Business to Motorways of the Sea Improvement of Customs ... · Dušan Delbelo, Intereuropa Ltd. Co PatriziaDagri, Intereuropa Ltd. Co Branko Lozej, Intereuropa Ltd. Co Moreno Marinac,

Activity 2 Report

Page 1

Business to Motorways of the Sea

Improvement of Customs and port control

efficiency in trade flows with EU neighbouring

countries

Document Version: Final Report

Activity 2 Report

Page 2

DISCLAIMER

"The sole responsibility of this publication lies with the author. The European Union is not

responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein."

AUTHORS:

Eva Pérez, Fundación Valenciaport

Ana Arévalo, Autoridad Portuaria de Barcelona

Anna Llisterri, Autoridad Portuaria de Barcelona

Mònica Rivera, Albea

Borja Vallejo, Albea

Bojan Beškovnik, Intereuropa Ltd. Co

Jana Barba, Intereuropa Ltd. Co

Dušan Delbelo, Intereuropa Ltd. Co

PatriziaDagri, Intereuropa Ltd. Co

Branko Lozej, Intereuropa Ltd. Co

Moreno Marinac, Intereuropa Ltd. Co

Paolo Scarpellini, Port of Livorno

Beatrice Tei, Port of Livorno

Giorgio Mainardi, Port of Livorno

Francesco Papucci, Port of Livorno

Activity 2 Report

Page 3

VERSION HISTORY

Date Document

Version

Document

Revision

History

Document Author/Reviser

2 July 2015 1.0 First Draft

(vs 0) Eva Pérez

15 September

2015 1.1

Second

Draft (vs

1)

Ana Arévalo, Ana Llisterri / Mónica Rivea, Borja

Vallejo

16 October

2015 1.2

Third

Draft (vs

2)

Paolo Scarpellini, Beatrice Tei and Giorgio

Mainardi / Ana Arévalo, Anna Llisterri /Mònica

Rivera, Borja Vallejo

23 October

2015 1.3

Fourth

Version

(vs 3)

Bojan Beškovnik and Jana Barba / Ana Arévalo,

Anna Llisterri/Mònica Rivera, Borja Vallejo

October 2015 1.0

Final

Report (vs

1)

Ana Arévalo, Anna Llisterri / Mónica Rivera, Borja

Vallejo

APPROVALS

Date Document Version Document Approved by

Activity 2 Report

Page 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DISCLAIMER .............................................................................................................................................................. 2

AUTHORS: .................................................................................................................................................................. 2

VERSION HISTORY .................................................................................................................................................... 3

APPROVALS ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................................... 4

INDEX OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................................................... 6

INDEX OF GRAPHS AND FIGURES ............................................................................................................................ 7

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................................................. 8

GLOSSARY OF TERMS ............................................................................................................................................... 9

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 11

1.1 OBJECTIVE OF THE INITIATIVE....................................................................................... 11

1.2 SCOPE ................................................................................................................................. 14

2 REPORT FOR THE PROTOTYPE AND PILOT “IMPORT-EXPORT APPLICATION WITH EU NEIGHBOURING

COUNTRIES” – PARTNER(S) RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS REPORT: APB ................................................................ 16

2.1 ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 16

2.2 INTRODUCTION: main problem identified at the beginning of the project ............... 18

2.3 MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE PROTOTYPE .......................................................................... 19

2.4 SCOPE OF THE PILOTs ...................................................................................................... 20

2.5 TECHNICal description of the PROTOTYPE and pilots carried out ............................. 20

2.6 LIST OF USERS AND ROLE OF USERS INVOLVED IN THE TESTS AND PILOTS ............ 26

2.7 TESTS RESULTS................................................................................................................. 26

2.8 main problems encountered during the tests .............................................................. 27

2.9 further work necessary for the implementation of the prototype ............................. 27

Activity 2 Report

Page 5

3 REPORT FOR THE PROTOTYPE AND PILOT “IMPROVEMENT OF CUSTOMS AND PORT CONTROL

EFFICIENCY IN TRADE FLOWS WITH EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES” – PARTNER(S) RESPONSIBLE FOR

THIS REPORT: APL ................................................................................................................................................. 28






3.6 TESTS RESULTS................................................................................................................. 35



4 REPORT FOR THE PROTOTYPE AND PILOT “E-COMMUNICATION WITH GOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTIONS

IN PGSC” – PARTNER(S) RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS REPORT: “INTEREUROPA” ................................................. 36





4.5 MESSAGE FLOW WITH COMPLETE EDI BETWEEN ALL STAKEHOLDERS ................................. 42

4.5.1 Communication with Port of Koper .....................................................................................42

4.5.2 Communication with Customs .............................................................................................43

4.5.3 Communication and documentation flow with Phyto-sanitary inspectors .........................45

4.6 description of tehnical improvements ................................................................................. 46

4.6.1 partner/sender and port forwarder communication ...........................................................46

4.6.2 port forwarder and Port of koper communication ..........................................................53

4.6.3 port forwarder and warehouse operator communication ..............................................57

Activity 2 Report

Page 6

4.6.4 port forwarder and Customs office communication ........................................................62

4.6.5 port forwarder and Phyto-sanitary inspectors communication .....................................66


4.8 TESTS RESULTS................................................................................................................. 70



INDEX OF TABLES

Table 1: Users involved in the APB prototype development ........................................................ 26

Table 2: Users involved in the APB prototype testing ................................................................... 26

Table 3: Average time savings in each measure ............................................................................ 27

Table 4: Exporter Actions ................................................................................................................ 33

Table 5: Freight Forwarder/Exporter Actions............................................................................... 34

Table 6: Freight Forwarder/Importer Actions .............................................................................. 34

Table 7: Users sign-up in the MILOS system .................................................................................. 34

Table 8: List of messages – communication btw. Partner/Sender and Port Forwarder ............ 47

Table 9: List of messages received from Shipping Agent for container assignment/release .... 53

Table 10: List of messages for positioning in the Port .................................................................. 54

Table 11: List of messages for stripping in the Port ...................................................................... 55

Table 12: List of messages for empty container positioning confirmation in the Port .............. 55

Table 13: List of messages for cargo entry in the Warehouse ...................................................... 58

Table 14: List of messages for cargo loading on the truck ............................................................ 60

Table 15: List of messages for Transit Customs Declaration ........................................................ 62

Table 16: List of messages for Import customs clearing ............................................................... 63

Table 17: List of messages for Phyto/Quality/Health certificate declaration ............................ 67

Activity 2 Report

Page 7

INDEX OF GRAPHS AND FIGURES

Figure 1: Maritime lines under study ............................................................................................. 13

Figure 2: Schematic operative for the import procedures from EU with neighbouring countries

............................................................................................................................................................ 17

Figure 3: Schematic operative for the export procedures from EU with neighbouring countries

............................................................................................................................................................ 18

Figure 4: Start of the B2MOS application ....................................................................................... 21

Figure 5: Import/Export menu ....................................................................................................... 21

Figure 6: Import menu ..................................................................................................................... 22

Figure 7: Insert data (Export menu) ............................................................................................... 22

Figure 8: Insert data (Import menu) .............................................................................................. 22

Figure 9: Import/Export global menu ............................................................................................ 23

Figure 10: Export current scenario ................................................................................................. 23

Figure 11: Import current scenario ................................................................................................ 24

Figure 12: Export future scenario ................................................................................................... 24

Figure 13: One of the Import future scenarios .............................................................................. 25

Figure 14: PDF report ...................................................................................................................... 25

Figure 15: Flow on information. HW and SW components .......................................................... 30

