Acas Ifr 2025

52796

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

U.S. Customs & Border Protection, by
telephone at 646–315–4330 or by email
at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

19 CFR Parts 103 and 122

Table of Contents

[Docket No. USCBP–2025–0053; CBP Dec.
25–08]

I. Public Participation
II. Executive Summary
III. Background and Purpose
A. Regulatory History
B. Statutory Authority
C. CBP Regulatory Requirements
1. 19 CFR 122.48a—Electronic Information
for Air Cargo Required in Advance of
Arrival
2. 19 CFR 122.48b—ACAS
D. TSA Requirements
E. Air Cargo Security Risks
F. The Enhanced ACAS Program
Development Process
IV. ACAS Program Revisions
A. Enhanced ACAS Data Element
Definitions
B. Mandatory Data Elements
C. Conditional Data Element: Master Air
Waybill Number
D. Conditional Data Element: Verified
Known Consignor Information
E. Conditional Data Elements That May Be
Required When There Is Not a Verified
Known Consignor
F. Optional Data Elements
G. Retention of Government-Issued Photo
Identification Document Copies
H. Exemption of ACAS Data From
Disclosure
I. Phased Enforcement
J. Severability
V. Statutory and Regulatory Reviews
A. Administrative Procedure Act
B. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
14192
C. Regulatory Flexibility Assessment
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Privacy Act of 1974 and E-Government
Act of 2002
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
G. International Trade Impact Assessment
H. Congressional Review Act

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY

RIN 1651–AB61

Enhanced Air Cargo Advance
Screening (ACAS)
U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, DHS.
ACTION: Interim final rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:

To address ongoing aviation
security threats, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) is amending its
regulations pertaining to the Air Cargo
Advance Screening (ACAS) program to
require the transmission of additional
data elements. The ACAS program
enhances the security of flights carrying
cargo into the United States by requiring
the transmission of certain air cargo data
and performing targeted risk
assessments based on the transmitted
data prior to an aircraft’s departure for
the United States. These risk
assessments identify and prevent highrisk air cargo from being loaded onto an
aircraft that could pose a risk to an
aircraft during flight.
DATES:
Effective Date: This interim final rule
is effective as of November 21, 2025.
Comment Date: Comments must be
received by January 20, 2026.
ADDRESSES: Please submit any
comments, identified by docket number
USCBP–2025–0053, by the following
method:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number for this rulemaking. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on submitting
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph Martella, Cargo and Conveyance
Security, Office of Field Operations,

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

Table of Abbreviations
ABI—Automated Broker Interface
ACAS—Air Cargo Advance Screening
APA—Administrative Procedure Act
ATS—Automated Targeting System
BLS—Bureau of Labor Statistics
CBP—U.S. Customs and Border Protection
CFR—Code of Federal Regulations
CRA—Congressional Review Act
DHS—Department of Homeland Security
DNL—Do-Not-Load
EIA—Energy Information Administration
E.O.—Executive Order
EU—European Union
FDM—Flight Departure Message
FR—Federal Register
GDP—Gross Domestic Product
HAWB—House Air Waybill
IFR—Interim Final Rule
IG—Implementation Guide
IP—Internet Protocol
IT—Information Technology
MAC—Media Access Control
MAWB—Master Air Waybill
NCSP—National Cargo Security Program

PO 00000

Frm 00002

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

OMB—Office of Management and Budget
PNR—Passenger Name Record
PRA—Paperwork Reduction Act
RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act
SBA—U.S. Small Business Administration
SKU—Stock Keeping Unit
SSI—Sensitive Security Information
TSA—Transportation Security
Administration
UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
URL—Uniform Resource Locator
U.S.—United States
U.S.C.—United States Code
VPN—Virtual Private Network

I. Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to
participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written data, views, or
arguments on all aspects of this interim
final rule (IFR). CBP also invites
comments that relate to the economic,
environmental, or federalism effects that
might result from this IFR. Comments
that will provide the most assistance to
CBP will reference a specific portion of
the IFR, explain the reason for any
recommended change, and include data,
information, or authority that support
such recommended change.
II. Executive Summary
Intentional attacks on international
aviation continue to pose a significant
threat to the security of aircraft and
individuals entering the United States.
For example, in July 2024, incendiary
devices caused fires at several air cargo
facilities in Europe. If the devices had
ignited mid-air, the resulting fires could
have caused the catastrophic loss of an
aircraft, threatening the safety and
security of all individuals and property
in the vicinity of the incident.
The Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) was established, in part,
to prevent such attacks, and to ensure
aviation safety and security. Within
DHS, U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) and the Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) have
responsibilities for securing
international air cargo bound for the
United States. Working together, CBP
and TSA employ a layered security
approach to secure aircraft entering the
United States, which includes risk
assessment methods that identify highrisk cargo for further screening.
As part of this layered security
approach, CBP’s Air Cargo Advance
Screening (ACAS) program requires
inbound air carriers or other eligible
filers to transmit specified air cargo data
as early as practicable, but no later than
prior to the loading of the cargo onto an
aircraft. This data is analyzed as part of
a joint CBP–TSA targeting operation
that identifies high-risk cargo for further
interventions before the cargo can be

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
loaded onto an aircraft bound for the
United States. In response to the July
2024 incidents, CBP, in coordination
with TSA, determined that it is
necessary to modify the ACAS program
to more effectively identify high-risk air
cargo.
CBP, in collaboration with TSA,
established the ACAS program in
response to an October 2010 attack in
which terrorists placed concealed
explosive devices in cargo on board two
aircraft destined for the United States.
The devices, disguised as printers, were
designed to detonate mid-air over the
continental United States with enough
explosive potential to cause catastrophic
damage to the two aircraft. The attack
was ultimately thwarted when the
devices were discovered through the
combined efforts of multiple foreign and
domestic intelligence agencies. If not
discovered, the devices could have
caused significant loss of life and
damage to property on board any of the
aircraft that the devices transited on,
including passenger aircraft that carry
air cargo. Despite the positive
conclusion, the attack highlighted
significant vulnerabilities in air cargo
security as the devices had flown on
board several flights prior to discovery.
To address vulnerabilities identified
in CBP’s analysis of the October 2010
attack, CBP, in collaboration with TSA,
established the ACAS program to
expedite the transmission of certain air
cargo information used by CBP when
conducting risk assessments. CBP and
TSA also established a joint CBP–TSA
targeting operation that analyzes
transmitted air cargo data by utilizing
CBP’s Automated Targeting System
(ATS) and other available intelligence as
a risk targeting tool. This targeting
operation enables CBP and TSA to
address specific threat information in
real time and identify high-risk cargo
shipments that require further scrutiny.
CBP’s objective for the ACAS program is
to obtain the most accurate data at the
earliest time possible while minimizing
any impact that the collection of data
might have on the flow of commerce.
The ACAS transmission timeline
enables CBP and TSA to deter and
disrupt threats faced by aircraft carrying
cargo into the United States by
identifying high-risk air cargo prior to
an aircraft’s departure for the United
States. CBP and TSA requirements
ensure that high-risk cargo shipments
identified through this process receive
appropriate screening and, if necessary,
are prevented from transport in civil
aviation. Following extensive
discussions with members of industry
and testing, CBP and TSA mandated
participation in the ACAS program

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

through the publication of CBP’s ACAS
IFR, effective June 12, 2018 (83 FR
27380) (‘‘2018 IFR’’), and through
revisions to TSA’s standard security
programs.
Under section 122.48a of title 19 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR
122.48a), for any inbound aircraft
required to make entry under 19 CFR
122.41 that will have commercial cargo
aboard, CBP must receive air cargo
information from the air carrier or other
approved party no later than the time of
departure (when the aircraft departs
from certain foreign ports near the
United States) or no later than four
hours prior to arrival in the United
States (when the aircraft departs from
any other foreign area). Prior to the
implementation of the ACAS program in
2018, the 19 CFR 122.48a timeline for
the transmission of electronic
information meant that an aircraft could
depart from a foreign port and be
airborne, enroute to the United States
before any information regarding air
cargo on board was transmitted to CBP.
Without CBP’s receipt of air cargo data
and the completion of an effective risk
assessment prior to an aircraft’s
departure from a foreign port, a threat
actor could place dangerous cargo on
board an aircraft, threatening the
security of the aircraft and any persons
or property in its vicinity.
CBP’s ACAS requirements, 19 CFR
122.48b, apply to any inbound aircraft
required to make entry under 19 CFR
122.41 that will have commercial cargo
on board. The ACAS data transmission
is in addition to the advance filing
requirements for aircraft under 19 CFR
122.48a. Under the ACAS program, an
inbound air carrier and/or other eligible
ACAS filer must transmit specified air
cargo data (hereafter referred to as
‘‘ACAS data’’) to CBP as early as
practicable, but not later than prior to
the loading of the cargo onto the aircraft.
This time frame allows CBP to analyze
ACAS data, identify if the cargo has a
nexus to a threat, and, with TSA, take
the necessary action, such as preventing
loading of the suspected high-risk cargo
on aircraft, to thwart potential threats
before an aircraft departs for the United
States. A complete ACAS filing includes
the transmission of all applicable ACAS
data as required by 19 CFR 122.48b(d).
The ACAS regulations refer to
individual ACAS data requirements as
data elements. In the 2018 IFR, CBP
listed six mandatory data elements
which must be transmitted for each
ACAS filing and one conditional data
element which must be transmitted only
under certain circumstances. The
regulation also provides that ACAS

PO 00000

Frm 00003

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52797

filers may choose to provide certain
optional data elements.
Information received under the ACAS
program enables the joint CBP–TSA
targeting operation to identify high-risk
cargo and CBP to issue Do-Not-Load
(DNL) instructions or referrals for
additional information or screening.
When the available information points
to an immediate or lethal threat to the
aircraft and its vicinity, the ACAS
regulations enable CBP to issue DNL
instructions which prohibit the
transportation of cargo. Referrals for
information are issued if a risk
assessment cannot be conducted due to
non-descriptive, inaccurate, or
insufficient information in the ACAS
filing. Referrals for screening are issued
pursuant to CBP authorities and
resolved using the enhanced screening
procedures required by TSA-approved
or accepted security programs.
TSA enforces the implementation of
enhanced screening methods through
security program requirements under 49
CFR parts 1544 and 1546. In accordance
with TSA regulations, inbound air
carriers are required to comply with
their respective TSA-approved or
accepted security program, including
any changes being implemented for
purposes of the enhanced ACAS
program.
The ACAS requirements and
corresponding TSA-approved or
accepted security program requirements
enhance the ability of CBP and TSA to
prevent air cargo that may contain a
potential bomb, improvised explosive
device, or other material that may pose
an immediate, lethal threat to the
aircraft or its vicinity from being loaded
on board an aircraft and allows law
enforcement authorities to coordinate
with necessary parties.
Air cargo information received under
the ACAS program has been an effective
risk-assessment tool for CBP’s ongoing
efforts to ensure aviation safety and
security including, but not limited to,
combatting terrorist threats to the
homeland. However, recent
developments prompted CBP to review
the ACAS program’s requirements and
announce revisions that provide CBP
with a more complete understanding of
the evolving threat environment. As
explained under Section III.E. and
Section V.A., the July 2024 incendiary
incidents, in combination with specific,
classified intelligence regarding the
intent of threat actors to exploit similar
vulnerabilities, informed CBP’s decision
to immediately revise the ACAS
program in collaboration with TSA.
To address this new threat, CBP
determined that it is necessary to
modify the ACAS program to require

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

52798

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

inbound air carriers and other eligible
filers to submit additional ACAS data
elements. As illustrated in Table 1, CBP
is revising 19 CFR 122.48b(d) to include
new mandatory, conditional, and
optional data elements applicable to air
carriers and other eligible ACAS filers.
This IFR does not modify any existing
substantive requirements under the
ACAS regulations other than the
addition of the new ACAS data
elements. As such, CBP does not
address any comments made or issues
identified under the 2018 IFR.
Unlike the previous set of ACAS data
elements which were entirely a subset
of the data elements that must be
submitted under 19 CFR 122.48a, the
enhanced set of ACAS data elements
combines the previous subset of 19 CFR
122.48a data elements with a new set of
data elements unique to the ACAS
program. The enhanced ACAS data
elements will provide CBP and TSA

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

with a more complete picture of the
parties involved in cargo shipment
transactions, the nature of the parties’
relationships, financial data related to
cargo shipments, and additional
identifying information for certain
online marketplaces and shipments
originating from individuals with
unknown risk profiles. The enhanced
ACAS data elements were developed, in
part, based on CBP’s and TSA’s
understanding of various indicators of
the relative risk of cargo shipments and
will allow the joint CBP–TSA targeting
operation to more effectively identify
cargo shipments that require further
scrutiny.
As discussed in Section III.F., CBP
conducted an implementation period
beginning in August 2024 to ensure the
feasibility of sourcing and transmitting
the enhanced ACAS data elements. The
implementation period included
extensive discussions with members of

PO 00000

Frm 00004

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

industry and government agencies to
assess and reduce any potential
complications associated with the new
data elements. During the
implementation period, members of
industry initiated the development of
the technological capabilities and
business processes necessary to comply
with the enhanced ACAS data element
requirements. Based on industry
feedback and CBP’s own observations,
CBP determined that it was necessary to
promulgate regulations under CBP’s
authorities that could permanently
mandate the transmission of the
enhanced ACAS data elements.
The table below contains a list of the
ACAS data elements previously
required under 19 CFR 122.48b and the
additional data elements introduced by
this rulemaking.
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

52799

Table 1 - Summary of Changes to the ACAS Data Elements
Previous 122.48b
Revised 122.48b 1
Mandatory Shipper name and address
Shipper name and address
Consignee name and address

Consignee name and address
Consignee email address

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Conditional

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Cargo description

Cargo description

Total quantity based on the
smallest external packing unit

Total quantity based on the
smallest external packing unit

Total weight of cargo

Total weight of cargo

Air waybill number

Air waybill number
Shipment packing location and/or
scheduled shipment pickup
location
Ship to party
Master air waybill (MAWB)
number
Verified known consignor
Shipper email address
Shipper phone number
Customer account name
Customer account issuer
Customer account number
Customer account shipping
frequency/volume
Customer account establishment
date
Customer account billing type
Unmasked internet protocol (IP)
address or media access control
(MAC) address of the device used
during account creation

Master air waybill (MAWB)
number

Jkt 268001

PO 00000

Frm 00005

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.013

Consignee phone number

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

Second notify party

Optional

Any additional data elements
listed in§ 122.48a or any
additional information regarding
ACAS data elements
BILLING CODE 9111–14–C

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

III. Background and Purpose1
Within DHS, CBP and TSA have
responsibilities for securing air cargo
bound for the United States from foreign
ports. CBP, in consultation with TSA,
established the mandatory ACAS
program in 2018 to require the
transmission of certain air cargo data
prior to the departure of a U.S.-bound
1 The revisions to the list of data elements under
19 CFR 122.48b are discussed in greater detail in
Section IV.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

Unmasked internet protocol (IP)
address or media access control
(MAC) address of the device used
to initiate the shipping transaction
and the unmasked IP address or
MAC address of the device used to
file the ACAS filing each time an
ACAS filing is submitted.
Shipping cost
Biographic data
Link to product listing and
unmasked internet protocol (IP)
address or media access control
(MAC) address of the device used
by the consignee to purchase the
product
Second notify party
Origin of shipment
Declared value
Harmonized commodity code
Transaction type
Special handling type
Customer account email address
Customer account phone number
Shipper Manufacturer
Identification code or Authorized
Economic Operator number
Consignee importer of record
number
Regulated agent name, address,
and code
ACAS filing type
Any additional data elements
listed in§ 122.48a or any
additional information regarding
ACAS data elements

aircraft from a foreign port. The
following subsections describe the
regulatory history of the ACAS program,
the statutory authorities for the ACAS
program, existing CBP and TSA
regulatory requirements, the security
threat that prompted the publication of
this IFR, and the development process
for the enhanced ACAS data elements
required by this IFR.
A. Regulatory History
On December 5, 2003, the Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection (now
CBP) published the Required Advance

PO 00000

Frm 00006

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

Electronic Presentation of Cargo
Information final rule to require the
transmission of electronic cargo
information for cargo arriving in or
departing from the United States by any
mode of transportation.2 The 2003 final
rule added 19 CFR 122.48a to require
the electronic transmission of certain
information pertaining to the
commercial cargo on board aircraft
entering the United States no later than
the time of departure from certain ports
near the United States or no later than
2 68

FR 68140 (Dec. 5, 2003).

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.014

52800

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
four hours prior to arrival in the United
States when the aircraft departs from
any other foreign area.
In October 2010, a terrorist plot to
place explosives on board cargo aircraft
destined for the United States
highlighted vulnerabilities in cargo
aviation security. In response to this
threat, CBP, in collaboration with TSA,
established the Air Cargo Advance
Screening (ACAS) pilot program in
December 2010. The ACAS pilot
required participants to provide certain
information concerning air cargo at the
earliest point practicable in the supply
chain. Participation in the ACAS pilot
was on a voluntary basis. CBP and TSA
also established a joint CBP–TSA
targeting operation that utilizes CBP’s
ATS as a dynamic risk targeting tool to
analyze the ACAS data and other
available intelligence to better identify
cargo that poses a high security risk.
The ACAS data transmission timeline
allows the joint CBP–TSA targeting
operation to identify high-risk cargo for
further screening prior to the departure
of an aircraft bound for the United
States. The ACAS pilot was formalized
and expanded in an October 2012
Federal Register notice; however,
participation was still on a voluntary
basis.3 As the ACAS program
developed, CBP determined that it was
necessary to mandate the transmission
of ACAS data.
On June 12, 2018, CBP published the
ACAS interim final rule (IFR).4 The
2018 IFR implemented a mandatory
ACAS program under 19 CFR 122.48b,
which specifies the general ACAS
requirements, the eligible filers, the
ACAS data elements, the time frame for
providing the data to CBP, the
responsibilities of the filers, and the
process regarding ACAS referrals and
DNL instructions.
Through the 2018 IFR, CBP also
amended 19 CFR 122.48a to reference
the ACAS requirements and to
incorporate a few additional changes.
Specifically, CBP amended 19 CFR
122.48a to revise the definition of the
consignee name and address data
element to provide a more accurate and
complete definition, and to add a new
data element requirement, the flight
departure message (FDM), to enable CBP
to determine the timeliness of ACAS
transmissions. CBP also amended the
applicable bond provisions in 19 CFR
part 113 to incorporate the ACAS
requirements.
For a detailed discussion of the
statutory and regulatory histories, the
factors governing the development of
3 77
4 83

FR 65006 (Oct. 24, 2012).
FR 27380 (Jun. 12, 2018).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

the ACAS regulations, and the changes
to the regulations prior to the issuance
of this IFR, see the 2018 ACAS IFR.5
B. Statutory Authority
Section 343(a) of the Trade Act of
2002 (Trade Act), as amended,
authorizes CBP to promulgate
regulations providing for the mandatory
transmission of electronic cargo
information by way of a CBP-approved
electronic data interchange (EDI) system
before cargo is brought into or departs
from the United States.6 Section
343(a)(2) of the Trade Act authorizes
CBP to require the transmission of any
cargo information that CBP ‘‘determines
to be reasonably necessary to ensure
cargo safety and security pursuant to
those laws enforced and administered
by [CBP].’’
When developing regulations under
CBP’s section 343(a) Trade Act
authority, CBP must adhere to
parameters under section 343(a)(3) that
require CBP to give due consideration to
the concerns of the industry and the
flow of commerce. These parameters
include, among others, provisions
requiring consultation with affected
parties and the consideration of the
differences in commercial and
operational practices among the
different parties. In addition, in
determining the timing for transmittal of
any information, the statute requires
CBP to balance the likely impact of the
data collection on the flow of commerce
with the cargo safety and security
benefits. The statute also requires CBP
to protect the privacy of business
proprietary and any other confidential
cargo information provided to CBP and
ensure that the information collected
pursuant to the regulations be used for
ensuring cargo safety and security,
preventing smuggling, and commercial
risk assessment targeting. Finally, the
statute requires that the obligations
imposed must generally be upon the
party most likely to have direct
knowledge of the required information,
and if not, that the obligations imposed
take into account ordinary commercial
practices for receiving data and what the
party transmitting the information
reasonably believes to be true.
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018,
Public Law 115–254 (FAA Act), was
enacted on October 5, 2018, nearly four
months after the publication of the 2018
ACAS IFR. Among other things, section
1951 of the FAA Act (codified at 49
U.S.C. 44901 note) requires the
FR 27380 (Jun. 12, 2018).
Trade Act of 2002, Public Law 107–210, 116
Stat. 982 (codified as amended at 19 U.S.C. 1415).
This section was formerly codified as a note to 19
U.S.C. 2071.

52801

Commissioner of CBP and the
Administrator of TSA to establish an air
cargo advance screening program for the
collection of advance electronic
information from air carriers and other
persons within the supply chain
regarding cargo being transported to the
United States by air in order to perform
risk targeting to prevent the loading and
transportation of high-risk cargo.
Section 1951 also requires that CBP, in
coordination with TSA, issue final
regulations that implement the air cargo
advance screening program within 180
days of enactment of the FAA Act, by
April 5, 2019. Despite some minor
differences in the terminology used in
the 2018 IFR and the FAA Act regarding
some of the specific requirements, the
ACAS program established by CBP, as
set forth in the 2018 IFR, is the type of
program that Congress envisioned in the
FAA Act and the 2018 IFR substantially
fulfills the requirements of the FAA Act.
C. CBP Regulatory Requirements
Section 343(a) of the Trade Act
authorizes CBP to promulgate
regulations providing for the mandatory
transmission of cargo information by
way of a CBP-approved electronic data
interchange (EDI) system before the
cargo is brought into or departs from the
United States by any mode of
commercial transportation. Under
section 343(a)(2) of the Trade Act, CBP
may require cargo information that is
reasonably necessary to ensure cargo
safety and security pursuant to the laws
enforced and administered by CBP. As
described in Section III.A., CBP
previously issued a 2003 final rule and
a 2018 IFR to promulgate regulations
requiring the transmission of advance
air cargo information under the Trade
Act.
For any inbound aircraft required to
make entry under 19 CFR 122.41 7 that
will have commercial cargo aboard, the
inbound air carrier or other eligible filer
must transmit certain data regarding
that cargo to CBP through a CBPapproved EDI system under two
separate, but related, sets of
requirements. The following two
subsections detail CBP’s transmission
requirements for certain air cargo data
under 19 CFR 122.48a (air manifest
data) and 19 CFR 122.48b (ACAS).
Section III.C.2. describes the ACAS
program requirements that have existed
prior to modification by this IFR. While
the following summary is not inclusive
of all of the differences between the two

5 83

6 See

PO 00000

Frm 00007

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

7 With certain limited exceptions, all aircraft
coming into the United States from a foreign area
must make entry under subpart E of 19 CFR part
122. See 19 CFR 122.41.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

52802

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

sets of requirements, the 19 CFR 122.48a
filing requirements and the ACAS
requirements can be most notably
distinguished by the differing timelines
for transmission of the data elements,
the differing but overlapping lists of
data elements, and the differing lists of
eligible filers.

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

1. 19 CFR 122.48a—Electronic
Information for Air Cargo Required in
Advance of Arrival
Under 19 CFR 122.48a, for any
inbound aircraft required to make entry
that will have commercial cargo on
board, air carriers or other eligible filers
are required to transmit certain air cargo
data to CBP. The data must be received
by CBP no later than the time of
departure (when the aircraft departs
from specified foreign areas near the
United States) or no later than four
hours prior to arrival in the United
States (when the aircraft departs from
all other foreign areas). The individual
data requirements are known as data
elements.
The 19 CFR 122.48a data elements
include:
(1) Air waybill number(s) (master and
house, as applicable)
(2) Trip/flight number
(3) Carrier/ICAO (International Civil
Aviation Organization) code
(4) Airport of arrival
(5) Airport of origin
(6) Scheduled date of arrival
(7) Total quantity based on the smallest
external packing unit
(8) Total weight
(9) Precise cargo description
(10) Shipper name and address
(11) Consignee name and address
(12) Consolidation identifier
(conditional)
(13) Split shipment indicator
(conditional)
(14) Permit to proceed information
(conditional)
(15) Identifier of other party which is to
submit additional air waybill
information (conditional)
(16) In-bond information (conditional)
(17) Local transfer facility (conditional)
(18) Flight departure message
Paragraph (d) of 19 CFR 122.48a
specifies, based on the type of shipment,
what data the inbound carrier must
transmit to CBP and what data other
eligible filers may elect to transmit to
CBP. There are different requirements
for consolidated and non-consolidated
shipments. A consolidated shipment
consists of a number of separate
shipments that have been received and
consolidated into one shipment by a
party such as a freight forwarder for
delivery as a single shipment to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

inbound carrier. Generally speaking, a
master air waybill (MAWB) is an air
waybill that is generated by the inbound
carrier for a consolidated shipment. In
addition, each of the shipments in the
consolidated shipment has its own air
waybill, referred to as the house air
waybill (HAWB). The HAWB provides
the information specific to the
individual shipment that CBP needs for
targeting purposes. The HAWB does not
include the flight and routing
information for the consolidated
shipment (which is included on the
MAWB). For consolidated shipments,
the inbound carrier must transmit to
CBP the above cargo data that is
applicable to the MAWB, and a subset
of the above data for all associated
HAWBs, unless another eligible filer
transmits this data to CBP. For nonconsolidated shipments, the inbound
carrier must transmit to CBP all of the
above cargo data for the air waybill
record, as applicable. For split
shipments, i.e., shipments that have
been divided into two or more smaller
shipments, either sent together or
separately, the inbound carrier must
transmit an additional subset of this
data for each HAWB.
Eligible filers under 19 CFR 122.48a
include the inbound air carrier, whose
participation is mandatory, Automated
Broker Interface (ABI) filers, Container
Freight Stations/deconsolidators,
Express Consignment Carrier Facilities,
and air carriers that arranged to have the
incoming air carrier transport the cargo
into the United States. Foreign indirect
air carriers, which includes freight
forwarders as defined under 19 CFR
122.48b, are notably not included in the
list of potential 19 CFR 122.48a filers.
This list of eligible filers contrasts with
the list of eligible filers under the ACAS
program, as described in the following
subsection.
2. 19 CFR 122.48b—ACAS
CBP’s regulatory ACAS requirements
can be found under 19 CFR 122.48b.
The ACAS requirements are the only
regulatory requirements amended
through this IFR. CBP introduced the
mandatory ACAS program in 2018 to
require earlier transmission of ACAS
data which, previous to this IFR, was
entirely a subset of the data collected
under 19 CFR 122.48a. CBP relies on the
timely transmission of the ACAS data
elements to create an informed
assessment regarding the relative
security risk a particular shipment
poses. ACAS data must be transmitted
as early as practicable, but no later than
prior to the loading of cargo onto an
aircraft, which is in contrast to the
broader set of 19 CFR 122.48a data

PO 00000

Frm 00008

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

which may, in some cases, be
transmitted after the departure of an
aircraft from a foreign port. This timing
requirement is one of the most
significant operational differences
between the requirements found under
19 CFR 122.48a and those found under
19 CFR 122.48b.
The inbound air carrier is ultimately
responsible for ensuring that mandatory
and applicable conditional ACAS data
elements are transmitted to CBP.
However, the ACAS regulations allow
other entities to elect to be ACAS filers.
The following types of entities can elect
to be an ACAS filer, provided that the
entities meet the ACAS filer
requirements: ABI filer (importer or its
customs broker) as identified by its ABI
filer code; a Container Freight Station/
deconsolidator as identified by its
FIRMS (Facilities Information and
Resources Management System) code;
an Express Consignment Carrier Facility
as identified by its FIRMS code; an air
carrier as identified by its carrier IATA
(International Air Transport
Association) code, that arranged to have
the inbound air carrier transport the
cargo to the United States; or a foreign
indirect air carrier (a term which
encompasses freight forwarders). The
inclusion of foreign indirect air carriers
in the list of eligible filers for the ACAS
program is different from the list of
eligible filers found under 19 CFR
122.48a. If an eligible party other than
the inbound air carrier files the ACAS
data, the inbound air carrier may also
choose to transmit its own ACAS filing.
If a party that is eligible to elect to file
ACAS data does not participate in an
ACAS filing, the party that arranges for
and/or delivers the cargo to the inbound
air carrier must fully disclose and
present to the inbound air carrier any
required ACAS data. See 19 CFR
122.48b(c)(4). If any third party that is
not an eligible ACAS filer possesses
required ACAS data, that party must
fully disclose and present the required
ACAS data to either the inbound air
carrier or other eligible ACAS filer for
transmission to CBP. See 19 CFR
122.48b(c)(5).
ACAS filers are responsible for the
accuracy of any ACAS data they
transmit. In accordance with Trade Act
parameters, CBP recognizes that certain
factors outside of an ACAS filer’s
control could affect the accuracy of
ACAS data. Thus, ACAS data is
accurate if it is the best available data
at the time of filing which is determined
by considering, in accordance with
ordinary commercial practices, how the
presenting party acquired the
information and whether and how the
presenting party is able to verify the

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
information. When a presenting party is
not reasonably able to verify the
information, the standard of evaluation
for accuracy is that which the
presenting party reasonably believes to
be true. See section 343(a)(3)(B) of the
Trade Act (19 U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)(B)); 19
CFR 122.48b(c)(6). If any of the ACAS
data changes or more accurate ACAS
data becomes available after the initial
ACAS filing, the ACAS filer must
update the initial filing up until the
deadline listed for 19 CFR 122.48a data.
See 19 CFR 122.48b(b)(2).
Under the regulations promulgated
through the 2018 IFR, CBP required
ACAS filers to transmit six mandatory
data elements in all circumstances, one
data element on a conditional basis, and
recommended the transmission of other
data elements on an optional basis. The
ACAS data elements, found under 19
CFR 122.48b(d), utilized the same
definitions as the broader set of data
elements found under 19 CFR 122.48a.
The six mandatory data elements which
must be transmitted in each ACAS filing
at the lowest air waybill level are:
(1) Shipper name and address;
(2) Consignee name and address;
(3) Cargo description;
(4) Total quantity based on the smallest
external packing unit;
(5) Total weight of cargo; and
(6) Air waybill number.
The 2018 IFR also required the
transmission of one conditional ACAS
data element, the master air waybill
(MAWB) number. Conditional data
elements are only required under
certain circumstances. If a conditional
data element is not required,
transmission of the data element is
optional, but encouraged. The
conditional MAWB number data
element provides the location of the
high-risk cargo and allows CBP to
associate the cargo with an ACAS
transmission. The MAWB number data
element is required (1) when the ACAS
filer is a different party than the party
that will file the 19 CFR 122.48a data;
(2) when the ACAS filer transmits all
the 19 CFR 122.48a data in the
applicable ACAS time frame through a
single filing; or (3) when the inbound air
carrier would like to receive a status
check from CBP on the ACAS
assessment of specific cargo. If not
required under one of the three
circumstances listed above,
transmission of the MAWB number is
optional.
Under the 2018 IFR, CBP also created
the optional category of data elements
which means that transmission of those
data elements is recommended, but not
required. CBP specifically allowed for

