ALAN PEAT
CANADIAN CUSTOMS is strongly enforcing the new ISPM15 requirements for non-manufactured wood packaging on imports to that country. According to information released to FTW by Roland Raath, MD of Cargocare, the Canadian International Freight Forwarders Association (Ciffa) has issued details of a number of costly problems incurred by members’ clients because of non-compliance with the new regulations. One member, for example, had a problem with a consolidated container import from Antwerp. The container was pulled for inspection and it was found that three pallets did not meet the requirement of ISPM 15, even though the forwarder’s office overseas had supplied a signed declaration from an industrial packing company that the pallets were heat treated and conformed to ISPM 15. But there was no ISPM stamp on the pallets. Alternative suggestions were refused by customs, and the forwarder was instructed to return the whole container. Cost to the Canadian forwarder was three times ocean freight, as well as cartage – not to mention that three other shipments inside the container had to have replacement supplies sent via airfreight, for which the forwarder will probably have to absorb the cost. The moral of this tale, according to Ciffa, is that ONLY correct ISPM 15 stamps are acceptable, or an official government-issued phyto-sanitary certificate. Substituting “a signed declaration from an industrial packing company” is not sufficient to meet the regulations. This, and a number of other infractions of the ISPM rulings which were interdicted by customs, highlighted that the Canadian authorities are not playing pussy-cat, according to Raath. “Canadian law requires that all non-manufactured imported wood should be treated in accordance with ISPM 15 regulations,” he said. “The wood must be marked with the IPPC symbol for treated wood packaging materials or be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate specifically attesting to the treatment of wood packing materials in accordance with ISPM 15.”
Canadian Customs gets tough with ISPM transgressors
15 Dec 2006 - by Staff reporter
0 Comments
FTW - 15 Dec 06
15 Dec 2006
15 Dec 2006
15 Dec 2006
15 Dec 2006
15 Dec 2006
15 Dec 2006
15 Dec 2006
15 Dec 2006
15 Dec 2006