Figure 16: Logical Setting ................................................................................................................ 31

Figure 17: Scenario 2 – No effractions detected ............................................................................ 31

Figure 18: Scenario 2 – Effractions detected ................................................................................. 32

Figure 19: MILOS Home Page .......................................................................................................... 32

Figure 20: Message structure for the MSG-01 message: “Aviso from partner/sender” – ¼ ...... 47

Figure 21: Message structure for the MSG-01 message: “Aviso from partner/sender” – 2/4 ... 48



Figure 24: Message structure for the MSG-08 message: “Confirmaton entry warehouse to

partner/sender” ............................................................................................................................... 51

Figure 25: Message structure for the MSG-05 message: “Release order from partner/sender”

............................................................................................................................................................ 52

Activity 2 Report

Page 8

Figure 26: Message structure for the MSG-16 message: “Loading confirmation to

partner/sender” ............................................................................................................................... 53

Figure 27: Message structure for the MSG-04 message: “Container assignment/release”........ 54

Figure 28: Message structure for MSG-09 message ...................................................................... 56

Figure 29: Message structure for MSG-10 message ...................................................................... 57

Figure 30: Message structure for MSG-06 message “Aviso entry Warehouse” ........................... 59

Figure 31: Message structure for MSG-07 message “Confirmation entry Warehouse” ............. 60

Figure 32: Message structure for MSG-14 message: Order to warehouse for loading on truck 61

Figure 33: Message structure for MSG-15: Loading confirmation from the warehouse ............ 62

Figure 34: Message structure for MSG-01/1 message: IM4 Customs Declaration – 1/2 ........... 64

Figure 35 Message structure for MSG-01/1 message: IM4 Customs Declaration – 2/2 ............ 65

Figure 36: Message structure for MSG-02/1 message for IM4 Customs Confirmation.............. 66

Figure 37: Message structure for MSG-2 a,b,c message: “Phyto/Quality/Health certificate

declaration” -1/2 .............................................................................................................................. 68


declaration” -2/2 .............................................................................................................................. 69

Figure 39: Message structure for MSG-4 message: “Document conformation” .......................... 70

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

APB Autoritat Portuaria de Barcelona

APL Autorità Portuale Livorno

AA Association Agreements

ATR Admission Temporaire Roulette

B2MoS Business To Motorways of the Sea

DAE Documento che Accompagna l’Esportazione – Document that

accompanies the export process

DUA Call Single Document (Documento Único Aduanero)

ECS Export Control System

EDI Electronic Data Interchange

Activity 2 Report

Page 9

EDIFACT UN/EDIFACT United Nations/Electronic Data Interchange For

Administration, Commerce and Transport

EXS Exit Summary Declaration

ENP

European Neighbourhood Policy

EU European Union

FCL Full Container Load

FTAs

Free Trade Agreements

PCAs Partnership and Cooperation Agreements

PGL Perishable Goods Logistics

PCS Port Community System

PGSC Perishable Goods Supply Chain

RTAs regional trade agreements

SAD Single Administrative Document

SSS Short Sea Shipping

SVAD Servizio Vigilanza Antifrode Dogane

RFID Radio Frequency Identification

TPCS Tuscan Port Community System

TT Transit Time

XML Extensible Markup Language

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

A3 Status Status of goods (nationalized or not)

APERAK UN/EDIFACT message that provides the definition of the Application Error and acknowledgment message.

Activity 2 Report

Page 10

Declaration of landing

A type of custom declaration in Livorno

IFTSAI UN/EDIFACT Electronic message used to request transport schedules.

http://www.unece.org/trade/untdid/d04b/trmd/iftsai_c.htm GIS Middleware platform

Ro-pax vessel A vessel that carries both people and trucks

Term Description

WEX Intereuropa’s operational IT platform

http://www.unece.org/trade/untdid/d04b/trmd/iftsai_c.htm

Activity 2 Report

Page 11

1 INTRODUCTION

EU trade policy towards the neighboring countries is covered under the general framework of

the EU regional trade agreements (RTAs) as well as the EU Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). The

European Union’s trade policy instruments consist of both bilateral cooperation like the

European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), Association Agreements (AA), Partnership and

Cooperation Agreements (PCAs) and multilateral (the Union for the Mediterranean -the Euro-

Mediterranean Partnership, formerly known as the Barcelona Process)

Some of the underlying problems, identified in this initiative are local but the focus has been

oriented to those inefficiencies that could be solved in a similar way throuout Europe. The

objective is optimising the passage of trade goods between EU and neighboring ports.

1.1 OBJECTIVE OF THE INITIATIVE

This initative 3 focused on demonstrating how data sharing with stakeholders in third

countries could improve the reliability and perceived quality of SSS services connecting EU

countries with EU neighbouring countries.

The schedules of these SSS services are adapted so that the vessels arrive late at large cities in

order for truck drivers to avoid peak times entering and leaving the port. This timing is

therefore very convenient for truck drivers but it is not adequate to minimise the time for

clearing processes as it is out of most official bodies’ office hours. However, if planned in

advance, some official inspection institutions could adapt their working time to serve these

vessels. The information needs and advance planning schemes that could help solve this

situation will be analysed and then prototyped and piloted in this initiative.

Some SSS stakeholders have repeatedly pointed out that the process for obtaining a response

from governmental offices at times takes several days. Reducing this time is crucial for SSS

services with neighbouring countries to increase their competitiveness in comparison to road

transport services.

Activity 2 Report

Page 12

Obtaining information from the port of origin at the port of destination prior to the arrival of

the vessel is particularly relevant for increasing the efficiency of SSS services coming from

neighbouring countries. More specifically, retrieving data at the port of destination regarding

the goods being transported from a port in a third neighbouring country (i.e. Tangier) via a SSS

service will enable the respective consignees, customs’ brokers and/or freight forwarders to

better plan cross-border regulatory bodies’ inspections (sanitary, phytosanitary, health,

quality,...) as well as to prepare Customs procedures. Sanitary and phyto-sanitary inspections

in these traffics are quite usual as there is a relevant volume of food products being traded

between neighbouring countries and EU countries.

The documentation process associated to the proof of EU origin in EU export flows to third

countries also presents a clear opportunity for improvement. The manual and paper based

procedures of the EUR-1 certificate and the ATR Movement Certificates could be transformed

into electronic messages and therefore reduce the administrative burden for MoS. At present,

the EUR-1 and ATR documents have many information fields in common with the export SAD.

However, it is necessary to fill them in separately and print them in SAD forms pre-established

by Customs using dot-matrix printers. Once these forms have been printed, a courier service

delivers these documents to the Customs office attaching the export SAD and the commercial

invoice copies to these documents. The export Customs office in the EU checks these documents

and stamps the authorisation. Finally, the original stamped EUR-1 and ATR certificates must be

sent again by express courier to the final destination. This long and cumbersome process could

be rendered much more efficient using electronic documents.

The methodology and approach of this initiative have been established considering from the

beginning three different realities (the Port of Barcelona, the Port of Koper and the Port of

Livorno) of the import and export procedures with neighbounring countries (see Figure 1).

Activity 2 Report

Page 13

Figure 1: Maritime lines under study

From the beginning of the initiative it was clear that:

- Port of Barcelona and Livorno were interested in the analysis of customs procedures for

trucks using SSS lines with Tangier. Both flows import and export, have been considered.

- Port of Luka was interested in the analysis of customs procedures for reefer containers

flows, especially bottlenecks in the import from Middle East countries (Israel and Egypt).

The different initial point of the three ports of the I3 Initiative allows to have more elements to

draw a map of the supply chains in order to find common features.