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

the optional designation of a ‘‘Second
Notify Party’’ to receive shipment status
messages from CBP. Additionally, CBP
encouraged ACAS filers to transmit any
additional data elements listed under 19
CFR 122.48a that are not required under
19 CFR 122.48b and any additional
information regarding ACAS data
elements.
If CBP issues a referral for information
under 19 CFR 122.48b(e)(1)(i), the
ACAS filer may be required to submit
additional information beyond what is
required under the ACAS data elements,
such as flight numbers and routing
information, to resolve the ACAS
referral. See 19 CFR 122.48b(e)(2)(i).
When necessary, this information will
be requested in a referral message.
CBP may issue a referral for screening
if the potential risk of the cargo is
deemed high enough to warrant
enhanced security screening. When CBP
issues a referral for screening under 19
CFR 122.48b(e)(1)(ii), the ACAS filer
may resolve the referral using TSAapproved enhanced screening methods
if it is a party recognized by TSA to
perform screening. See 19 CFR
122.48b(e)(2)(ii). TSA approves the use
of enhanced screening methods
pursuant to security programs issued
under 49 CFR parts 1544 and 1546;
thus, an ACAS filer is not recognized by
TSA to perform the enhanced screening
necessary to resolve a referral unless the
ACAS filer is regulated by TSA under
49 CFR part 1544 or 1546. See 83 FR
27380, 27381, 27384–85 (Jun. 12, 2018).
If the ACAS filer is a party other than
the inbound air carrier and chooses not
to address the referral or is not a party
recognized by TSA to perform
screening, the ACAS filer must notify
the inbound air carrier of the referral for
screening. The inbound air carrier is
responsible for addressing referrals for
screening unless another ACAS filer has
addressed the referral by performing the
required enhanced screening. Referrals
for screening can only be resolved by
parties recognized by TSA to perform
screening. See 19 CFR 122.48b(e)(2)(ii).
To resolve a referral for screening, the
inbound air carrier and/or other eligible
ACAS filer must respond to the referral
with information on how the cargo was
screened in accordance with TSAapproved or accepted enhanced
screening methods.
CBP may also issue a DNL instruction
if it is determined, based on the risk
assessment and other intelligence, that
the cargo may contain a potential bomb,
improvised explosive device, or other
material that may pose an immediate,
lethal threat to aircraft, persons aboard,
and/or the vicinity. If a DNL instruction
is issued, the cargo must not be loaded

PO 00000

Frm 00009

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52803

onto the aircraft. The party in physical
possession of the cargo at the time the
DNL instruction is issued must adhere
to the appropriate CBP and TSA
protocols and the directions provided
by the applicable law enforcement
authority. See 19 CFR 122.48b(f).
The ACAS regulations also enable
CBP to take appropriate enforcement
action against ACAS filers who do not
comply with the ACAS requirements.
Through the transmission of an ACAS
filing, the ACAS filer assumes certain
responsibilities, including the
responsibility to provide accurate data
to CBP and update that data if
necessary, the responsibility to transmit
the ACAS data to CBP within the
required time frame, and the
responsibility to resolve ACAS referrals
prior to the departure of an aircraft and
respond to DNL instructions in an
expedited manner. See 19 CFR
122.48b(b), 122.48b(c)(6), 122.48b(e),
and 122.48b(f). An ACAS filer’s failure
to perform those responsibilities could
result in CBP issuing liquidated
damages and/or assessing penalties. See
83 FR 27392 (Jun. 12, 2018) (discussing
amendments to the relevant bond
conditions to account for enforcement of
ACAS requirements). Furthermore, TSA
may assess additional penalties for
violations of TSA’s regulations.
D. TSA Requirements
Under the Aviation and
Transportation Security Act (ATSA) of
November 2001, TSA is required to
‘‘provide for the screening of all
passengers and property . . . that will
be carried aboard a passenger aircraft
operated by an air carrier or foreign air
carrier in air transportation . . . .’’ 49
U.S.C. 44901(a). Additionally, TSA is
required to ensure a system is in
operation to ‘‘screen, inspect, or
otherwise ensure the security of all
cargo that is to be transported in allcargo aircraft in air transportation
. . . .’’ 49 U.S.C. 44901(f). Under the
Implementing Recommendations of the
9/11 Commission Act of 2007, TSA was
further required to ‘‘establish a system
to screen 100 percent of cargo
transported on passenger aircraft
operated by an air carrier or foreign air
carrier in air transportation . . . .’’ 49
U.S.C. 44901(g). To satisfy these
statutory mandates, TSA is authorized
to promulgate regulations and issue
security requirements for U.S. and
foreign air carriers at non-U.S. locations
for flights departing a foreign port
bound for the United States.8
8 TSA is authorized to promulgate regulations
that ‘‘are necessary to carry out the functions of the

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

Continued

21NOR2

52804

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Under TSA’s regulatory framework,
air carriers are required to implement
TSA-approved security programs that
are tailored to each air carrier’s security
and operational needs. A security
program may describe, among other
things, screening requirements for air
cargo departing from a foreign port
bound for the United States. Details
related to the security programs are
considered Sensitive Security
Information (SSI),9 and are made
available to carriers as necessary.
Alternatively, carriers may request TSA
approval to follow National Cargo
Security Program (NCSP) recognition
procedures in lieu of TSA security
program requirements.10 When the
security environment or operational
factors necessitate the modification of a
security program, TSA or an air carrier
may initiate a security program
amendment.11 TSA also has the
regulatory authority to issue Security
Directives and Emergency Amendments
which impose immediate security
measures that supersede other
requirements based on changing
security environments, intelligence, and
emergency situations.12
TSA regulations and security
programs require carriers to perform
screening procedures and security
Administration.’’ 49 U.S.C. 114(l). TSA regulations
are found under Title 49 CFR Chapter XII (parts
1500 through 1699). Parts 1544 and 1546 are
specific to U.S. aircraft operators (i.e., domestic or
U.S. flagged air carriers) and foreign air carriers.
Sections 1544.205(f) and 1546.205(f) provide that
U.S. aircraft operators and foreign air carriers,
respectively, must ensure that cargo loaded on
board an aircraft inside the United States, or outside
the United States and destined to the United States,
is screened in accordance with the requirements in
their security program. Sections 1544.101 and
1546.101 require that certain U.S. aircraft operators,
and certain foreign air carriers landing or taking off
in the United States, must adopt and implement a
security program in the form and with the content
approved or accepted by TSA pursuant to the
provisions in §§ 1544.103 and 1546.103.
9 ‘‘Sensitive Security Information’’ or ‘‘SSI’’ is
information obtained or developed in the conduct
of security activities, the disclosure of which would
constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy,
reveal trade secrets or privileged or confidential
information, or be detrimental to the security of
transportation. The protection of SSI is governed by
49 CFR part 1520.
10 To approve and officially recognize a foreign
country’s air cargo security program, the
Administrator of TSA must make a determination
that the foreign country’s air cargo security program
provides a level of security commensurate with the
level of security required by United States air cargo
security programs. See FAA Extension, Safety, and
Security Act of 2016, Public Law 114–190, sec.
3205, 130 Stat. 615, 653.
11 See 49 CFR 1544.105(b), (c), and (d); 49 CFR
1546.105(b), (c), and (d).
12 Security Directives based on TSA’s regulatory
authority impose mandatory security requirements
on certain air carriers that are generally U.S.-based.
Emergency Amendments impose mandatory
security requirements on foreign air carriers. See 49
CFR 1544.305, 1546.105(d).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

measures on all cargo inbound to the
United States. These requirements are
met through a risk-based combination of
assessments, aided by data collected by
CBP, and screening, as required by an
air carrier’s TSA-approved or -accepted
security program.
TSA routinely inspects carriers’ cargo
facilities to ensure compliance with the
required measures of the carriers’
security programs. If TSA determines
that violations of the requirements have
occurred, appropriate measures will be
taken and penalties may be levied.
E. Air Cargo Security Risks
Intentional attacks on international
aviation continue to pose a significant
threat to the security of international air
cargo operations. In 2018, CBP
published the ACAS IFR to address
risks initially identified in response to
the October 2010 incident in which
explosive devices were concealed in
two shipments of printers addressed for
delivery to Chicago, Illinois. While that
attack was successfully thwarted by the
combined intelligence efforts of several
foreign countries, CBP and TSA
determined that a mandatory ACAS
program was necessary to provide a
systematic and targeted approach to
identifying high-risk cargo prior to
departure from a foreign port. Although
the ACAS program has previously been
successful in identifying high-risk cargo
and continues to do so, threat actors
have evolved to exploit additional
vulnerabilities in air cargo security that
necessitate modification of the ACAS
program.
Recent events, such as the October
2023 HAMAS attack on Israel and
ongoing conflicts in the Middle East,
have inspired terrorists to renew calls
for attacks against civil aviation.13
Certain state actors, such as Iran, also
pose a threat to the safety and security
of international aviation due to their
support for international terrorist
organizations and statements indicating
an intent to harm the United States.14
Additionally, certain ongoing
international conflicts have increased
the threat of asymmetric attacks in
13 See

Dept. of Homeland Security, 2025
Homeland Threat Assessment 24 (Oct. 2024),
https://www.dhs.gov/publication/homeland-threatassessment.
14 See Office of the Director of National
Intelligence, Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S.
Intelligence Community (Mar. 25, 2025), https://
www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reportspublications/reports-publications-2025/4058-2025annual-threat-assessment (last visited Aug. 8,
2025); Press Release, U.S. Department of State, Joint
Statement on Iranian State Threat Activity in
Europe and North America (July 31, 2025), https://
www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/
2025/07/joint-statement-on-iranian-state-threatactivity-in-europe-and-north-america.

PO 00000

Frm 00010

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

neutral territories, the effects of which
could be felt in the United States.15
In July 2024, incendiary devices
caused fires at multiple air cargo
facilities in Europe.16 While
investigators continue to probe the
sources and motives of the entities that
introduced those devices into the air
cargo supply chain, existing
circumstances suggest that these
incidents were intentional attacks. Had
the devices activated during a flight, the
resulting conflagration could have
caused catastrophic damage to the
aircraft, potentially resulting in the
complete destruction of the aircraft and
its cargo and loss of life for any crew or
passengers on board. These attacks also
pose risks to individuals and property
on the ground due to the potential loss
of an aircraft. Additionally, as
demonstrated by the July 2024
incendiary attacks, attacks on the air
cargo supply chain also threaten the
security of air cargo infrastructure while
a device is in transit prior to or
following transportation by air.
In consideration of these recent
attacks and classified information
regarding a specific threat to air cargo
security, CBP determined that it is
necessary to modify the ACAS program
to better address these evolving threats.
With the increasing sophistication of
attacks on air cargo infrastructure, CBP
requires additional ACAS data to
effectively identify and target high-risk
shipments.
F. The Enhanced ACAS Program
Development Process
In response to the threats discussed in
Section III.E., CBP updated the ACAS
Implementation Guide (IG) to version
2.3.1 on August 30, 2024.17 Version
2.3.1 contained a number of new data
elements under section 3.3.2, Data
Recommended Pre-Loading. These
recommended data elements were
introduced to provide immediate
actionable steps members of industry
could take to improve air cargo security.
In the period between the publication
of the recommended data elements in
15 See Office of the Director of National
Intelligence, Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S.
Intelligence Community (Mar. 25, 2025), https://
www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reportspublications/reports-publications-2025/4058-2025annual-threat-assessment (last visited Aug. 8,
2025).
16 See, e.g., German Firms Warned of Packages
Containing Incendiary Devices, Reuters (Aug. 30,
2024), https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/
german-security-services-warn-danger-packagescontaining-incendiary-devices-2024-08-30/.
17 CBP, Air Cargo Advance Screening (ACAS)
Implementation Guide, version 2.3.1 (Aug. 30,
2024), https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/202409/ACAS%20IG%20v2.3.1_508.pdf (last visited
Sept. 29, 2025).

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

August 2024 and the publication of this
IFR, CBP conducted extensive outreach
with members of the air cargo industry
to determine the feasibility of
permanently requiring the transmission
of the recommended data elements
through the revision of the ACAS
regulations. During critical periods of
the implementation process, CBP
conducted regularly scheduled meetings
with a broad range of interested parties
including, but not limited to, trade
associations, software providers, air
carriers, and freight forwarders.
Through this outreach, CBP worked to
limit any potential burden on members
of the air cargo industry by refining the
list of recommended data elements.
Additionally, prior to the publication of
this IFR, CBP published several revised
versions of the ACAS Implementation
Guide and frequently asked questions
and answers on CBP’s website to reflect
the results of CBP’s discussions with
members of the air cargo industry.18
The recommended data elements
under the ACAS Implementation Guide
provided the basis for the mandatory
and conditional data elements included
in this IFR. As a direct result of CBP’s
engagement with industry and the air
cargo industry’s active participation in
securing air cargo infrastructure, a
number of ACAS filers have been
regularly transmitting many of the
enhanced ACAS data elements prior to
the publication of this IFR.
IV. ACAS Program Revisions
In accordance with CBP’s Trade Act
authority to promulgate regulations
pertaining to the transmission of
information for air cargo entering the
United States, as well as CBP’s authority
under the FAA Act, CBP is revising the
ACAS regulations to require the
transmission of additional data elements
that will enable CBP to counter new
threats to air cargo security.
While the ACAS program, as
originally implemented, has been
successful in identifying high-risk cargo,
threat actors have evolved to exploit
additional vulnerabilities in air cargo
security, including the security of cargo
entering the United States. To counter
these additional threats, CBP
determined that it is necessary to
modify the ACAS program. The
revisions to the ACAS program under
this IFR are limited to the addition of
mandatory, conditional, and optional
18 Supplementary information regarding the
ACAS program can be found online at https://
www.cbp.gov/border-security/ports-entry/cargosecurity/acas. Previous versions of the ACAS
Implementation Guide are listed in a table
contained in each revised ACAS Implementation
Guide.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

ACAS data elements under 19 CFR
122.48b(d) and the addition of a records
retention requirement related to the new
biographic data conditional data
element. This IFR does not alter or
remove any of the ACAS data elements
required under the previous 19 CFR
122.48b(d); however, to accommodate
additional conditional data elements,
optional data elements, previously
provided in 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(3), are
now included in 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(5).
A summary of the data element changes
made to the CFR by this IFR can be
found under Table 1.
The transmission of the enhanced
ACAS data elements will allow CBP to
gain a more complete understanding of
the financial, business, and personal
relationships between parties that are
engaged in shipping air cargo. The
transmission of all required existing and
new ACAS data elements is essential for
CBP to assess the risk associated with a
cargo shipment because CBP analyzes
ACAS data elements and other available
intelligence in the aggregate. In other
words, CBP’s ATS combines multiple
individual data elements which can
then be compared against law
enforcement, intelligence, or other
enforcement data to identify ACAS
filings that require additional review.
Data elements that are innocuous when
viewed in isolation may be suspect
when viewed in the aggregate.
Alternatively, a single data element
could prompt additional review;
however, the transmission of all
required data elements is still necessary
to build the aggregate and identify highrisk cargo because of the difficulty of
predicting, prior to transmission, which
data elements will or will not indicate
a heightened level of risk.
The new data elements must be
transmitted in accordance with the
existing ACAS timeline, as soon as
practicable, but no later than prior to the
loading of cargo onto an aircraft. 19 CFR
122.48b(b)(1). This timeline enables
CBP to target high-risk cargo prior to
loading with the goal of preventing
high-risk cargo from entering the United
States or causing harm while enroute to
the United States. A later timeline for
some or all enhanced data elements
would reduce the effectiveness of CBP’s
pre-loading aggregate analysis and
nullify the security benefit of requiring
additional data elements for the
purposes of thwarting threats prior to
arrival of the aircraft. Building on this
understanding of why CBP collects a
number of data elements prior to the
loading of cargo onto an aircraft, the
following subsections further detail
CBP’s rationale for requiring certain
data elements.

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52805

CBP developed the enhanced ACAS
data elements within the parameters
defined by the Trade Act to balance the
imposition of any burden on the public
against the critical need for additional
ACAS data. Consistent with FAA Act
requirements, CBP also (1) considered
that the content and timeliness of the
available data may vary among entities
in the air cargo industry and among
countries, and (2) explored procedures
to accommodate such variations while
maximizing the contribution of such
data to the risk assessment process
under the ACAS program, among other
requirements. Throughout the
development of the enhanced ACAS
data elements, CBP conducted extensive
outreach with members of the air cargo
industry to understand their business
practices and to ensure that the new
data elements will not place unrealistic
or undue burdens on members of
industry. CBP also considered the
results of the implementation period
discussed in Section III.F., during
which, multiple ACAS filers transmitted
many of the enhanced ACAS data
elements prior to the requirements
imposed through the publication of this
IFR.
In developing these revisions, CBP
considered international efforts to
develop advance air cargo data targeting
programs. CBP also coordinated with
international trade associations and
their members to understand
requirements imposed by other
countries and limit any potential
conflicts. CBP will continue to engage
with members of the international
community to work toward enhancing
international standards for the
collection and analysis of air cargo data
prior to loading.
A. Enhanced ACAS Data Element
Definitions
The ACAS data elements introduced
under the 2018 IFR are entirely a subset
of the data elements that must be
transmitted under 19 CFR 122.48a.
Thus, the definitions for the initial
ACAS data elements introduced under
the 2018 IFR can be found under 19 CFR
122.48a. This definitional crossreference is detailed in the introductory
text of 19 CFR 122.48b(d). The new
ACAS data elements introduced by this
IFR are unique to the ACAS program. As
such, the definitions for the new ACAS
data elements can be found under the
revised 19 CFR 122.48b(d) and are not
referenced under 19 CFR 122.48a.
B. Mandatory Data Elements
Mandatory ACAS data elements must
be transmitted to CBP in all
circumstances. Through this IFR, CBP is

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

52806

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

revising 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(1) to include
several new mandatory ACAS data
elements. This revision of 19 CFR
122.48b(d)(1) does not remove or
otherwise modify existing ACAS data
element requirements. The additions to
the list of mandatory ACAS data
elements include consignee email
address, consignee phone number,
shipment packing location and/or
scheduled shipment pickup location,
and ship to party. The following
paragraphs describe what CBP will
require for each new data element and
explain CBP’s rationale for requiring the
data elements.
(1) Consignee email address. This is
the email address for the party
identified as the consignee under the
consignee name and address data
element. The consignee name and
address data element is currently
required under 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(1)(ii).
(2) Consignee phone number. This is
the phone number for the party
identified as the consignee under the
consignee name and address data
element. The consignee name and
address data element is currently
required under 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(1)(ii).
These two new mandatory contact
information data elements, consignee
email address and consignee phone
number, will allow CBP to improve its
targeting of high-risk shipments by
further identifying the parties involved
in the shipping process, by comparing
transmitted contact information with
information in CBP databases, and by
improving CBP’s ability to directly
contact parties in the event of an
emergency involving a safety or security
risk with the shipment.
The provision of additional contact
information will allow CBP to gain a
more complete understanding of the
parties involved in a shipping
transaction which can be compared
against other data elements to identify
potential threats. As stated previously,
CBP assesses data elements in the
aggregate; thus, seemingly mundane
data elements such as email addresses
and phone numbers may gain
significance when a comparison against
other transmitted data elements reveals
ambiguities or patterns consistent with
the existence of a threat.
Contact information can also be
compared against existing contact
information in CBP databases to identify
threat actors. For example, CBP
conducts similar targeting for
individuals entering and exiting the
United States through CBP’s analysis of
passenger name record (PNR) data. In
2010, a terrorist attempted to detonate a
car bomb in New York’s Times Square.
The FBI quickly identified the terrorist’s

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

cell phone number but had little
additional information. Through
coordination between DHS and the FBI,
CBP was able to compare the terrorist’s
cell phone number with PNR data to
identify and detain the terrorist before
the terrorist could flee the United
States.19
The new requirements to provide
additional consignee contact
information also give CBP the ability to
directly contact the relevant party in the
event of an emergency which improves
CBP’s ability to respond to threat
incidents and reduces impacts to the
flow of commerce by expediting the
resolution of any issue.
(3) Shipment packing location and/or
scheduled shipment pickup location.
The shipment packing location is the
name and address of the foreign
warehouse, factory, or other place the
cargo was initially made ready for
transportation before the cargo arrives at
the location where the cargo will be
loaded on the aircraft. The scheduled
shipment pickup location is the name
and address of the location where the
cargo shipment is scheduled to transfer
from the custody of the shipper to the
custody of the inbound air carrier or
other party arranging for and/or
delivering the cargo to the inbound air
carrier. At minimum, ACAS filers must
transmit either the shipment packing
location or the scheduled shipment
pickup location. It is optional, but
recommended, for ACAS filers to
transmit both the shipment packing
location and the scheduled shipment
pickup location if available.
Receipt of the shipment packing
location and/or scheduled shipment
pickup location will allow CBP to better
identify the location from which a cargo
shipment originated. In the course of
normal business practices, the shipper
name and address, an existing
mandatory ACAS data element, may
differ from the location where cargo is
prepared for shipment. For example,
when a large corporation is listed as the
shipper, an ACAS filer might list the
corporate headquarters of the
corporation in the address field.
However, any cargo shipped by the
corporation would likely originate from
a different address, such as a warehouse
or manufacturing center, that could be
in a different city or country. By
identifying the actual location a cargo
19 Intelligence Sharing and Terrorist Travel:
Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Counterterrorism
and Intelligence of the H. Comm. on Homeland
Security, 112th Cong. 7–10 (2011) (joint prepared
statement of David Heyman, Assistant Secretary for
Policy, DHS, Mary Ellen Callahan, Chief Privacy
Officer, DHS, and Thomas Bush, Executive Director
of Automation and Targeting, CBP).

PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

shipment originated from, CBP will be
able to identify locations that pose a
heightened risk to air cargo security and
more effectively target cargo shipments
that originate from those locations.
CBP’s early implementation guidance
and discussions with members of
industry focused on the provision of the
shipment packing location; however,
those discussions informed CBP that the
collection and transmission of the
shipment packing location could be
difficult under certain business models.
Thus, in recognition of Trade Act
parameters which require consideration
of differences in commercial practices,
information availability, and operational
characteristics, CBP developed the
scheduled shipment pickup location as
an alternative to the shipment packing
location. The scheduled shipment
pickup location is readily available in
the ordinary course of business because
a cargo shipment could not be collected
by an inbound air carrier or party
transporting the cargo to an air carrier
without that information.
(4) Ship to Party. This is the name and
address of the first deliver-to party
scheduled to physically receive a
shipment after the shipment is released
from CBP custody. The information
transmitted for the ship to party data
element may be identical to the
information transmitted for the
consignee name and address data
element. If this occurs, the ACAS filer
should still transmit both data elements
independently.
This data element will allow CBP to
more accurately assess the risk of a
shipment by further identifying the
party that will physically receive a cargo
shipment. As discussed previously, CBP
will now require the transmission of
both the shipper name and address and
the shipment packing location and/or
scheduled shipment pickup location to
allow CBP to more completely identify
the parties involved in preparing and
shipping cargo. On the receiving side of
a shipping transaction, a similar
dynamic may occur under some
business models where the consignee
name and address data element does not
reflect the name and/or location of the
party that will physically receive a cargo
shipment. Thus, to more accurately
identify the party that will physically
receive a cargo shipment, CBP will now
require ACAS filers to transmit the ship
to party information in addition to the
consignee name and address data
element.
When analyzed in conjunction with
one another, the shipper name and
address, shipment packing location and/
or scheduled shipment pickup location,
consignee name and address, and ship

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
to party data elements improve CBP’s
targeting capabilities by providing a
more complete understanding of supply
chains and transactions that lead to the
shipment of cargo. Additionally, CBP
will be able to use these data elements
to identify anomalous shipper and
recipient relationships. For example, the
terrorists in the 2010 printer attacks
shipped the explosive devices from the
Middle East to synagogues in the United
States and addressed the packages to
historical figures.20

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

C. Conditional Data Element: Master Air
Waybill Number
The MAWB number for each leg of
the flight is an existing conditional
ACAS data element. See 19 CFR
122.48b(d)(2). Conditional data
elements are only required under
certain circumstances. If the
circumstances listed for a particular
data element do not exist, transmission
of the data element is optional, but
encouraged. This IFR does not make any
substantive changes to the MAWB
number conditional data element.
As discussed previously, this IFR
requires the transmission of new data
elements that are not required under 19
CFR 122.48a. The new data elements
that are unique to the ACAS program
are defined under 19 CFR 122.48b and
the original ACAS data elements that
are a subset of the 19 CFR 122.48a
requirements are defined under 19 CFR
122.48a. To clarify that the MAWB
number data element is one of the
original ACAS data elements that is
defined under 19 CFR 122.48a, this IFR
revises the introductory text of 19 CFR
122.48b(d)(2) to state that the MAWB
number is required ‘‘as defined under
§ 122.48a.’’
D. Conditional Data Element: Verified
Known Consignor Information
This IFR contains multiple new
conditional ACAS data elements that
are only required under certain
circumstances. In this preamble and the
corresponding regulatory text, new 19
CFR 122.48b(d)(3), the Verified Known
Consignor data element is presented
separately from the other new
conditional ACAS data elements
because the circumstances under which
those data elements are required are first
conditioned on the existence or absence
of a shipper’s Verified Known
Consignor status.
The Verified Known Consignor data
element is required if the shipper,
identified under 19 CFR
20 Mark Mazzetti & Scott Shane, In Parcel Bomb
Plot, 2 Dark Inside Jokes, N.Y. Times (Nov. 2, 2010),
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/world/
03terror.html.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

122.48b(d)(1)(i), is designated as a
known consignor by a CBP-recognized
designating body.21 If a shipper is
designated as a Verified Known
Consignor by a CBP-recognized body,
the ACAS filer must transmit the
registration number associated with the
shipper’s Verified Known Consignor
status and the CBP-specified code, as
detailed in the CBP ACAS
Implementation Guide, representing the
designating body.
The known consignor designation
indicates a designating body’s level of
trust in the security practices of a
shipper that can assist CBP in assessing
the risk that cargo shipments originating
from a particular shipper carry. Verified
Known Consignors meet rigorous
standards and regulations for the
transportation of cargo by air and are
often subject to validation audits by the
designating body. This data element is
conditional because a shipper may not
have a known consignor status; thus, the
data element could not be transmitted in
those instances. It is within CBP’s sole
discretion to recognize known consignor
programs that could be used by an
ACAS filer to complete this data
element field. CBP reserves the right to
not recognize a known consignor
program or a particular shipper’s known
consignor status at any time.
At the time of publication for this IFR,
CBP plans to recognize the known
consignor program set forth under the
European Union (EU) Commission
Implementing Regulation 2015/1998 22
as requiring sufficiently rigorous status
criteria and vetting standards. Thus, if
recognized, an entity designated as a
known consignor by the appropriate
civil aviation authority of an EU
member state would be noted in this
data element field. CBP also plans to
recognize known shippers, as
designated under TSA’s known shipper
program at 49 CFR 1544.239, 1546.215,
and 1548.17.
CBP encourages public comment on
additional programs similar to the EU’s
known consignor program or TSA’s
known shipper program that could be
used as a data point within the Verified
Known Consignor conditional data
element.
21 Instructions for accessing the list of CBPrecognized designating bodies will be located in the
CBP ACAS Implementation Guide, https://
www.cbp.gov/document/guides/air-cargo-advancescreening-acas-implementation-guide.
22 See Commission Implementing Regulation
2015/1998 of Nov. 5, 2015, Laying Down Detailed
Measures for the Implementation of the Common
Basic Standards on Aviation Security, annex, 2015
O.J. (L 299) 1, https://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/
2015/1998/oj (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).

