CBP – ISF(10+2) GAO Recommendation

(Source: U.S. Government GAO Website)

GAO’s recommendation to CBP

(1) To enforce the CSM requirement where targeters identify carriers’noncompliance;
(2) To evaluate the effect of enforcement strategies on compliance at the port level;
(3) To collect additional performance information to better evaluate the effectiveness of the ISF program
(July 20, 2017)


CBP Needs to Enforce Compliance and Assess the Effectiveness of the Importer Security Filing and Additional Carrier Requirements

GAO-17-650: Published: Jul 20, 2017. Publicly Released: Jul 20, 2017.

Additional Materials:

What GAO Found

Through the Importer Security Filing (ISF) and Additional Carrier Requirements (the ISF rule), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) requires importers to submit ISFs and vessel carriers to submit vessel stow plans and container status messages (CSM). Submission rates for ISF-10s—required for cargo destined for the United States—increased from about 95 percent in 2012 to 99 percent in 2015. Submission rates for ISF-5s—required for cargo transiting but not destined for the United States—ranged from about 68 to 80 percent. To increase ISF-5 submission rates, CBP published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in July 2016 to clarify the party responsible for submitting the ISF-5. GAO could not determine submission rates for vessel stow plans, which depict the position of each cargo container on a vessel, because CBP calculates stow plan submission rates on a daily basis, but not comprehensively over time. CBP officials noted, though, that compliance overall is likely nearly 100 percent because Advance Targeting Units (ATU), responsible for identifying high-risk shipments, contact carriers if they have not received stow plans. GAO also could not determine submission rates for CSMs, which report container movements and status changes, because CBP does not have access to carriers’ private data systems to know the number of CSMs it should receive. CBP targeters noted that they may become aware that CSMs have not been sent based on other information sources they review.

CBP has taken actions to enforce ISF and stow plan submissions, but has not enforced CSM submissions or assessed the effects of its enforcement actions on compliance at the port level. ATUs enforce ISF and vessel stow plan compliance by using ISF holds, which prevent cargo from leaving ports, and issuing liquidated damages claims. CBP has not enforced CSM submissions because of the high volume it receives and lack of visibility into carriers’ private data systems. However, when CBP targeters become aware that CSMs have not been received based on reviewing other information sources, taking enforcement actions could provide an incentive for carriers to submit all CSMs and help targeters better identify high-risk cargo. GAO’s enforcement data analysis shows that ATUs used varying methods to enforce the ISF rule and that ports’ ISF-10 submission rates varied. By assessing the effects of its enforcement strategies at the port level, CBP could better ensure it maximizes compliance with the rule.

CBP officials stated that ISF rule data have improved their ability to identify high-risk cargo shipments, but CBP could collect additional performance information to better evaluate program effectiveness. Evaluating the direct impact of ISF rule data in assessing shipment risk is difficult; however, GAO identified examples of how CBP could better assess the ISF program’s effectiveness. For example, CBP could track the number of containers not listed on a manifest—which could pose a security risk—it identifies through reviewing vessel stow plans. Collecting this type of additional performance information could help CBP better assess whether the ISF program is improving its ability to identify high-risk shipments.

This is a public version of a sensitive report that GAO issued in May 2017. Information CBP deemed Law Enforcement Sensitive has been deleted.

Why GAO Did This Study

Cargo shipments can present security concerns as terrorists could use cargo containers to transport a weapon of mass destruction or other contraband into the United States. In January 2009, CBP, within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), implemented the ISF rule. The rule requires importers and vessel carriers to submit information, such as country of origin, to CBP before cargo is loaded onto U.S.-bound vessels. The information is intended to improve CBP’s ability to identify high-risk shipments.

GAO was asked to review the ISF program. This report addresses: (1) importers’ and carriers’ submission rates for ISF rule requirements, (2) CBP’s actions to enforce the ISF rule and assess whether enforcement actions have increased compliance, and (3) the extent to which the ISF rule has improved CBP’s ability to identify high-risk shipments. GAO, among other things, analyzed CBP’s compliance and enforcement data for 2012 through 2015—the most recent data available at the time of GAO’s review—and interviewed CBP officials and trade industry members.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that CBP (1) enforce the CSM requirement when targeters identify carriers’ noncompliance; (2) evaluate the effect of enforcement strategies on compliance at the port level; and (3) collect additional performance information to better evaluate the effectiveness of the ISF program. DHS concurred with the recommendations.