Port of

Barcelona

Port of

KoperMiddle East

0

Document analysis Document analysis

BIP Customs

3 linesPort of

Livorno

Port of

Tanger Med

Ro–ro cargo

Activity 2 Report

Page 14

The work carried out in the initiative has been structured in the following phases:

Phase 1: Technical analysis

Phase 2: Prototype development

Phase 3: Pilot

Phase 4: Public demonstration

1.2 SCOPE

The partners that initially manifested interest to participate in this initiative in the B2MoS

proposal were:

Port Authority of Barcelona (leader)

Valenciaport Foundation

Port Authority of Valencia

GRM

Italian Ministry of Transport

Port Authority of Livorno

Intereuropa

The partners that have analysed the import and export procedures with neighbounring

countries and that are engaged to develop the prototype are:

Port Authority of Barcelona (leader)

Port Authority of Livorno

Intereuropa

The scope of this Initiative was to retrieve data at the port of destination in Europe, about the

goods transported from a port in a third neighbouring country (i.e. Tangier) via a SSS service.

Activity 2 Report

Page 15

This data will enable respectively consignees, customs’ brokers and/or freight forwarders to

plan better cross-border regulatory bodies’ inspections (sanitary, phytosanitary, health,

quality) as well as to prepare Customs procedures. Sanitary and phytosanitary inspections in

these traffics occur quite often since there is a large volume of food products traded between

neighbouring countries and EU countries.

Activity 2 Report

Page 16

2 REPORT FOR THE PROTOTYPE AND PILOT “IMPORT-EXPORT APPLICATION WITH

EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES” – PARTNER(S) RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS REPORT:

APB

2.1 ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION

The starting point for the APB was to understand and carefully analysed the current situation

in customs procedures (import and export) and how to improve some of them in the maritime

line between Barcelona and Tangier.

The Port Authority of Barcelona designed a template for the I3 Initiative in order to gather the

information (problems found, proposed solutions, etc.) in an orderly way. The focus was put on

the following issues:

- Possibility of exchanging data with North-African countries, especially Tangier -Morocco

(and Middle-East countries for the port of Koper);

- How to deal with documents related to customs procedures;

- How to deal with documents with phyto-sanitary (health) controls and checks.

The technical analysis of this phase 1 aimed to:

1. Identify the bottlenecks of the import and export procedures in the commercial maritime line

of Barcelona-Tangier and determine the technical feasibility of possible solutions.

2. Chose one of the possible solutions to be developed through a prototype for subsequent pilot

test and optimise administrative procedures in import and export.

The analysis of the import and export procedures undertaken at the Port of Barcelona has taken

into account all relevant stakeholders in the transport chain: shippers, freight forwarders,

customs agents, end customers, border inspection, inspector’s services, and customs.

The communication with the different stakeholders has allowed the project to clearly detect

bottlenecks in each step of the global procedure. After finishing the analysis in the APB the same

analysis has been done in the port of Tangier (Tangier-MED). A mission was organised at the

beginning of August (from the 5th to 7th of 2014) to understand the import and export

procedures, analysing what it is being doing in each port with the aim to establish common

improvements adapted to both realities.

Activity 2 Report

Page 17

Once the analysis was done, it has been considered experiences in similar traffic characteristics

in other iniciatives developed in the B2MoS project. This consideration allows checking the

procedures that are similar in comparable traffics in the different port authorities. Therefore

local aspects have been rejected, and it is ensured the solutions proposed are global and could

be applicable at national level.

The analysis done in the import and export procedures with neighbouring countries could be

seen in Figure 2 and 3.

Figure 2: Schematic operative for the import procedures from EU with neighbouring countries

Submission of SADManual

Via EDI

ValidationsApplication of summaries

Application of guarantees

Application of filters

Application of TARIC

Other applications

SAD refusal SAD admission

Filters

RED channel

Validations: TARIC,

guarantees, summaries

ORANGE channel

Automatic clearing

GREEN channel

Physical recognition Documentary

recognitionAutomatic release of

goods without

recognition

Activation of the summary

declaration

Activity 2 Report

Page 18

Figure 3: Schematic operative for the export procedures from EU with neighbouring countries

2.2 INTRODUCTION: MAIN PROBLEM IDENTIFIED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE

PROJECT

The drawbacks encountered in the import procedures are:

1. Currently, the summary declaration is activated once the vessel arrives in port. Then, the SAD

is submitted and the Customs automatically assign a channel: red, orange or green.

2. There are problems when red or orange channels are assigned and the Customs are closed,

because the trucks have to wait for the services to reopen then they can proceed accordingly.

The drawbacks encountered in the export procedures are:

1. The original EUR1 document signed by Customs must travel with the vessel, as it is required

in the port of destination. In case there is no time to sign the EUR1 before the departure of the

vessel, the document is sent by express courier to the port of destination in order to be there

once the vessel arrives. This incurs an additional cost and also additional time.

This problem is common in weekends, when Customs are closed and the EUR1 can not be

signed. The trucks arrive at the port of destination before the EUR1 and then they have to wait

for it. There is an alternative, paying the full taxes that will be returned after the original

documentation is presented. This also implies to the customer to assume a cost.

Export declaration -

Submission of SADSupporting documentation

(commercial invoices, export

certificate, etc.)

SAD refusal SAD admission

Filters

RED channel

Validations: TARIC,

guarantees, summaries

ORANGE channel

Automatic clearing

GREEN channel

Physical recognition Documentary

recognitionAutomatic release of

goods without

recognition

Activity 2 Report

Page 19

For the different drawbacks identified considering APB but also after visiting the port of

Tangier and analysed the same procedures, it has been concluded different technical solutions:

1. Documents in the ‘cloud’: the SAD can be uploaded in the ‘cloud’ prior to the vessel’s arrival,

i.e. the port authority system. Then when the vessel’s arrival is activated, the SAD can be

submitted automatically. In this way, the customs agents do not need to be physically in

front of a computer waiting for the activation of the vessel in order to submit the SAD. This

solution could be measured in terms of time savings for customs agents and drivers.

2. Pre-Clearance, activation prior to the arrival of the vessel in port:

- Orange channel: it is only a documentary recognition; therefore, documents can be presented

to Customs while the vessel is in transit. If the documents are correct, the channel will turn

green and the goods will be released. This solution could be measured in terms of time savings

for drivers.

- Red channel: if the vessel is activated prior to its arrival in port, the positioning request can

be anticipated. Then, once the vessel arrives in port, the truck will know exactly where it has to

go for inspection. This solution could be measured in terms of time savings for drivers.

3. Electronic EUR1, this document is a certificate of origin under a bilateral agreement between

countries. This solution could be measured in terms of time savings for Customs, customs

agents and drivers and also in terms of cost savings for clients.

2.3 MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE PROTOTYPE

Once the main drawbacks in the import and export processes have been analysed and different

technical solutions have been proposed, the main objective of the prototype developed is to

demonstrate how these solutions allow reducing the time consumption that affects the overall

process, improving the current situation.

In addition to this main objective, this prototype contributes to achieve benefits for the users

of this SSS line since it allows obtaining, in a dynamic and comfortable way for the user, an

estimation of the time that a truck could spend in each of the different processes that take place

in the port (import/export). Moreover, this estimation of times obtained by this tool allows

companies to improve the planification of the global transport of their cargo.

Activity 2 Report

Page 20

Finally, this application allows showing how increasing Custom’s schedule could optimise the time

spent for the trucks in the different procedures, improving in that way the supply chain and

transport costs of the companies that use this mode, making thereby, more competitive SSS lines.