PO 00000

Frm 00013

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52807

E. Conditional Data Elements That May
Be Required When There Is Not a
Verified Known Consignor
Conditional data elements are only
required under certain circumstances.
The following conditional data elements
are only required if the shipper is not
a Verified Known Consignor as
described under Section IV.D. of this
IFR. For some of the following data
elements, the existence or absence of
Verified Known Consignor status is the
only condition applicable to whether or
not the data element is required. The
conditional data elements that are
always required when the shipper is not
a Verified Known Consignor are shipper
email address, shipper phone number,
the customer account shipping
frequency/volume, and the customer
account billing type.
For the remaining data elements that
may be required when the shipper is not
a Verified Known Consignor, the
absence of a Verified Known Consignor
is a precondition, meaning that if a
Verified Known Consignor does not
exist, additional conditions must then
be considered to determine whether the
data element is required for a particular
ACAS filing. These data elements
include shipping cost, unmasked IP
address or MAC address of the device
that initiated shipment and the device
that filed the ACAS filing, biographic
data, link to product listing, and certain
customer account data elements,
including customer account name,
issuer, number, establishment date, and
unmasked IP or MAC address of the
device used during account creation.
If the shipper is a Verified Known
Consignor or, when applicable, the
shipper is not a Verified Known
Consignor and the additional
circumstances listed for a particular
data element do not exist, transmission
of the conditional data elements is
recommended, but not required. The
ACAS conditional data elements that
may be required when there is not a
Verified Known Consignor can be found
under the new 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(4).
1. Customer Account Data Elements
Several of the new conditional ACAS
data elements are prefaced with the
customer account descriptor. The
customer account data elements detail
the business relationship between a
customer and a logistics provider.
Generally, a customer that has a
business relationship with a logistics
provider will have an account with that
logistics provider, hence the customer
account descriptor. If a customer does
not have an account with a logistics
provider, certain customer account data

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

52808

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

elements must still be provided because
the absence of an existing account does
not negate the role of the customer
account data elements in detailing the
business relationship between the
parties involved in conducting a cargo
shipment.
Under the new ACAS conditional
data elements in 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(4),
‘‘customer’’ is defined as a party who
has an ownership interest in cargo, as
either a buyer or seller, who engages
with a logistics provider to arrange
transport of the cargo to the United
States. A foreign entity that provides
services that involve aggregating
shipments from customers, in which the
foreign entity acts as a facilitator and
engages with a logistics provider for the
importation of cargo into the United
States, is not a customer for the
purposes of this definition.
Under the new ACAS conditional
data elements, ‘‘logistics provider’’ is
defined as an entity that provides
transportation, importation, and/or
delivery services for the importation of
cargo into the United States. The
logistics provider could be, but is not
limited to, an air carrier, a customs
broker, freight forwarder, or other
service provider.
CBP’s definition of customer focuses
on the party that engages with the
logistics provider to transport cargo and
recognizes that the customer may be a
party other than the shipper. This
definition and the related customer
account data elements support CBP’s
interest in describing the account or
business transaction that enabled the
movement of cargo. The customer
account data elements are not a
replacement for data elements that
provide information regarding aspects of
the shipper’s identity, such as the
shipper name and address; however,
transmitted data for certain customer
account data elements and other party
identification data elements may
overlap depending on the business
relationships involved in a particular
ACAS filing.
The customer account data elements
include the customer account name,
customer account issuer, customer
account number, customer account
shipping frequency/volume, customer
account establishment date, customer
account billing type, and the unmasked
internet protocol (IP) address or media
access control (MAC) address of the
device used during the creation of the
customer account. The definitions for
the customer account data elements are
detailed in the following subsections.
The customer account data elements
will assist CBP in analyzing the relative
risk of a shipment because cargo

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

shipments that occur within an existing
business relationship between parties
that are known to CBP may present a
different risk profile compared to cargo
shipments occurring between parties
that do not have a history of prior
dealings. The customer account data
elements also assist CBP in identifying
cargo shipments that are anomalous
within the context of two or more
known parties’ previous shipments.
Additionally, if high-risk cargo is
identified and associated with a
particular customer’s account, CBP can
readily identify other cargo shipments
associated with that customer’s account
for further intervention as necessary.
2. Data Elements Required for Each
ACAS Filing When There Is Not a
Verified Known Consignor
The following data elements are
required when the shipper is not a
Verified Known Consignor. This is the
only condition applicable to the
following data elements. When the
shipper is a Verified Known Consignor,
transmission of the following data
elements is optional, but recommended.
The following data elements can be
found under the new 19 CFR
122.48b(d)(4)(ii).
(i) Shipper email address. This is the
email address for the party identified as
the shipper under the shipper name and
address data element. The shipper name
and address data element is currently
provided under 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(1)(i).
(ii) Shipper phone number. This is the
phone number for the party identified as
the shipper under the shipper name and
address data element. The shipper name
and address data element is currently
provided under 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(1)(i).
Unlike the new consignee contact
information data elements which must
be transmitted in all circumstances, CBP
determined that the two new shipper
contact information data elements could
be implemented as conditional data
elements, thus not required in all
circumstances. This decision was made,
in part, by the introduction of the new
Verified Known Consignor data element
which, when a shipper is designated as
such, provides CBP with information
about the shipper that reduces the net
gain of requiring additional shipper
contact information. In the absence of a
verified known consignor, the new
conditional contact information data
elements, shipper email address and
shipper phone number, will allow CBP
to improve its targeting of high-risk
cargo shipments by obtaining additional
information about the shipper. These
data elements will also enable CBP to
directly contact the shipper in the event
of an emergency, which improves CBP’s

PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

ability to respond to threat incidents
and reduces impacts to the flow of
commerce by expediting the resolution
of any issue.
(iii) Customer account shipping
frequency/volume. This data element
describes the nature of the business
relationship between the customer and
the logistics provider that issued the
lowest level air waybill in terms of the
frequency and volume of shipments
being conducted within that business
relationship. The ACAS filer must
assign the code that most accurately
describes the frequency and volume of
the customer’s cargo shipment
transactions with the logistics provider
that issued the lowest level air waybill.
CBP recognizes the following five codes:
shipping outlet/walk-in; immediate
transaction; occasional shipper; regular/
daily shipper; and high-volume shipper.
For each code, the shipping frequency/
volume is determined by the number of
ACAS filings that occurred in the course
of a particular logistics provider’s
interactions with a particular customer.
The customer’s cargo shipments
conducted with other logistics providers
does not count toward the customer’s
shipping frequency with the logistics
provider that issued the lowest level air
waybill.
The shipping outlet/walk-in code
should be assigned when a customer,
who does not have an account with a
logistics provider, enters a storefront
and transfers physical custody of a cargo
shipment to a party that arranges the
importation of the cargo into the United
States by air. An example of a scenario
where the shipping outlet/walk-in code
should be applied is when an individual
brings cargo to a shipping outlet and the
shipping outlet agrees to make all
necessary shipping and handling
arrangements for the importation of the
cargo into the United States.
The immediate transaction code
should be assigned when the logistics
provider that issued the lowest level air
waybill receives an isolated request for
service from a customer who does not
have an account with the logistics
provider. Under the immediate
transaction code, the party that would
normally be identified as the customer
account issuer directly interacts with
the customer, unlike the shipping
outlet/walk-in code where the customer
account issuer interacts with an
intermediary storefront. An example of
an immediate transaction might be
when a customer uses a guest account
on a logistics provider’s website to
request transportation services, and
some data, such as where to pick up the
shipment, may have been collected.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
The occasional shipper code should
be assigned when a customer who has
an account with the logistics provider
that issued the lowest level air waybill
places requests for service on an as
needed and/or infrequent basis. CBP
recognizes that determinations of
frequency can vary between different
logistics providers and customers
depending on the scale of their
respective operations. A determination
that a shipping frequency is occasional
should be contextualized by the
conditions defined for the regular/daily
shipper code. The occasional shipper
code should be assigned when a
customer places requests for service on
an ‘‘as needed’’ basis, in contrast to the
regular/daily shipper code which
should be assigned when there is a
‘‘standing request for pickups.’’
Generally, occasional shipper codes
should be assigned when a customer
places requests for service with a
particular logistics provider on a less
than daily and irregular basis.
The regular/daily shipper code should
be assigned for a customer who has an
account with the logistics provider that
issued the lowest level air waybill and
has a standing request for pickups.
The high-volume shipper code should
be assigned for a customer that has an
account with the logistics provider that
issued the lowest level air waybill and
regularly ships at high-volume,
enterprise levels. For this type of
customer, shipments are often delivered
for transport from the shipper’s
warehouse directly to the courier or
consolidator’s facility.
The transmission of codes which
identify the frequency and volume of a
customer’s interactions with a logistics
provider will enable CBP to more
effectively identify high-risk cargo by
categorically assigning certain aspects of
risk to shipments and by identifying the
parties’ importing relationships with the
United States. For example, CBP
estimates that high-volume shipments,
as defined within the ACAS program,
constitute approximately 80 percent of
the total volume of ACAS filings to be
reviewed and cleared by CBP. The
customers that fall within the highvolume shipper code are often known to
CBP; thus, they carry a more
recognizable risk profile compared to a
customer that is not known to CBP.
Despite the likelihood that a customer is
known to CBP when a high-volume
shipper code is assigned, it is still
necessary for ACAS filers to assign a
customer account shipping frequency/
volume code because the assigned code
represents the volume of filings between
the customer and the logistics provider
that issued the lowest level air waybill,

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

not the overall volume of ACAS filings
attributable to a particular customer’s
shipments. This data element enables
CBP to determine the extent of a
business relationship between a
customer and a logistics provider.
Additionally, the assignment of
shipping frequency/volume codes limits
the applicability of requirements to
provide other conditional data elements,
such as the shipping cost data element.
This categorical assessment of risk
will also affect an ACAS filer’s
obligation to file certain conditional
ACAS data elements. CBP determined
that certain code assignments reflect a
lack of targetable information and
heightened threat profiles which will
necessitate the transmission of
additional ACAS data for targeting
purposes when those codes are
assigned. To develop frequency codes
that will best aid CBP’s targeting efforts,
CBP conducted extensive outreach with
industry and reviewed internal data
regarding filing frequencies.
Additionally, CBP considered how the
use of the frequency codes as a
determining condition for other
conditional data elements might affect
regulated entities. For example, one of
the new conditional ACAS data
elements requires ACAS filers to
transmit the unmasked IP or MAC
address of the device used to initiate a
shipping transaction and the unmasked
IP or MAC address of the device used
to file the ACAS filing. CBP considered
the potential security benefits and
burdens of the requirement and
determined that, when a customer’s
shipments are assigned the regular/daily
shipper and high-volume shipper codes,
the security benefit of the requirement
would be limited compared to the
security benefit of the requirement
when the customer ships at a lower
frequency; thus, CBP will not require
filers to transmit this particular data
element when a regular/daily shipper or
high-volume shipper code is assigned.
(iv) Customer account billing type.
Under this data element, the ACAS filer
must assign the code that most
accurately describes the customer’s
method of payment in the shipping
transaction. Possible account billing
types include, but are not limited to,
electronic funds transfers (EFTs); mobile
and person to person payments; credit
card or debit card transactions; cash
payments; checks; cryptocurrency; and
periodic billing.

PO 00000

Frm 00015

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52809

3. Conditional Data Elements That Are
Required When the Customer Account
Shipping Frequency/Volume Data
Element Is Assigned the Shipping
Outlet/Walk-In, Occasional Shipper,
Regular/Daily Shipper, or High-Volume
Shipper Codes
In addition to the precondition of the
absence of the shipper’s Verified Known
Consignor status, the transmission of the
following data elements is required in
all circumstances except for when an
immediate transaction code is assigned
under the customer account shipping
frequency/volume data element. These
data elements are related to the creation
or existence of a customer’s account
with a logistics provider, a circumstance
that does not exist when the immediate
transaction code is assigned. The
following data elements can be found
under the new 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(4)(iii).
(i) Customer account name. When the
customer account shipping frequency/
volume is assigned the high-volume
shipper, regular/daily shipper, or
occasional shipper codes, this is the
name of the customer. Generally, these
codes occur when the customer
interacts directly with the logistics
provider that issued the lowest level air
waybill.
If the customer account shipping
frequency/volume data element is
assigned the shipping outlet/walk-in
code, the ACAS filer must transmit the
name of the shipping outlet or other
party that accepted the cargo from the
customer. When the shipping outlet/
walk-in code is assigned, the shipping
outlet is the party that engages with the
logistics provider for the transportation
of the cargo; thus, the relevant account
is between the shipping outlet and the
customer account issuer.
The customer account name may be
the same as the shipper name found
under 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(1)(i). If the
shipper name, or any other ACAS data
element, and the customer account
name are the same, the ACAS filer must
still transmit the customer account
name and the shipper name or other
ACAS data element as separate entries.
The combination of the customer
account name and the following
customer account issuer and customer
account number data elements
distinguishes the customer account
information from other ACAS data
elements.
(ii) Customer account issuer. The
customer account issuer is the party that
engaged with the party identified under
the customer account name for the
purposes of importing cargo into the
United States by air. For most
transactions, the customer account

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

52810

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

issuer is the same entity that files the
ACAS data, and may be, but is not
limited to, the freight forwarder,
customs broker, air carrier, or service
provider. For this data element, the
ACAS filer must transmit the applicable
code that identifies the customer
account issuer. This data element may
be satisfied by transmitting the Air
Waybill Prefix (the three-digit code at
the beginning of an air waybill number
that identifies the air carrier), the CBP
Filer Code (the three-character CBP filer
code), or the ACAS Originator Code (the
seven-character code used to identify
the ACAS participant, identified under
19 CFR 122.48b(c)(3)(iii)).
In the ordinary course of business,
customers and customer account issuers
may have multiple accounts with other
customers and customer account
issuers. Additionally, separate customer
account issuers may issue similar
customer account numbers to customers
that are otherwise unrelated. Thus, CBP
collects the customer account issuer
information as a code which can be
combined with the following customer
account number to create a uniquely
identifiable customer account code. The
combined code describes a specific
customer and customer account issuer
relationship.
(iii) Customer account number. The
customer account number is the
identifier assigned by the customer
account issuer to represent the customer
account name. In other words, this is
the identifier that represents a
customer’s account with a logistics
provider. When a customer does not
have an account with a logistics
provider, different requirements apply
which vary depending on whether the
customer account shipping frequency/
volume data element is assigned the
shipping outlet/walk-in code or the
immediate transaction code.
The customer account number is
linked to the customer account name;
thus, the same principles that apply
when determining the customer account
name in the shipping outlet/walk-in
context apply here in determining
which party’s customer account number
should be transmitted. In the shipping
outlet/walk-in context, the customer
account name refers to the
establishment where the customer
delivered the cargo for shipment and
not the identity of the customer. Since
the customer account number definition
is linked to the customer account name
and not the identity of the customer, the
customer account number will also
describe a party other than the customer
when the shipping outlet/walk-in code
is transmitted under the customer

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

account shipping frequency/volume
data element.
When the customer account shipping
frequency/volume data element is
assigned the immediate transaction
code, a customer account number is not
required. When the immediate
transaction code is assigned, the
customer does not have an account
number because an account does not
exist, and, unlike shipping outlet/walkin scenarios, there is no intermediate
party that negotiates with the customer
account issuer on the customer’s behalf.
(iv) Customer account establishment
date. This refers to the date the account
was established between the parties
identified under the customer account
issuer and the customer account name
data elements. For older accounts where
only the year is known and the filer is
identifying the account as a valid,
known, and long-established account,
an ACAS filer may fill in the month and
date fields with a ‘‘01’’, but must
accurately list the year in the year field.
The customer account data element
will identify when the parties involved
in a shipping transaction originally
entered into their business relationship.
The degree to which the parties
involved in a shipping transaction are
known to each other and to CBP affects
the degree of risk assigned during CBP’s
targeting of high-risk cargo.
Similar to the circumstances
described under the customer account
number data element, a customer
account establishment date is not
required when the customer account
shipping frequency/volume is assigned
the immediate transaction code. When a
transaction frequency is described as
immediate, the relevant parties do not
have a previous course of dealing; thus,
there is not an account establishment
date.
(v) Unmasked internet protocol (IP)
address or media access control (MAC)
address of the device used during
account creation. This data element
collects the unmasked IP or MAC
address of the device used to create the
account between the parties identified
under the customer account issuer and
the customer account name data
elements. The collection of an IP or
MAC address assists CBP’s targeting of
high-risk air cargo by presenting an
additional means of verifying the
identity and location of the parties
engaged in the importation of cargo into
the United States by air.
The requirement to provide the IP or
MAC address of the device used during
account creation applies when the
customer account establishment date,
required under the new 19 CFR
122.48b(d)(4)(iii)(D), is dated after the

PO 00000

Frm 00016

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

effective date of this IFR, subject to the
phased enforcement approach described
in Section IV.I. CBP recommends, but
does not require, that ACAS filers
provide the IP or MAC address of the
device used during account creation if
the customer’s account was created
before the effective date of this IFR.
The language used here and in the
regulatory text states that ACAS filers
must transmit the ‘‘unmasked’’ IP or
MAC address ‘‘of the device used’’
during account creation. This language
specifies that the data element is not
satisfied if the ACAS filer transmits an
IP address or MAC address that is the
result of using any technique or
technology to mask or otherwise
misrepresent IP or MAC addresses
because that would not be the
‘‘unmasked’’ IP or MAC address ‘‘of the
device used.’’ Examples of masking
include, but are not limited to, the use
of proxy servers and virtual private
networks (VPNs).
CBP understands that some members
of the air cargo industry may need to
adjust their business practices to collect
and transmit the unmasked IP or MAC
addresses of devices used during
account creation. However, CBP has
determined that IP and MAC address
monitoring is an important security
feature given the significant
consequences of attempted and
successful attacks and the heightened
potential for threat actors to obfuscate
their identities when digitally
interfacing with ACAS filers.
In accordance with section 1951 of
the FAA Act (49 U.S.C. 44901 note) and
section 343(a)(3) of the Trade Act (19
U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)), CBP considered how
to best implement this requirement
using an operationally feasible and
practical approach that considers the
application of the data element’s
requirements, the ability of filers to
acquire information for transmittal, and
differences in commercial practices,
among other statutory requirements.
Using commercially available
software, it is reasonably possible to log
the IP address or MAC address, as
applicable, of devices that interface with
an ACAS filer’s networks. Using
commercially available software, it is
also possible to determine if a device is
utilizing IP or MAC address masking
techniques when the device interacts
with an ACAS filer’s networks. When a
party attempts to mask their IP or MAC
address, it is within the discretion of
each ACAS filer or the relevant third
party to determine the unmasked IP or
MAC address of the party and transmit
that information, refuse to accept the
cargo for shipment until the party
provides their unmasked IP or MAC

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
address for transmittal, or use some
other reasonable means of acquiring the
unmasked IP or MAC address.
ACAS filers are responsible for the
accuracy of any information that filers
transmit to CBP. However, when ACAS
filers receive information from another
party, CBP will take into consideration
how, in accordance with ordinary
commercial practices, the filer acquired
the information, and whether and how
the filer is able to verify the information.
See section 343(a)(3)(B) of the Trade Act
(19 U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)(B)); 19 CFR
122.48b(c)(6).
Given the commercial availability of
technologies that can facilitate the
logging of IP or MAC addresses and the
detection of masking techniques, CBP
anticipates that ACAS filers will be able
to acquire unmasked IP or MAC
addresses of the device used in account
creation in most use cases. Additionally,
ACAS filers may choose to transmit
either an IP address or a MAC address
to satisfy this data element. CBP allows
this IP or MAC address choice in
consideration of certain trade practices
where the provision of an IP address
may be impractical, such as when the
ACAS filer is required to report the
address of a device on their own
network that is not connected to the
internet. The option of providing an IP
address or MAC address does not
excuse ACAS filers from their obligation
to provide accurate information for this
data element. For example, if an ACAS
filer or relevant third party can
reasonably confirm that an IP address is
unmasked, it would not be reasonable
for the ACAS filer to report a MAC
address that the ACAS filer does not
know to be accurate or unmasked.
When an ACAS filer is not reasonably
able to provide either an unmasked IP
address or an unmasked MAC address
of the device used during account
creation, CBP will permit the ACAS filer
to transmit data on the basis of what the
filer reasonably believes to be true. See
section 343(a)(3)(B) of the Trade Act (19
U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)(B)); 19 CFR
122.48b(c)(6).
Similar to the circumstances
described under the customer account
name, issuer, number, and
establishment date data elements, this
data element is not required when the
customer account shipping frequency/
volume is assigned the immediate
transaction code. When a shipping
frequency is described as immediate,
the relevant parties do not have a
previous course of dealing, thus an
account does not exist, and an IP or
MAC address would not have been
logged in the creation of an account.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

4. Conditional Data Elements That Are
Required When the Customer Account
Shipping Frequency/Volume Data
Element Is Assigned the Shipping
Outlet/Walk-In, Immediate Transaction,
or Occasional Shipper Codes
The following data elements are
conditioned on the ACAS filer’s
assignment of certain codes under the
customer account shipping frequency/
volume data element, specifically, the
shipping outlet/walk-in, immediate
transaction, or occasional shipper codes.
These codes are associated with a low
frequency of shipments conducted by
the relevant parties or the use of an
intermediary, such as a shipping outlet,
which in turn, is correlated to an
absence of data that could be used by
CBP in targeting high-risk cargo. Thus,
it is necessary to require additional data
elements when these codes are assigned
to improve CBP’s targeting of lowfrequency shipments. The following
data elements can be found under the
new 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(4)(iv).
(i) Shipping cost. The shipping cost is
the total amount of charges assessed by
the carrier, freight forwarder, or other
logistics provider to deliver the cargo
shipment. This amount must be
reported in U.S. dollars and includes
any applicable shipping costs, such as
taxes and insurance. CBP will provide a
‘‘less than one U.S. dollar’’ option to
capture small internet marketplace
transactions. The shipping cost, as
defined here, is generally negotiated
between the customer and the logistics
provider that issued the lowest level air
waybill; however, circumstances may
vary based on the details of a particular
shipping contract or commercial
practice.
For certain cargo shipments, the
ACAS filer might not be the party that
financially interacted with the
customer, which could complicate the
ACAS filer’s ability to provide the
shipping cost as defined here. For
example, a freight forwarder might
interact with a customer to coordinate
and accept payment for a cargo
shipment. The freight forwarder then
contracts with parties such as an air
carrier to transport the cargo. The freight
forwarder may be hesitant to share the
amount that the customer paid to the
freight forwarder with the air carrier
because of the freight forwarder’s
interest in maintaining a competitive
business relationship with all involved
parties. Section 343(a)(3)(C) of the Trade
Act requires that CBP consider the
existence of competitive relationships
when imposing information
requirements. In consideration of this
parameter, CBP will accept an estimated

PO 00000

Frm 00017

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52811

shipping cost for a particular cargo
shipment when (1) the total amount of
charges will be assessed after the ACAS
filing is transmitted; or (2) the ACAS
filer is not the carrier, freight forwarder,
or other logistics provider that assessed
the total amount of charges to deliver
the shipment. The ACAS filer must
transmit the true shipping cost to CBP
if it is known to the ACAS filer at the
time of filing. If the ACAS filer is not
the carrier, freight forwarder, or other
logistics provider that assessed or will
assess the total amount of charges to
deliver the shipment, other ACAS filers
or third parties, as described under 19
CFR 122.48b(c)(5), are not required to
provide the shipping cost to the ACAS
filer because the data element can be
satisfied by transmitting an estimated
shipping cost. When transmitted
shipping cost data is non-descriptive,
inaccurate, or insufficient, CBP may
require ACAS filers to provide the
contract of carriage as proof of the
freight charges under a referral for
information.
The shipping cost data element will
help CBP identify financial information
that, when combined with other data
elements, will allow CBP to identify
suspicious or high-risk shipments.
(ii) Unmasked internet protocol (IP)
address or media access control (MAC)
address of the device used to initiate the
shipping transaction and the unmasked
IP address or MAC address of the device
used to file the ACAS filing each time
an ACAS filing is submitted. This data
element collects both the IP address or
MAC address of the device used to
initiate a shipping transaction and the
IP address or MAC address of the device
used by an ACAS filer when
transmitting each ACAS filing.
As stated previously, shipping
frequency/volume codes associated with
a low number of shipments or the use
of an intermediary, such as a shipping
outlet, correlate to an absence of
targetable data; thus, it is necessary to
require additional information for CBP
to determine whether those shipments
present a threat to air cargo security.
The collection of an IP address or MAC
address assists CBP’s targeting of highrisk air cargo by presenting an
additional means of verifying the
identity and location of an ACAS filer
and the party that initiated the
shipment.
Depending on the business models
involved in a particular shipping
transaction, the device used to initiate
the shipping transaction could be the
same device used to complete the ACAS
filing. If this situation occurs, the ACAS
filer must transmit IP or MAC addresses
for both the initiating device and filing

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

52812

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

device fields, even if the addresses are
identical.
The language used here and in the
regulatory text states that ACAS filers
must transmit the ‘‘unmasked’’ IP or
MAC addresses ‘‘of the device used’’ to
initiate a shipping transaction and the
device used to complete an ACAS filing.
This language specifies that the data
element is not satisfied if the ACAS filer
transmits an IP address or MAC address
that is the result of using any technique
or technology to mask or otherwise
misrepresent IP or MAC addresses
because that would not be the
‘‘unmasked’’ IP or MAC address ‘‘of the
device used.’’ Examples of masking
include, but are not limited to, the use
of proxy servers and VPNs.
CBP understands that some members
of the air cargo industry may need to
adjust their business practices to collect
and transmit the unmasked IP or MAC
addresses of devices used to initiate
shipping transactions and devices used
to file ACAS filings. However, CBP has
determined that IP and MAC address
monitoring is an important security
feature given the significant
consequences of attempted and
successful attacks and the heightened
potential for threat actors to obfuscate
their identities when digitally
interfacing with ACAS filers and CBP.
In accordance with section 1951 of
the FAA Act (49 U.S.C. 44901 note) and
section 343(a)(3) of the Trade Act (19
U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)), CBP considered how
to best implement this requirement
using an operationally feasible and
practical approach that considers the
application of the data element’s
requirements, the ability of filers to
acquire information for transmittal, and
differences in commercial practices,
among other statutory requirements.
Using commercially available
software, it is reasonably possible to log
the IP address or MAC address, as
applicable, of devices that interface with
an ACAS filer’s networks. Using
commercially available software, it is
also possible to determine if a device is
utilizing IP or MAC address masking
techniques when the device interacts
with an ACAS filer’s networks. When a
party attempts to mask their IP or MAC
address, it is within the discretion of
each ACAS filer or the relevant third
party to determine the unmasked IP or
MAC address of the party and transmit
that information, refuse to accept the
cargo for shipment until the party
provides their unmasked IP or MAC
address for transmittal, or use some
other reasonable means of acquiring the
unmasked IP or MAC address.
ACAS filers are responsible for the
accuracy of any information that filers

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

transmit to CBP. However, when ACAS
filers receive information from another
party, CBP will take into consideration
how, in accordance with ordinary
commercial practices, the filer acquired
the information, and whether and how
the filer is able to verify the information.
See section 343(a)(3)(B) of the Trade Act
(19 U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)(B)); 19 CFR
122.48b(c)(6).
Given the commercial availability of
technologies that can facilitate the
logging of IP or MAC addresses and the
detection of masking techniques, CBP
anticipates that ACAS filers will be able
to acquire unmasked IP or MAC
addresses in most use cases.
Additionally, ACAS filers may choose
to transmit either an IP address or a
MAC address to satisfy this data
element. CBP allows this IP or MAC
address choice in consideration of
certain trade practices where the
provision of an IP address may be
impractical, such as when the ACAS
filer is required to report the address of
a device on their own network that is
not connected to the internet. The
option of providing an IP address or
MAC address does not excuse ACAS
filers from their obligation to provide
accurate information for this data
element. For example, if an ACAS filer
or relevant third party can reasonably
confirm that an IP address is unmasked,
it would not be reasonable for the ACAS
filer to report a MAC address that the
ACAS filer does not know to be accurate
or unmasked.
When an ACAS filer is not reasonably
able to provide either an unmasked IP
address or an unmasked MAC address,
CBP will permit the ACAS filer to
transmit data on the basis of what the
filer reasonably believes to be true. See
section 343(a)(3)(B) of the Trade Act (19
U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)(B)); 19 CFR
122.48b(c)(6).
5. Conditional Data Elements Required
Only in Certain Situations
The following data elements can be
found under the new 19 CFR
122.48b(d)(4)(v).
(i) Biographic data. Biographic data is
the data contained on a CBP-approved
government-issued photo identification
document. Biographic data also
includes the date and time an
individual presents a CBP-approved
government-issued photo identification
document for the collection of the textbased biographic data. The biographic
data of an individual presenting cargo
for shipment must be transmitted when
the customer account shipping
frequency/volume is assigned the
shipping outlet/walk-in code or when a

PO 00000

Frm 00018

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

shipment contains household goods or
personal effects.
When the conditions listed above
occur, the individual presenting cargo
for shipment must provide the party
taking custody of the cargo for shipment
with a CBP-approved governmentissued photo identification document.
At minimum, CBP will recognize a
document as CBP-approved if it is a
valid, unexpired government-issued
driver’s license or passport that lists the
required text-based biographic data and
includes a photo of the individual that
the document is assigned to. CBP
understands that these documents may
not be readily available to all
individuals; thus, CBP plans to list
instructions for determining whether
additional, alternative documents are
CBP-approved in the ACAS
Implementation Guide.23
The party accepting the cargo must
verify that the document matches the
individual presenting the document. At
minimum, the biographic data
transmitted to CBP must include the
government-issued identification
document type, the identifier that is
uniquely associated with the
identification document (e.g., an
alphanumeric passport number), the
issuing government authority and
country, the name of the individual, and
the date of birth. This data must be
transmitted to CBP in a text format.
ACAS filers must also transmit the date
and time when the individual presented
the government-issued photo
identification document.24
The government-issued photo
identification document that is
presented by an individual for purposes
of compliance with the biographic data
transmission requirement is subject to a
copy retention requirement found under
the new 19 CFR 122.48b(c)(7). The data
collected under the biographic data date
and time requirement will be used by
CBP to ensure ACAS filers’ compliance
with notifications to obtain and retain
copies of government-issued photo
identification documents. The copy
retention requirement and CBP’s
analysis of data collected under the
biographic data date and time
requirement are discussed in more
detail under Section IV.G. of this IFR.
CBP can more effectively assess the
risk of a particular shipment when the
23 The ACAS Implementation Guide will be
located at https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/
ports-entry/cargo-security/acas.
24 Instructions for formatting the biographic data
date and time reporting requirements will be
located in the ACAS Implementation Guide and
Enhanced ACAS Frequently Asked Questions,
https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/ports-entry/
cargo-security/acas.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
parties involved in a shipping
transaction are known to CBP and
regularly conduct similar transactions.
Conversely, when a shipping
transaction occurs between parties that
are not known to CBP as having an
ongoing business relationship, CBP’s
ability to accurately identify the risk of
a shipment based on the identity of the
parties involved diminishes. Thus,
when the shipping outlet/walk-in code
is assigned or a shipment contains
household goods or personal effects,
CBP will require the collection of
biographic data to better identify the
party shipping the item. The collection
of biographic data will allow CBP to
more effectively assess ACAS filings
that contain cargo descriptions that are
generally assigned to shipments
between individuals and shipments
between parties that are not known to
CBP as having an ongoing business
relationship.
(ii) Link to product listing and
unmasked IP address or MAC address of
the device used by the consignee to
purchase the product. This data element
is required when a consignee, who does
not have an account with the logistics
provider who issued the lowest level air
waybill, initiates a shipment by
conducting a transaction on any internet
store or online marketplace platform
(collectively, e-commerce platforms).
When this data element is required, the
ACAS filer must transmit the unmasked
IP address or MAC address of the device
used by the consignee to purchase the
product and either the uniform resource
locator (URL) or stock keeping unit
(SKU) of the product.
As discussed below, e-commerce
transactions present a special risk to
aircraft, crewmembers, and passengers,
in part, due to the relative anonymity
associated with the transactions. To
ensure that CBP receives adequate
identity and location information for
parties involved in e-commerce
transactions, CBP determined that it is
necessary to require, under this link to
product listing data element, the
unmasked IP or MAC address of certain
consignees involved in e-commerce
shipping transactions.
This IFR separately requires the
transmission of the unmasked IP or
MAC address of the device used to
initiate the shipping transaction when
the customer account shipping
frequency/volume data element is
assigned the shipping outlet/walk-in,
immediate transaction, or occasional
shipper codes, which provides identity
and location information when there is
a low frequency of shipments conducted
by the relevant parties or when there is
an intermediary, such as a shipping

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

outlet. Under this low frequency
condition set, ACAS filers would not be
required to transmit IP or MAC
addresses for devices that initiate
shipping transactions on a regular/daily
or high-volume basis. E-commerce
shipments will typically be assigned
regular/daily or high-volume frequency
codes, thus, without a specific data
element for e-commerce consignees’ IP
or MAC addresses, CBP would be
limited in its ability to collect and
analyze unmasked IP or MAC addresses
for the majority of e-commerce
transactions. Additionally, in the ecommerce context, the device that
initiates the shipping transaction is
likely a device operated by the ecommerce platform and not the device
used to purchase the product; thus, the
IP or MAC address of the device that
initiated the shipping transaction has
limited usefulness in resolving the
anonymity issues associated with ecommerce transactions.
The language used here and in the
regulatory text states that ACAS filers
must transmit the ‘‘unmasked’’ IP or
MAC address ‘‘of the device used’’ to
purchase the product. This language
specifies that the data element is not
satisfied if the ACAS filer transmits an
IP address or MAC address that is the
result of using any technique or
technology to mask or otherwise
misrepresent IP or MAC addresses
because that would not be the
‘‘unmasked’’ IP or MAC address ‘‘of the
device used.’’ Examples of masking
include, but are not limited to, the use
of proxy servers and VPNs.
CBP understands that some members
of the air cargo industry and third
parties may need to adjust their
business practices and incur additional
costs to collect and transmit the
unmasked IP or MAC addresses of the
devices used by consignees to purchase
products on e-commerce platforms.
However, CBP has determined that IP
and MAC address monitoring is an
important security feature given the
significant consequences of attempted
and successful attacks and the
heightened potential for threat actors to
capitalize on the anonymity associated
with e-commerce transactions.
In accordance with section 1951 of
the FAA Act (49 U.S.C. 44901 note) and
section 343(a)(3) of the Trade Act (19
U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)), CBP considered how
to best implement this requirement
using an operationally feasible and
practical approach that considers the
application of the data element’s
requirements, the ability of filers to
acquire information for transmittal, and
differences in commercial practices,
among other statutory requirements.