For more information, contact Jennifer Grover at (202) 512-7141 or groverj@gao.gov.



ISF 10+2 Related Information
at BAL’s Past Website


米国CBPの動き、ISF & AMS 24時間ルール施行等の最新ニュース
CBP ISF (10+2) 最新の施行状況-特設欄 

American Shipper-ISF導入後1年の状況 概ね順調、問題も残る
CBP-ISFの追加措置コード(Disposition Code)-2010年9月15日発効 
CBP-Importer Security Filing (10+2)の施行後の最新状況を発表
CBP-AAEI(米国輸出輸入協会)に『 ISF Enforcement Strategy』を通達
CBP ISF(10+2)-米国の輸入関係者がNVOのAutomatingに言及
CBP-10+2 運用開始の注意事項、2010年1月26日向け最終手続
Trade Symposium 2009 in Wash D.C. “ISF(10+2) Progress Update”
日本機械輸出組合-米国 CBP高官 Mr. De Nucci セミナーを実施



(Source: JIFFA News 第159号 2009年3月の一部より–寄稿 野田誠孫)


2009年1月26日、CBPによる暫定最終規則─ISF10+2の施行により米国の海上輸入貨物向けのテロ対策、つまり「貨物セキュリティの電子事前申告制度」は船社及びNVOCCを対象とするAMS(Automated Manifest System)から、輸入者及びその関係者を対象とするISF(Importer Security Filing)という次の段階に進んだ。ISF10+2の施行によりCBPはこれまでのAMS情報、即ち貨物輸送のデータ(物流)から貨物内容のデータ(商流)に対テロのセキュリティ対象を拡げることとなった。これによりCBPは輸出港での米国向け船舶への貨物の船積前にサプライチェーン上の関連情報を入手することでセキュリティ監視を一層強化したことを意味する。以下、新たな制度であるISFがどのように機能するのか、当事者である輸入者はこれにどう対応するかを説明する。また、そのために必要となる情報システムに求められる能力とは何であるのかを述べる。


CBPでは2003年1月に施行したAMSで貨物セキュリティ対策として最も有効な手段である“DO NOT LOAD”(DNL)の指示を船社(輸送事業者)に対して出すことができる。つまり、AMSで規定された輸送事業者に対して電子データで事前申告した内容に基づき必要に応じてCBPは輸出港にいる船舶に対し船積24時間前にDNL指示ができる。このCBPによるDNL指示は新たなISF制度でも同じ意味を持つ。即ち、CBPは「不審な貨物は船積みしない、させない」をISFが原因の場合でも適用する。海上貨物によるテロと言う物理的危険を排除できるのは「貨物を持ち込まない」ことであり、米国はこれが最大の防御であるとしている。つまり、船舶に物理的に「積まない、積ませない」ことをどのように徹底できるかが米国のテロ対策の基本である。この場合、物流を管理するAMSこそが基本となり、今回の商流を対象とするISFがAMSをさらに強化し、商流に関わる情報提供を通じてCBPはサプライチェーン全体に監視の対象を拡大した。つまり、CBPはISFとAMSの連携を通じて「物流+商流」を一体化して、より安全な貨物セキュリティ体制の構築を目指している。

2009年3月12日 JASTPROセミナー: 「10+2の第三者サービスについて」の講演資料

米国CBPの新たなISF規則、 「10+2」など米国税関に関連してデカルト社の第三者サービスを提供する弊社は、財団法人日本貿易関係手続簡易化協会(JASTPRO)の講演会に講師として招かれ、「ISF規則とAMS24時間ルールの関連」などについて貨物セキュリティに関する講演を行った。当日配布の資料は発端である米国における9/11事件がその後の世界に及ぼした影響の始まりを見ることができる。

詳細資料はPDF(2009年3月12日 JASTPROセミナー: 「10+2の第三者サービスについて」)を参照下さい。