2.4 SCOPE OF THE PILOTS

The scope of the Prototype developed by the APB, is to show the effect of implementing the

technical solutions proposed by the APB in the current situation, in order to optimise the

procedures that cargo flows have to pass in a SSS line between a member state (Barcelona –

Spain) and a third neighbouring country (Tangier – Morocco).

The prototype measures the time savings of the different technical solutions proposed by the

APB impact in a freight truck that use the SSS line between these two locations for the import

and export procedures.

Furthermore, is desirable to extend the use of this tool to other SSS Mediterranean Ports in

order to complement and improve the utility and action range of this Initiative’s prototype.

The development of the prototype has began in March of 2015 and it has finished in July 2015.

After that, a pilot phase has started in the Port of Barcelona to check if the prototype

corresponds to the real situation. This has taken place in September 2015.

Once concluded this phase, a Demonstration phase of this prototype will be realized. This phase

wants to show the benefits that this prototype would produce in the Port of Barcelona and in

other Mediterranean ports if this prototype would be implemented. This phase take place on

November and December 2015.

2.5 TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROTOTYPE AND PILOTS CARRIED OUT

The application developed is based in a serie of Excel tables. These tables simulate numerically

all the processes that a truck of SSS should pass in each of the entry/exit operations within the

port. These tables receive all the data introduced by the client (arrival time, departure time,

freight of each truck…) and later, this information is treated to simulate the current scenario

and the future situations considering the measures proposed by the Port of Barcelona.

In the following paragraphs, a serie of screenshots will be presented in order to show how this

application works.

Activity 2 Report

Page 21

Figure 4: Start of the B2MOS application

To start using the application, it should be clicked the Start button. Once clicked, the Operation

Selecting Menu will appear: Import or Export

Figure 5: Import/Export menu

Once the import/export option is chosen an identical menu will appear for both options: Insert

data or going back to the general menu.

Activity 2 Report

Page 22

Figure 6: Import menu

Figure 7: Insert data (Export menu)

Figure 8: Insert data (Import menu)

Activity 2 Report

Page 23

Once the data has been selected, a menu with the different possible scenarios (current and

piloting) and export to Pdf document will appear.

Figure 9: Import/Export global menu

If the chosen option is the current scenario, the following screen will appear:

Figure 10: Export current scenario

Activity 2 Report

Page 24

Figure 11: Import current scenario

If the chosen option is Piloting, a screen with a serie of tables representing the time savings

obtained according to the different possible solutions will appear:

Figure 12: Export future scenario

Activity 2 Report

Page 25

Figure 13: One of the Import future scenarios

It has also been developed a final option to generate a pdf report integrating the different

options selected.

Figure 14: PDF report

Activity 2 Report

Page 26

2.6 LIST OF USERS AND ROLE OF USERS INVOLVED IN THE TESTS AND PILOTS

Users involved in the prototype development:

Shippers Freight forwarders

Customs agents End customers

Border inspection Inspector’s services

Customs

Table 1: Users involved in the APB prototype development

All of them have provided us information to find out which are the main drawbacks in the

import and export process.

Users involved in the prototype testing:

Shippers Freight forwarders

Customs agents End customers

Table 2: Users involved in the APB prototype testing

Their roll on the project was to confirm the data of our application.

2.7 TESTS RESULTS

The results obtained from the different tests realized gave us very meaningful savings of time

that could be taken into account to the competitive administrations in order to improve the

performance of the differents import/export procedures. Here, a summary table with the time

savings is shown:

Average Time

savings

Pre-Clearance Documents in

the cloud

Electronic

EUR1

Import 1 hour 13 hours

Activity 2 Report

Page 27

Export 48 hours

Table 3: Average time savings in each measure

There are also cost savings derivated from this reduction of times but it has not been measured

due to the difficulty of giving a monetary value to the time of the different stakeholders

implicated in the processes.

2.8 MAIN PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED DURING THE TESTS

There was no meaningful problem found during the testing of the prototype since it is an

informatics application that shows the information gather in the previous stages (both real and

future scenarios).

2.9 FURTHER WORK NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROTOTYPE

The real implementation of the measures developed in the prototype means the agreement

between different administrations which have to assess the benefits generated and also which

have the competencies to set up the solutions.

Activity 2 Report

Page 28

3 REPORT FOR THE PROTOTYPE AND PILOT “IMPROVEMENT OF CUSTOMS AND PORT

CONTROL EFFICIENCY IN TRADE FLOWS WITH EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES” –

PARTNER(S) RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS REPORT: APL


PROJECT

The call in the port of Livorno of the “Tangier-Barcelona-Livorno” line is scheduled every

Thursday night for arrival and every Saturday afternoon for saling. It is a Ro-pax vessel that

carries both passengers and merchandise. The goods are both of Community and non-

Community origin.

Description of Customs Procedures

Once the ramp of the Ro-Ro vessel is placed, the serving customs officers at pier stop the vans

one by one while disembarking, asking the drivers whether or not they have goods to declare.

Secondly, they proceed with the document control and physical inspection of the van(s).

In case of non-conformity of goods and/or need for paperwork, control operators ask the driver

to move the truck to a dedicated area where they have their local office and they go on with the

preparation of the minutes of the control.

List of Documents for Import/Export

All necessary documents to make the customs declaration:

Invoice

Packing list

Mandate of clearance

Certificates of Origin

The customs of Livorno has developed a new document called “Declaration of Landing” where

is possible to find all the useful information for export operations.

Problems Found

1. Low smoothness of disembarking vehicles;

2. High likelihood of accident;

Activity 2 Report

Page 29

3. Lack of the presence of an on-site freight forwarder for all the passengers carrying goods

without a custom bill: for this reason, the customs releases the goods in A3 status (not

nationalised) and send it to a different depot area;

4. Lack of road signals marking the lane for cars and for trucks;

5. Lack of road signals marking the lane for "goods to declare" or "nothing to declare";

6. The lane "Community goods" and "non-Community goods" is marked only by two road

hurdles.

7. Setbacks for passengers and goods coming from EU.


This prototype aims to reach the main goals of improving customs procedures and port security

in terms of cost and time related to trade with EU neighbouring Countries.

In more detail, the objective is:

1. Speed up controls of cargo by:

a) Efficient separation of flows and identification of EU and non-EU cargo;

b) Use of electronic means to check seal integrity.


The scope is to create the conditions for streamlined passengers and cargo flows circulation

between two member states and a third neighbouring country.


The new system is focused on new technical solutions in order to speed up the control process.

Furthermore, a solution will be proposed that includes customised RFID seals (active seals) that

have validity for the Italian Customs Agency. Moreover, the extended use of handheld devices

for checking seal integrity and security controls will allow the enhancement and enforcement

of operations to be more efficient whilst speeding up the process.

Given the fact that both logistic and customs clearance operations take place in the port area,

where a lot economic operators and of control authorities are engaged, the following

documents are produced:

Activity 2 Report

Page 30

A procedural workflow manual for logistic operations, dedicated to EU and non-EU

economic operators, explaining step by step the import/export procedure with the new

technological assessment.

A customs procedural workflow, dedicated to the one stop shop local technical taskforce,

in order to have a clear flow of messages either electronic or physical, to handle the new

process.

The new process will be based on handheld devices connected with the TPCS system in real

time.