PO 00000

Frm 00019

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52813

Using commercially available
software, it is reasonably possible to log
the IP address or MAC address, as
applicable, of devices that interface with
a network. Using commercially
available software, it is also possible to
determine if a device is utilizing IP or
MAC address masking techniques when
a device interacts with a network. When
a party attempts to mask their IP or
MAC address, it is within the discretion
of the ACAS filer or the relevant third
party to determine the unmasked IP or
MAC address of the party and transmit
that information, refuse to complete an
e-commerce transaction or accept the
cargo for shipment until the party
provides their unmasked IP or MAC
address for transmittal, or use some
other reasonable means of acquiring the
unmasked IP or MAC address.
For most of the IP or MAC address
transmission requirements introduced
by this IFR, the IP or MAC address will
be associated with a device that
interfaces directly with an ACAS filer’s
networks. However, for this IP or MAC
address of the e-commerce consignee
requirement, the device used by a
consignee to purchase a product from an
e-commerce platform will likely
interface with an e-commerce platform’s
networks to purchase the product and
will likely not interface with an ACAS
filer’s networks. Thus, similar to how
ACAS filers acquire information from ecommerce platforms to identify U.S.based consignees for existing consignee
data elements, such as the consignee
name and address, ACAS filers will
need to engage with third parties, such
as e-commerce platforms, to ensure that
the necessary information is collected
and provided to the ACAS filer for
transmission to CBP.
ACAS filers are responsible for the
accuracy of any information that filers
transmit to CBP. However, when ACAS
filers receive information from another
party, CBP will take into consideration
how, in accordance with ordinary
commercial practices, the filer acquired
the information, and whether and how
the filer is able to verify the information.
See section 343(a)(3)(B) of the Trade Act
(19 U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)(B)); 19 CFR
122.48b(c)(6).
Given the commercial availability of
technologies that can facilitate the
logging of IP or MAC addresses and the
detection of masking techniques, CBP
anticipates that ACAS filers will be able
to acquire unmasked IP or MAC
addresses in most use cases.
Additionally, ACAS filers may choose
to transmit either an IP address or a
MAC address to satisfy this data
element. CBP allows this IP or MAC
address choice in consideration of

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

52814

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

certain trade practices where the
provision of an IP address may be
impractical, such as when the ACAS
filer is required to report the address of
a device on their own network that is
not connected to the internet. The
option of providing an IP address or
MAC address does not excuse ACAS
filers from their obligation to provide
accurate information for this data
element. For example, if an ACAS filer
or relevant third party can reasonably
confirm that an IP address is unmasked,
it would not be reasonable for the ACAS
filer to transmit a MAC address that the
ACAS filer does not know to be accurate
or unmasked.
When an ACAS filer is not reasonably
able to provide either an unmasked IP
address or an unmasked MAC address,
CBP will permit the ACAS filer to
transmit data on the basis of what the
filer reasonably believes to be true. See
section 343(a)(3)(B) of the Trade Act (19
U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)(B)); 19 CFR
122.48b(c)(6).
In addition to identifying the IP or
MAC address of the device used to
purchase a product from an e-commerce
platform, ACAS filers are also required
to transmit a URL or SKU that identifies
the product. If an ACAS filer provides
an inactive or defective URL, this data
element is not satisfied because the
regulatory text requires the transmission
of the URL of the product, hence, an
active link that CBP could use to
reference the product. CBP recognizes
that the business practices of ecommerce platforms may require the
ongoing modification of a product’s
URL. Thus, the link to product listing
data element also provides for the
transmission of a SKU, so long as the
ACAS filer provides the home page of
the e-commerce platform and entry of
the SKU into the search function of the
website directs a user to the active
product landing page.
The large volume of shipments
conducted as a result of e-commerce
transactions, the potential for the
obfuscation of the true contents of a
shipment, and the relative anonymity
afforded to participants in e-commerce
transactions presents a special risk to air
cargo security.25 For example, many ecommerce platforms facilitate
transactions between purchasers and
third-party vendors that independently
25 See DHS, Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit
and Pirated Goods (Jan. 24, 2020), https://
www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/20_
0124_plcy_counterfeit-pirated-goods-report_01.pdf
(last visited Sept. 29, 2025); GAO, Use of Online
Marketplaces and Virtual Currencies in Drug and
Human Trafficking, GAO–22–105101 (Feb. 2022),
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-105101 (last
visited Sept. 29, 2025); cf. 90 FR 3048, 3060 (Jan.
14, 2025); 90 FR 6852, 6857 (Jan. 21, 2025).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

package and ship merchandise. The
degrees of separation between the ecommerce platform and third-party
vendors can make oversight and
enforcement difficult or unattractive for
e-commerce platforms. This anonymity
and the relative ease of establishing a
business relationship with an ecommerce platform, among other
factors, can make e-commerce platforms
effective distribution tools for
manufacturers of counterfeit consumer
products and other illicit items. As
relevant to this emergency rulemaking,
these factors of anonymity and ease-ofuse also present a specific security
vulnerability that threat actors can
exploit to target aircraft, especially
considering the high volume of ecommerce shipments that enter the
United States as air cargo shipments.26
This data element will allow CBP to
identify the item being imported into
the United States, the marketplace that
facilitated the creation of the shipment,
and the location of the device that
purchased the product. With this
information, CBP can compare the cargo
description, an existing mandatory
ACAS data element, and the URL or
SKU item description for discrepancies,
identify online marketplaces that
present abnormal risk profiles, and
identify discrepancies between the
location of the purchaser and the
destination of the cargo shipment.
Based on feedback from industry, CBP
believes that an unmasked IP or MAC
address would only be required for a
minority of ACAS filings because the
majority of ACAS filings involve a
shipper that is a Verified Known
Consignor. In addition, even for those
filings that do not involve a shipper that
is a Verified Known Consignor, the filer
would only be required to provide an
individual’s unmasked IP or MAC
address in certain circumstances. At the
same time, CBP recognizes that there
may be privacy, security, or
implementation cost concerns
associated with the requirement to
provide unmasked IP or MAC addresses
in some circumstances, and that effects
on companies could vary depending on
their existing information technology
(IT) infrastructure and business
practices. Such concerns may arise from
the requirement to provide an actual IP
or MAC address that is linked to a
specific device and not an address that
is the result of using a masking
technique, such as the use of a proxy
server or VPN. Concerns may also be
26 See CBP, E-Commerce, https://www.cbp.gov/
trade/basic-import-export/e-commerce (last visited
Sept. 29, 2025) (regarding the volume of ecommerce shipments that enter the United States as
air cargo).

PO 00000

Frm 00020

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

related to how parties might maintain,
use, and disclose this information,
specifically, the collection of unmasked
IP or MAC addresses by ACAS filers and
third parties that report information to
ACAS filers, or CBP’s receipt of this
information. Additionally, CBP
recognizes that the unmasked IP or
MAC address requirements could create
additional financial burdens for parties
who provide information to ACAS filers
(such as some e-commerce sites and
their customers).
CBP recognizes that there are genuine,
non-nefarious reasons for seeking
privacy protections, such as the use of
IP or MAC address masking techniques,
when connected to the internet,
including making it harder for hackers
to target an individual’s device or steal
sensitive data. In addition, CBP
recognizes that there are potential costs
for requiring this information, including
costs that may extend beyond ACAS
filers. Similarly, CBP recognizes that
there is a significant benefit to requiring
unmasked IP or MAC addresses, such as
a greater chance of averting an attack on
international aviation that could result
in a significant loss of life and disrupt
global supply chains.
In analyzing the July 2024 incidents
and other potential threats, CBP
determined that the transmission of
additional location or device identity
information, including the transmission
of unmasked IP or MAC addresses,
would aid CBP’s targeting of high-risk
shipments in certain circumstances.
While other ACAS data elements also
provide CBP with location and identity
information, such as the consignee
name and address, unmasked IP and
MAC addresses may offer technically
verifiable location or device identity
information that CBP believes is more
difficult for threat actors to misrepresent
compared to other ACAS data elements
and generally provides an important
additional point of comparison. CBP
determined that the value of unmasked
IP or MAC address information in
conjunction with the significant and
potentially life-threatening
consequences of attacks on international
aviation warranted the approach taken
in this rule.
However, CBP has sought to limit the
collection of these and other conditional
data elements to the extent possible. In
addition to other limiting conditions,
unmasked IP or MAC addresses are only
required if the shipper is not identified
as a Verified Known Consignor. As
noted above and as discussed in Section
V.B., CBP believes that this condition
will significantly limit the applicability
of the unmasked IP or MAC address
requirements, among other enhanced

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

ACAS data elements. These conditions
impose transmission requirements in
scenarios associated with heightened
threat levels, in which CBP believes the
security benefit justifies requiring
unmasked IP or MAC addresses in
certain circumstances.
When unmasked IP or MAC addresses
are transmitted to CBP, CBP will use the
information in accordance with
statutory requirements applicable to
CBP’s use of advance electronic
information for cargo and ACAS
information specifically. See, e.g., 19
U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)(F), (G); section 1951(h)
of the FAA Act (49 U.S.C. 44901 note).
Section V.E. contains additional
information regarding CBP’s handling of
information collected pursuant to the
ACAS program.
F. Optional Data Elements
Under the existing ACAS program,
CBP encourages ACAS filers to transmit
data elements that are not required or
additional information regarding ACAS
data as optional data elements. The
transmission of optional data elements
is voluntary in all circumstances;
however, CBP recommends the
transmission of these data elements
when available because these data
elements improve CBP’s targeting of
high-risk cargo and may allow for a
faster ACAS disposition. To
accommodate the addition of new
conditional data elements, the optional
data elements previously listed under
19 CFR 122.48b(d)(3) can now be found
under the new 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(5).
These data elements provide additional
points of comparison during CBP’s
targeting of high-risk shipments that
complement or contrast against data
elements that are required for
transmission. To gain the greatest
possible security benefit from these
voluntary transmissions, CBP
determined that it is necessary to
provide additional guidance to
standardize the transmission of certain
optional data elements. Thus, CBP is
revising the list of optional data
elements currently provided by
regulation as follows:
(i) Second Notify Party. This is an
existing optional data element that
allows the ACAS filer to voluntarily
designate a second notify party to
receive shipment status messages from
CBP. This IFR does not modify the
Second Notify Party optional data
element.
(ii) Origin of Shipment. This is the
International Standards Organization
(ISO) country code that represents the
country where the cargo was tendered
for shipment. This data element can
complement or contrast against

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

52815

information reported under the
shipment packing location and/or
scheduled shipment pickup location
data element, among others.
(iii) Declared Value. This is the U.S.
fair market value of the cargo in U.S.
dollars.
(iv) Harmonized Commodity Code.
This is the Harmonized Tariff Schedule
(HTS) code at the 6-digit or 10-digit
level that most accurately identifies the
cargo. CBP’s use of HTS refers to the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States.27 The first six digits of a
10-digit HTS (HTS–10) code are
identical to the digits contained in a 6digit HTS (HTS–6) code, sometimes
referred to as a Harmonized System
code. The remaining four digits in an
HTS–10 code further classify the cargo,
and within the ACAS program, provide
CBP with the most effective targeting
information.
As a mandatory data element, ACAS
filers are already required to transmit a
precise cargo description, which is
defined under 19 CFR 122.48a as a
precise cargo description or HTS–6
code. CBP introduced this optional data
element to clarify that ACAS filers are
encouraged to transmit both a precise
cargo description and an HTS–6 or
HTS–10 code.
(v) Transaction Type. This is the CBPspecified code that best represents the
transactional relationship between the
shipper and the consignee. For example,
if an individual in a foreign country is
shipping cargo to a business in the
United States, the ACAS filer should
assign the Consumer to Business code.
These codes can be found in the ACAS
Implementation Guide.28 The list of
transaction types also includes special
categories, such as live animals or
dangerous goods, which may
complement the special handling type
optional data element.
(vi) Special Handling Type. This is
the CBP-specified special handling or
dangerous goods code applicable to
certain cargo shipments. A cargo
shipment may have a special handling
type to signify the presence of special or
dangerous cargo that requires nonstandard handling. These codes can be
found in the CBP Export Manifest
Implementation Guide and the CBP
ACAS Implementation Guide.29 For

example, a shipment of flowers could be
assigned the ‘‘PEF’’ code. The voluntary
reporting of special handling types in
the ACAS filing alerts CBP to the
presence of anomalous or unusual cargo
which could benefit the filer by
hastening the resolution of, or avoiding
the issuance of, any potential referrals.
(vii) Customer Account Email
Address. This is the email address
associated with the account identified
under the customer account name data
element.
(viii) Customer Account Phone
Number. This is the phone number
associated with the account identified
under the customer account name data
element.
(ix) Shipper Manufacturer
Identification (MID) Code or Authorized
Economic Operator (AEO) Number. This
is the MID code or AEO number and
code representing the designating body
for the party identified as the shipper.
Instructions for deriving a MID code can
be found under Customs Directive No.
3550–055.30 AEO numbers are issued by
customs agencies to identify parties
involved in international trade that meet
certain security standards. If
transmitting an AEO number, ACAS
filers must also identify the designating
body.
For purposes of satisfying the Verified
Known Consignor conditional data
elements, CBP plans to recognize certain
MID codes or AEO numbers associated
with programs that meet CBP’s security
requirements. CBP is introducing this
optional data element to encourage the
transmission of MID codes or AEO
numbers that are not used to satisfy the
Verified Known Consignor data
element. MID codes and AEO numbers
transmitted under this optional data
element can improve CBP’s
identification of shippers and indicate
the existence of certain risk factors.
(x) Consignee Importer of Record
Number. This is the U.S. Social Security
number, Internal Revenue Service
number, Employer Identification
Number (EIN), or CBP-assigned number
used as the importer of record number
by the party identified as the consignee.
This data element will be used by CBP
to identify the consignee that is the
importer of record for a particular cargo
shipment.

27 The Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States is available electronically at https://
hts.usitc.gov/ (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).
28 The CBP ACAS Implementation Guide can be
found at https://www.cbp.gov/document/guides/aircargo-advance-screening-acas-implementationguide (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).
29 The CBP Export Manifest Implementation
Guide can be found at https://www.cbp.gov/
document/guidance/ace-export-manifest-

implementation-guide (last visited Jan. 28, 2025).
The CBP ACAS Implementation Guide can be found
at https://www.cbp.gov/document/guides/air-cargoadvance-screening-acas-implementation-guide (last
visited Jan. 28, 2025).
30 CBP Customs Directive No. 3550–055,
Attachment A (Nov. 24, 1986), https://
www.cbp.gov/document/guidance/3550-055instructions-deriving-manufacturershipperidentification-code (last visited Jan. 29, 2025).

PO 00000

Frm 00021

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

52816

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

(xi) Regulated Agent Name, Address,
and Code. This is the name, address,
and code associated with a party that
ensures security controls for the
transportation of cargo by air in
accordance with standards established
by a CBP-recognized body. Regulated
agent status designates parties that
undertake certain security controls in
the handling of cargo that may limit the
security risk posed by those shipments.
It is within CBP’s sole discretion to
recognize regulated agent programs that
could be used by an ACAS filer to
complete this data element field. CBP
reserves the right to not recognize a
regulated agent program or a party’s
regulated agent status at any time.
CBP currently plans to recognize the
regulated agent program specified under
EU Commission Implementing
Regulation 2015/1998 as imposing
sufficiently rigorous security
standards.31 CBP encourages public
comment on additional programs
similar to the EU’s regulated agent
program that could be used to satisfy
this data element.
(xii) ACAS Filing Type. This is a CBPspecified code that represents the nature
of the handling and transportation of the
cargo. The regulatory text provides the
examples of standard, express, and ecommerce; however, CBP may add
additional filing types through further
guidance. The express filing type
represents delivery services that are
offered to the public as door-to-door
deliveries on a reliable and timely basis.
The standard filing type represents the
remainder of cargo shipments that are
not advertised as an ‘‘express’’ option.
E-commerce cargo shipments may be
transported as standard or express, but
are distinguished as a unique filing type
by the presence of an online store or
internet marketplace that facilitates the
cargo shipment.
(xiii) CBP is also revising the
regulatory text from the previous 19
CFR 122.48b(d)(3), which encourages
ACAS filers to transmit data that is not
required for a particular ACAS filing, to
remove the references to telephone
numbers, email addresses, and internet
protocol addresses as examples of
optional data elements. This revision
clarifies that some previously optional
data elements are now mandatory or
conditional ACAS data elements. CBP
continues to encourage ACAS filers to
submit additional information regarding
any of the ACAS data or any data listed
31 See Commission Implementing Regulation
2015/1998 of Nov. 5, 2015, Laying Down Detailed
Measures for the Implementation of the Common
Basic Standards on Aviation Security, annex, 2015
O.J. (L 299) 1, https://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/
2015/1998/oj (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

in 19 CFR 122.48a that is not ACAS
data, when available. The regulatory
text encouraging the transmission of
additional information regarding ACAS
data or data listed in 19 CFR 122.48a
can be found under the new 19 CFR
122.48b(d)(5)(xiii).
G. Retention of Government-Issued
Photo Identification Document Copies
To support the new biographic data
transmission requirement, detailed
under Section IV.E.5., CBP is adding a
records retention requirement under the
new 19 CFR 122.48b(c)(7). When ACAS
filers are required to transmit the
biographic data conditional data
element (i.e., when (1) the customer
account shipping frequency/volume,
identified under 19 CFR
122.48b(d)(4)(ii)(C), is assigned the
shipping outlet/walk-in code, or (2)
when a shipment contains household
goods or personal effects), CBP may,
following prior notification from CBP to
ACAS filers, require that ACAS filers
obtain a copy of the government-issued
photo identification document used to
supply the text-based biographic data
and retain the copy for 3 years. During
the retention period, the ACAS filer
must provide the copy to CBP if
requested.
The language used here and in the
regulatory text, new 19 CFR
122.48b(c)(7), specifies that ACAS filers
are not required to retain document
copies by default; however, CBP may
require the retention of document
copies at CBP’s discretion. ACAS filers
will not be required to obtain and retain
copies unless prior notification is
provided to ACAS filers by CBP. CBP
will provide the notification to ACAS
filers through an established, preexisting means of communication. For
example, CBP may send the notification
to the email address provided by ACAS
filers under 19 CFR 122.48b(c)(3)(iv),
the 24 hours/7 days a week ACAS filer
email address.
The biographic data transmission
requirement found under the new 19
CFR 122.48b(d)(4)(v)(A) requires ACAS
filers to transmit the date and time the
individual shipping the cargo provided
the government-issued photo
identification document to supply the
text-based biographic data. An ACAS
filer’s compliance with the document
copy retention requirement will be
determined by comparing the date and
time CBP sent the copy retention
notification to the ACAS filer and the
date and time an individual presented a
government-issued photo identification
document for the collection of textbased biographic data under the new 19
CFR 122.48b(d)(4)(v)(A).

PO 00000

Frm 00022

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

CBP retains discretion over the
applicability of any requirement to
retain copies, including, but not limited
to, requirements to retain copies on a
temporary or ongoing basis and the
applicability of retention requirements
to ACAS filings originating from certain
ACAS filers, geographic regions, or
countries.
CBP selected a 3-year copy retention
period to identify individuals that
present a risk to air cargo security, aid
in the resolution of any questions
regarding an individual’s identity, and
assist CBP in verifying the accuracy of
transmitted biographic data under the
new 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(4)(v)(A). As
discussed previously, CBP will not
require ACAS filers to provide
document copies to CBP unless CBP
requests a copy; thus, a 3-year copy
retention period is also necessary to
ensure that document copies remain
available in the event that an
enforcement action occurs. See 19 CFR
113.62(l), 113.63(h), 113.64(i).
H. Exemption of ACAS Data From
Disclosure
Under section 343(a)(3)(G) of the
Trade Act (19 U.S.C. 1415(a)(3)(G)), CBP
is required to promulgate regulations
that protect the privacy of business
proprietary and any other confidential
cargo information provided to CBP
pursuant to the ACAS regulations. Data
electronically presented to CBP in
accordance with 19 CFR 122.48a is
specifically exempt from disclosure as
either trade secrets or privileged or
confidential commercial or financial
information under 19 CFR 103.31a,
unless CBP receives a specific request
for such records pursuant to 6 CFR 5.3,
and the owner of the information
expressly agrees in writing to its release.
19 CFR 122.48a(a) states that ACAS data
is a subset of data required under 19
CFR 122.48a and notes that any data
identified as ACAS data under 19 CFR
122.48a(d) is ‘‘subject to the
requirements and time frame described
in § 122.48b.’’
The original ACAS data elements,
delineated under the 2018 IFR, are
exempt from disclosure under 19 CFR
103.31(a) because those data elements
are entirely a subset of data required
under 19 CFR 122.48a. However, the
enhanced set of ACAS data elements,
introduced in this IFR, combines the
previous subset of 19 CFR 122.48a data
elements with a new set of data
elements unique to the ACAS program
(19 CFR 122.48b). As such, information
transmitted pursuant to the new ACAS
data element requirements would not be
explicitly exempt from disclosure

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

unless 19 CFR 103.31a is revised to
specifically exempt those data elements.
While the ACAS data elements
delineated in the 2018 IFR would
continue to be exempt from disclosure
without revising 19 CFR 103.31a and
the new ACAS data elements could be
protected by applicable Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) exemptions (see
5 U.S.C. 552(b)), CBP determined that it
is necessary to modify 19 CFR
103.31a(a) to per se exempt the new
ACAS data elements introduced in this
IFR from disclosure.
Information transmitted pursuant to
the new data element requirements may
contain trade secrets or privileged or
confidential commercial or financial
information; thus, it is immediately
necessary to per se exempt information
transmitted pursuant to those data
element requirements to promote
industry compliance with the enhanced
ACAS requirements. If information
transmitted pursuant to these data
element requirements were not per se
exempt from disclosure, ACAS filers,
and parties who supply ACAS filers
with information to complete ACAS
filings, may be hesitant to provide
information that could be disclosed. As
discussed throughout this IFR, complete
and accurate ACAS data is necessary to
inform CBP’s assessments of threats to
aircraft, crewmembers, and passengers
entering the United States. Thus, in
accordance with Trade Act
requirements, CBP is adding a specific
reference to ‘‘§ 122.48b’’ in 19 CFR
103.31a(a) to ensure that the new
enhanced ACAS data elements
introduced in this IFR receive the same
per se exemptions from disclosure that
the original ACAS data elements
presently receive.
I. Phased Enforcement
As required under section 343(a)(3)(J)
of the Trade Act (19 U.S.C.
1415(a)(3)(J)), CBP considered whether
it would be appropriate to provide a
transition period between the
promulgation of the new ACAS data
elements and the effective date of the
regulation. Given the immediate threat
to aviation security discussed in
Sections III.E. and V.A., CBP
determined that a delayed effective date
would be inappropriate because the
immediate implementation of the new
ACAS data elements is necessary to
address a demonstrated, existing
security vulnerability.
However, to provide members of
industry sufficient time to adjust to the
new requirements and in consideration
of the business process changes that
may be necessary to achieve full
compliance, CBP will show restraint in

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

enforcing the data transmission
requirements introduced by this IFR for
12 months after the effective date, taking
into account difficulties that inbound
air carriers and other eligible ACAS
filers may face in complying with the
rule, so long as inbound air carriers and
other eligible ACAS filers are making
significant progress toward compliance
and are making a good faith effort to
comply with the rule to the extent of
their current ability.
While full enforcement will be phased
in over this 12-month period, willful
and egregious violators will be subject
to enforcement actions at all times. CBP
welcomes comments on this phased
enforcement.
As required under section 343(a)(3)(E)
of the Trade Act (19 U.S.C.
1415(a)(3)(E)), CBP also considered
whether interim requirements may be
appropriate to the extent the technology
necessary for parties to transmit ACAS
data, and for CBP to receive and analyze
the data, is available at the time of
promulgation. Members of the air cargo
industry have successfully transmitted
ACAS data to CBP on a mandatory basis
since 2018; thus, the technological
framework for transmitting ACAS data
to CBP currently exists. Although the
addition of new data elements will
likely require ACAS filers to modify
their transmission software to
accommodate the new requirements,
some ACAS filers have already adapted
their systems to source and transmit
information for many of the new
requirements, and for other ACAS filers,
updated commercial software is
available. CBP has developed the
technical ability to receive and analyze
the enhanced ACAS data elements.
Based on these observations and
CBP’s conversations with members of
the air cargo industry, the technology
necessary to implement the enhanced
ACAS data element transmission
requirements exists and is widely
available. CBP recognizes that
additional software development,
technology acquisition, and
coordination and negotiation among
supply chain participants may be
needed to implement the sourcing or
transmission of information for specific
requirements. However, CBP
determined that the imposition of
interim requirements would not be
appropriate because the technology
necessary to transmit and source
information for the enhanced ACAS
data elements presently exists. Instead,
CBP determined that the previously
discussed phased enforcement period
would be most beneficial for ACAS
filers in adapting existing systems to
source and transmit information for the

PO 00000

Frm 00023

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52817

enhanced ACAS data element
requirements. A phased enforcement
period will immediately provide CBP
with available enhanced ACAS data and
enable ACAS filers to effectively
allocate technology development
resources toward adapting existing
technology to comply with one set of
requirements.
J. Severability
CBP intends for the decisions
contained in this rule to be severable
from each other and to be given effect
to the maximum extent possible, such
that if a court holds that any provision
is invalid or unenforceable—whether in
their entirety or as to a particular person
or circumstance—the other provisions
will remain in effect as to any other
person or circumstance.32 The various
decisions in this IFR are designed to
function sensibly without the others,
and CBP intends for them to be
severable so that each can operate
independently.
For example, CBP would intend to be
able to implement as much of the rule
as possible, even if it could not
implement some of the rule (such as a
conditional data element) due to a court
order. This approach ensures that CBP
can make necessary security
improvements to the greatest extent
possible.
Even if a court order were to render
the requirement to transmit a particular
data element invalid or unenforceable
and ACAS filers’ responses under that
data element inform filers’
responsibilities to transmit other data
elements, CBP would intend that ACAS
filers continue to provide the other data
elements, using the preamble of this IFR
as guidance for the applicability of any
conditions to the extent this
conditionality interpretation does not
violate a court order. For example, if a
court holds that the requirement to
provide the customer account shipping
frequency/volume data element is
unenforceable, CBP intends that ACAS
filers would continue to be required to
transmit biographic data if the
conditions described in the preamble for
the shipping outlet/walk-in code exist.
If a stricken provision creates a
question of whether or not a conditional
data element should be transmitted,
CBP intends that ACAS filers would
interpret the stricken provision as
satisfied such that transmission of the
conditional data element is required.
32 Courts have uniformly held that the APA, 5
U.S.C. 706(2), authorizes courts to sever and set
aside ‘‘only the offending parts of the rule.’’ Carlson
v. Postal Regulatory Comm’n, 938 F.3d 337, 351
(D.C. Cir. 2019); see, e.g., K Mart Corp. v. Cartier,
Inc., 486 U.S. 281, 294 (1988).

