[Nhcoll-l] ACE entry & APHIS core

[Ellen Paul]

Remember, you asked...


On 8/16/16 3:20 PM, Dirk Neumann wrote:
> Hi Ellen,
>
> thanks a lot for all this valuable information you provided and all 
> you efforts & discussions with regulators and authorities.
>
> As an "outsider" and being not that familiar with the US imports 
> regulations I had a look on the customs declaration form you linked in 
> your second post (form 19 CFR 122 27).
>
> To me, this seems to be the standard questionnaire passengers arriving 
> from abroad have to file in many countries. It applies for all _fresh, 
> unpreserved_ materials. The reasoning behind is protection against 
> bird flue strains or phytopathogenes that could be carried in the hand 
> or checked luggage.
No, the form I sent is for Customs and Border Patrol, which is part of 
homeland security.

Just FYI especially to those in the U.S., 19 CFR 122.27 is actually not 
a form. It is part of the Code of Federal Regulations and this 
particular regulation is part of the air commerce regulations.

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.gpo.gov_fdsys_pkg_CFR-2D2016-2Dtitle19-2Dvol1_xml_CFR-2D2016-2Dtitle19-2Dvol1-2Dpart122.xml-23seqnum122.27&d=CwID-g&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=CLFZJ3fvGSmDp7xK1dNZfh6uGV_h-8NVlo3fXNoRNzI&m=x2dNpBKrXOFQPgaEJF2vd1ynQEx593XDtBnMxB-H0S8&s=wzTo44WPjWg0qebTFq1dZothsK0HmLUG2dcEJ69UzU4&e= 

Documents required.(a)Crewmembers and passengers.Crewmembers and 
passengers on a private aircraft arriving in the U.S. shall make baggage 
declarations as set forth in part 148 of this chapter. An oral 
declaration of articles acquired in foreign areas shall be made, unless 
a written declaration on Customs Form 6059-B is found necessary by 
inspecting officers.(b)Cargo.(1) On arrival, cargo and unaccompanied 
baggage not carried for hire aboard a private aircraft may be listed on 
a baggage declaration on Customs Form 6059-B, and shall be entered. If 
the cargo or unaccompanied baggage is not listed on a baggage 
declaration, it shall be entered in the same manner as cargo carried for 
hire into the U.S.(2) On departure, when a private aircraft leaves the 
U.S. carrying cargo not for hire, the Bureau of Census (15 CFR part 30) 
and the Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR parts 730 through 774) 
and any other applicable export laws shall be followed. A foreign 
landing certificate or certified copy of a foreign Customs entry is 
required as proof of exportation if the cargo includes:(i) Merchandise 
valued at more than $500.00; or(ii) More than one case of alcoholic 
beverages withdrawn from a Customs bonded warehouse or otherwise in bond 
for direct exportation by private aircraft.A foreign landing 
certificate, when required, shall be produced within six months from the 
date of exportation and shall be signed by a revenue officer of the 
foreign country to which the merchandise is exported, unless it is shown 
that the country has no Customs administration, in which case the 
certificate may be signed by the consignee or by the vessel's agent at 
the place of landing.(c)Pilot certificate/license, certificate of 
registration—(1)Pilot certificate/license.A commander of a private 
aircraft arriving in the U.S. must present for inspection a valid pilot 
certificate/license, medical certificate, authorization, or license held 
by that person, when presentation for inspection is requested by a 
Customs officer.(2)Certificate of registration.A valid certificate of 
registration for private aircraft which are U.S.-registered must also be 
presented upon arrival in the U.S., when presentation for inspection is 
requested by a Customs officer. A so-called “pink slip” is a duplicate 
copy of the Aircraft Registration Application (FAA Form AC 8050-1), and 
does not constitute a valid certificate of registration authorizing 
travel internationally.


You will note that it refers to another section (part 148) which is a 
long, complex chapter detailing various declarations. Just glancing at 
the table of contents, it appears to be entirely about personal imports 
(i.e., non-business items). Which in turn leads me to believe that 
122.27 is not the correct chapter in the first place. This is what I am 
working through with the CBP Trade staff. Please be patient. It is very 
complex and I am just learning it myself. As I said to Chris Milensky 
yesterday, I am the alpha geek here. And you know what the alpha geek is 
- the most knowledgeable person. It doesn't mean I am proficient. It 
means I have more knowledge than others. Perhaps just a miniscule amount 
more!

It has nothing to do with type of imported material or the phyto- and 
bio-sanitary concerns that are handled by an entirely different agency - 
the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHISof the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture.

The nexus between Customs and Border Protection and APHIS is that after 
9/11, the Agricultural Quality Inspectors - the people who are actually 
stationed at the ports and who check the APHIS permits and inspect the 
personal accompanying luggage and cargo were transferred from APHIS to CBP.