A new software, MILOS, has been created in order to manage the information related to e-seals

Figure 15: Flow on information. HW and SW components

Activity 2 Report

Page 31

Figure 16: Logical Setting

MILOS interacts with TPCS in order to verify the right association between e-seal and trailer

(plate). In case of match, Port Authority and Control Authorities can verify the status of the

trailer along the stretch (Tangier – Barcelona – Livorno). Each e-seals reading allows to know

the status of the trailer (breached or not breached). In case of breaches Trailer status gets

“SVAD block” and cargo has to be controlled in a specific place. In order to implement MILOS

system, two different scenarios have been identified:

Figure 17: Scenario 2 – No effractions detected

Activity 2 Report

Page 32

Figure 18: Scenario 2 – Effractions detected

Figure 19: MILOS Home Page


EXPORTER Action

The exporter prepares the

documentation related to cargo

It dispatches, as soon as they are available, the exact

Customs codes of the goods he wants to export to the

coordinator of the SUD task-force and copy to the Port

Authority, for the starting and the traceability of the seal.

Activity 2 Report

Page 33

He sends an e-mail. Object: Notification of bill of lading arrival IMO:

9999999 - No. Voyage: 99999 - ETA: 99/99/9999 –

TARIC 12345678

In the e-mail message:

List of avaiable documentation.

He gets a reply He prepares any possible additional documentation

needed by Controlling Authorities.

Table 4: Exporter Actions

We make reference to the ANFIBIOL procedure for the pre-notification of bill of lading and the

Customs clearance at sea procedure.

The referred customs operation will be goods unloading with Code delivered at quay 99,

followed by IM7 code for the introduction in a private Customs warehouse.

FREIGHT FOWARDER /exporter Action

Sealing of the cargo He seals up the cargo with rope seal and spike seal

(depending on the cargo unit) “high security”.

Sealing up of the cargo with active

RFID

He puts the active RFID, he labelled the Seal associating

it to license plate or to the container to MILOS system.

He reads the seal data for checking the accuracy of the

information uploaded in the system.

Dispatch of data sheet of seals,

dispatch of e-mail

Object: Pre-notification Bill of Lading. IMO: 9999999 –

No. Voyage: 99999 - ETA: 99/99/9999

He sends the Ship manifest in excel format, with the

physical and electronic seal code linked to the single

reference of the Ship Manifest.

He sends copy to the Port Authority which will check on

MILOS the successful activation of the Seals

Activity 2 Report

Page 34

Table 5: Freight Forwarder/Exporter Actions

Arrival of goods to be loaded or unloaded

Freight forwarder/importer Action

Cargo unloading He reads the RFID seal when unloading cargo, checking

the integrity.

Shipment to warehouses The goods are immediately shipped to the private

Customs warehouse.

Arrival at private Customs

warehouse

He reads the RFID seals, checking the integrity.

Arrival notices through e-mail

dispatch

He sends e-mail:

Object: Bills of Lading arrival. IMO: 9999999 –Voyage

no.: 99999 - ETA: 99/99/9999

He sends the e-mail to:

Port Authority

Table 6: Freight Forwarder/Importer Actions

The port Authority, through dedicated functionality of the MILOS application, checks if there are

any malfunctioning notices related to the single seal

Table 7: Users sign-up in the MILOS system

Activity 2 Report

Page 35

3.6 TESTS RESULTS

In cooperation with the Maroccan Operators and Institutions, the final test will be done in

November 23th, starting from Tangier Port.

Up to now some tests related to software and hardware functionalities have been made (in

Livorno).



Activity 2 Report

Page 36

4 REPORT FOR THE PROTOTYPE AND PILOT “E-communication with governmental

institutions in PGSC” – PARTNER(S) RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS REPORT:

“INTEREUROPA”


PROJECT

The logistics management processes for perishable goods flows through the port system

requires a wide set of documents and procedures, which are exchanged between different

involved stakeholders. The processes are continuously changing due to new requirements from

shippers, traders and importers. In order to optimise these processes for cargo flows through

Port of Koper the problem is lack of tools and services that will simplify and speed-up the

exchange of the information between all the relevant stakeholders electronically. Those tools

should base on standard electronic data interchange (EDI) messages.

The following main issues appear as the main bottlenecks for developing an integrated EDI

within all the stakeholders in the perishable goods supply chain (PGSC):

- Establishing EDI between exporters or traders from third countries (to receive

structured data for goods in arrival to the port of discharge),

- Establish EDI with national phyto-sanitary inspection as such platform does not exist

presently.

Presently the PGSC through Koper port is managed by Port of Koper as a solely operator, which

manages PGSC through their specialised warehouses. Intention of this initative is to prototype

an EDI platform also with other logistics operators that might handle fresh fruit and vegetables

through their warehouses facilities in Koper. With this two communication channels have to be

developed by ordering warehousing work:

- Between port forwarder and Port of Koper for managing PGSC through port’s facilities;

- Between port forwarder and external logistics operator for managing PGSC through

their warehouse facilities.

Further on, the main scope is to develop a unique IT tool supporting PGSC as a platform for all

stakeholders using Port of Koper as inbound or outbound logistics node. The solution relates

to presented stakeholders in Picture 1.

Activity 2 Report

Page 37

Picture 1: Stakeholders in PGL through Koper port

The main problem is therefore how to connect all stakeholders under unified messaging

protocol and to reduce data entry as defined also by Maritime Single Window (MSW). It is

important to find wider used protocols to cover as much as possible requests from other

logistics chains served by Port of Koper.

Today the entire chain does not base on EDI. As presented in Picture 2, the actual document

flow for container arrival in the Port of Koper with perishable goods is managed mainly by hard

copy procedure. This is partially still valid for customs procedures, meanwhile entirely valid for

communication with phyto-sanitary inspections (sending documents and receiving their

approvals).

Picture 2: Communication flow between main stakeholders in PGSC for container arrival

PGL

Customs

Harbour Master

Port Authority

Shipping AgentsBanks

Warehouse operators

Haulage contractor

Freight Forwarder

Phyto-sanitary inspectorate

SENDER OF GOODS

PORT FORWARDERS

PHYTO SANITARY INSPECTORS

CARRIER PORT OF KOPER CUSTOMS

No EDI No EDI

No EDI existing existing

Activity 2 Report

Page 38

The main stakeholders are freight forwarders that perform the main work in coordination and

planning of inbound and outbound process. They are the main nodal point in information

exchange between all stakeholders. The second group of stakeholders consists of Port of Koper

and governmental institutions as Customs and Phyto-sanitary inspectorate. In the third group

are shipping lines, shipping agents and other logistics operators that can offer goods reloading

through their warehouses at Koper.

Port forwarders prepare and send electronic messages through PCS based on received data

from good’s senders that can be either in electronic format (mostly xls data base) or in some

cases through EDI. Besides the order to POK, the port forwarder prepares documents for

Customs office. The freight forwarders prepare and hand over documents also to the phyto-

sanitary inspectors.

The existing EDI is just between port forwarder and the port, but on this “line” improvements

are further requested, due to the necessities foreseen from the PGSC. In order to speed-up all

the processes in PGSC that are connected to POD operations, it is of crucial importance to

receive as much as possible commercial data in EDI already from the Shipper based in third

countries.

This would significantly simplify the data entry for freight forwarders. Due to the very short

transit time (approx. 72 hours) between Port of loading and Port of Koper, the data processing

for goods entry is very sensitive. Thus the IT solution should be able to import structured

messages obtained via EDI. After all data entry processed, the IT tool, should offer solutions to

send structured messages and documents:

- to Port of Koper, their warehouse or outside warehouses operators,

- to customs,

- to phyto-sanitary inspectorate,

- to road hauliers and

- to final receivers or good’s traders.

Customs procedures for perishable goods in Koper still base on presentation of hard copy

documentation. By developing the Single window manifests should be sent to the Customs in e-

format. Besides Customs procedures a phyto-sanitary inspection and approval is also required.