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

52818

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

For example, if a court holds that the
verified known consignor information
data element is unenforceable, CBP
would intend that ACAS filers be
required to provide a customer account
establishment date for all ACAS filings
where the immediate transaction code
was not assigned to the ACAS filing. In
this example, the verified known
consignor precondition under the new
19 CFR 122.48b(d)(4) would be
considered satisfied, regardless of the
existence of a known consignor.
V. Statutory and Regulatory Reviews

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

A. Administrative Procedure Act
The Administrative Procedure Act
(APA), 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq., generally
requires agencies to publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register and provide interested persons
the opportunity to submit comments
prior to issuing a final rule. However,
the APA provides an exception to these
requirements ‘‘when the agency for good
cause finds (and incorporates the
finding and a brief statement of reasons
therefor in the rules issued) that notice
and public comment thereon are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest.’’ 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B). The good cause exception
‘‘excuses notice and comment in
emergency situations . . . or where
delay could result in serious harm.’’ 33
Notice and comment is impracticable
when the due and required execution of
agency functions would be unavoidably
prevented by undertaking public
rulemaking proceedings.34
Impracticability can occur when there is
an imminent hazard to aircraft, persons,
or property within the United States, or
when immediate implementation of a
rule might directly affect public safety.35
The public interest prong of the good
cause exception applies when ordinary
procedures of notice and comment,
generally presumed to serve the public
interest, would actually harm the public
interest.36 This prong is distinct from
the need for immediacy under the
impracticability prong and is
‘‘appropriately invoked when the timing
and disclosure requirements of the
usual procedures would defeat the
purpose of the proposal.’’ 37
33 Jifry v. FAA, 370 F.3d 1174, 1179 (D.C. Cir.
2004) (citations omitted).
34 See S. Doc. No. 248, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. 200
(1946).
35 See Jifry v. FAA, 370 F.3d 1174, 1179 (D.C. Cir.
2004); NRDC v. Nat’l Highway Traffic Safety
Admin., 894 F.3d 95, 114 (2d Cir. 2018).
36 Mack Trucks, Inc. v. EPA, 682 F.3d 87, 95 (D.C.
Cir. 2012); see Florida v. HHS, 19 F.4th 1271, 1306
(11th Cir. 2021).
37 See Mack Trucks, Inc. v. EPA, 682 F.3d 87, 95
(D.C. Cir. 2012).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

The implementation of this rule as an
interim final rule, with provisions for
post-promulgation public comments, is
based on the APA’s good cause
exception. As explained below, delaying
the publication of this IFR for purposes
of providing public notice and comment
and following the APA’s 30-day waiting
period would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest.
Delaying the publication of this IFR
for purposes of conducting notice and
comment would be impracticable
because of the immediate need for CBP
to address imminent threats to the
security of aircraft and persons entering
the United States. CBP issued the 2018
ACAS regulations as an IFR because of
specific, classified intelligence that
certain terrorist organizations sought to
exploit vulnerabilities in international
air cargo security to cause damage to
infrastructure and to cause injury or loss
of life in the United States. While the
regulations introduced by the 2018 IFR
addressed certain security risks, since
then, CBP’s ongoing review of the ACAS
program and specific, classified
intelligence regarding the evolving
threat environment have identified
additional vulnerabilities.
Recent incidents, such as the July
2024 incendiary attacks described in
Section III.E., demonstrate the
immediate risk that threat actors pose to
the security of air cargo infrastructure
and the safety of individuals. CBP’s
discussions with members of the air
cargo industry during the
implementation period, detailed in
Section III.F., also highlighted the
immediate need for CBP regulations that
could mandate the provision of the
enhanced ACAS data elements for both
air carriers and other eligible ACAS
filers. Given the demonstrated
vulnerability within air cargo security
and heightened global tensions that may
result in further attempts to attack
critical air cargo infrastructure, it would
be impracticable to delay the
publication of this IFR for the purposes
of conducting notice and comment
procedures.
Notice and comment procedures
would be contrary to the public interest
because advance public notice of these
regulations would highlight a
vulnerability that threat actors could
leverage in the period between the
provision of public notice and the
effective date of the enhanced ACAS
requirements. The abilities of threat
actors vary significantly; thus, while a
threat from certain sophisticated actors
poses an imminent threat to air cargo
security, other less sophisticated actors
may not be aware of the existence or full
scope of a vulnerability until public

PO 00000

Frm 00024

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

notice from a government entity alerts
that threat actor. In this case, public
notice and comment procedures would
provide threat actors with the list of
enhanced ACAS data elements with
sufficient time prior to the effective date
of the regulations to plan and act on any
perceived vulnerabilities. In the current
threat environment, attempted or
unsuccessful attacks can still threaten
the safety of the American public and
have disruptive effects to the supply
chain similar to those of a successful
attack, such that any perceived
actionable vulnerability significantly
outweighs the public’s interest in
conducting notice and comment prior to
implementation of the enhanced ACAS
data elements.
For the reasons stated above, CBP has
determined that it would be
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest to delay the implementation of
this rule to provide for prior public
notice and comment. While CBP has
determined that this rule is exempt from
the APA’s notice and comment
requirements, CBP is providing the
public with the opportunity to comment
without delaying implementation of this
rule. CBP will accept public comments
for 60 days following the publication of
this IFR. CBP will respond to the
comments received when it issues a
final rule.
In addition to finding that this IFR
meets the good cause exception from the
APA’s notice and comment procedures,
CBP finds that good cause exists such
that this rule is not subject to the 30-day
delayed effective date requirement
found under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3); thus,
this rule is effective immediately upon
publication. Delaying the effective date
of this rule for 30 days after publication
would be impracticable and contrary to
the public interest for the same critical
national security reasons that
necessitated the publication of this rule
without notice and comment
procedures. Without an immediate
effective date, the United States would
be left unnecessarily vulnerable to a
specific threat. Therefore, this rule is
effective upon publication.
As such, CBP finds that this rule is
exempt from the public notice and
comment and delayed effective date
requirements of the APA under the good
cause exception.
B. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
14192
Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review) and 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review) direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing
rules, and promoting flexibility.
Executive Order 14192 (Unleashing
Prosperity Through Deregulation)
directs agencies to significantly reduce
the private expenditures required to
comply with Federal regulations and
provides that ‘‘any new incremental
costs associated with new regulations
shall, to the extent permitted by law, be
offset by the elimination of existing
costs associated with at least 10 prior
regulations.’’
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has designated this rule an
economically significant regulatory
action as defined under section 3(f)(1) of
E.O. 12866. Accordingly, the rule has
been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
This rule is not an Executive Order
14192 regulatory action because it is
being issued with respect to a national
security or homeland security function

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

of the United States. The benefit-cost
analysis demonstrates that the
regulation is anticipated to improve
national or homeland security as its
primary direct benefit and OIRA and the
promulgating agency agree the
regulation qualifies for a ‘good cause’
exception under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). See
OMB Memorandum M–25–20,
‘‘Guidance Implementing Section 3 of
Executive Order 14192, titled
‘Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation’’’ (Mar. 26, 2025). CBP
conducted an economic analysis to
assess the potential impacts of this IFR,
which can be found in the following
sections. Although this analysis
attempts to mirror the terms and
wording of the rule, readers are
cautioned that the regulatory text, not
the text of this assessment, is binding.
In summary, CBP expects that during
the period of analysis (from 2024 to
2033), the net cost of this IFR will range
from $877 million (7% discount rate,
2024 U.S. dollars) to $1.04 billion (3%
discount rate, 2024 U.S. dollars). The
annualized costs will range from

PO 00000

Frm 00025

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52819

$116,754,193 to $118,721,545 (7% and
3% discount rate respectively). This IFR
will affect CBP, air carriers, and other
trade members engaging in the process
of importing cargo into the United
States by air. CBP anticipates that this
IFR will also provide added benefits in
the form of enhanced cargo safety and
security measures that will reduce the
potential for the loss of life, destruction
of infrastructure, and the disruption of
supply chains due to a threat. Due to
data limitations, CBP is unable to
monetize the benefits of this rule.
Instead, CBP conducts a ‘‘break-even’’
analysis, which shows how often a
terrorist event must be avoided due to
the rule for the benefits to equal or
exceed the costs of the enhanced ACAS
program. As this rule has annualized
costs of over $100 million, the rule is
considered an economically significant
rulemaking, and, in accordance with
OMB Circular A–4 and Executive Order
12866, CBP has provided accounting
statements in Table 2.
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

52820

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
Table 2. 0MB Circular A-4 Accounting Statement: Cost of the Rule, 2024-2033 (2024$, millions)
Primary
Estimate

Category

Low
Estimate

High
Estimate

Dollar
Year

Discount
Rate

Time
Horizon

Source

BENEFITS
Annualized monetized
benefits

-

Annualized quantified,
but non-monetized,
benefits

-

-

-

2024

3%

2024

7%

2024

3%

2024

7%

10 Years

RA

Prevent high-risk cargo shipments from being loaded onto aircraft
before arrival in United States.
Improve CBP's security efforts on air imports in an effort to reduce
threats.
Unquantified benefits

Improve CBP's security efforts on air imports in an effort to reduce
importation of prohibited goods.

RA

Improve transparency of supply chain to reduce threats and protect
trade members' employees and customers.

COSTS
Annualized monetized
costs

$118.82

Annualized quantified,
but non-monetized,
costs

-

-

-

$116.85

-

-

2024

3%

2024

7%

2024

3%

2024

7%

10 Years

RA

Trade members may see costs as any additional trainings or meetings
with CBP are needed to learn the new process.

Unquantified costs

The supply chain may face disruptions as the new data elements are
enacted and industry learns the new process to provide them.
There is a potential of lost revenue if shipments are rejected or
customers shift to new carriers to avoid regulation.

RA

Liquidated damages, $5,000 for each violation up to max of
$100,000 per departure.
Transfers

NIA

Effects on State, local,
or Tribal governments

NIA

Effects on small
businesses

NIA

BILLING CODE 9111–14–C

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

1. Purpose, Background, and Baseline
Section 343(a) of the Trade Act
authorizes CBP to promulgate
regulations providing for the mandatory
transmission of cargo information by
way of a CBP-approved electronic data
interchange (EDI) system before the
cargo is brought into or departs from the
United States by any mode of
commercial transportation. The required

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

cargo information is that which is
reasonably necessary to enable high-risk
cargo to be identified for purposes of
ensuring cargo safety and security
pursuant to the laws enforced and
administered by CBP. Within DHS, CBP
and TSA have responsibilities for
securing inbound air cargo and work
together to identify high-risk cargo prior
to the aircraft’s departure for the United
States. CBP and TSA employ a layered
security approach to secure inbound air

PO 00000

Frm 00026

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

cargo, including using various risk
assessment methods to identify highrisk cargo and to mitigate any risks
posed.
For any aircraft required to make
entry under 19 CFR 122.41 that will
have commercial cargo on board, an
inbound air carrier or other eligible
party must transmit specified advance
air cargo data to CBP. See 19 CFR
122.48a. Under 19 CFR 122.48a,
advance data pertaining to air cargo

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.015

TRANSFERS

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

must be transmitted to CBP no later than
the time of departure (when the aircraft
departs from certain foreign ports near
the United States) and four hours prior
to arrival of the aircraft in the United
States (when the aircraft departs from
any other foreign area). Under this data
transmission timeline, aircraft could
depart from foreign ports and be enroute
to the United States prior to the
transmission of air cargo data or a risk
assessment by CBP.
To address this issue, CBP published
an IFR in 2018, establishing a
mandatory ACAS program that requires
the transmission of certain advance air
cargo data earlier in the import process
to the United States. CBP’s objective for
the ACAS program is to obtain the most
accurate data at the earliest time
possible with as little impact to the flow
of commerce as possible. CBP requires
that ACAS data be transmitted prior to
the loading of cargo onto an aircraft
departing for the United States. This
timeline is required to enable the
performance of a risk assessment for
each cargo shipment and to conduct the
required screening. The earlier in the
import process ACAS data is
transmitted, the sooner CBP can
conduct risk assessments and
determinations can be communicated to
air carriers and other trade members,
which minimizes the impact to
operations. Obtaining this import data
in advance enables CBP to identify highrisk cargo before the cargo is transported
aboard an aircraft destined to the United
States. These ACAS requirements, in
conjunction with the existing 19 CFR
122.48a data requirements and TSA’s
updated security programs, enhance air
cargo safety and security measures.
To provide added flexibility in the
ACAS program, CBP allows for any
eligible party that has the most direct
information about the data elements to
provide the information directly to
CBP.38 However, the air carrier is
required to file the ACAS data if no
other eligible party elects to submit the
data. The ACAS regulations divide the
ACAS data requirements into data
elements. Mandatory data elements
must be transmitted in all
38 Eligible parties to provide ACAS data to CBP
include freight forwarders, Automated Broker
Interface (ABI) filers, Container Freight Station/
deconsolidators, Express Consignment Carrier
Facilities, or the air carrier. CBP requires all ACAS
filers to meet the following requirements: establish
the communication protocol to properly transmit
ACAS data to CBP through a CBP-approved EDI
system, possess the appropriate bond, have access
to report all of the originator codes that will be used
to file ACAS data, and provide 24 hours/7 days a
week contact information including a telephone
number and email address that CBP can use to
notify and communicate as needed.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

circumstances. Conditional data
elements must be transmitted only in
certain circumstances. The transmission
of optional data elements is
recommended, but not required. CBP
requires that ACAS data be transmitted
at the lowest air waybill level by all
ACAS filers. The ACAS data elements
introduced through the publication of
the 2018 IFR include (data elements are
mandatory unless otherwise noted):
1. Shipper name and address 39
2. Consignee name and address 40
3. Cargo description 41
4. Total quantity (based on the smallest
external packing unit)
5. Total weight of cargo (expressed in
lbs or kgs)
6. Air waybill number 42
7. Master Air Waybill Number (MAWB)
(conditional) 43
8. Second Notify Party (optional) 44
CBP also encourages ACAS filers to
submit additional information regarding
any of the ACAS data or any data listed
in 19 CFR 122.48a that is not ACAS
data. CBP and/or TSA may also require
additional information such as flight
numbers and routing information to
address ACAS referrals for information.
This information will be requested in a
referral message, when necessary.
As stated previously, CBP’s objective
with the ACAS program is to obtain the
most accurate data possible at the
earliest point in the import process.
Therefore, CBP allows multiple parties
to submit the ACAS data and requires
the ACAS data to be disclosed to the
ACAS filer by parties in the supply
chain. If any third party that is not an
eligible ACAS filer possesses required
ACAS data, that party must fully
disclose and present the required ACAS
data to either the inbound air carrier or
other eligible ACAS filer for
transmission to CBP. See 19 CFR
39 The name and address of the foreign vendor,
supplier, manufacturer, or other similar party is
acceptable. The address of the foreign vendor, etc.,
must be a foreign address. The identity of a carrier,
freight forwarder, or consolidator is not acceptable.
40 This is the name and address of the party to
whom the cargo will be delivered regardless of the
location of the party; this party need not be located
at the arrival or destination port.
41 A precise cargo description or the 6-digit
Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) number must be
provided.
42 The air waybill number must be the same in
the ACAS filing and the 19 CFR 122.48a filing. The
air waybill number is the International Air
Transport Association (IATA) standard 11-digit
number, as provided in 19 CFR 122.48a(d)(1)(i).
43 The MAWB number is the IATA standard 11digit number.
44 Any secondary stakeholder or interested party
in the importation of goods to the United States, to
receive shipment status messages from CBP. This
party does not have to be the inbound air carrier
or an eligible ACAS filer.

PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52821

122.48b(c)(5). If no other eligible filer
elects to submit the ACAS data, then it
is the inbound air carrier’s
responsibility to provide the ACAS data
to CBP. Even if another eligible party
decides to submit the ACAS data
directly to CBP, the inbound air carrier
may also elect to file the ACAS data.
The party that transmits the ACAS data
to CBP (the ACAS filer) is the party
responsible for updating the information
if any data changes or more accurate
information becomes available and this
party is also responsible for responding
to any CBP questions or referrals that
may arise during the review of that
ACAS data. CBP requires ACAS filers to
provide CBP with a telephone number
and email address that the filer must
monitor 24 hours, 7 days a week to
quickly address any instructions or
referrals that CBP issues. After ACAS
data is submitted to CBP, the ACAS filer
receives a confirmation message.45
CBP’s ATS reviews each ACAS filing
and uses targeting strategies to identify
filings that require additional review.
ACAS filings that are identified by ATS
are then manually reviewed by a CBP or
TSA officer to determine if an ACAS
referral or DNL instruction should be
issued. Once the determination is made
by the CBP or TSA officer, the ACAS
filer is notified electronically.
There are two types of ACAS referrals
that may be issued after an officer
manually reviews the ACAS filing
information, a referral for information
and/or a referral for screening. The
responsible party must address any
ACAS referrals no later than prior to the
departure of the aircraft to the United
States. Until referrals are resolved, the
inbound air carrier is prohibited from
transporting that cargo on an aircraft
destined to the United States. A referral
for information is issued after the ACAS
filing is manually reviewed and
determined to have non-descriptive,
inaccurate, or insufficient ACAS data,
preventing CBP from conducting a
proper risk assessment.46 For these
referrals, the ACAS filer must resolve
the referral by providing CBP with the
requested clarifying data. The last party
to file the ACAS data is responsible for
addressing a referral for information
because that party is generally in the
best position, relative to earlier filers, to
45 If the ACAS filer designates a Second Notify
Party, that party will also receive the status
notification (and any subsequent status
notifications).
46 This can be due to typographical errors, vague
cargo descriptions, and/or unverifiable data.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

52822

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

lead in correcting any data
inconsistencies or errors.47
An ACAS referral for screening is
issued after manual review of ACAS
data and the risk assessment concludes
that the cargo presents an elevated level
of risk that warrants enhanced security
screening. Once a referral for screening
is issued, the ACAS filer and/or the
inbound air carrier is required to
respond with information on how the
cargo was screened in accordance with
TSA-approved or accepted enhanced
screening methods.48 A referral for
screening mandates that the ACAS filer
implement a higher security screening
before the cargo can be imported into
the United States. The ACAS filer can
perform the necessary screening
provided that it is a party recognized by
TSA to perform screening. If the ACAS
filer is a party other than the inbound
air carrier and chooses not to perform
the screening, or is not a party
recognized by TSA to perform
screening, then that ACAS filer must
notify the inbound air carrier of the
referral for screening. Once the inbound
air carrier is notified of the unresolved
referral for screening, the inbound air
carrier must perform the enhanced
screening required, and/or provide the
necessary information to TSA and/or
CBP to resolve the referral for
screening.49 The ultimate responsibility
to resolve any outstanding referral for
screening is placed on the inbound air
carrier because that is the party with
physical possession of the cargo prior to
the departure of the aircraft.
If it is determined during a manual
review of ACAS data that the cargo
contains a potential immediate and
lethal threat to an aircraft and/or its
vicinity, CBP will issue a DNL
instruction. If a DNL is issued, the cargo
must not be loaded onto the aircraft. If
a DNL were issued, it would pose
significant costs to the airline and their
customers. Since the implementation of
the 2018 ACAS IFR, CBP has limited the
issuance of DNL orders by working
closely with carriers and other ACAS
filers to resolve issues as they arise;
however, CBP reserves the right to issue
a DNL when necessary. Additionally, a
DNL prohibits any party that currently
47 For instance, when the inbound air carrier
retransmits an original ACAS filer’s data and a
referral for information is issued after this
retransmission, the inbound air carrier is
responsible for taking the necessary action to
address the referral.
48 All inbound cargo must be screened in
accordance with the TSA-approved or accepted
enhanced screening methods contained in the
carrier’s security program.
49 If a screening is not performed, TSA will follow
up with any administrative action against the ACAS
filer.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

has physical possession of that cargo
from transporting that cargo until
further guidance is received from law
enforcement authorities. When a DNL is
issued, the ACAS filer will be contacted
by CBP and TSA using the 24/7 contact
information that must be provided for
all eligible filers. CBP has defined the
process described above as the baseline
scenario, the environment since the
2018 ACAS IFR was implemented. The
analysis of this IFR attempts to measure
any incremental costs, cost savings, or
benefits compared to the baseline
scenario.
Since 2018, the ACAS program has
improved CBP’s ability to ensure cargo
safety and security; however, security
concerns have expanded while the
amount and quality of information
mandated to be transmitted has
remained static. As an example of
expanding security concerns, in recent
months, there have been heightened
concerns about unconventional
incendiary devices being sent in parcels
which have avoided detection and have
caught fire while in transit.50
Experience has shown that the existing
ACAS regulations require further
refinement for CBP to effectively
identify high-risk cargo.51 CBP believes
an expansion of the required ACAS data
elements is needed to conduct effective
pre-loading cargo screening and
targeting measures. This rule will
require inbound air carriers or other
eligible filers to transmit this additional
data in advance of loading so that
appropriate security vetting can occur.
2. Enhanced ACAS Filing
Since 2018, air cargo imports to the
United States have evolved and
increased significantly in volume. CBP
determined that additional ACAS data
requirements are needed to ensure the
safety and security of air cargo entering
the United States. To enhance CBP’s
ability to identify high-risk cargo,
prevent that cargo from being loaded
onto aircraft destined for the United
States, and prevent aircraft with highrisk cargo onboard from departing a
foreign country and entering the United
States, CBP is introducing the enhanced
ACAS filing which contains additional
data element requirements. CBP will
continue to use ATS for screening and
risk assessment. Based on targeting
50 See, e.g., German Firms Warned of Packages
Containing Incendiary Devices, Reuters (Aug. 30,
2024), https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/
german-security-services-warn-danger-packagescontaining-incendiary-devices-2024-08-30/ (last
visited October 18, 2024).
51 Other countries, including Australia and
Canada, have also taken steps to increase security
measures on inbound air freight shipments in
recent months.

PO 00000

Frm 00028

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

results, CBP and TSA officers will
continue to review certain ACAS
shipments and issue referrals for
information, referrals for screening, and
DNL instructions, as discussed above in
the baseline. Additionally, ACAS filers
and other parties involved in the supply
chain must meet the same requirements
as established in the 2018 ACAS IFR,
and will continue to be subject to
penalties and/or claims for liquidated
damages of $5,000 for each violation up
to a maximum of $100,000 per
conveyance arrival for noncompliance
with the enhanced ACAS filing.52
The enhanced ACAS filing will
include new mandatory and conditional
data elements, in addition to the
existing ACAS data elements, which
must be transmitted no later than prior
to the loading of cargo onto an aircraft
that is departing a foreign port bound
for the United States. ACAS filers must
transmit ACAS data elements at the
lowest air waybill level. These data
elements can be provided by any
eligible ACAS filer; however, if any
party in the supply chain does not elect
to provide the enhanced ACAS filing
data, then it must be provided by the air
carrier within the ACAS time frames.
CBP lists the new mandatory and
conditional ACAS data elements below:
1. Consignee email address (mandatory)
2. Consignee phone number
(mandatory)
3. Shipment packing location and/or
scheduled shipment pickup
location (mandatory)
4. Ship to party (mandatory)
5. Verified Known Consignor
(conditional)
6. Shipper email address (conditional)
7. Shipper phone number (conditional)
8. Customer account name (conditional)
9. Customer account issuer (conditional)
10. Customer account number
(conditional)
11. Customer account shipping
frequency/volume (conditional)
12. Customer account establishment
date (conditional)
13. Customer account billing type
(conditional)
14. Unmasked internet protocol (IP)
address or media access control
(MAC) address of the device used
during account creation
(conditional)
15. Unmasked internet protocol (IP)
address or media access control
(MAC) address of the device used to
initiate the shipping transaction
and the unmasked IP address or
MAC address of the device used to
52 See 83 FR 27392 (Jun. 12, 2018) (discussing
amendments to the relevant bond conditions to
account for enforcement of ACAS requirements).

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
file the ACAS filing each time an
ACAS filing is submitted
(conditional)
16. Shipping cost (conditional)
17. Biographic data (conditional)
18. Link to product listing (conditional)
In addition to the data elements listed
above, CBP is also revising the list of
optional data elements. Under the 2018
IFR, CBP encouraged ACAS filers to
transmit data elements that are not
required or additional information
regarding data elements. CBP continues
to encourage these transmissions;
however, CBP determined that
additional guidance was needed in the
form of new optional data elements.
CBP continues to encourage the
transmission of additional optional data
when available. CBP believes that filers
will provide the optional information if
it is collected already and poses no extra
burden to collect. The additional
information will further help CBP target
high-risk shipments. Higher levels of
security will benefit trade members who
have valuable assets, such as aircraft,
involved in the supply chain. CBP lists
the new optional data elements below:
1. Origin of shipment
2. Declared value
3. Harmonized commodity code
4. Transaction type
5. Special handling type
6. Customer account email address
7. Customer account phone number
8. Shipper Manufacturer Identification
(MID) code or Authorized Economic
Operator (AEO) number
9. Consignee importer of record number
10. Regulated agent name, address, and
code
11. ACAS filing type
This IFR will implement the addition
of the enhanced data elements and the
retention of biographic data as noted in
the regulatory text. The process and
requirements to complete an ACAS
filing will continue in the same manner
as the baseline scenario prior to this
IFR, but now with the additional data
elements.

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

3. Population Affected by Rule
CBP expects that this IFR will affect
a number of different trade members
that engage in importing cargo into the
United States in the air environment.
CBP expects that this IFR will affect all
air carriers currently participating in
importing cargo into the United States
and a number of other trade members,
such as freight forwarders, involved in
the process of importing cargo into the
United States in the air environment. In
the regulatory impact analysis for the
ACAS IFR published in 2018, CBP
expected there would be 293 unique

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

ACAS filers affected by the IFR,
including passenger carriers, cargo
carriers, express carriers, and freight
forwarders. CBP was able to obtain the
number of unique ACAS filers for fiscal
years 2020 through 2024.53 The number
of unique filers declined after the
COVID–19 pandemic, but is now
trending upward toward, and remaining
close to, pre-pandemic levels. CBP
anticipates that the number of unique
ACAS filers will remain relatively
constant in the future because trade
members that will transmit enhanced
ACAS data are already involved in
transmitting ACAS data to CBP. The
level of ACAS filers has reached prepandemic levels and CBP believes it
will remain constant at this rate.54 CBP
assumes that the number of filers will
remain constant, and that this IFR will
affect 281 trade members acting as
ACAS filers, largely including passenger
carriers, cargo carriers, express carriers,
and freight forwarders. CBP anticipates
that this IFR will also affect a large
number of other trade members,
including freight forwarders and
customs brokers, that are involved in
the process of importing cargo into the
United States in the air environment.
CBP also anticipates that this IFR will
affect a number of software vendors that
provide data processing services to the
trade community. These companies will
need to adjust their systems to
incorporate the additional enhanced
ACAS data elements for their clients to
provide the enhanced ACAS data
elements to CBP. CBP expects that
around 50 software vendors will be
affected as a result of this IFR.55
4. Time Period of Analysis
To estimate the effects from this IFR,
CBP examines costs and benefits to CBP,
air carriers, and other trade members
involved in the process of importing
cargo into the United States in the air
environment during a 10-year period of
analysis from fiscal years 2024–2033
compared to the baseline scenario (prior
to requiring the enhanced ACAS filing
data elements). Though this rule was
not in place in 2024, many of the
affected parties incurred costs in 2024
53 Data obtained from CBP, National Targeting
Center, Cargo Division, subject matter expert on
Oct. 3, 2024. Number of unique ACAS filers per
fiscal year: 2020—295, 2021—204, 2022—227,
2023—244, 2024—281.
54 Information obtained from CBP, National
Targeting Center, Cargo Division, subject matter
expert on Oct. 7, 2024.
55 CBP, ABI Software Vendors (Sept. 26, 2024),
https://www.cbp.gov/document/guidance/abisoftware-vendors-list (last visited Oct. 21, 2024).
CBP assumes that ABI software vendors that act as
Entry Vendors or Entry Service Bureaus would be
affected by this IFR.

PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52823

in anticipation of this rulemaking, so we
use 2024 as the first year of the analysis
to capture all relevant costs. Moving
forward in this analysis, all references to
years are for fiscal years unless
otherwise noted.
5. ACAS Filings, Referral Data, and
Projections
CBP anticipates that this IFR will not
affect the annual number of ACAS
filings submitted to CBP but may
increase the time burden incurred by
trade members when submitting the
additional data elements for each ACAS
filing.56 To determine how many ACAS
filings will be submitted in future years,
CBP examined recent trends in the
number of ACAS filings. CBP was able
to identify the actual number of ACAS
filings submitted to CBP by air carriers
and other trade members from 2020–
2024.57 Additionally, as an ACAS filing
may be resubmitted several times prior
to departure, we differentiate between
the number of total ACAS filings and
the number of unique ACAS filings.
Total ACAS filings are the total number
of submissions in a given year and
unique ACAS filings are the total
number minus any resubmissions. We
make this differentiation to ensure that
the time burden of submitting an ACAS
filing is not double counted.58
First, we estimate the actual unique
number of ACAS filings from 2020–
2024 and CBP’s estimates for the future
number of unique ACAS filings in Table
4. According to CBP data, the number of
ACAS filings have been increasing as ecommerce has increased significantly,
resulting in a higher volume of
shipments to the United States in the air
environment. In 2020, there were a total
of 237,778,028 unique ACAS filings and
filings increased by 108 percent in 2021
to 493,447,602. Growth slowed in 2022
as unique ACAS filings only increased
by 2 percent to 504,948,978, but ACAS
filings increased by 53 percent in 2023,
and by 62 percent in 2024 when there
were 1,249,182,643 ACAS filings. CBP
subject matter experts anticipate that the
56 CBP expects that this IFR will increase the
number of data elements that need to be included
in the ACAS filings. CBP does not expect that this
IFR will result in additional or fewer ACAS filings
when compared to the baseline scenario.
57 Information obtained from CBP, National
Targeting Center, Cargo Division, subject matter
expert on Oct. 3, 2024.
58 Trade members have noted that they resubmit
data at specific intervals regardless of new
information being added to the filing. For example,
an air carrier may submit the ACAS filing 12 hours
before departure and then resubmit 8 hours before
departure. In these cases, resubmitting the same
data would not increase the time burden because
the resubmission is automated. CBP filters data for
unique filings to ensure that this time burden is not
double counted.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

52824

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

annual number of unique ACAS filings
submitted will continue to increase in
future years as e-commerce continues to
grow; however, CBP does not expect
unique ACAS filings to increase at the
same rate as 2023 and 2024. The rapid
growth of ACAS filings was tied to the
increase of direct business to consumer
shipments, the COVID–19 pandemic,
and the increase in the administrative
exemption limit from $200 to $800
(commonly referred to as the de
minimis limit). CBP believes that
consumers have already adjusted their
behavior to these factors and that the
rapid growth will not continue for the
next 5 years. CBP also notes that
ongoing policy developments, including
recent Executive Order 14324 which
eliminated the tariff exemption for de
minimis shipments starting August 29,
2025, could have significant effects on
the number of unique ACAS filings.59
Since it is too soon to determine the full
impact of such factors affecting the
volume of shipments, CBP presents a
range of estimates for the possible
number of future unique ACAS filings
that will be submitted.
To estimate how many unique ACAS
filings will be submitted in future years,
CBP provides a primary, low, and high
estimate. CBP acknowledges that
currently there is significant uncertainty

on how ongoing and future policy
developments will affect the number of
unique ACAS filings. Specifically, this
uncertainty refers to the effects of
changing tariff rates and the elimination
of the de minimis tariff exemption. It is
too early to know exactly how trade
members will react, but CBP expects
there could be a significant drop in the
number of unique ACAS filings as a
result of this policy change. Thus, CBP
addresses this uncertainty by providing
a wide range of estimates. As CBP’s
primary estimate for the number of
unique ACAS filings that will be
submitted in future years, CBP assumes
the number of unique ACAS filings will
mirror gross domestic product (GDP)
growth each year in the future. CBP
models growth in unique ACAS filings
using the GDP projection developed by
the Energy Information Administration
(EIA) for its ‘‘Annual Energy Outlook
2023.’’ 60 EIA projects real annual GDP
growth ranging from 1.56 percent to
2.11 percent for years 2025 through
2033 (see Table 3). CBP acknowledges
that due to uncertainty from ongoing
policy developments, the actual number
of unique ACAS filings submitted could
be more or less than what CBP expects.
CBP’s high estimate shows how many
unique ACAS filings would be
submitted in future years if the number

of ACAS filings increases by 5 percent
annually (CBP’s high estimate). CBP’s
low estimate assumes that the
elimination of the tariff exemption in
2025 could result in a significant
decrease (15%) in the number of unique
ACAS filings in the first year as trade
adjusts to policy changes. Then CBP
assumes that the number of unique
ACAS filings would continue slowing
by 1 percent each year, as ongoing trade
policy developments could decrease the
overall number of unique ACAS filings
despite increasing economic growth.
According to CBP’s primary estimate, in
future years (2024–2033), trade
members will submit a total of 12.3
billion unique ACAS filings or, on
average, 1.4 billion annually. CBP’s low
and high estimates suggest that the
number of unique ACAS filings in
future years of the period of analysis
could range from 9.2 billion to 14.5
billion or, on average, trade members
will submit 1.0 billion to 1.6 billion
unique ACAS filings annually. CBP
acknowledges that it is too early to tell
what the effect of ongoing policy
decisions will be on the number of
unique ACAS filings in future years,
and CBP intends to revisit these
estimates for the number of future
unique ACAS filings in the final rule.
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P

Table 3. Percentage Change in Gross Domestic Product

59 See, e.g., E.O. 14256, Further Amendment to
Duties Addressing the Synthetic Opioid Supply
Chain in the People’s Republic of China as Applied
to Low-Value Imports, 90 FR 14899 (Apr. 7, 2025).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

60 U.S. Energy Information Administration,
Macroeconomic Indicators: Real Gross Domestic
Product (Reference Case), https://www.eia.gov/
outlooks/aeo/data/browser/#/?id=18-

PO 00000

Frm 00030

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

AEO2023&cases=ref2023&sourcekey=0 (last visited
Nov. 14, 2024).