>
> But for our preserved stuff, as well as for hunting trophies, there 
> are specific harmonised regulations between North America which help 
> to ease import when the material either originated from a safe 
> sourcing country (i.e. a country with proper reliable veterinarian 
> check), or underwent a so called safe treatment (i.e. 
> boiling/maceration, formalin fixation, ethanol preservation, complete 
> cell lysis). Do you know if there is any reference inside the US laws 
> which reflect this concept ? Is the concept of safe sourcing/safe 
> treatment applicable for US imports?
I don't know if by "harmonised regulations" between North America (did 
you mean the United States) and (which other countries?) you are 
referring to the harmonized system (known in the U.S. as the Harmonized 
Tariff System). If so, it is exactly what it sounds like. These are 
uniform codes to help a different part of the CBP (the part that used to 
be known as the U.S. Customs Service) implement tariff regulations. 
Those codes have nothing to do with easing import as to the biosafety 
issues.

Again, just FYI, the Customs and Border Protection agency has several 
parts, each with different functions. The CBP is charged with keeping 
scary people and their weapons out of the U.S., implementing tariff 
regulations, interdicting all sorts of illegal cargo including 
narcotics, and implementing the agricultural regulations promulgated by 
the USDA.

That being said, it is true that the harmonized tariff schedule 
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.usitc.gov_tata_hts_index.htm&d=CwID-g&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=CLFZJ3fvGSmDp7xK1dNZfh6uGV_h-8NVlo3fXNoRNzI&m=x2dNpBKrXOFQPgaEJF2vd1ynQEx593XDtBnMxB-H0S8&s=5TMON_bNr2qCNUah0f_tO2uJwqTQbojVev8mGcl39tY&e= > helps the CBP to determine

9705.00.91 (other)

Collections and collectors' pieces of zoological, botanical,
mineralogical, anatomical, historical, archeological, paleontological,
ethnographic or numismatic interest..........................

with precision what you've got in that package.

However, as to the agricultural regulations, what they go by is the 
permits issued by APHIS.

For "animal byproducts" - the VS16-3.

The conditions on those permits control the imports. Customs and Border 
Protection has nothing to do with that as to either permits or import 
declarations. Their only role here is to enforce whatever that permit 
requires.

It happens that Customs and Border Protection is the "lead agency" in 
developing this Automated Commercial Environment declaration system, but 
I know for a fact, from being in contact with them, that each agency has 
its own team developing its own part of the "single window" for import 
declarations.

Think of it as a single window with multiple panes of glass. The CBP has 
built the window and maintains it. One of those panes of glass is the 
ACE, which is the customs declaration information. Another pane is the 
"APHIS Core" which is just what it sounds like. One of these days - the 
current projection is apparently November -another pane will be a USFWS 
window.


>
> Further, you mentioned normal shipments send by courier companies such 
> as FedEx (which is a complete separate string compared to the checked 
> luggage ACE declarations); all shipments we sent the last few weeks 
> with FedEX (with reference the the respective EU animal-by-product 
> laws / safe treatment) arrived without any hassles or delay at the 
> museum of destination.
Yes, as I have tried to explain, FedEx has its own in-house customs 
broker called FedEx Trade Networks and FTN handles the customs 
declaration, the APHIS process, and the USFWS process.
And again, my only concern here is that we have no reason to think that 
their brokers have any more expertise with regard to the APHIS Core 
complexities and the "translation" of what you are importing into the 
terms used in the APHIS Core.

In addition, APHIS Core was in a pilot phase until August 15 and I don't 
know if FedEx was among the pilot users. They probably were, but I don't 
know. If not, then they were doing it the "old way."

>
> Our material travels under custom tariff code 9705.00  - which serves 
> as indirect hint that it is somehow treated but not fresh.
APHIS regulations do NOT make a distinction between treated and "fresh" 
or what APHIS calls "untreated." In the U.S., the requirements for how 
material must be treated, if at all, is controlled by permit conditions. 
This is greatly simplified, but basically:

1. If coming from a country or region where HPAI is present - and this 
is an official list, not just the determination of the importer - all 
avian material must be treated. APHIS has a list of approved treatment 
methods.

2. If coming from a country or region where END is present but HPAI does 
not occur then:
a) if imported into a USDA-approved biosafety level 2 lab, then it may 
come into the U.S. untreated (importer's option)
b) if imported to a lab that is NOT a USDA-approved biosafety level 2 
lab, then it must be treated

3. If coming from a country or region where neither HPAI nor END occurs, 
then it may be imported untreated, whether the lab is USDA-approved as 
BSL2 or not. There are very few (maybe 14?) countries and regions 
recognized as free of both pathogens.


> So far, I had the impression that this combination was working well - 
> at least for the preserved stuff that travels inside regular postal 
> networks ...
>
> Curious to hear your thoughts,
> all the best from the old world / late side of our globus
>
> Dirk
>