Today all documents must be hand-over directly by the freight forwarder, because no EDI is

established.

Following problems were detected in communication and in handling documents for perishable

goods with Customs:

Activity 2 Report

Page 39

- Actual procedures related to customs and other inspections for described supply chain

at Port of Koper base on hard copy documentation, where several copies of the same

documents have to be delivered to different addresses.

- No unified IT platform in use by port forwarding agents.

- Multiple data insertion even for community goods.

- Due to very short time for container un-stuffing and stuffing into truck the time for

Customs purposes limits the entire supply chain.

- Real data of good’s status under process at Koper port unavailable.

Besides Customs procedures a Phyto-sanitary inspection is also required for fresh fruit and

vegetables. Today all documents must be hand-over directly by the freight forwarder. A 24 hrs

pre-advise is still sent by fax or by e-mail as written message. The entire communication with

local Phyto-sanitary inspectors is managed by phone or by e-mail. No EDI is established,

therefore freight forwarding agents and shipping lines do not have an IT solution to speed-up

the entire process of good’s inspection in inbound or outbound direction. Besides, no IT

platform is under development by Phyto-sanitary officers for external communication, that

presents the major obstacle in developing a wider used IT tool to cover entire PGSC.

Following problems were detected in communication and in handling documents with phyto-

sanitary inspectors:

- Just direct phone/e-mail communication is possible between freight forwarders,

shipping agents or shipping lines and Phyto-saintary inspection to agree on date and

time of good’s control.

- Actual procedures related to Phyto-sanitary inspections for described supply chain at

Port of Koper base on hard copy documentation presentation.

- No unified IT platform in use by port forwarding agents, NVOCC operators and shipping

agencies.

- Multiple data insertion for pre-advise preparation, request for inspections…

- Due to very short time for container un-stuffing and stuffing into refrigerated truck the

time for Phyto-sanitary purposes limits the entire supply chain – the waiting time can

be extended for over 30% of planned time for good’s stay in the port area.

The analysis of all needed documents to organise PGSC shows that still all main documents are

handled as hard copy documents. Beside this, following hard copy documents and e-documents

or messages that are required for proper process for PGSC through Koper port are missing:

- Departure pre-notice from POL agent or shipper containing goods description, quantity,

destination etc.

Activity 2 Report

Page 40

- Pre-notice from freight forwarder to the Port of Koper containing goods description,

quantity, stripping details, final destinations, mode of transportation, dates etc.

- Shipper’s notice or POL agent notice about sailed goods in containers per each Consignee

(possible several consignees per container).

- E-message to Port of Koper with specification of goods per consignee/outgoing truck.

- Electronic Release order from Line’s agent to Freight forwarder.

- Electronic message from Port of Koper to Freight forwarder about scanned (bar code)

pallets/goods that were unstuffed from the container.

- Notice from Freight forwarder to the POL agent or Shipper about cargo arrival in Koper

warehouse.

- Electronic disposition for cntr. stripping from Freight forwarder to Port of Koper.

- Order to Customs office for Import customs procedure or for Transit procedure (T1).

- Order to the phyto-sanitary inspectors for goods checking (directly hand over by Freight

forwarder).

- Order to the Phyto-sanitary inspection to issue Certificates (directly hand over by

Freight forwarder).

- Order for truck driver to pick-up the goods by frigo truck.

- Notice to Shipper and Consignee about goods departure from Port of Koper.


Main objective of the prototype is to propose the electronic data and message platform between

all the stakeholders involved in Perishable Goods Supply Chain business in Slovenia, where Port

of Koper is used as a PGSC gateway serving the European market of fresh fruit and vegetables.


Due to unrealised prototype, the pilots and tests were not carried out.


The prototype was not realised due to lack of cooperation from the Phyto-sanitary inspectors.

Further on during the analysis and design, some identified solutions were covered in the

inititative 9 of the b2mos project.

Further on within this chapter is listed design of the prototype with specified functionalities,

planned to be realised after the Phyto-sanitary inspector will launh corresponding project.

Activity 2 Report

Page 41

The prototype message platform is designed in a way, where all the stakeholders would be able

to use it and check it, in order to send or receive structured messages, under the rules of flows

shown in Picture 3. The main focus is on the first group of stakeholders (freight forwarder) and

second group (Port of Koper or other logistics operator, customs authorities and phyto-sanitary

inspectors).

Picture 3: New Proposed system schema for communication flow and data exchange in PGL

The prototype is desiged to set a clear protocol in the entire perishable goods supply chain

where commercial and operational data generated by the shipper/exporter are the initial step

in managing inbound PGSC via Port of Koper. The platform defines protocols where different

freight forwarders can use the same platform, in order to reduce operational and commercial

work and possibly reduce operational costs.

The prototype is designed to use e-communication with the Port and with governmental

institutions through a middleware platform - GIS to create and modify EDI messages. The

second part of the prototype for managing inbound and outbound processes for perishable

goods supply chain through Koper port is designed as a new module of the IT operational

solution - WEX, which is existing freight forwarder’s operational IT tool.

The entire package of GIS and WEX tools presents the platform that can be used also by other

small and mid-size forwarders, which do not have their own IT tool to provide lean PGSC. The

platform can connect also freight forwarders at loading point in third countries and receiving

freight forwarders at final destination in Europe by sending and receiving messages about

good’s status.

NVOCC

Freight forwarders

Customs in Slovenia

Container Carriers / Ship

agents

Port of Koper

Warehouse

WEX

GIS

Phyto-sanitary inspetorate

Activity 2 Report

Page 42

The prototype is designed to bring new knowledge in managing PGSC, especially in the field of

e-communication. The design for prototype includes proposals to develop EDI with phyto-

sanitary inspection office even the platform for data exchange at their side is not defined yet.

Consequently, proposal from the prototype can serve as the basis for future development of IT

solution for governmental institutions where a unified solution should be considered

accordingly.

New optimised message flow between involved stakeholders is further on described in chapter

2.1, coresponfing message structures are specified in chapter 2.2..

4.5 MESSAGE FLOW WITH COMPLETE EDI BETWEEN ALL STAKEHOLDERS

4.5.1 COMMUNICATION WITH PORT OF KOPER

The communication with Port of Koper basis on the use of PCS built by Port of Koper. For the

PGSC process it is very important to receive all incoming data in an electronic format. Presently

a lot of commercail and operational data are still communicated by hard copy documentation.

It is important to have a platform where a freight forwarding agent can import commercial and

operational data and to preapre electronic orders via the message exchange with the port's

system. Today the data exchange between port forwarding agent and POK does not include all

the relevant data in PGSC. Consequently the communication protocol sholud be updated.

The Picture 4 shows simplified communication and documentation flow for PGSC with POK.

The needed communication flow with POK starts from point 3 (Picture 4). After the container

release (point 3) the entire communication relies on port forwarding agent, thus the main focus

is on building IT prototype that facilities e-communication with the port.

Activity 2 Report

Page 43

Picture 4: Communication and documentation flow for PGSC with POK

4.5.2 COMMUNICATION WITH CUSTOMS

The main focus is to build a prototype that enables port community users to provide all the

necessary data from one-shop-point. Communication with Customs for incoming containers

will be partly solved with the development of MSW. The ship agent has to send pre-advice and

cargo manifest to the national customs office.

It is important to build one IT tool that already containes data from cargo manifest in order to

reduce data entry. For this reason prototype would allow to prepare documentation needed for

ship formality administration and to prepare electronic reporting to the customs office. On this

Activity 2 Report

Page 44

basis import customs declaration would be speed up. The entire communication flow between

the freight forwarder and Customs office would base on EDI (Picture 5).