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.016

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Fiscal Year
Percentage Change of GDP
2025
1.56%
2026
2.11%
2027
2.08%
2028
1.92%
2029
1.71%
1.54%
2030
1.56%
2031
1.81%
2032
1.95%
2033
Source: Author Calculations, and Energy
Information Administration's "Annual Energy
Outlook 2023."

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

52825

Table 4. Millions of Unique and Projected Unique ACAS Filings Annually (2020-2033)
Unique ACAS Filings

2020

Unique ACAS
Filin2:s
238

2021

493

2022

505

2%

2023

772

53%

2024

1,249

62%

Fiscal Year

Future Projections of Unique ACAS Filings
Primary Estimate
(Mirrors GDP)
1,269
2025
1,296
2026
1,322
2027
1,348
2028
1,371
2029
1,392
2030
1,414
2031
1,439
2032
1,467
2033

Percent
Chan2:e 61

108%

Low Estimate*

12,317

Total

1,062
1,051
1,041
1,030
1,020
1,010
1,000
990
980

High Estimate
(5% increase)
1,312
1,377
1,446
1,518
1,594
1,674
1,758
1,846
1,938

9,183

14,463

*CBP's low estimate assumes a 15% decline in unique ACAS filings in 2025 followed by
a 1% decline each year from 2026-2033.

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Next, we estimate the total number of
ACAS filings from 2020–2024 and CBP’s
estimates for the future number of total
ACAS filings, including resubmissions,
in Table 5. According to a sample of
historical data, there are 12.5
resubmissions for every 100 unique
ACAS filings.62 We use this estimate to
61 The rapid growth of ACAS filings from 2020 to
2021 was primarily driven by the increase of direct
business to consumer (B2C) shipments, the COVID–
19 pandemic, and the increase in the administrative
exemption limit from $200 to $800 (commonly
referred to as the de minimis limit). This growth
slowed in 2022 as businesses who were able to
adapt quickly had already shifted their business
models to ship directly to consumers. We see an
increase in ACAS filings in the subsequent years as
companies slower to change adapted and new
companies entered the market that focused on B2C
shipments.
62 Information obtained from CBP, National
Targeting Center, Cargo Division, subject matter
expert on Nov. 26, 2024.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

calculate the estimated total number of
ACAS filings from 2020–2024 by
multiplying the unique number of
filings by 1.125 (1+0.125). CBP subject
matter experts anticipate that the total
rate of resubmissions will remain
constant in future years. This analysis
will apply the rate of resubmissions to
our predicted future unique ACAS
filings and will keep the assumption
that growth will mirror GDP growth
each year in the future. CBP
acknowledges that the actual number of
total ACAS filings submitted could be
more or less than what CBP expects, and
therefore, to show how the number of
total ACAS filings could vary in future
years, CBP provides a range of
estimates. CBP’s low and high estimates
show how many total ACAS filings
would be submitted in future years if
the number of ACAS filings decrease by

PO 00000

Frm 00031

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

15 percent in 2025 and then decline by
1 percent annually (CBP’s low estimate)
and if total ACAS filings increase by 5
percent annually (CBP’s high estimate).
According to CBP’s primary estimate, in
future years (2024–2033), trade
members will submit a total of 13.9
billion total ACAS submissions or, on
average, 1.5 billion annually. CBP’s low
and high estimates suggest that the
number of total ACAS filings in future
years of the period of analysis could
range from 10.3 billion to 16.2 billion
or, on average, trade members will
submit 1.1billion to 1.8 billion total
ACAS filings annually. Trade members
and CBP subject matter experts state
that resubmissions are typically fully
automated and updated based on a preset schedule (i.e., 12 hours before

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.017

BILLING CODE 9111–14–C

52826

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

departure, 8 hours before departure,
etc.). Therefore, CBP will use the unique

number of ACAS filings for all future
calculations unless otherwise stated.63

Table 5. Millions ofActual and Projected Total ACAS Filings Annually (2020-2033)
Actual Total ACAS Filings
Total ACAS
Filine:s

Fiscal Year

Percent Change

2020

268

2021

555

108%

2022

568

2%

2023

868

53%

2024

1,405

62%

Future Projections of Total ACAS Filings
Primary Estimate
(Mirrors GDP)
2025
1,427
2026
1,457
2027
1,488
2028
1,516
2029
1,542
2030
1,566
2031
1,590
2032
1,619
2033
1,651

Low Estimate*

1,195
1,183
1,171
1,159
1,147
1,136
1,125
1,113
1,102

High Estimate
(5% increase)
1,476
1,549
1,627
1,708
1,794
1,883
1,977
2,076
2,097

this IFR will not result in a higher
percentage of total ACAS filings being
targeted for manual review, issued
referrals for information, issued referrals
for screening, or issued DNL
instructions when compared to the
baseline. Therefore, CBP does not
include the time associated with
manually reviewing filings, issuing
referrals for information, issuing
referrals for screening, or issuing DNL
instructions as a cost.

CBP acknowledges it may be possible
that when ACAS filers submit the
additional enhanced ACAS data
elements, this could result in additional
ACAS shipments being targeted and
needing to be manually reviewed by a
CBP or TSA officer compared to the
baseline. However, CBP anticipates that
the additional data elements will help
CBP or TSA officers validate existing
business relationships and patterns,
assisting in the identification of
legitimate shipments which could
reduce the number of ACAS shipments
that will be targeted for manual
review.64 Therefore, CBP expects that
this IFR will have a negligible effect on
the overall percentage of ACAS
shipments that need to be manually
reviewed when compared to the
baseline scenario. During future years of
the period of analysis, CBP believes that

Because the ACAS program is already
fully operational and developed in a
CBP IT system, CBP did not have to
develop an entirely new IT system to
implement the changes for this IFR.
There was a one-time development cost
for adjusting the ACAS program to

63 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.

64 Information obtained from CBP, National
Targeting Center, Cargo Division, subject matter
expert on Oct. 3, 2024.
65 Data obtained from CBP’s Office of Information
Technology, Targeting and Analysis Systems

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

6. Costs
CBP IT System Costs

PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

include the new enhanced ACAS data
elements in CBP’s system. CBP’s Office
of Information Technology reports that
this one-time development cost was
$240,182 in 2024.65 Beyond the system
costs incurred from developing and
implementing the enhanced ACAS data
elements into the ACAS program, CBP
expects to experience ongoing system
operation and maintenance costs each
year associated with the enhanced
ACAS filing data elements. According to
CBP estimates, ongoing maintenance of
the ACAS program related to the
enhanced ACAS data elements will cost
CBP a total of $831,195 during the
period of analysis or, on average,
$92,355 annually.66 Table 6 below
displays CBP’s system costs related to
the development and maintenance of
the enhanced ACAS filing data elements
during the pilot period. CBP estimates
Program Directorate, subject matter expert on Sept.
26, 2024.
66 Data obtained from CBP’s Office of Information
Technology, Targeting and Analysis Systems
Program Directorate, subject matter expert on Sept.
26, 2024.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.018

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

10,331
16,188
Total
13,857
* CBP's low estimate assumes a 15% decline in unique ACAS filings in 2025 followed by a 1% decline
each year from 2026-2033.

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
that the total CBP IT system costs during
the pilot period was approximately

52827

$1,071,377 or, on average, $107,138
annually.

Table 6. CBP IT System Costs (in undiscounted 2024 US. dollars)
Development

2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033

$240,182
$82,355
$84,855
$87,355
$89,855
$92,355
$94,855
$97,355
$99,855
$102,355

Sub Total
Total Costs
CBP Opportunity Costs

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

As stated earlier, CBP believes that
this IFR will not result in a higher
percentage of total ACAS filings being
targeted for manual review when
compared to the baseline.68 CBP expects
that the time burden to manually review
an ACAS filing with the additional
enhanced data elements would be the
same as the time burden to manually
review an ACAS filing before this IFR.69
Additionally, CBP does not anticipate
that providing the enhanced ACAS data
elements will result in more referrals for
information, referrals for screening, and
DNL instructions when compared to the
baseline. This rule will not result in
more targeting or more referrals, and
instead, will improve the quality of the
targeting and referrals that are made. As
such, CBP does not expect that this rule
67 CBP estimates that the cost to maintain the
system will increase each year as the technology
ages.
68 Information obtained from CBP, National
Targeting Center, Cargo Division, subject matter
expert on Oct. 3, 2024. Additional data could lead
to more referrals, but the additional data also helps
CBP identify legitimate shipments as the data could
validate established relationships and patterns and
reduce the number of referrals. Therefore, CBP
assumes that the percentage of total ACAS filings
that will result in a referral should remain relatively
constant in future years compared to the baseline.
69 Information obtained from CBP, National
Targeting Center, Cargo Division, subject matter
expert on Oct. 18, 2024. CBP expects that manual
review of ACAS shipments targeted for review will
not necessarily require the reviewing officers to
review each data element or to resolve each data
element. Instead, the data elements will assist the
reviewing officer to better understand the totality of
the circumstances.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

Operations and
Maintenance 67

$240,182
$831,195
$1,071,377

will increase time spent by CBP and
TSA.
However, if CBP’s assumption is
inaccurate and the submission of the
enhanced ACAS data elements results
in a higher percentage of ACAS filings
being targeted for manual review, CBP
and TSA officers would incur added
costs to review and resolve those
additional ACAS filings. CBP notes that
the time burden to manually review an
ACAS filing varies significantly based
on the complexity of the ACAS filing.
CBP estimates that the time burden to
manually review an ACAS filing can
range from 5 minutes for a simple filing
to as much as 60 minutes for a complex
filing. CBP assumes that the average
time to manually review an ACAS filing
will be around 10 minutes. Therefore, if
submitting the enhanced ACAS data
elements results in a higher percentage
of ACAS filings being referred for
manual review, then CBP assumes that
each additional manual review above
the baseline will result in a 10-minute
time burden to CBP. CBP uses the
average hourly wage rate for a CBP
officer of $99.33, to estimate that the
average added cost will be around
$16.56 to review an additional ACAS
filing.70 In summary, CBP does not
expect that this rule will increase the
number of manual reviews by CBP
officers, but to the extent that it does,
70 CBP bases this wage on the FY 2024 salary,
benefits, premium pay and non-salary costs of the
national average of CBP Officer Positions, which is
equal to a GS–11, Step 10. Source: Email
correspondence with CBP’s Office of Finance on
June 17, 2024.

PO 00000

Frm 00033

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

the additional opportunity cost will be
about $16.56 per review.
Trade Member IT System Costs
Based on numerous conversations
with trade members throughout the
course of this analysis, CBP estimates
that all ACAS filers and some other
trade members involved in the process
of importing goods into the United
States in the air environment will incur
IT system costs as a result of this IFR.
Additionally, trade members have
experienced costs to keep IT systems in
line with CBP’s ACAS Implementation
Guide.71 CBP reports these costs
because trade members have adjusted
their systems to meet CBP’s request for
more information to improve targeting
efficiency. The cost to adjust IT systems
will vary significantly depending on the
trade member. Most affected trade
members have existing systems for
completing ACAS filings and will not
need to develop entirely new systems,
and instead, would adjust their existing
systems to meet the new requirements
of the enhanced ACAS filing. Based on
feedback from trade members, the
investment needed will vary based on
the size of the affected party. Larger
trade members that manage their own
integrated IT systems will have
significantly higher costs than smaller to
medium sized trade members.
Additionally, many smaller trade
71 The most recent version of the ACAS
Implementation Guide can be found at https://
www.cbp.gov/document/guides/air-cargo-advancescreening-acas-implementation-guide (last visited
May 16, 2025).

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.019

Fiscal Year

52828

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

members will have minimal IT system
adjustments as they rely heavily on
purchasing software packages from
software vendors to provide ACAS data.
In order to estimate the total IT
system costs to trade members as a
result of this rule, CBP provides
estimates for each category of trade
member. First, CBP categorizes ACAS
filers into small, medium, or largevolume filers based on how many ACAS

filings the entity submitted in 2024. In
2024, there were approximately 1.2
billion ACAS filings and 281 unique
filers. CBP analyzed the number of
ACAS filings per company in 2024 to
decide size categories. First, we
calculated the average number of filings
per company per day by dividing the
total number of ACAS filings per
company by 365 days. Based on
feedback from trade members, CBP

assumes that large companies file, on
average, over 5,000 ACAS filings a day.
Medium companies, on average, file
between 101 and 5,000 filings a day,
and small companies will file, on
average, 100 or fewer filings a day. The
resulting distribution is 39 largevolume, 88 medium-volume, and 154
small-volume filers. See Table 7. CBP
assumes that the future number of filers
will remain constant at 281.

Size of company

Number of ACAS filers

Small volume
Medium volume

154

88

Large volume

39

Total ACAS Filers

281

First, we estimate the costs faced by
large and medium trade members to
reprogram their internal systems to
match CBP’s ACAS Implementation
Guide published in August 2024.72
Representatives from trade members
estimate that updating systems to match
the latest guide cost $139,600
(undiscounted 2024 U.S. dollars) per
firm. Due to limited feedback, this
analysis assumes that large and medium
firms faced similar costs to update their
systems to match guidance. CBP
requests public comment on this
assumption. Additionally, CBP assumes
this is a one-time cost that trade
members experienced in 2024.
Next, we estimate the cost that large
firms will pay to further reprogram their
internal IT systems to match the data
elements in this IFR. According to

feedback from large trade members,
each member will experience an initial
cost of $900,000 (undiscounted 2024
U.S. dollars).73 After reprogramming
their systems, each large-volume filer
will experience an operating and
maintenance cost of $90,000 per year.
On average, a large-volume filer will pay
$1,620,000 ($900,000 (cost to reprogram
internal IT system) + ($90,000 (yearly
cost of maintenance) × 8 (years in the
regulatory period where maintenance is
needed)) to further update its IT systems
as a result of this IFR. Costs for largevolume filers are presented in Table 8.
CBP requests comments on the cost of
updating IT systems.
Medium-volume filers will also have
to further reprogram their IT systems as
a result of this IFR. According to trade
members, the initial cost to these filers

72 CBP, Air Cargo Advance Screening (ACAS)
Implementation Guide, version 2.3.1 (Aug. 30,
2024), https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/202409/ACAS%20IG%20v2.3.1_508.pdf (last visited
Nov. 25, 2024).

73 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

PO 00000

Frm 00034

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

will be $20,000 (undiscounted 2024
U.S. dollars).74 After reprogramming
their systems, each medium-volume
filer will experience an operating and
maintenance cost of $10,000 per year.
On average, a medium-volume filer will
pay $100,000 ($20,000 (cost to
reprogram the system) + ($10,000
(yearly cost of maintenance) × 8 (years
in the regulatory period where
maintenance is needed)) = $100,000) to
update its IT systems as a result of this
IFR. Costs for medium-volume filers are
presented in Table 8. CBP requests
comments on the cost of updating IT
systems.
74 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. During these discussions larger
companies indicated that they were more willing to
substantially change their IT systems to reduce time
burden. Additionally, large companies have
extremely complex IT systems. Whereas, medium
filers mentioned they would not have to make as
many changes. Information obtained in October
2024.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.020

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Table 7. ACAS Filers by Size

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

52829

Table 8. ACAS Filers IT Costs (in undiscounted 2024 U.S. Dollars)

No. of
Companies

2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033

Development

39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

75 CBP, Air Cargo Advance Screening (ACAS)
Implementation Guide, version 2.3.1 (Aug. 30,
2024), https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/202409/ACAS%20IG%20v2.3.1_508.pdf (last visited
Nov. 25, 2024).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Operations and
Maintenance

No. of
Companies

Development

Operations and
Maintenance

$0
$0
$3,510,000
$3,510,000
$3,510,000
$3,510,000
$3,510,000
$3,510,000
$3,510,000
$3,510,000

88
88
88
88
88
88
88
88
88
88

$12,284,800
$1,760,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0

$0
$0
$880,000
$880,000
$880,000
$880,000
$880,000
$880,000
$880,000
$880,000

$5,444,400
$35,100,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0

Small-volume ACAS filers generally
do not program their own systems to file
ACAS, but instead pay for access to
software developed by vendors for that
purpose. According to interviews with
small-volume ACAS filers and software
vendors, any changes to the software to
comply with ACAS requirements are
made at no cost to the customer. As
such, this rule will have no software
costs for small-volume filers. CBP
requests public comment on this
assumption.
Software vendors incurred costs to
reprogram software to match CBP’s
ACAS Implementation Guide published
in August 2024.75 Representatives from
trade members estimate that updating
systems to match the latest guide cost
$55,920 per firm (undiscounted 2024
U.S. dollars). Due to limited feedback,
this analysis assumes that large and
small software vendors faced similar
costs to update their systems to match
the latest guidance. CBP requests public
comment on this assumption.
Additionally, CBP assumes this is a onetime cost that trade members
experienced in 2024.

Jkt 268001

Medium-Volume Filers

Software vendors will also incur costs
to update their platforms to accept the
enhanced data elements in this IFR.
Small-volume filers rely on software
vendors to update their software based
on the latest regulations. Based on
conversations with software vendors
and their clients, CBP expects that in
the situations where trade members
purchase the software necessary to
provide the ACAS data, the costs to
update the software to comply with this
rule will be incurred by the software
vendors at no cost to the clients as the
existing contract provides that the
software will stay up to date with any
changing filing requirements. Therefore,
CBP assumes that the total costs to
software vendors to adjust their systems
accurately reflects the total costs to
smaller trade members that rely on their
software. There are 50 approved
software providers and CBP finds that
there are 11 large vendors and 39 small
vendors.76 CBP assumes that each large
76 CBP used Dun & Bradstreet Hoovers business
database to obtain business level data on the
software vendors identified by CBP to be affected
by this IFR. CBP then compared the number of
employees or revenue for each company with the
U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) size
standards to determine if that company is a small
entity. The SBA size standards can be found at
https://www.sba.gov/document/support-table-size-

PO 00000

Frm 00035

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

Total Costs
$17,729,200
$36,860,000
$4,390,000
$4,390,000
$4,390,000
$4,390,000
$4,390,000
$4,390,000
$4,390,000
$4,390,000

vendor will have an upfront cost of
$140,000 with operating and
maintenance costs of $40,000 that they
pay in 2025.77 On average, a large
vendor will pay $460,000 ($140,000
(cost to reprogram the system) +
($40,000 (yearly cost of maintenance) ×
8 (years in the regulatory period where
maintenance is needed)) = $100,000) as
a result of this IFR. Small vendors will
have an upfront cost of $50,000, with
operating and maintenance costs of
$5,000 that they pay in 2025.78 On
average, a small vendor will pay
$90,000 ($50,000 (cost to reprogram the
system) + ($5,000 (yearly cost of
maintenance) × 8 (years in the
regulatory period where maintenance is
needed)) = $90,000) as a result of this
IFR. Table 9 provides a breakdown by
category of trade members. CBP requests
public comment on the IT costs as a
result of the rule.
standards (last visited Dec. 31, 2024). Sampling was
conducted in 2024.
77 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.
78 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.021

Large-Volume Filers
Fiscal
Year

52830

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
Table 9. Software Provider IT Costs (in undiscounted 2024 US. Dollars)

2024
2025

11

$1,540,000

$0

No.of
Companies

Development

Operations and
Maintenance

Total

39

$2,180,880

$0

$2,796,000

$1,950,000

$3,490,000

2026

11

$0

$440,000

39
39

$0

0
$195,000

2027

11

$0

$440,000

39

$0

$195,000

$635,000

2028
2029

11
11

$0
$0

$440,000
$440,000

39

$0
$0

$195,000
$195,000

$635,000
$635,000

2030

11

$0

11
11

$0
$0

$440,000
$440,000

$0

2031
2032

$195,000
$195,000

$635,000
$635,000

$195,000

$635,000

2033

11

$0

$195,000

$635,000

This IFR requires ACAS filers to
submit biographic data elements of a
customer and the date and time when
this information was collected.
Additionally, CBP may, following prior
notification from CBP to ACAS filers,
require ACAS filers to store a copy of a
government-issued photo identification
document for 3 years for potential
inspection. There will be a cost to filers
to store this information. Because of
differing existing data storage capacities
for different filers and privacy
requirements in foreign countries, CBP
notes that this could lead to significant
variations in the costs of storing this
information per ACAS filer. CBP does
not know exactly how much this data
storage will cost ACAS filers, but to
illustrate the potential costs, CBP
provides an estimate below. CBP
assumes that, on average, an ACAS filer
will incur costs of approximately $200
annually to secure sufficient space to
store a copy of the photo identification
documents.79 Therefore, CBP estimates
that the total annual cost to the 281
ACAS filers would be around $56,200
(undiscounted 2024 U.S. dollars) each
year. CBP requests public comment on
the cost of storing copies of customers’
government-issued photo identification.

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Small Software Vendors

79 CBP based this cost estimate on the average
cost of cloud storage space across 10 cloud service
products for around 1TB of cloud storage, which
would allow for each ACAS filer to store around
300,000 photos annually. Sources: CloudZero: ‘The
2025 Cloud Storage Price Guide’’, July 14, 2025,
https://www.cloudzero.com/blog/cloud-storagepricing/. Accessed August 11, 2025.
10StoredBits.com: ‘‘Photo Storage Calculator:
Estimated Storage Required for Photos’’, https://
storedbits.com/photo-storage-calculator/. Accessed
August 8, 2025.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

39
39
39

$440,000

39

$0
$0

$440,000

39

$0

Trade Member Opportunity Costs
In addition to costs associated with
adjusting and maintaining IT systems,
trade members may face an added time
burden to submit the enhanced ACAS
data elements. Based on feedback from
trade members, most ACAS filers do not
actually incur time burdens to compile
the data for the ACAS filing as trade
members submit the air waybills and
ACAS data to the filer. In this situation,
the ACAS filer acts as a conduit,
accepting the ACAS data from the
customer and transmitting the ACAS
filing on the customer’s behalf. In
addition, with respect to the original set
of ACAS data elements, these data
elements are already needed for other
purposes within the ordinary course of
business, so there is not an additional
time burden for gathering that
information. ACAS filers have
automated this process such that there
is no time burden to the ACAS filers.
This is also the case for the enhanced
ACAS data as ACAS filers report that
other than software costs, they do not
anticipate an additional cost to submit
the enhanced ACAS data.
Filers themselves do not have an
opportunity cost to submit the enhanced
ACAS data, as it is an automated
transmission of information in their
systems. However, CBP has learned
through its interviews that other trade
members will bear an opportunity cost
to gather this data and provide it to the
ACAS filer. While the basic ACAS data
was already provided on a routine basis
to the filer for other purposes, that is not
the case for all of the enhanced ACAS
data. CBP assumes the time burden to
provide these additional data elements
will be incurred across a number of

PO 00000

Frm 00036

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

$635,000

companies engaging in the importation
of air cargo into the United States, such
as freight forwarders, exporters,
importers, etc., and will vary depending
on the business model used; thus, CBP
provides these cost estimates to the
trade as a whole.
CBP met with several trade members
that engage in importing goods into the
United States in the air environment
and worked with them to develop a list
of data elements that meets the security
needs of CBP without creating undue
burden to the public. Based on feedback
from trade members, CBP acknowledges
that, for certain trade members, some of
the data elements may be difficult to
obtain.80 Specifically, for foreign-based
trade members, there are concerns about
the changes that need to be made to
obtain some of the data elements. Some
trade members do not currently track
the unmasked IP address from
customers or other trade members.
Another element of concern is the link
to product description URL, as some
trade members do not currently obtain
that information from customers.81 CBP
notes that trade members have the
incentive to be efficient and CBP
expects trade members to automate the
processes of obtaining and providing the
additional enhanced ACAS data
elements, as much as possible. CBP
nonetheless anticipates that there will
80 CBP notes that most of the enhanced ACAS
data elements are conditional, and in most
situations, ACAS filers or their customers will not
be providing all additional data elements.
81 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.022

Fiscal
Year

Large Software Vendors
Operations
No.of
Development
and
Companies
Maintenance
11
$615,120
$0

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
be some added time burden for these
trade members.
During the enhanced ACAS program
development process, several trade
members expressed concerns about the
public burden imposed by the new
information collection requirements. To
reduce public burden, CBP has made
certain data elements conditional which
means that those data elements are only
required under certain circumstances.
The majority of the new conditional
data elements are only required if the
shipper is not a Verified Known
Consignor. In addition to the existence
or absence of a Verified Known
Consignor, certain conditional data
elements are only required if additional
circumstances exist. These additional
circumstances generally refer to the
assignment of certain codes under the
customer account shipping frequency/
volume data element, with some
exceptions. According to conversations
with trade members and subject matter
experts, CBP estimates that 85% of
shipments will come from accounts
with a Verified Known Consignor or
from customers that have a shipping
frequency code of regular/daily shipper
or high-volume shipper and there will
be no time burden to submit an ACAS
filing.82 Feedback from industry
indicates that the process to submit
ACAS filings is fully automated and, if
the above condition is met, has no time

burden because the data elements they
are required to provide already exist in
their systems and the software
modifications discussed above will
seamlessly transmit that data to CBP.
However, for accounts that are not from
a Verified Known Consignor or from
customers that have a shipping
frequency of regular/daily shipper or
high-volume shipper, there will be a
time burden associated with submitting
an ACAS filing. Due to the automated
nature of ACAS filing, trade members
will need to update systems to compile
needed information or capture new
information. CBP requests public
comment on the percentage of
customers who will have a Verified
Known Consignor or have a shipping
frequency of regular/daily shipper or
high-volume shipper. Additionally, CBP
requests comments on the assumption
that shipments made by Verified Known
Consignor or from customers that have
a shipping frequency of regular/daily
shipper or high-volume shipper will
pose no additional time burden per
ACAS filing.
CBP anticipates that trade members
will incur an additional time burden of
around 1 minute (0.017 hours) to submit
the average enhanced ACAS filing if the
customer is not a Verified Known
Consignor or does not ship with a
frequency of regular/daily shipper or
high-volume shipper.83 Trade members

82 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in November
2024.

83 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

PO 00000

Frm 00037

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52831

believe that 85% of shipments have an
associated Verified Known Consignor
number or a shipping frequency of
regular/daily shipper or high-volume
shipper and will incur no time burden
to submit an ACAS filing. To estimate
the time burden costs to trade members
from submitting enhanced ACAS filings,
CBP multiplied the additional time
burden per ACAS filing (.017 hours) by
CBP’s range of estimates for the future
number of ACAS filings submitted each
year that do not have a Verified Known
Consignor number or a shipping
frequency of regular/daily shipper or
high-volume shipper (15%). According
to CBP’s primary estimate, from 2025–
2033, trade members will incur an
added time burden of 30,793,324 hours
or, on average, 3.4 million hours
annually. From 2024–2033, CBP’s low
and high estimates suggest that the time
burden could range from 22,956,960
hours to 36,157,256 hours or, on
average, 2.5 million hours to 4 million
hours annually.84 Table 10 below
displays the affected numbers of ACAS
filings and CBP’s range estimates for the
total time burden to trade members to
submit the additional enhanced ACAS
data elements as required by this IFR.
CBP requests public comments on the
time burden incurred by shippers who
are not a Verified Known Consignor or
have a shipping frequency of regular/
daily shipper or high-volume shipper.
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
84 Average annual time burdens are for 2025–
2033 and exclude 2024 since CBP does not
anticipate an added time burden in that year.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

52832

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
Table 10. Estimated Time Burden of Trade Members (in hours)

Fiscal
Year

ACAS Filings with Time Burdens 1
High
Primary
Low
Estimate
Estimate
Estimate2
(5%)
187,377,396
187,377,396
187,377,396
190,305,123
159,270,787
196,746,266
194,326,661
157,678,079
206,583,580
216,912,759
198,361,384
156, IO 1,298
202,164,181
154,540,285
227,758,396
205,618,389
152,994,882
239,146,316
208,789,697
151,464,934
251,103,632
212,055,377
149,950,284
263,658,814
215,887,295
148,450,781
276,841,754
220,091,332
146,966,274
290,683,842

Estimated Time Burden
Primary
Estimate

Low
Estimate2

High
Estimate
(5%)
0
3,279,I04
3,443,060
3,615,213
3,795,973
3,985,772
4,185,061
4,394,314
4,614,029
4,844,731

0
0
2024 3
3,171,752
2,654,513
2025
3,238,778
2,627,968
2026
3,306,023
2,601,688
2027
3,369,403
2,575,671
2028
3,426,973
2,549,915
2029
3,479,828
2,524,416
2030
3,534,256
2,499,171
2031
3,598,122
2,474,180
2032
3,668,189
2,449,438
2033
Total 2,034,976,836 1,564,795,002
2,356,812,756
30,793,324
22,956,960
36,157,256
203,497,684
156,479,500
235,681,276
3,421,480
2,550,773
4,017,473
Average
Notes:
1 The affected number of ACAS filings was calculated by taking the unique number of ACAS filings in Table 4
and multiplying by the percentage of filings that are estimated to not be VKC or a shipping frequency of
regular/daily shipper or high-volume shipper.
2 CBP's low estimate assumes a 15% decline in 2025, followed by an annual 1% decline in following years.
3 For the year 2024, carriers did not incur any burden hours because the elements that carriers were required to
report were already ones they had in their systems or were easy to obtain.

