TPAT Certification, but from a practical standpoint very few qualify. This is because in order for a company to be eligible they must demonstrate that they have some level of influence over the cargo prior to it entering the U.S. Most U.S. 3PL’s are not involved in international shipments until they are already in the country.

The company that is asking you about C-TPAT certification is doing what they are required to do, which is to determine which of their business partners are C-TPAT Certified and which are not. Those that are not C-TPAT Certified are required to be “fully compliant” with all C-TPAT requirements even though they themselves are not eligible.  This is usually accomplished by requiring the non-C-TPAT certified company to complete a security questionnaire, and in some cases, do an on-site audit at the business partner’s office.

Jeff Platts – C-TPAT Consultant - jeff@combinationsales.com – 714-788-1531

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management.  Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.net.

The process begins with an owner recording a registered trademark, copyright or patent. The recorded works are placed into an electronic database used for reference. In the event that a US Customs official suspects the importation of infringing goods – which federal regulations refer to as piratical – they have the authority to detain the import as piratical goods. While U.S. Customs seizures generally involve only infringing goods for which a trademark, copyright or patent has been recorded, the agency clearly detain any clearly piratical goods, recorded or not. 19 U.S.C. § 1595a (c)(2)(C); 17 U.S.C. §§ 602; 501.

Procedures for Seizures of Infringing Goods

U.S. Customs regulations provide a very specific procedure to be followed in the event that there is a suspicion of the importation of infringing goods. 19 C.F.R. §133.43. Unfortunately for some importers, the local officials may not understand or care to follow the regulations and instead detain the goods under US Customs general detention authority. We have seen this occur where the importer must protest the seizure to have the goods released.

U.S. Customs regulations provide for the detention of an import if there is a suspicion that an import infringes the copyright, trademark or patent. After seizure of the suspected infringing goods, the agency is required to notify the importer, who then has 30 days in which to file a statement denying that the goods are “piratical” and that “the detention of the article will result in a material depreciation of its value, or a loss or damage to him.” 19 C.F.R. §133.43(a). If the importer does not make such a denial with 30 days, the piratical goods are subject to seizure or forfeiture.

Bond Requirement in Customs Detention

If the importer denies that the allegedly infringing goods are piratical, then U.S. Customs must notify the copyright owner, deliver a sample of the goods, give notice that the goods will be released within 30 days unless the copyright holder files a demand for the exclusion and, significantly, a bond to cover any resulting losses the importer might suffer if the goods are not infringing.

If the copyright owner follows these procedures by filing a bond and a written demand for exclusion, both parties then have an additional 30 days for discovery and submission of legal briefs. The burden of proof is on the party claiming that importation contains piratical goods.

U.S. Customs Determination of Piratical Goods

Once the time to submit briefs has passed, the files are given to the office of the Commissioner of Customs to determine whether there was any infringement. The regulations do not specify a time limit for the commissioner’s determination. The copyright holder may also choose to go to district court in search of an order enjoining the importation of the article in lieu of the aforementioned procedure. 17 U.S.C. §501.

Protest of U.S. Customs Detention

There are two ways that the parties can dispute an adverse decision or the failure to follow the procedures outlined in the statute. As a general rule, U.S. Customs regulations provide for the protest of adverse decisions within the agency. A protest is an application for relief, often relatively informal in nature, that seeks to reverse a decision of the agency.

A significant issue is the requirement in the regulations that a party seeking to prevent the importation of allegedly piratical goods is required to demand exclusion and to post bond. The bond requirement provides an important protection for importers, which may have goods detained for months and incur market losses and storage costs.

If Customs seizes allegedly piratical goods but relies on its general authority to detain imported goods for inspection, then a protest to compel compliance with the regulations – or, in some cases, a lawsuit in the International Court of Trade – may be required. If a protest is filed, a demand that it be decided in 30 days should be included to prevent additional storage costs.

