PROVIDENCE, R.I.—From the moment U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued new criteria for importers participating in the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT), the agency has been fending off criticism from the trade community. Among the biggest complaints: The new criteria place too much responsibility on the importer, and they shift the voluntary security program closer to a mandatory regulatory regime.

The first version of the C-TPAT criteria were presented as "guidelines"—some importers, in fact, said they were too vague. But the new requirements, issued on March 25, establish mandatory security standards, specifying actions importers must take to ensure the security of warehouses, container storage and loading, hiring of personnel, information technology, and suppliers' security practices, to name just a few. New applicants must meet the current standards immediately, while existing members can phase in compliance in three stages. (See table on Page 20.)

CBP officials say the impetus for the new standards is to provide more specifics about the program's expectations and a "more consistent baseline" for evaluating compliance and benefits for C-TPAT members. In a March 25 e-mail to importers, CBP Commissioner Robert C. Bonner said the new standards achieve those goals while maintaining flexibility and facilitating trade.

Importers say the specific standards will help them gauge whether or not their security programs will gain CBP's approval, but many are concerned that they are being required to exert more control over their foreign suppliers than is realistic. CBP's response: Importers can make compliance a contractual condition of doing business, said C-TPAT Program Manager Patricia Sobol at last month's Coalition of New England Companies for Trade (CONECT) conference in Providence, R.I. Importers should pay special attention to that part of their supply chains, she added, as the agency is making validations of overseas operations a higher priority.

In response to concerns that mandatory criteria undermine the voluntary nature of C-TPAT, Sobol insisted that the program would remain voluntary, and noted that 18 different industry groups provided input on the proposed requirements. Speaking on the same panel, Arthur Litman, vice president of regulatory affairs for FedEx Trade Networks and a member of several Customs advisory groups, skewered Sobol's response, calling it "a nice sales presentation." "It's correct that C-TPAT is strong on collaboration," he said. But there were five iterations of the new criteria before the final document was published, he pointed out, and the final version remains contentious enough that COAC, CBP's primary trade advisory group, did not give the document its full endorsement.

On another panel, customs attorney Jeffrey Meeks was equally critical. CBP asked for industry's advice "in the context of a guidelines scenario ... but what we got was mandatory criteria," he said. Meeks also criticized the agency for issuing mandatory standards before publishing promised "best practices" guidelines. (Sobol said CBP will publish a best practices document, "hopefully soon.")

CBP officials confirmed that the agency will issue mandatory security standards for other parties to C-TPAT, including carriers, customs brokers, and foreign suppliers. In the meantime, shippers can get information about the new criteria, an implementation plan, and the agency's responses to questions at www.cbp.gov.