To calculate the cost to trade members
from this additional time burden, CBP
multiplied the time burden hours by the
average loaded hourly wage rate for
importers of $35.59.85 CBP calculated
this loaded wage rate by first
multiplying the Bureau of Labor
Statistics’ (BLS) 2023 median hourly
wage rate for Cargo and Freight Agents
($23.24), which CBP assumes best
represents the wage for importers, by
the ratio of BLS’ Q4 2023 total
compensation to wages and salaries for
Office and Administrative Support
occupations (1.4774), the assumed
occupational group for importers, to
account for non-salary employee
benefits.86 CBP assumes an annual

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

85 CBP assumes that this is the most appropriate
wage rate for the trade member personnel that
actually compile and provide the ACAS data and
information.
86 Source of median wage rate: U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Occupational Employment and

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

growth rate of 3.64% based on the prior
year’s change in the implicit price
deflator, published by the Bureau of
Economic Analysis.87 According to
Wage Statistics, ‘‘May 2023 National Occupational
Employment and Wage Estimates United States.’’
Updated April 3, 2024. Available at https://
www.bls.gov/oes/2023/may/oes_nat.htm. Accessed
June 4, 2024. The total compensation to wages and
salaries ratio is equal to the total compensation cost
per hour worked for Office and Administrative
Support occupations ($33.98) divided by the wages
and salaries cost per hour worked for the same
occupation category ($23.00). See ‘‘Table 2.
Employer Costs for Employee Compensation for
civilian workers by occupational and industry
group.’’ Bureau of Labor Statistics, ‘‘Employer Costs
for Employee Compensation—December 2023.’’
Released March 13, 2024. Available at https://
www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_
03132024.pdf. Accessed June 4, 2024.
87 To adjust to 2024 dollars, multiply by the
2022–2023 percent change in the Bureau of
Economic Analysis’s Implicit Price Deflators for
Gross Domestic Product (122.273/117.973–1). See
‘‘Table 1.1.9. Implicit Price Deflators for Gross
Domestic Product,’’ Line 1 Gross Domestic Product,
annual. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Updated

PO 00000

Frm 00038

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

CBP’s primary estimate from 2024–
2033, total opportunity costs to trade
members from submitting the additional
ACAS data elements will be around
$1.095 billion. Additionally, CBP’s low
and high estimates for the number of
ACAS filings that will be submitted
show that from 2024–2033 the
opportunity costs to trade members
could range from $0.817 billion to
$1.286 billion. Table 11 below shows
CBP’s estimates for the opportunity cost
to trade members from providing the
additional data elements required for
the enhanced ACAS filing.
May 30, 2024. Available at https://apps.bea.gov/
iTable/?reqid=19&step=2&isuri=1&categories=
survey#eyJhcHBpZCI6MTksInN0ZXBzIjpbM
SwyLDMsM10sImRhdGEiOltbImNhdGVnb
3JpZXMiLCJTdXJ2ZXkiXSxbIk5JUEFfVGFib
GVfTGlzdCIsIjEzIl0sWyJGaXJzdF9ZZWFy
IiwiMjAxNiJdLFsiTGFzdF9ZZWFyIiwiMjAyNCJ
dLFsiU2NhbGUiLCIwIl0sWyJTZXJpZXMiL
CJBIl1dfQ==. Accessed June 4, 2024.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.023

BILLING CODE 9111–14–C

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

52833

Table 11. Estimated Time Burden Costs (in undiscounted 2024 U.S. Dollars)

Primary Estimate

2024

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

High Estimate
$0

2025

$112,882,655

$94,474,122

$116,703,327

2026

$115,268,098

$93,529,381

$122,538,493

2027

$117,661,361

$92,594,087

$128,665,418

2028

$119,917,054

$91,668,146

$135,098,689

2029

$121,965,974

$90,751,464

$141,853,623

2030

$123,847,088

$89,843,950

$148,946,304

2031

$125,784,181

$88,945,510

$156,393,620

2032

$128,057,147

$88,056,055

$164,213,301

2033

$130,550,842

$87,175,495

$172,423,966

Total

$1,095,934,401

$817,038,210

$1,286,836,741

Trade Member Miscellaneous Costs
CBP anticipates that some trade
members will also incur time burden
costs related to training their staff and
becoming familiar with the process of
providing data elements required in the
enhanced ACAS filings. CBP expects
that the training costs will vary
depending on the trade member and
larger companies will likely incur larger
costs to train their staff and to become
familiar with the new processes. CBP
spoke with several trade members to
determine the cost of training staff
members and took the average of these
costs. Based on feedback from the trade,
CBP assumes that each filer will spend
an average of $12,200 on training staff
members and customers on the required
elements. In 2025, this will cost the 281
trade members $3,428,200 (in
undiscounted 2024 U.S. dollars). CBP
requests public comment on the costs to
train staff members for large and small
trade members on the additional
enhanced data element requirements.
See Table 12 for summary of
miscellaneous costs.
Requiring additional ACAS data
elements will likely also result in other
costs to trade members beyond IT
systems, opportunity costs to provide
the ACAS data, and training costs.
Implementing new requirements for the
ACAS filing can result in disruptions to
supply chain and result in significant
costs. Inbound air carriers are the
responsible party for loading and
transporting cargo into the United
States, and those carriers are required to
submit the ACAS filing if another trade
member does not elect to do so, but the
carriers may also submit an ACAS filing
in addition to an ACAS filing submitted

VerDate Sep<11>2014

Estimated Time Burden Costs
Low Estimate
$0
$0

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

by another trade member. Because the
loading of cargo onto aircraft is the
responsibility of the carrier, the carriers
have the right to decide whether or not
the ACAS data provided by freight
forwarders or other trade members is
sufficient to load the cargo for import to
the United States. When carriers begin
transitioning to requiring additional
ACAS data elements, trade members
who provide the ACAS data to the
carriers may not have access to all of the
data elements that carriers are requiring,
which could result in the cargo not
being shipped or being delayed until
data can be researched and provided to
the carrier. This situation could be
costly to trade members.88 CBP cannot
accurately predict the frequency at
which this is currently occurring or the
frequency at which this will occur after
the enhanced ACAS data requirements
are implemented. In recognition of these
challenges and to ensure trade members
will have sufficient time to adjust to the
new requirements, CBP will phase in
full enforcement over a 12-month period
following publication of the IFR.
However, willful and egregious violators
will be subject to enforcement actions at
all times. CBP obtained feedback
suggesting that the average carrier could
lose up to $30,000 a day in lost revenue
when shipments are rejected and not
moved.89
88 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.
89 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.

PO 00000

Frm 00039

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

The IFR could also cause significant
disruptions to the supply chain, and
depending on the time required to
research and provide the necessary data
to carriers, other trade members may
decide to reroute their cargo shipment
from the air environment to the sea
environment.90 However, after speaking
with trade members, CBP updated
requirements to make certain data
elements conditional. Trade members
and CBP believe that this change will
minimize the risk of shipping delays.91
Additionally, CBP will be flexible in
implementing enforcement to allow
time for trade members to update
systems. CBP requests public comment
on the costs of shipping delays and how
often they may occur.
CBP received feedback from trade
members about certain enhanced ACAS
data elements not being readily
available to foreign-based companies.92
The supply chain processes of foreign
and U.S. carriers vary in operational
structure and complexity. The time to
collect ACAS data for foreign carriers
90 Importing cargo into the United States through
the sea environment has different requirements for
import data compared to the air environment. As
a result of this rule, it may be possible that there
could be a slight transfer in cargo movement from
air to sea but CBP expects this will be negligible
since moving cargo by sea can be significantly
slower and not practicable in a company that
engages in B2C shipments (which suggests that
these modes of transport are not readily
substitutable in many instances).
91 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.
92 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.024

Fiscal Year

52834

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

may be significantly longer compared to
U.S. carriers due to their varying
operational practices. For U.S. carriers,
the freight forwarders typically provide
the ACAS data at the house air waybill
level; however, under foreign carrier
operations, the carriers typically submit
the house air waybill, not the freight
forwarder. Therefore, foreign carriers
may not be able to rely on the freight
forwarder to provide certain ACAS data,
unlike the U.S. carriers. Additionally,
feedback from some trade members
suggests that they may need to adjust
their business practices to start
requiring new data elements from
customers that they do not currently
request that data from in order to obtain
all the enhanced ACAS data elements.93
As a result, there could be some
significant administrative costs to
foreign companies to alter their export
business practices so that foreign-based
ACAS filers can obtain and transmit all
the enhanced ACAS filing data elements
in the appropriate time frame before
loading cargo onto aircraft. CBP
acknowledges that for some scenarios,
some data elements may be difficult to
obtain or may not exist. To mitigate
issues with the existence of information
and to add flexibility to the enhanced
ACAS requirements, CBP developed
alternative data transmission
requirements, such as allowing ACAS
filers to choose to transmit either the
shipment packing location or the
scheduled shipment pickup location, or
both. Additionally, for certain
conditional data elements, CBP
structured the conditions such that the
information would not be required if it
does not exist under certain
circumstances. For example, when the
immediate transaction code is assigned
under the customer account shipping
frequency/volume data element, a
customer account name would not exist
and would not be required.94 CBP
expects that trade members will attempt
to automate this process through their
IT systems as much as possible to
streamline the process, and CBP notes
that some of these costs may be
93 Data obtained from CBP discussion with trade
members on the impacts to trade from
implementing the enhanced ACAS filing data
elements.
94 The customer account name is required under
the new 19 CFR 122.48b(d)(4)(iii).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

captured in the IT systems development
and operations and maintenance costs
discussed above. However, the costs to
adjust business practices could go
beyond IT system adjustments. For
example, companies may have to
allocate staff to refine their current
procedures to comply with new
regulations. CBP does not know the
extent of these administrative costs but
recognizes that they could be
significant, based on feedback from
trade members.95 After speaking with
trade members, CBP updated certain
data elements to be conditional. Based
on conversations with the trade while
developing this rule and the economic
analysis, CBP believes that this will
minimize the burden on foreign
businesses. CBP requests comments
from trade members on these potential
costs due to altering foreign business
practices to comply with the
requirements of the enhanced ACAS
filing.
In the air environment, trade
associations help trade members stay
informed and compliant with air cargo
regulations and help set standards
throughout the industry. CBP
anticipates that these associations will
incur some costs related to adjusting the
industry standards for air cargo as a
result of increasing the number of data
elements required for the ACAS filing.
Based on feedback from trade members,
CBP anticipates that trade associations
will incur costs of around $50,000 to
adjust standards to meet the new
requirements of the enhanced ACAS
filing regulation.96 Additionally, the
trade associations will incur other time
burdens to educate the industry through
working groups, webinars, and inperson events to ensure industry
compliance. CBP expects that the time
burden to trade association staff from
these tasks would be around 50 hours.97
95 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.
96 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with Trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.
97 Information obtained from CBP discussions
with Trade members on the impacts from
implementing enhanced ACAS filing data

PO 00000

Frm 00040

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

In order to monetize the time burden of
trade association staff, CBP multiplies
the time burden of 50 hours by $106.51
(the fully loaded wage rate for in-house
attorneys).98 CBP calculated this loaded
wage rate by first multiplying the
Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) 2023
median hourly wage rate for Lawyers
($70.08), which CBP assumes best
represents the wage for attorneys, by the
ratio of BLS’ Q4 2023 total
compensation to wages and salaries for
professionals and related occupations
(1.4664), the assumed occupational
group for attorneys, to account for nonsalary employee benefits.99 CBP
assumes an annual growth rate of 3.64%
based on the prior year’s change in the
implicit price deflator, published by the
Bureau of Economic Analysis.100 Trade
associations will likely incur costs of
$55,326 to educate members about
changing requirements. See Table 12 for
a summary of miscellaneous costs.
requirements. Information obtained in October
2024.
98 CBP assumes that this is the most appropriate
wage rate for the trade association personnel who
educate industry about the required information for
ACAS filings.
99 Source of median wage rate: U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Occupational Employment and
Wage Statistics, ‘‘May 2023 National Occupational
Employment and Wage Estimates United States.’’
Updated April 3, 2024. Available at https://
www.bls.gov/oes/2023/may/oes_nat.htm. Accessed
June 4, 2024. The total compensation to wages and
salaries ratio is equal to the total compensation cost
per hour worked for Professional and related
occupations ($67.50) divided by the wages and
salaries cost per hour worked for the same
occupation category ($46.03). See ‘‘Table 2.
Employer Costs for Employee Compensation for
civilian workers by occupational and industry
group.’’ Bureau of Labor Statistics, ‘‘Employer Costs
for Employee Compensation—December 2023.’’
Released March 13, 2024. Available at https://
www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_
03132024.pdf. Accessed June 4, 2024.
100 To adjust to 2024 dollars, multiply by the
2022–2023 percent change in the Bureau of
Economic Analysis’s Implicit Price Deflators for
Gross Domestic Product (122.273/117.973–1). See
‘‘Table 1.1.9. Implicit Price Deflators for Gross
Domestic Product,’’ Line 1 Gross Domestic Product,
annual. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Updated
May 30, 2024. Available at https://apps.bea.gov/
iTable/?reqid=19&step=2&isuri=1&categories=
survey#eyJhcHBpZCI6MTksInN0ZXBzI
jpbMSwyLDMsM10sImRhdGEiOltbImNhdGVnb3
JpZXMiLCJTdXJ2ZXkiXSxbIk5JUEFfVGF
ibGVfTGlzdCIsIjEzIl0sWyJGaXJzdF9ZZWFy
IiwiMjAxNiJdLFsiTGFzdF9ZZWFyIiwiMjAyNC
JdLFsiU2NhbGUiLCIwIl0sWyJTZXJp
ZXMiLCJBIl1dfQ==. Accessed June 4, 2024.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

52835

Table 12. Summary ofMiscellaneous Trade Member Costs (in undiscounted 2024 U.S. dollars)

Cost to Trade
Training staff and customers on new requirements
Updating industry standards to match new requirements

FY2024
$3,428,200
$55,326

Total

$3,483,526

Total Costs
According to CBP’s primary estimates,
the enhanced ACAS filing data
requirements will result in total costs of

around $1.2 billion. CBP will incur IT
system costs of approximately
$1,071,377, while trade members will
experience costs of around
$1,202,576,103. The total annualized

costs will range from $116,851,637 (7%
discount rate) to $118,821,152 (3%
discount rate). Table 13 displays CBP’s
estimates for costs from enhanced ACAS
filing data requirements.

Table 13. Total Costs (2024 U.S. dollars)

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

7. Benefits
CBP anticipates that the enhanced
ACAS filing will generate benefits after
this IFR is implemented. However, CBP
is unable to quantify those benefits in
this analysis because of unknown risk
factors and therefore discusses these
benefits qualitatively. CBP expects the
enhanced ACAS filing will improve
lawful international trade by reducing
the risk of terrorism and improving
efforts to ensure cargo safety and
security by providing CBP and TSA
with more in-depth information about
inbound shipments earlier in the import
process. This section will discuss the
potential threats to air cargo, the current
vulnerabilities CBP faces, and the
consequences of not addressing the
threat.
CBP processes over a billion air cargo
shipments per year, and because of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

CBP
$240,182
$82,355
$84,855
$87,355
$89,855
$92,355
$94,855
$97,355
$99,855
$102,355

Total
$20,765,382
$156,910,936
$120,490,353
$122,886,116
$125,144,309
$127,195,729
$129,079,343
$131,018,936
$133,294,402
$135,790,597

$1,201,504,726

$1,071,377

$1,202,576,103

$118,712,408

$108,744

$118,821,152

$116,740,583

$111,054

$116,851,637

volume of shipments compared to
operational resources, is limited in its
ability to manually inspect all cargo
shipments upon arrival. Compounding
the vulnerability is that by the time the
shipments get to the United States to be
inspected, it is already too late, because
if a dangerous package was on the
plane, it may do little good to have it
interdicted after the flight. For this
reason, CBP relies on advance data to
identify shipments before planes depart
for the United States. Using a mix of
computer-based targeting and the
expertise of CBP officers, CBP identifies
shipments needing additional data or a
manual inspection before the aircraft
takes flight.
The advance data provided under the
original ACAS program has
strengthened CBP’s ability to ensure
cargo safety and security. Security

PO 00000

Frm 00041

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

concerns have increased in recent years
due in part to increased trade and the
increased volume of shipments arriving
in the United States by air. However, the
amount and quality of information
mandated for transmission has
remained static. In 2024, packages
containing unconventional incendiaries
caught fire while in transit.101 Had these
incendiaries activated during a flight,
the resulting conflagration could have
caused significant damage to the
aircraft, potentially resulting in the
complete destruction of the aircraft and
its cargo and loss of life for any crew or
passengers on board. Even the
101 See, German Firms Warned of Packages
Containing Incendiary Devices, Reuters (Aug. 30,
2024), https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/
german-security-services-warn-danger-packagescontaining-incendiary-devices-2024-08-30/.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.026

2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
Total,
Undiscounted
Annualized Costs,
3% Discount Rate
Annualized Costs,
7% Discount Rate

Industry
$20,525,200
$156,828,581
$120,405,498
$122,798,761
$125,054,454
$127,103,374
$128,984,488
$130,921,581
$133,194,547
$135,688,242

ER21NO25.025

Fiscal Year

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

52836

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

perception of this kind of vulnerability,
let alone the reality that multiple such
parcels entered the supply chain,
creates a heightened threat to the United
States air cargo sector, as this dangerous
cargo poses a threat to aviation and the
physical supply chain.
The new data elements introduced
through the publication of this IFR will
provide CBP with additional
information that can help CBP identify
the highest-risk and lowest-risk cargo
prior to cargo being loaded on an
aircraft. CBP believes that the enhanced
ACAS filing will improve entity
identification by leveraging business
relationships that naturally exist
between the actual shippers and their
logistics providers. The new data
elements will provide CBP with more
information about the original party
shipping cargo into the United States.
For example, customer account
frequency information will allow CBP to
know if the original shipper frequently
ships cargo to the United States or if the
shipper is relatively unknown. For
frequent shippers, this information will
allow for analyses of shipping patterns
to either clear shipments in less time or
identify shipments for further review.
Other new data elements, put together
with existing information, will allow
officers to identify suspicious
inconsistencies. The additional
information will help officers effectively
target and screen air cargo.
CBP believes that improving entity
identification is critical for CBP to
conduct proper risk assessments,
because it allows CBP to better identify
legitimate shipments by validating
established relationships and patterns.
This important data would be one
added piece to the overall information
that CBP uses for targeting efforts, and
in turn, will allow CBP officers to focus
more time and effort on identifying
other potentially illicit shipments. If a
potential threat is loaded on an aircraft,
there could be serious harm or loss of
life to the public, air carrier staff, and
CBP officers. Additionally, if a potential
threat is able to destroy an airplane,
airport facilities, or supply chain
infrastructure, it can cause large
economic losses through destroying
infrastructure and disrupting supply
chains. This rule will benefit the public,
industry, and CBP through the
mitigation of potential threats.
Additionally, while this rule is
intended to address aviation safety and
security risks, the enhanced data
elements may also have the added
benefit of preventing prohibited goods,
such as narcotics, from entering the
United States. In particular, CBP
believes that these data elements may

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

identify shipments of illicit synthetic
drugs, synthetic drug raw materials, and
related manufacturing equipment.
Fentanyl, a synthetic opioid, continues
to be prevalent in the air environment
and poses a significant risk to the
United States. In calendar year 2023, the
Centers for Disease Control estimated
that 107,543 individuals died in the
United States from a drug overdose, and
approximately 70% of these overdoses
were caused by fentanyl.102 In fiscal
year 2024, CBP seized 676.17 pounds of
fentanyl and 349.66 pounds of precursor
chemicals in the air environment.103
The additional data elements will
enhance CBP’s ability to assess air cargo
risk and, by extension, could assist
officers in identifying shipments that
contain prohibited goods. Additionally,
CBP anticipates that that the new data
elements will allow CBP to segment risk
and identify shipments that can move
through without physical inspection
which would allow CBP to focus on
shipments that are more likely to
contain fentanyl and other illicit goods.
CBP believes that the enhanced ACAS
data elements could improve
enforcement actions against these goods.
Lastly, trade members will benefit
from the improved security of their
supply chains. As trade members
identify entities earlier in the import
process, it will help secure members’
supply chains to protect their
employees, customers, and sources of
revenue.
Break-Even Analysis
Ideally, CBP would quantify and
monetize the security benefit of the IFR
through a two-step process. First, CBP
would need to estimate the reduction in
the probability of a successful attack on
a flight carrying air cargo. CBP would
also need to estimate the quantified
consequences of an averted attack.
However, due to unknown risk factors,
it is not possible to estimate the
likelihood of an attack and the
probability that it would be successful.
Instead, CBP presented the benefits of
the analysis qualitatively above.
Additionally, to explore the effects of
the uncertainty surrounding the
unknown risk factors, CBP prepared a
break-even analysis. OMB Circular A–4
recommends conducting a threshold, or
break-even analysis, if the nonmonetized benefits are likely to be
102 Ahmad

FB, Cisewski JA, Rossen LM, Sutton P.
Provisional drug overdose death counts. Available
at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drugoverdose-data.htm. National Center for Health
Statistics. 2025. Last accessed Jan. 29, 2025.
103 Information provided by CBP’s National
Targeting Center, Cargo Division, Office of Field
Operations, subject matter expert on Jan. 29, 2025.

PO 00000

Frm 00042

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

important and cannot be quantified.
CBP believes that the non-monetized
benefits in this analysis are important to
capture. According to OMB, a
‘‘threshold’’ or ‘‘break-even’’ analysis
answers the question, ‘‘How small could
the value of the non-monetized benefits
be (or how large would the value of the
non-monetized costs need to be) before
the regulation would yield zero net
benefits (or before the most netbeneficial regulatory alternative
changes)?’’ 104
In this break-even analysis, CBP
compares the estimated costs to
implement the enhanced ACAS data
elements with the estimated monetary
value of the avoided consequences of a
successful attack. The direct
consequences of an attack (or averted
costs) include the monetized value of
avoided fatalities, non-fatal injuries,
property damage, and rescue and
cleanup costs. Dividing the averted
costs of an attack by the annualized
costs of the regulation results in the
number of such attacks that must be
avoided on an annual basis for benefits
to equal costs.
In order to compare direct costs with
direct benefits, CBP considers major
direct costs of the attack scenarios. The
analysis does not account for possible
macroeconomic consequences of
attacks, specifically the indirect benefits
(in terms of avoided indirect costs),
from preventing a successful attack.
Indirect effects might include, for
example, macroeconomic effects
associated with temporary closures of
airports or specific air routes, resulting
in business interruption and cargo
delays; broader reductions in air travel;
and other follow-on effects. The
omission of indirect effects, due to data
limitation and uncertainty, leads to a
likely understated total avoided cost.
To identify the types of attack
scenarios that may be averted by the
regulation, we rely on TSA’s
Transportation Sector Security Risk
Assessment (TSSRA). TSA uses TSSRA
to evaluate risk for hundreds of attack
scenarios across aviation, mass transit,
highway, freight rail, and pipeline
transportation modes. The assessments
are used to inform mitigation priorities,
security strategy and program
development, and resource
allocation.105
104 Off. of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Off. of the
President, OMB Circ. A–4, Regulatory Analysis
(2003), https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/omb/
circulars_a004_a-4 (last visited Feb. 12, 2025).
105 General background on TSSRA is taken from
Pekoske, David P., Administrator, Transportation
Security Administration, ‘‘Biennial National
Strategy for Transportation Security (NSTS)’’ April
18, 2023.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
TSA provided CBP with data on the
consequences of possible attack
scenarios incorporated in TSSRA. These
scenarios are characteristic of the types
of events the ACAS rule is intended to
prevent. In this analysis, we consider
the range of potential outcomes for these
scenarios.
For the value of reducing the risk of
death and injuries, we apply the
estimates used in TSSRA. To estimate
the value of reducing the risk of deaths
and injuries, DHS uses the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT)
recommended value of a statistical life
(VSL) of $13.2 million dollars.106 DOT

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

106 Economists estimate VSL by measuring
individual WTP for a defined change in his or her
own mortality risk. This tradeoff between money
and small changes in mortality risk is reported as
the VSL, and is often estimated by dividing the
value of a small risk reduction by the size of the
risk change (for example, if an individual is willing
to pay $1,320 for a 1 in 10,000 reduction in his or
her risk of dying in the current year, then his or her
VSL is calculated as $1,320 ÷ 1/10,000 annual risk
change = $13.2 million VSL). Alternatively, this
tradeoff can be multiplied by the population risk
change to determine the value of a community-wide
risk reduction (for example, if $1,320 is the average
WTP for a 1 in 10,000 risk reduction across all
affected individuals, and the number of affected
individuals is 10,000, then aggregating these values
leads to the same VSL: $1,320 average individual
WTP × 10,000 affected individuals = $13.2 million).
Therefore, VSL is not the value of an individual’s
life; it is simply the conventional way to express the
value of small risk reductions.
The VSL terminology has led to substantial
confusion. Therefore, agencies have begun to
instead use the term ‘‘value of mortality risk
reduction’’ (VMRR) to refer to WTP for a risk
change of specific magnitude. For example, the
estimates above reflect a VMRR of $1,320 for a 1

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

also recommends relative disutility
factors that can be applied to the VSL
to estimate the value of reducing the
risk of non-fatal injuries of varying
levels of severity. We apply DOT’s
factor of 26.6 percent to value avoided
‘‘severe’’ injuries and 4.7 percent to
value avoided ‘‘moderate’’ injuries.107 In
other words, we assume the value of
avoiding one severe injury is equal to
26.6 percent of the VSL ($13.2 million
× 0.266 = $3.5 million), and similarly,
the value of avoiding one moderate
injury is approximately 4.7 percent of
the VSL ($13.2 million × 0.047 =
$620,400).
For the value of private property
losses and rescue and cleanup costs, we
apply the estimates used in TSSRA.
Private property losses generally
in 10,000 risk reduction. However, in this breakeven analysis, we express this change as the VSL
to clarify the relationship of the results to the
expected number of deaths averted in each binned
scenario and for consistency with DOT guidance.
U.S. Department of Transportation,
‘‘Departmental Guidance on Valuation of a
Statistical Life in Economic Analysis’’, May 7, 2024.
Available at: https://www.transportation.gov/officepolicy/transportation-policy/revised-departmentalguidance-on-valuation-of-a-statistical-life-ineconomic-analysis. Last accessed on Dec. 5, 2024.
107 The selection of the DOT severity level that
corresponds most closely to the types of injuries
likely to result from the scenarios included in the
TSSRA model is based on guidance provided by
TSA. Source: U.S. Department of Transportation,
‘‘Departmental Guidance, Treatment of the Value of
Preventing Fatalities and Injuries in Preparing
Economic Analyses’’, March 2021. Available at:
https://www.transportation.gov/resources/value-ofa-statistical-life-guidance. Last accessed on Dec. 5,
2024.

PO 00000

Frm 00043

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52837

include the depreciated value of the
plane and the value of lost cargo, as
appropriate, depending on the extent of
damage to the plane(s). We use the GDP
implicit price deflator of 1.024 (124.874/
122.273) to update the costs from 2023
to 2024 dollars.108
Table 14 indicates what would need
to occur for the costs of the interim final
rule to equal its benefits, assuming the
rule reduces the risk of a successful
attack (based on the annualized costs of
the regulation using a three or seven
percent discount rate, see Table 14). For
the low consequence estimate, CBP
estimates the regulation must result in
the avoidance of an attack event about
every 0.6 years (or about every 7
months) for the benefits of the rule to
equal the costs. For the higher
consequence estimate, CBP estimates
that the regulation must result in the
avoidance of an attack event
approximately once every 21.6 years. As
a result, if the rule only reduces the risk
of a single type of attack, the attack
would need to be avoided once every
0.6 years to 21.6 years, depending on
the scenario of attack, for the benefits of
the rule to equal costs.
108 U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, ‘‘Table
1.1.9. Implicit Price Deflators for Gross Domestic
Product’’. Available at: https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/
?reqid=19&step=3&isuri=1&1921=survey&
1903=13#eyJhcHBpZCI6MTksInN0ZXBzIjpbMSwy
LDMsM10sImRhdGEiOltbIk5JUEFfVGFibGVfTGlzd
CIsIjEzIl0sWyJDYXRlZ29yaWVzIiwiU3VydmV5I
l0sWyJGaXJzdF9ZZWFyIiwiMjAyMCJdLFsiTGFzdF
9ZZWFyIiwiMjAyNCJdLFsiU2NhbGUiLCIwIl0sWy
JTZXJpZXMiLCJBIl1dfQ==. Last accessed on Dec. 5,
2024.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

52838

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

Table 14. Break-Even Results

Discount
Rate

Annualized
Costs
2024-2033
(In Millions
of2024
Dollars)

Three
Percent

$119

Seven
Percent

$117

Benefits of the Regulation= Costs if: 1
Economic
Consequences of an
Attack2 (In Millions
of2024 Dollars)

Number Of Events That Must
Be Avoided in Ten Years 3

Critical Event
Avoidance
Rate4

High

$2,517

0.47

I in 21.2 years

Low

$70

17.04

1 in 0.6 years

High

$2,517

0.46

1 in 21.6 years

Low

$70

16.76

1 in 0.6 years

The benefits of the rule and breakeven analysis have limitations that may
lead us to under- or overstate the
potential benefits of the interim final
rule. Notably, we are unable to quantify
the incremental risk reduction likely to
result from the regulation, providing a
qualitative discussion instead. The
break-even analysis is limited, as
macroeconomic consequences and
indirect consequences, such as closures
of airports and air routes, are excluded
from our analysis. As a result, the breakeven analysis likely overstates the
frequency at which an attack would
need to be averted for the avoided
consequences of a successful attack to
equal the costs of the rule. Additionally,
this analysis focuses on the
consequences of a single attack. We
compare these costs to the annualized
costs of the IFR, which only identifies
the critical event avoidance rate for one
aircraft attack at a time. In reality, the
rule reduces the risk for all aircrafts
simultaneously and even if the rule only
partially achieved each of the targets in
Table 14, it might still break even if the
sum of the monetized risk-reduction
benefits across all events equals its cost.
Finally, this analysis does not address
other benefits of the rule. It does not
address, for instance, the rule’s potential
to reduce the amount of fentanyl and

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

other illicit goods that enter the United
States and enrich bad actors.
8. Net Impact of Rule
CBP expects that the enhanced ACAS
filing data requirements rule result in
overall net quantified cost but will
result in significant unquantified
security benefits. CBP estimates that
during the period of analysis, CBP and
trade members will incur a total net
present value cost between
$820,717,002 (7% discount rate) and
$1,016,568,529 (3% discount rate). The
annualized costs of the rule are between
$116,851,637 (7% discount rate) and
$118,821,152 (3% discount rate). CBP
notes that the net impact is largely
driven by time burden costs. This time
burden is largely faced by unknown or
occasional shippers that pose the
highest security risk. The total cost of
the rule can be found in Table 15 and
Table 16. We present the costs in 2024
dollars and discounted at a rate of three
and seven percent.
Additionally, CBP anticipates that
this IFR will result in added benefits,
but CBP was unable to quantify these
benefits. The enhanced ACAS filing will
improve commercial risk assessment
targeting, prevent smuggling, and
increase cargo security by providing
CBP and TSA with more in-depth
information about inbound shipments

PO 00000

Frm 00044

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

earlier in the import process. It will also
give CBP more information about
business relationships between parties.
This allows CBP officers to identify
legitimate shipments and spend more
time identifying potentially illicit
shipments. Trade members will also
benefit from added security and will
have more confidence in their cargo.
Table 17 displays CBP’s primary
estimate for costs to CBP and trade
members during each year of the
regulatory period and summarizes
potential benefits. CBP believes that the
increased risk to aviation security merits
the collection of additional ACAS
information. While the collection will
result in significant costs to CBP and the
public, CBP has worked with trade
members to minimize those costs to the
extent possible. During these
conversations, trade members were
focused on providing CBP the data
needed in a way that did not overly
burden industry, and trade members
CBP interviewed generally understood
the need to collect additional
information due to the recent increased
risk. CBP believes that the security
benefits that will result from this
collection of information will outweigh
the costs. CBP requests public comment
on this conclusion.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.027

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Notes:
1. The estimates provided here reflect the low and high ends of the range of averted cost estimates
associated with attack scenarios in TSA's TSSRA model.
2. Results assume regulation reduces risk of a single attack. The rule will likely reduce the risk of
multiple numbers and types of attacks simultaneously, as well as reducing smuggling and other
risks.
3. Indicates the number of attack events targeting aircraft that would have to be avoided in 10 years
for the benefits of the rule to equal the costs.
4. Indicates the frequency at which the event would need to be averted for the benefits of the rule to
equal the costs.

