The car and the lading are two different issues to U.S.
Customs. While my experience was derived from international
air cargo operations, the rules were roughly similar, to
wit:
- The locomotives and crew (if non-U.S. citizens) were
treated as temporarily in-bond under Customs rules. The
locomotives, at least, were required to return within 48
hours or whatever the Customs-specified period was. (I
suspect RR crews weren't subject to the General Declaration
procedure that applied to airline crews, but I don't know
that for a fact. GD was about U.S. flag property operating
in international waters/airspace and was overseen principally
by INS.)
- The freight cars most likely moved/move back and forth under
standard interchange rules I suspect were ratified by both U.S.
Customs and (at that time) Revenue Canada. Particularly prior
to computerized car tracking, tracking each car (vs. the lading
it contained) in each train entering/leaving the U.S. would have
been an onerous burden on trade and prohibitively expensive to
enforce. I'd bet, however, the preponderance of cars moving either
way across the border were loaded anyway with MT's minimized
excepting possibly car shortage situations such as heavy seasonal
movements like grain or other commodities traded on the futures
exchanges.
- The lading was the real issue. Cars were sealed. Whether or not
customs seals were applied in addition to standard RR seals is
unkown to me. They were either destined for the account of a
consignee in whose name the LOAD cleared customs under the car
number on the waybill; or they moved on some form of T&E
(Transportation & Exportation) entry for one of two reasons. First,
they might have been moving under a rate that permitted enroute
processing in which case they were TIB (Temporary In Bond); or
second, they were moving from one country through the other and
then back again such as New England paper traffic did when CNR
or CPR moved it through Canada and back into the U.S. such as the
Detroit gateway. I was only familiar with Uniform Bills of Lading
or Short Form UBL's, but I suspect international traffic was
limited to the former.
Process-wise that's probably ballpark. Anybody out there who
worked in car accounting or directly with Customs on either side
of the border who can nail down the details with greater clarity??
JCH
--- kvrailway@xxxxxxx wrote:
From: KVRailway <kvrailway@xxxxxxx>
To: cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [cpsig] Re: 48-hour law
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 16:24:27 -0700
Can't put my hands on anything definite right now, but I'm pretty sure that
you will find that rule stayed in place until the 1980s or even 1990s. It
certainly was in place in the mid-1970s. I might note that this law did not
apply to "all equipment" in quite the way implied. Freight equipment in
particular, could be across the border for significant lengths of time, but
there were arrangements in place to allow for that. Even so, IIRC, freight
cars had to clear customs in both directions, whether loaded or empty.
Joe Smuin
----- Original Message -----
From: "jshorvath10583" <jshorvath10583@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 7:09 AM
Subject: [cpsig] Re: 48-hour law
"mcindoefalls" <mcindoefalls@...> wrote:
What was the name of the law that prohibited Canadian locomotives
steam and diesel from being in the U. S. more than 48 hours ?
It began when? It was repealed when?
law or treaty per se; it was 24, not 48, hours; and it applied to allWalt, my impression is that this was a customs regulation not a
equipment.
I've only seen it mentioned in an off-hand way in various books and
other publications. I actually tried to look into it on-line a month
or so ago but to no avail. The sense I get is that it changed some
time in the '60s.
JSH
Yahoo! Groups Links