Our experience has been that Customs officials, who detained the allegedly piratical goods, will simply accelerate the investigation and then seize the goods that it has detained, releasing any that are not piratical in the eyes of the inspectors, rather than complying with the administrative procedure specified in the code.The U.S. Customs seizure creates its own set of procedural rules and moves the case out of the administrative realm and into the federal courts. We’ll discuss those procedures in another post.

This post was submitted by Viviana Arturo.

The seizure occurred on April 26 at the Del Rio International Bridge. A CBP officer referred a 1996 Kenworth tractor hauling a manifested shipment of concrete block driven by a 37-year-old male Mexican citizen from Ciudad Acuña, Coahuila, Mexico for a secondary examination. In secondary, CBP officers conducted an intensive examination of the tractor trailer and discovered 400 packages within the shipment that contained 2,285 pounds of alleged marijuana. The marijuana has an estimated street value of $2.2 million.

No immediate arrests were made; however an investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement-Homeland Security Investigations special agents remains ongoing.

“This is the largest seizure of marijuana so far in Fiscal Year 2011 made by CBP officers at the Del Rio port of entry and underscores the importance of maintaining a robust border security enforcement posture,” said Michael Perez, CBP Port Director, Del Rio.

Source = CBP

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management.  Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.net.

“This agreement represents the shared commitment of both the United States and China to enhance global peace and security by working to prevent nuclear smuggling,” said Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman. “Preventing illicit transfers of nuclear materials is a critical part of NNSA’s efforts to implement President Obama’s goal of securing vulnerable nuclear material around the world. The success of this program is due in no small part to continued and future cooperation and support from partners such as the People’s Republic of China.”

NNSA is working to expand and strengthen nonproliferation efforts throughout East Asia. Through its Second Line of Defense (SLD) program, NNSA will provide radiation detection equipment and support the development of training materials for use at the Qinhuangdao Training Center. The radiation detection training facility at the Qinhuangdao Training Center will be the first of its kind in the region.

This agreement will complement ongoing cooperative efforts established by a 2005 MOU to combat nuclear and radiological smuggling. The 2005 agreement supports NNSA’s Megaports Initiative, which is working to equip the Yangshan Deepwater Port in Shanghai with radiation detection equipment.

NNSA’s SLD program works collaboratively with foreign governments at land border crossings, airports and seaports to install specialized radiation detection equipment, mobile radiation detection equipment, and associated communications equipment. Through its SLD program, NNSA also provides training to host government law enforcement officers and other personnel to detect smuggled nuclear and other radioactive materials.

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management.  Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.net.

Counterit Marlboro Cigarettes seized by U.S. Customs

As an attempt to mislead CBP and circumvent U.S. federal laws, smugglers falsely invoiced the shipment as “hang tags and hang plugs”. Examination of the merchandise revealed a total of 22,170 cartons equivalent to more than 4.4 million individual cigarettes in violation of the Marlboro Light 100’s and Marlboro Gold Pack trademarks.

“This seizure is a fine example of the hard work the men and women of CBP perform to protect the American consumer and the economic vitality of our country,” said CBP Acting Director of Los Angeles Field Operations. “Preventing the importation of illegal merchandise continues to be a top priority for CBP.”

CBP officers seized a total of 22,170 cartons equivalent to over 4.4 million individual cigarettes in violation of the Marlboro Light 100’s and Marlboro Gold Pack trademarks.

Counterfeit cigarettes not only affect trademark owners, but defraud consumers and deprive government of tax revenue. Consumers think they pay less for a genuine product, when in reality they pay less for a product of substandard quality.

More than 4.4 million counterfit Marlboro Lights and Marlboro Gold Pack cigarettes were hidden by smugglers in a container that arrived in Los Angeles / Long Beach from China

Organized crime organizations smuggle counterfeit cigarettes because of the substantial profits it generates. Much of these profits fund other criminal activities including money laundering and terrorism.

Importers violating intellectual property rights may be subject to civil penalties and/or criminal prosecution. The domestic value of this shipment was estimated at $443,400.

In fiscal year 2009, 14,841 seizures of counterfeit and pirated goods with a total domestic value of $260.7 million were intercepted by CBP at U.S. ports of entry.

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management.  Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.net.