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

52839

Table 15. Total Impact ofEnhanced ACAS Data Elements (in 2024 dollars, 3% discount rate)
Fiscal Year
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
Present
Value
Annualized

Industry
$20,525,200
$152,260,758
$113,493,730
$112,378,262
$111,109,262
$109,640,487
$108,022,478
$106,451,226
$105,145,006
$103,993,739

CBP
$240,182
$79,956
$79,984
$79,942
$79,835
$79,666
$79,440
$79,159
$78,826
$78,447

Total

$1,043,020,148

$955,437

$1,043,975,585

$118,712,408

$108,744

$118,821,152

$20,765,382
$152,340,715
$113,573,713
$112,458,204
$111,189,097
$109,720,154
$108,101,918
$106,530,385
$105,223,832
$104,072,186

Table 16. Total Impact ofEnhanced ACAS Data Elements (in 2024 dollars, 7% discount rate)
CBP
$240,182
$76,967
$74,116
$71,308
$68,550
$65,848
$63,206
$60,628
$58,117
$55,674

Total
$20,765,382
$146,645,735
$105,240,940
$100,311,675
$95,471,994
$90,688,797
$86,011,017
$81,592,009
$77,578,556
$73,861,088

Present Value

$877,332,597

$834,595

$877,927,010

Annualized

$116,740,583

$111,054

$116,851,637

ER21NO25.029

2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033

Industry
$20,525,200
$146,568,767
$105,166,825
$100,240,368
$95,403,444
$90,622,949
$85,947,811
$81,531,381
$77,520,439
$73,805,413

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

PO 00000

Frm 00045

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.028

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Fiscal Year

52840

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
Table 17. Net Impact Summary (in 2024 US. dollars)
Costs
CBP Cost - Annualized Costs, 3%

$108,744

Trade Cost -Annualized Costs, 3%

$118,712,408

Total Cost - Annualized Costs, 3%

$118,821,152

CBP Cost - Annualized Costs, 7%

$111,054

Trade Cost - Annualized Costs, 7%

$116,740,583

Total Cost - Annualized Costs, 7%

$116,851,637

Trade members may see costs as any additional trainings or
meetings with CBP are needed to learn the new process.

Qualitative (non-quantified) (Trade)

The supply chain may face disruptions as the new data elements
are enacted and industry learns the new process to provide them.
There is a potential of lost revenue if shipments are rejected or
customers shift to new carriers to avoid re!!l.llation.
Liquidated damages, $5,000 for each violation up to max of
$100,000 per departure.

Annualized monetized benefits

None

Qualitative (non-quantified) (CBP
and Trade)

Prevent high-risk cargo shipments from being loaded onto aircraft
before arrival in United States.
Improve CBP's security efforts on air imports in an effort to
reduce threats.
Improve CBP's security efforts on air imports in an effort to
reduce importation of prohibited goods.
Improve transparency of supply chain to reduce threats and protect
trade members' employees and customers.

BILLING CODE 9111–14–P

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

9. Alternatives
In accordance with E.O. 12866, the
following alternatives were considered:
(1) Alternative 1 (the chosen
alternative): Submission of 4 new
mandatory ACAS data elements, 14 new
conditional elements, and 11 new
optional elements in addition to the
original ACAS data elements. In
particular, copies of documents used to
provide biographic data will only be
required with prior notice from CBP and
copies should be retained for 3 years.
The transmission of these data elements
is required no later than prior to loading
the cargo onto any inbound aircraft
required to make entry under 19 CFR

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

122.41 that will have commercial cargo
aboard;
(2) Alternative 2: Submission of 18
new mandatory ACAS data elements
and 11 new optional elements in
addition to the original ACAS data
elements. Additionally, copies of
documents used to provide biographic
data would be required for all shipping
outlet/walk-in transactions and copies
should be retained for 3 years. The
transmission of these data elements is
required no later than prior to loading
the cargo onto any inbound aircraft
required to make entry under 19 CFR
122.41 that will have commercial cargo
aboard;
(3) Alternative 3: Same as Alternative
1, however, there would be no
requirement to store a copy of the

PO 00000

Frm 00046

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

document used to provide biographic
data. The ACAS filer would still be
required to transmit text-based
biographic data when the shipping
outlet/walk-in code is assigned or when
a shipment contains household goods or
personal effects. The transmission of the
data elements is required no later than
prior to loading the cargo onto any
inbound aircraft required to make entry
under 19 CFR 122.41 that will have
commercial cargo aboard;
(4) Alternative 4: Same as Alternative
1, however, the portion of the link to
product listing data element that
requires transmission of the unmasked
IP or MAC address of the device used
by the consignee to purchase a product
from an e-commerce platform would be
optional. Required data elements must

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

ER21NO25.030

Benefits

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
be transmitted no later than prior to
loading the cargo onto any inbound
aircraft required to make entry under 19
CFR 122.41 that will have commercial
cargo aboard.
These alternatives represent how CBP
adjusted conditional and mandatory
elements to balance the anticipated
security benefits and potential effects of
the requirements on the air cargo
industry. In comparison to Alternative
1, Alternative 2 requires more
mandatory data elements that will pose
a large burden on ACAS filers. CBP
believes that making certain elements
conditional will lessen the burden on
trade members while still increasing
security. In particular, CBP made the
unmasked IP or MAC address and the
shipping cost data elements conditional.
Trade members expressed concern
about the availability of these elements
in certain cases. After speaking with
trade members, CBP updated certain
data elements to be conditional. Based
on conversations with the trade while
developing this rule and the economic
analysis, CBP believes that this will
minimize the burden on industry
members. CBP’s preferred alternative
only requires these elements when the
security risk outweighs the potential
burden on trade members. Additionally,
in Alternative 2, CBP would require all
walk-in transactions to store a copy of
the document used to provide
biographic data for 3 years. The
preferred alternative (Alternative 1) only
requires copies of biographic data
documents in select cases and with
prior notice from CBP.
In comparison to Alternative 1,
Alternative 3 does not require industry
members to store copies of the
identification documents used to
provide text-based biographic data. This
alternative would have a lower time
burden and cost on industry. However,
this alternative does not provide a way
for CBP to verify that the information
collected is accurate. The lack of an
accountability mechanism could result
in poor compliance which could
consequently affect the quality of the
data CBP receives and reduce the
effectiveness of CBP’s targeting of highrisk air cargo.
In comparison to Alternative 1,
Alternative 4 makes the portion of the
link to product listing data element that
requires transmission of the unmasked
IP or MAC address of the device used
to purchase a product from an ecommerce platform optional. This
would slightly lower the burden on
trade members and the cost of this rule.
However, the rise of B2C shipping and
e-commerce platforms necessitates the
transmission of these unmasked IP or

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

MAC addresses. Shipments from ecommerce transactions present a special
risk to aircraft, crewmembers, and
passengers, in part, due to the relative
anonymity associated with the
transactions. To ensure that CBP
receives adequate identity and location
information for parties involved in ecommerce transactions, CBP determined
that it is necessary to require the IP or
MAC address of certain consignees
involved in e-commerce shipping
transactions.
After speaking with trade members,
CBP set mandatory and conditional data
elements that will minimize the burden
on trade members while achieving the
goal of minimizing threats in the air
cargo space. CBP’s preferred alternative
requires data elements when the
security risk outweighs the potential
burden on trade members. In evaluating
these three alternatives, CBP sought the
most favorable balance between security
outcomes and impacts to air
transportation. Based on this analysis of
alternatives, CBP determined that
Alternative 1 provides the most
favorable balance between security
outcomes and impacts to air
transportation.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Assessment
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–12, as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
Public Law 104–121, (Mar. 29, 1996),
requires that agencies consider the
impacts of their rules on small
entities.109 For purposes of the RFA,
small entities include small businesses,
not-for-profit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. Individuals
and States are not included in the
definition of a small entity. The RFA’s
regulatory flexibility analysis
requirements apply only to those rules
for which an agency is required to
publish a general notice of proposed
rulemaking pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 or
any other law. See 5 U.S.C. 604(a). As
discussed previously, CBP did not issue
a notice of proposed rulemaking for this
action as exempted by 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B). Therefore, a regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required for
this rule.

52841

the effects of any Federal mandate in a
proposed rule or final rule for which the
agency published a proposed rule,
which includes any Federal mandate
that may result in a $100 million or
more expenditure (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector.
A written statement under UMRA is
not required unless an agency has
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking. See 2 U.S.C. 1532(a). In
addition, an action is exempt from
UMRA if it is necessary for the national
security. See 2 U.S.C. 1503(5). As
discussed under Section V.A., this rule
is exempt from notice and comment
rulemaking procedures and is necessary
for the national security. Accordingly,
CBP has not prepared a written
statement in connection with this rule.
E. Privacy Act of 1974 and EGovernment Act of 2002
CBP will ensure that all Privacy Act
and E-Government Act requirements
and policies are adhered to in the
implementation of this rule and will
issue or update any necessary Privacy
Impact Assessment and/or Privacy Act
System of Records notice (SORN) to
fully outline processes that will ensure
compliance with Privacy Act
protections.
CBP has conducted an initial Privacy
Threshold Analysis (PTA) for the
Enhanced ACAS program and is in the
process of updating the existing Privacy
Impact Assessment (PIA) for the ACAS
program, DHS/CBP/PIA–061 Air Cargo
Advance Screening, to accommodate the
requirements promulgated under this
IFR.110 CBP maintains transmitted
ACAS data in ATS which is covered by
the DHS/CBP–006 Automated Targeting
System SORN.111 CBP does not
anticipate that this IFR will require any
updates to the DHS/CBP–006
Automated Targeting System SORN.
CBP will create new documents or
update documents as needed to reflect
the revisions to the ACAS program
discussed in this IFR and will make any
new or revised documents available at:
https://www.dhs.gov/compliance.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–38,
UMRA) requires each Federal agency to
prepare a written statement assessing

F. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13, 109 Stat. 163 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
(PRA), an agency may not conduct, and
a person is not required to respond to,
a collection of information unless the

109 Resources for small entities and further
information regarding SBREFA can be found on
CBP’s web page at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/
stakeholder-engagement/small-business-regulatoryenforcement-fairness-act-sbrefa.

110 DHS/CBP/PIA–061 Air Cargo Advance
Screening is available online at https://
www.dhs.gov/publication/dhscbppia-061-air-cargoadvance-screening (last visited Apr. 25, 2025).
111 See 77 FR 30297 (May 22, 2012).

PO 00000

Frm 00047

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

52842

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

collection of information displays a
valid control number assigned by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). The collection of information
contained in this IFR was submitted to
OMB for emergency review and
authorization under section 3507(j) of
the PRA.
In accordance with section
3507(j)(1)(A) of the PRA, CBP
determined that the collection of
information described in this IFR is
needed prior to the expiration of the
time periods established under the PRA
and is essential to the mission of CBP.
Additionally, in accordance with
section 3507(j)(1)(B) of the PRA, CBP
determined that it cannot reasonably
comply with the provisions of the PRA
because public harm is reasonably likely
to result if normal clearance procedures
are followed.
As discussed in Section III.E., CBP’s
analysis of recent incidents has
identified significant ongoing threats to
the security of international air cargo
operations. To address those threats,
CBP determined that it is necessary to
expand the ACAS information
collection by requiring air carriers and
other eligible ACAS filers to transmit
additional data elements, among other
requirements. The collection of
information described in this IFR will
enable CBP to effectively identify and
target high-risk shipments that could
threaten the safety and security of
individuals, cargo, and critical
transportation infrastructure.
The time periods established under
the PRA, such as the 60-day and 30-day
comment periods found in sections
3506–07, would delay the
implementation of the data elements
described in this IFR. Given the
immediate need for additional
information that will bolster CBP’s
ability to identify and target high-risk
shipments, the collection of information
described in this IFR is needed prior to
the expiration of the time periods
established under the PRA.
Among other duties, CBP is
responsible for ensuring the interdiction
of goods illegally entering or exiting the
United States, safeguarding the borders
of the United States to protect against
the entry of dangerous goods, and
developing and implementing screening
and targeting capabilities for cargo
across all international modes of
transportation. See Homeland Security
Act of 2002, Public Law 107–296, sec.
411, 116 Stat. 2178, as amended (6
U.S.C. 211(c)). Given the parallels
between these duties and the need for
additional ACAS data that can aid CBP
in identifying high-risk shipments, the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

collection of information is essential to
CBP’s mission.
In consideration of the potential
consequences of successful or attempted
attacks, such as injury, loss of life, and
damage to critical transportation
infrastructure, the ongoing nature of the
threat, and the immediate need for
information that can address the threat,
public harm is reasonably likely to
result if normal clearance procedures
are followed.
For the reasons stated above, CBP has
determined that it is necessary to
request, under section 3507(j) of the
PRA, an emergency authorization for the
collection of information discussed in
this IFR.
CBP is simultaneously inviting the
general public and other Federal
agencies to comment on the proposed
and/or continuing information
collections pursuant to section
3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA. This process
is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR
1320.8. Written comments and
suggestions from the public and affected
agencies should address one or more of
the following four points: (1) whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3)
suggestions to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (4) suggestions to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on those who are to
respond, including through the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses. The
comments that are submitted will be
summarized and included in the request
for approval. All comments will become
a matter of public record. Such
comments can be submitted in the
regulatory docket for this IFR or by
email to [email protected].
The Enhanced ACAS IFR will require
air carriers, or other eligible filers, to
transmit new enhanced data elements
and add additional optional data
elements, resulting in a change to OMBapproved collection 1651–0001.
According to representatives from the
trade, this IFR will not add a time
burden for 85% of responses. A party
that will not face a time burden is
referred to as a ‘‘known party’’ for the
purposes of this section. The remaining
15% will incur an average time burden

PO 00000

Frm 00048

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

of 1 minute. A party that will face a time
burden is referred to as an ‘‘unknown
party’’ for the purpose of this section.
Additionally, the optional data elements
will not add a time burden to the public.
CBP assumes that parties will only
provide these data elements if they
already collect them internally and it
does not create an additional burden to
provide them to CBP. In addition to the
time burden below, CBP estimates that
some respondents will incur capital
costs required to update their systems to
collect and submit the requested
information. The resulting estimated
burden associated with the electronic
information for air cargo required in
advance of arrival under this rule is as
follows:
Air Cargo Advance Screening (ACAS)
Original and Optional Data
Estimated Number of Respondents:
281.
Estimated Number of Total Annual
Responses: 1,249,182,643.
Estimated Time per Response: 0
minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 0.
Enhanced ACAS Data (Known Party)
Estimated Number of Respondents:
281.
Estimated Number of Total Annual
Responses: 1,061,805,247.
Estimated Time per Response: 0
minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 0.
Enhanced ACAS Data (Unknown Party)
Estimated Number of Respondents:
281.
Estimated Number of Total Annual
Responses: 187,377,396.
Estimated Time per Response: 1
minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 3,122,957.
G. International Trade Impact
Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979, 19
U.S.C. 2501–82, prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing any
standards or engaging in related
activities that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States. See 19 U.S.C. 2532.
Legitimate domestic objectives, such as
essential security and legitimate safety
interests, are exempted from
classification as an unnecessary obstacle
to foreign trade. See 19 U.S.C. 2531(b).
The Act also requires consideration of
international standards and, where
appropriate, that the standards
constitute the basis for U.S. standards.

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations
See 19 U.S.C. 2532(2)(A). Some
suggested standards exist for collecting
and analyzing air cargo data, such as the
World Customs Organization (WCO)
SAFE Framework of Standards to
Secure and Facilitate Global Trade
(SAFE FoS); 112 however, CBP
determined that the 2021 WCO SAFE
FoS, the most recent adaptation, does
not adequately address CBP’s immediate
need for information that could address
recent threats.
The publication of this IFR serves
legitimate domestic objectives, such as
the security of the air cargo industry;
thus, is exempt from classification as an
unnecessary obstacle to foreign trade.
However, CBP assessed the potential
effects of this IFR and determined that
it will not create unnecessary obstacles
to the foreign commerce of the United
States. CBP conducted extensive
outreach with international trade
associations during the development of
this IFR and incorporated international
standards where applicable.

List of Subjects

H. Congressional Review Act

■

Before a rule can take effect, 5 U.S.C.
801, the Congressional Review Act
(CRA), requires agencies to submit the
rule and a report indicating whether it
is a major rule, to Congress and the
Comptroller General. If a rule is deemed
a ‘‘major rule’’ by OMB, the CRA
generally provides that the rule may not
take effect until at least 60 days
following its publication. 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(3). However, the CRA provides
that if an agency finds good cause that
notice and public procedure are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest, the rule shall take
effect at such time as the agency
determines. 5 U.S.C. 808(2).
The Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB has determined that this IFR meets
the criteria for a ‘‘major rule’’ in 5 U.S.C.
804(2). However, as indicated by the
analysis under Section V.B., CBP
determined, as explained in Section
V.A., that there is good cause for this
rule to become effective immediately
upon publication. Thus, the delayed
effective date requirements of the CRA
are not applicable to this IFR.

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

VI. Signing Authority
The signing authority for this
document falls under 19 CFR 0.2(a).
Accordingly, this document is signed by
the Secretary of Homeland Security.
112 The WCO SAFE Framework is available at
https://www.wcoomd.org/en/topics/facilitation/
instrument-and-tools/frameworks-of-standards/
safe_package.aspx.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

§ 122.48b
(ACAS).

19 CFR Part 103

19 CFR Part 122
Administrative practice and
procedure, Air carriers, Aircraft,
Airports, Alcohol and alcoholic
beverages, Cigars and cigarettes, Cuba,
Customs duties and inspection, Drug
traffic control, Freight, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, U.S. Customs and Border
Protection amends 19 CFR parts 103 and
122 as follows:
PART 103—AVAILABILITY OF
INFORMATION
1. The authority citation for part 103
is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a; 19
U.S.C. 66, 1624; 31 U.S.C. 9701.

*

*

*

*

*

Section 103.31a also issued under 19
U.S.C. 2071 note, 6 U.S.C. 943, 19 U.S.C.
1415, and 49 U.S.C. 44901 note;

*

*
*
*
*
2. Amend § 103.31a by revising
paragraph (a) as follows:

■

§ 103.31a Advance electronic information
for air, truck, and rail cargo; Importer
Security Filing information for vessel cargo.

*

*
*
*
*
(a) Advance cargo information that is
electronically presented to Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) for inbound or
outbound air, rail, or truck cargo in
accordance with § 122.48a, § 122.48b,
§ 123.91, § 123.92, or § 192.14 of this
chapter;
*
*
*
*
*
PART 122—AIR COMMERCE
REGULATIONS
3. The authority citation for part 122
is revised to read as follows:

■

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 58b, 66,
1415, 1431, 1433, 1436, 1448, 1459, 1590,
1594, 1623, 1624, 1644, 1644a, 2071 note.

*

*

*

*

*

Section 122.48b also issued under 49
U.S.C. 44901 note.

*

*
*
*
*
4. Amend § 122.48b by adding
paragraph (c)(7) and revising and
republishing paragraph (d) to read as
follows:

■

PO 00000

Frm 00049

Air Cargo Advance Screening

*

Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Courts, Freedom of
information, Law enforcement, Privacy,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

52843

*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(7) Retention of government-issued
photo identification document copies.
When biographic data is a required data
element under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) of
this section, CBP may, following prior
notification from CBP to ACAS filers,
require such filer(s) to obtain a copy of
the government-issued photo
identification documents presented by
individuals for purposes of fulfilling the
biographic data requirements and retain
the copy for 3 years. During the
retention period, such ACAS filers must
provide the copy to CBP if requested.
(d) ACAS data elements. Some of the
ACAS data elements are mandatory in
all circumstances, some are conditional
and are required only in certain
circumstances, and others are optional.
(1) Mandatory data elements. The
following data elements are required to
be submitted at the lowest air waybill
level (i.e., at the house air waybill level
if applicable) by all ACAS filers and are
defined as set forth in § 122.48a unless
otherwise provided in this paragraph
(d)(1):
(i) Shipper name and address;
(ii) Consignee name and address;
(iii) Consignee email address (the
email address for the party identified
under paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this
section);
(iv) Consignee phone number (the
phone number for the party identified
under paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this
section);
(v) Cargo description;
(vi) Total quantity based on the
smallest external packing unit;
(vii) Total weight of cargo;
(viii) Air waybill number (the air
waybill number must be the same in the
filing required by this section and the
filing required by § 122.48a);
(ix) Shipment packing location and/or
scheduled shipment pickup location
(The shipment packing location is the
name and address of the location where
the cargo was initially made ready for
transportation before the cargo arrives at
the location where the cargo will be
loaded on the aircraft. The scheduled
shipment pickup location is the name
and address of the location where the
cargo is scheduled to transfer from the
custody of the shipper to the custody of
the inbound air carrier or other party
arranging for and/or delivering the cargo
to the inbound air carrier.); and
(x) Ship to party (the name and
address of the first deliver-to party
scheduled to physically receive a
shipment after the shipment is released
from CBP custody).

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

52844

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

(2) Conditional data element: master
air waybill number. The master air
waybill (MAWB) number, as defined
under § 122.48a, for each leg of the
flight is a conditional data element. The
MAWB number is a required data
element in the following circumstances;
otherwise, the submission of the MAWB
number is optional, but encouraged:
(i) When the ACAS filer is a different
party than the party that will file the
advance electronic air cargo data
required by § 122.48a. To allow for
earlier submission of the ACAS filing,
the initial ACAS filing may be
submitted without the MAWB number,
as long as the MAWB number is later
submitted by the ACAS filer or the
inbound air carrier according to the
applicable ACAS time frame for data
submission in paragraph (b) of this
section; or
(ii) When the ACAS filer is
transmitting all the data elements
required by § 122.48a according to the
applicable ACAS time frame for data
submission; or
(iii) When the inbound air carrier
would like to receive from CBP a check
on the ACAS status of a specific
shipment. If the MAWB number is
submitted, either by the ACAS filer or
the inbound air carrier, CBP will
provide this information to the inbound
air carrier upon request.
(3) Conditional data element: verified
Known Consignor Information. If the
shipper, identified under paragraph
(d)(1)(i) of this section, is designated as
a Verified Known Consignor by a CBPrecognized body, the registration
number associated with the shipper’s
Verified Known Consignor status and
the CBP-specified code representing the
designating body are required.
(4) Conditional data elements that
may be required when there is not a
Verified Known Consignor. The
following data elements are required if
the shipper, identified under paragraph
(d)(1)(i) of this section, is not identified
as a Verified Known Consignor under
paragraph (d)(3) of this section and the
additional circumstances listed in
paragraph (d)(4)(ii), (iii), or (iv) or
(d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section exist.
If the shipper is a Verified Known
Consignor or the circumstances listed
for a data element in this paragraph
(d)(4) do not exist, the transmission of
the data element is optional, but
encouraged.
(i) Definitions. For the purposes of
this paragraph (d)(4):
Customer means a party who has an
ownership interest in cargo, as either a
buyer or seller, who engages with a
logistics provider to arrange transport of
the cargo to the United States. A foreign

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

entity that provides services that
involve aggregating shipments from
customers, in which the foreign entity
acts as a facilitator and engages with a
logistics provider for the importation of
cargo into the United States, is not a
customer for the purposes of this
paragraph (d)(4).
Logistics provider means an entity
that provides transportation,
importation, and/or delivery services for
the importation of cargo into the United
States.
(ii) Data elements required for each
ACAS filing. The following data
elements are required for each ACAS
filing under this paragraph (d)(4):
(A) Shipper email address (the email
address for the party identified under
paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section);
(B) Shipper phone number (the phone
number for the party identified under
paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section);
(C) Customer account shipping
frequency/volume (the nature of the
business relationship between the
customer and the logistics provider that
issued the lowest level air waybill,
expressed as one of the following
applicable codes representing the
frequency and volume of shipments
conducted within that business
relationship: shipping outlet/walk-in,
immediate transaction, occasional
shipper, regular/daily shipper, or highvolume shipper); and
(D) Customer account billing type (the
method of payment used by the
customer to pay for the shipping
transaction).
(iii) Data elements required for
customer account shipping frequency/
volume assigned shipping outlet/walkin, occasional shipper, regular/daily
shipper, or high-volume shipper codes.
The following data elements are only
required when the customer account
shipping frequency/volume, under
paragraph (d)(4)(ii)(C) of this section, is
assigned the shipping outlet/walk-in,
occasional shipper, regular/daily
shipper, or high-volume shipper codes:
(A) Customer account name. When
the customer account shipping
frequency/volume, paragraph
(d)(4)(ii)(C) of this section, is assigned
the high-volume shipper, regular/daily
shipper, or occasional shipper codes,
this is the name of the customer.
However, when the customer account
shipping frequency/volume data
element, paragraph (d)(4)(ii)(C) of this
section, is assigned the shipping outlet/
walk-in code, this is the name of the
shipping outlet or other party that
accepted the cargo from the customer;
(B) Customer account issuer. The
customer account issuer is the party that
engaged with the party identified under

PO 00000

Frm 00050

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

the customer account name, paragraph
(d)(4)(iii)(A) of this section, for the
purposes of importing cargo into the
United States by air, identified by the
applicable code: Air Waybill prefix, CBP
Filer Code, or ACAS Originator Code;
(C) Customer account number. The
customer account number is the
identifier assigned by the customer
account issuer, identified under
paragraph (d)(4)(iii)(B) of this section, to
represent the customer account name,
identified under paragraph (d)(4)(iii)(A)
of this section;
(D) Customer account establishment
date. The customer account
establishment date is the date the party
identified as the customer account
name, paragraph (d)(4)(iii)(A) of this
section, established an account with the
party identified as the customer account
issuer, paragraph (d)(4)(iii)(B) of this
section; and
(E) Unmasked internet protocol (IP)
address or media access control (MAC)
address of the device used during
account creation (If the customer
account establishment date under
paragraph (d)(4)(iii)(D) of this section is
after November 21, 2025, the ACAS filer
must transmit the unmasked IP or MAC
address of the device used during the
creation of the account between the
parties identified under the customer
account name, paragraph (d)(4)(iii)(A) of
this section, and customer account
issuer, paragraph (d)(4)(iii)(B) of this
section.).
(iv) Data elements required for
customer account shipping frequency/
volume assigned shipping outlet/walkin, immediate transaction, or occasional
shipper codes. The following data
elements are only required when the
customer account shipping frequency/
volume, under paragraph (d)(4)(ii)(C) of
this section, is assigned the shipping
outlet/walk-in, immediate transaction,
or occasional shipper codes:
(A) Shipping cost. The shipping cost
is the total amount of charges, reported
in U.S. dollars, assessed by the carrier,
freight forwarder, or other logistics
provider to deliver the cargo including,
but not limited to, taxes, insurance, and
other applicable costs. Alternatively, an
estimated shipping cost is acceptable
when the total amount of charges will
be assessed after the ACAS filing is
transmitted, or when the ACAS filer is
not the carrier, freight forwarder, or
other logistics provider that assessed the
total amount of charges to deliver the
shipment.
(B) Unmasked internet protocol (IP)
address or media access control (MAC)
address of the device used to initiate the
shipping transaction and the unmasked
IP address or MAC address of the device

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2

Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 223 / Friday, November 21, 2025 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES2

used to file the ACAS filing each time
an ACAS filing is transmitted.
(v) Data elements required only in
certain situations. (A) Biographic data.
Biographic data (Biographic data is the
data contained on a CBP-approved
government-issued photo identification
document verified to match the
individual presenting cargo for
shipment. Biographic data includes, but
is not limited to, the government-issued
identification document type, the
identifier that is uniquely associated
with the identification document, the
issuing government authority and
country, the name of the individual, and
the date of birth of the individual.
Biographic data also includes the date
and time an individual presents a CBPapproved government-issued photo
identification document for the
collection of biographic data under this
paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A). A copy of the
document used to provide biographic
data is subject to the retention
requirement under paragraph (c)(7) of
this section.) is a required data element:
(1) When the customer account
shipping frequency/volume, identified
under paragraph (d)(4)(ii)(C) of this
section, is assigned the shipping outlet/
walk-in code; or
(2) When a shipment contains
household goods or personal effects.
(B) Link to product listing and
unmasked internet protocol (IP) address
or media access control (MAC) address
of the device used by the consignee to
purchase the product. This data element
is required when a consignee, who does
not have an account with the logistics
provider that issued the lowest level air
waybill, initiates a cargo shipment by
conducting a transaction on any internet
store or online marketplace platform.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:13 Nov 20, 2025

Jkt 268001

When this data element is required, the
ACAS filer must transmit:
(1) The unmasked IP address or MAC
address of the device used by the
consignee to purchase the product; and
(2) The uniform resource locator
(URL) of the product; or
(3) The stock keeping unit (SKU) of
the product so long as the home page
URL of the website used to conduct the
transaction is also transmitted and entry
of the SKU into the search function of
the website results in the display of the
product landing page described under
paragraph (d)(4)(v)(B)(2) of this section.
(5) Optional data elements. The
transmission of the following data
elements is optional, but encouraged.
(i) Second Notify Party. The ACAS
filer may choose to designate a Second
Notify Party to receive shipment status
messages from CBP.
(ii) Origin of shipment. The
International Standards Organization
(ISO) country code representing the
country where the cargo was tendered
for shipment.
(iii) Declared value. Declared value is
the U.S. fair market value of the cargo
in U.S. dollars.
(iv) Harmonized commodity code.
The Harmonized commodity code is the
applicable Harmonized Tariff Schedule
(HTS) code at the 6-digit or 10-digit
level.
(v) Transaction type. The CBPspecified code that best represents the
transactional relationship between the
shipper and the consignee (e.g., C2B—
Consumer to Business).
(vi) Special handling type. The CBPspecified special handling code or
dangerous goods code applicable to
certain cargo shipments.
(vii) Customer account email address.
The email address associated with the

PO 00000

Frm 00051

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 9990

52845

account identified under paragraph
(d)(4)(iii)(A) of this section.
(viii) Customer account phone
number. The phone number associated
with the account identified under
paragraph (d)(4)(iii)(A) of this section.
(ix) Shipper Manufacturer
Identification (MID) code or Authorized
Economic Operator (AEO) information.
The MID code or AEO number and code
representing the designating body for
the party identified as the shipper under
paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section.
(x) Consignee importer of record
number. The consignee importer of
record number is the U.S. Social
Security number, the Internal Revenue
Service number, the Employer
Identification Number (EIN), or the CBPassigned number used as the importer of
record number by the party identified as
the consignee under paragraph (d)(1)(ii)
of this section.
(xi) Regulated agent name, address,
and code. The name, address, and code
associated with a party that ensures
security controls for the transportation
of cargo by air in accordance with
standards established by a CBPrecognized body.
(xii) ACAS filing type. The CBPspecified filing code that represents the
nature of the handling and
transportation of the cargo shipment
(e.g., Standard, Express, E-Commerce).
(xiii) Any additional data elements
listed in § 122.48a or any additional
information regarding ACAS data
elements may be provided and are
encouraged.
*
*
*
*
*
Kristi L. Noem,
Secretary of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2025–20606 Filed 11–20–25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P

E:\FR\FM\21NOR2.SGM

21NOR2