Picture 5: Communication flow with Customs

Following solutions are proposed to be implemented in the prototype:

- Develop a process that includes all necessary procedures to declare the goods up on

arrival of the ship in the port, release of the goods/containers, delivery of full containers

to the warehouse, un-stuffing the goods and delivery by regular trucks to the final

destination; with strong focus on simplification of customs procedures for inbound flow.


arrival of the truck in the port, un-stuffing the goods from the truck into reefer container

and loading it to the vessel for the final destination; with strong focus on simplification

of customs procedures in the port.

- Introduce developed process within Port community by unified IT solution, that bring

benefits to NVOCc operators, Shipping Agents, freight forwarders, to the Port and

Customs,

- Reduce hard copy documentation and reduce needed time to prepare/handle requested

documentation.

Activity 2 Report

Page 45

4.5.3 COMMUNICATION AND DOCUMENTATION FLOW WITH PHYTO-SANITARY INSPECTORS

Presently the communication with Phyto-sanitary inspectors is done by phone or by e-mail

system. No EDI is established, as the inspectorate does not support EDI with external subjects

from port community. Consequently freight forwarding agents and Ocean carriers do not have

an IT solution to speed-up the entire process of good’s inspection in inbound or outbound

direction.

Present communication flow with Phyto-sanitary inspectors is presented in Picture 6. The

prototype is designed to allow freight forwarder to build an EDI message that would be sent to

the Inspector’s office. It is of crucial importance to have a support from Inspectors in order to

build the right architecture which should help said administration office to obtain time and cost

savings by reducing multiple data entry into their system.

According to first prediction about design and communication protocols, communication with

Phyto-sanitary inspectors will not be included with the development of MSW. Therefore, it is

on freight forwarders to find a solution to establish an EDI with phyto-sanitary inspector office.

On this basis following solutions are proposed and will be implemented by Intereuropa through

the prototype – upgrade of WEX:

- Develop a process that includes data flow transfer between freight forwarder and phyto-

sanitary inspections for inbound flow of fresh fruit and vegetables.


arrival of the truck in the port for outbound flows of fresh fruit and vegetables.

- Introduce developed process within Port community by unified IT solution, that bring

benefits to NVOCc operators, freight forwarders, to the Port and Inspections,

- Reduce hard copy documentation and reduce needed time to prepare/handle requested

documentation.

Activity 2 Report

Page 46

Picture 6: Communication flow with Phyto-sanitary inspectors

4.6 DESCRIPTION OF TEHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS

4.6.1 PARTNER/SENDER AND PORT FORWARDER COMMUNICATION

The prototype must enable to process the messages, as listed in the Table 8, exchanged with

the Partner/Sender of perishable goods, which enable him to provide following documents and

data to port forwarder, enabling port forwarder to prepare all the relevant hard copy and

electronic documents:

- Perishable goods data,

- Container data,

- Costs of goods,

- Data for phito-sanitary inspection of goods.

Based on the received data from the Partner/Sender, the prototype must enable to the port

forwarder to prepare order for phito-sanitary inspection review and to send the order to the

national Phito-sanitary office (the prototype should generate new message). For this

communication, the protoype should implement the messages, as listed in the Table 8.

Activity 2 Report

Page 47

# Msg ID Message Sender Receiver

01 MSG-01 Aviso from partner/sender Partner/Sender F.Forwarder

08 MSG-08 Confirmation entry warehouse to partner/sender F.Forwarder Partner/Sender

05 MSG-05 Release order from partner/sender Partner/Sender F.Forwarder

16 MSG-16 Loading confirmation to partner/sender F.Forwarder Partner/Sender

Table 8: List of messages – communication btw. Partner/Sender and Port Forwarder

Figure 20: Message structure for the MSG-01 message: “Aviso from partner/sender” – ¼

Activity 2 Report

Page 48

The message structure for the message-01 is specified in the Figure 20-Figure 23, reflecting the

message for receiving the aviso from the Partner/sender with segment for phyto-sanitary

inspection in the level of Port of Koper. The aviso contains all the revelant data to organise and

perform needed service of cooled cargo in arrival in the Port. Structured data should be

imported in the prototype, where, if properly parametrised, the system would automatically

generate all needed operations per each order.

Figure 21: Message structure for the MSG-01 message: “Aviso from partner/sender” – 2/4

Activity 2 Report

Page 49


Activity 2 Report

Page 50


Activity 2 Report

Page 51

The Figure 24 specifies message structure for the message, which enables to send the answer

regarding goods entry in the warehouse, to the Partner/Sender.

Figure 24: Message structure for the MSG-08 message: “Confirmaton entry warehouse to

partner/sender”

Activity 2 Report

Page 52

The Figure 25 specifies message structure for the order message, recevied from the

Partner/Sender. This message should be imported in the prototype and describes order to

release the goods.

Figure 25: Message structure for the MSG-05 message: “Release order from partner/sender”

Activity 2 Report

Page 53

The Figure 26 specifies message structure regarding loading confirmation from the warehouse.

Once the warehouse perform the loading operation and confirm this in the system following

message structure should be generated and sent to the Partner/Sender.

Figure 26: Message structure for the MSG-16 message: “Loading confirmation to

partner/sender”

4.6.2 PORT FORWARDER AND PORT OF KOPER COMMUNICATION

The prototype must enable to process the messages, as listed in Table 10 to enable to the freight

forwarder to receive the container assignment from the Shipping agent. The technical

specification has delivered the same solution, as it was identified and implemented in the

initiative 9 – LCL, thus the message was developed under I3 initative.


04 MSG-04 Container assignment/release Shipping Line F.Forwarder

Table 9: List of messages received from Shipping Agent for container assignment/release

The Figure 27 specifies message structure for receiving the message about container

assignment from the Shipping Agent.

Activity 2 Report

Page 54

Figure 27: Message structure for the MSG-04 message: “Container assignment/release”

The prototype must also enable to process the messages, as listed in the Table 10, as freight forwarder sends to the Port of Koper an electronic order for Full Container Positioning to the Warehouse and receiving the replay from the Warehouse regarding performed positioning. These messages were synchronised also with solutions described in Initative 9.


09 MSG-09 Full container positioning to Warehouse F.Forwarder Port

10 MSG-10 Full container positioning confirmation Port F.Forwarder

Table 10: List of messages for positioning in the Port

The prototype must enable to process the messages, as listed in the Table 11, as freight

forwarder sends to the Port of Koper for Container Stripping or to another warehouse platform.

The protoype must generate the replay from the Warehouse regarding performed stripping. A

wider described messages were specified and implemented in the prototype for in Initative 9.

Activity 2 Report

Page 55


11 MSG-09 Order for stripping F.Forwarder Port

12 MSG-10 Stripping confirmation Port F.Forwarder

Table 11: List of messages for stripping in the Port

When the empty container is positioned back to the container yard, the prototype must enable

to process the message, as listed in the Table 12 - to receive the anwser from the Warehouse

performed amty container positioning.


13 MSG-10 Empty container positioning confirmation Port F.Forwarder

Table 12: List of messages for empty container positioning confirmation in the Port

The Figure 28 specifies message structure for the messages to order full container positioning

to the warehouse operation and to order stripping of the container to the Port of Koper or to an

extermal warehouse platform (Picture 4, number 9 and 11).

Activity 2 Report

Page 56

Figure 28: Message structure for MSG-09 message

The Figure 29 specifies the message structure for the confirmation messages regarding full

container positioning operation, stripping operation and empty container positioning from the

Activity 2 Report

Page 57

warehouse operation (Picture 4, number 10, 12 and 13) received from the Port of Koper

warehouse or from an external warehouse.

Figure 29: Message structure for MSG-10 message

4.6.3 PORT FORWARDER AND WAREHOUSE OPERATOR COMMUNICATION

Presently Port of Koper manages cooling warehouses in Port of Koper. The communication goes

directly through established PCS, because POK plans and controls operation processes in

specialised warehouses.

Activity 2 Report

Page 58

Prototype design plans to develop a communication protocol with a warehouse operator

directly, because perishable goods can be unstuffed from the container to the warehouse and

lately stuffed in frigo trucks inside the port area or by the warehousing providers outside the

port area.

Following message protocol is defined:

- Freight forwarder sends aviso to Warehouse about FCL positioning,

- Warehouse sends confirmation of FCL positioning/entry in a warehouse,

- Freight forwarder sends stripping order for goods in FCL,

- Warehouse sends stripping confirmation,

- Freight forwarder sends order for loading on the truck,

- Warehouse sends confirmation loaded on the truck.

The prototype must enable to process the messages, as listed in the Figure 26Table 13,

exchanged with the Warehouse operator, which announce to the warehouse the arrival of

perishable goods (MSG-06) and after the goods are unloaded in the warehouse, receives from

the warehouse operator confirmation entry for a container. The protoype shall process these

messages based on the data, received from the Partner/Sender with Aviso entry to warehouse

and Confirmation as specified in Table 14.


06 MSG-06 Aviso entry Warehouse F.Forwarder Warehouse

07 MSG-07 Confirmation entry Warehouse Warehouse F.Forwarder

Table 13: List of messages for cargo entry in the Warehouse

The Figure 30 specifies message structure for the message Aviso Entry to the Warehouse, that

Freight forwarder sends to the Warehouse operator.

Activity 2 Report

Page 59

Figure 30: Message structure for MSG-06 message “Aviso entry Warehouse”

Activity 2 Report

Page 60

The Figure 31 specifies message structure for the confirmation entry to the warehouse for

receiving from the warehouse operator. Such message should be created by the prototype for

confirming goods entry in the warehouse.

Figure 31: Message structure for MSG-07 message “Confirmation entry Warehouse”

The prototype must enable to process tha messages, as listed in Table 14, to provide exchange

of messages for ordering loading to the truck operation to the warehouse and receving the

confirmation after, the loading of perishable goods to the truck is finished.


14 MSG-14 Order for loading on truck F.Forwarder Warehouse

15 MSG-15 Loading confirmation Warehouse F.Forwarder

Table 14: List of messages for cargo loading on the truck

Activity 2 Report

Page 61

The Figure 32 specifies message structure for odering loading of perishable goods from the

warehouse to the truck. The structurecontains all the relevant data to execute loading

opeations of goods being stored for a certain period.

Figure 32: Message structure for MSG-14 message: Order to warehouse for loading on truck

Activity 2 Report

Page 62

After this operation is finished and confirmed by the warehouse operator, the prototype must

generate an automatic message for loading confirmation. The Figure 33 specifies message

structure for receiving the loading confirmation from the warehouse.

Figure 33: Message structure for MSG-15: Loading confirmation from the warehouse

4.6.4 PORT FORWARDER AND CUSTOMS OFFICE COMMUNICATION

The prototype must enable to process the messages, as listed in Table 15 and Table 16 to enable to the freight forwarder to order customs clearing of the perishable goods at the import in the country. The prototype analysis has delivered almost the same solution, as it was identified and implemented in the initiative 9. Main differences are in goods specifications.


01 MSG-01/2 Transit Customs Declaration F.Forwarder Customs

02 MSG-02/2 Transit Customs Confirmation Customs F.Forwarder

Table 15: List of messages for Transit Customs Declaration


01 MSG-01/1 IM4 Customs Declaration F.Forwarder Customs

Activity 2 Report

Page 63

02 MSG-02/1 IM4 Customs Confirmation Customs F.Forwarder

Table 16: List of messages for Import customs clearing

Activity 2 Report

Page 64

The Figure 34 - Figure 35 specify message structure for import customs clearing with data

about invoice and goods value in the segment “Additional_information”.

Figure 34: Message structure for MSG-01/1 message: IM4 Customs Declaration – 1/2

Activity 2 Report

Page 65

Figure 35 Message structure for MSG-01/1 message: IM4 Customs Declaration – 2/2

Activity 2 Report

Page 66

The prototype must receive a structured message from Custioms for confirming message

receipt. Following structure (Figure 36) specifies message for receiving confirmation of

perfomed customs clearing with customs duties from Customs.

Figure 36: Message structure for MSG-02/1 message for IM4 Customs Confirmation

4.6.5 PORT FORWARDER AND PHYTO-SANITARY INSPECTORS COMMUNICATION

The prototype must enable to process the messages, as listed in Table 17, which will enable to

exchange the messages with Phyto-sanitary inspection office. The prototype must generate a

structured message for Phyto/Quality/Health certificate declaration that is sent to the

governmental office. In addition, the prototype sould be able to receive an incoming message

from Phyto sanitary inspectors for Document confirmation. The optimization is proposed in the

way that one message structure for requesting three certificates at three different

Activity 2 Report

Page 67

governmental institutions can be used: Phyto-sanitary certificate, Inspection Quality certificate

and Health Inspection Certificate and one universal message for receiving theirs answer.


2 MSG-2 a,b,c Phyto/Quality/Health certificate

declaration F.Forwarder

Phyto-Sanitary

inspectors

4 MSG-4 Document confirmation Phyto-Sanitary

inspectors

F.Forwarder

Table 17: List of messages for Phyto/Quality/Health certificate declaration

Activity 2 Report

Page 68

The Figure 37 - Figure 38 specifies message structure for r Phyto / Quality / Health certificate declaration.


declaration” -1/2

Activity 2 Report

Page 69


declaration” -2/2

Activity 2 Report

Page 70

The Figure 39 specifies the message structure for receiving the document confirmation from

governmental offices.

Figure 39: Message structure for MSG-4 message: “Document conformation”



4.8 TESTS RESULTS

The prototype was not developed and pilots were not tested. Yet work, carried out within this

initative provides the management and stakeholders with these identified benefits, which can

be expected, when the prototype would be realised:

- Process simplification within PGSC through Koper port that puts North Adriatic on a

map of European regions which provide logistics solutions for optimal PGSC;

- Reducing hard copy documentation and reducing needed time to prepare/handle

requested documentation that reflect as reducing operational costs within all groups of

stakeholders and not just at port forwarder’s side;

Activity 2 Report

Page 71

- Reducing time to handle containers with fresh fruit and vegetables, where time is an

important element in organising such logistics service, that brings time saving on the

entire transport route,

- Reducing manpower in port forwarding agencies as with the introduction of new IT

platform and EDI with Port of Koper, Customs authorities, Phyto-sanitary inspectors and

other subjects, the work process would be better organised and multi-data entry would

be eliminated accordingly;

- Developing and promoting a platform to attract further cold supply chains into North

Adriatic, where West MED markets represent potentials also in establishing new MoS

connections and by attracting northern European exporters to use North Adriatic

gateway for their exports to MED region or even to Middle East markets (export ex.

Poland, Germany etc.).




The prototype with specified functionalities might be realised after the Phyto-sanitary

inspector would launh corresponding project. Some described propsed tehnical specifications

were included in the specifications within initiative 9, where the prototype was developed. But

just message structures were implemented; meanwhile functionalities to perform the entire

process for PGSC were not covered.