Paula Cadle, of DotCom Technologies, Inc., wants to know the correct
usage of Data Elements 1131 and 3055 in EDIFACT composites. I touched
on the 1131/3055 pair in an old posting from last year; unfortunately,
there are no online EDI-L archives that old, and so I have reproduced it
below. The references in the last paragraph give pointers to relevant
UN/EDIFACT EWG documentation that will clarify usage.
William J. Kammerer
FORESIGHT Corp.
4950 Blazer Memorial Pkwy.
Dublin, OH USA 43017-3305
+1 614 791-1600
Visit FORESIGHT Corp. at http://www.foresightcorp.com/
"Commerce for a New World"
----- Original Message -----
From: William J. Kammerer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 12:51 PM
Subject: Re: Is this an EDIFACT message?
Bob Carper wrote in to remind us that the U.S. Customs actually
maintains at least "two versions of CUSDEC, both rather distinct from
one another." He also noted that "[t]he I-Guide [he worked with] was
one where USCS departed in many cases from the PAEB-approved codes,
especially in DE 7365."
Bob:
Thanks for all the information on the U.S. Customs EDI implementation.
It's appreciated, and goes a long way towards helping us understand Joe
Mihai's CUSDEC sample. Because of the close match-up between code
values used in Joe's sample and the AES guideline, and what appeared to
be usage of each permissible segment as allowed by that particular
guideline, we're probably safe in inferring that the data was meant to
be an AES CUSDEC. Only Joe could really tell us his intentions. By the
way, the Customs ITDS site is at http://www.itds.treas.gov/itds/ and
includes some material on their EDIFACT mappings.
Your point about Customs departing "in many cases from the PAEB-approved
codes, especially in DE 7365" is worth discussing. D.E. 7365,
Processing indicator, coded, is used in the GIS (General Indicator)
segment within the CUSDEC. It is qualified by the 1131/3055 pair. If
these elements are omitted, the intention would be that one of the
EDIFACT supplied code values for the Processing indicator be used; any
deviation would be a syntax error.
But in the case of the AES CUSDEC, the qualifier contained in D.E. 1131
(Code list qualifier) is "109" - Customs Indicator, and that for D.E.
3055 (Code list responsible agency, coded) is "111" - U.S. Customs.
This well-used and quite proper EDIFACT artifact tells us that D.E. 7365
must contain a Customs Indicator code maintained by U.S. Customs. It's
up to the responsible agency defined in D.E. 3055, in this case the U.S.
Customs, to define the acceptable code values, which they have done.
There is nothing that the PAEB (actually, the PAEB no longer exists) or
UN/EDIFACT has to approve; only the U.S. Customs defines the acceptable
code values in the external code list for D.E. 7365.
For more information on how the 1131/3055 pair work together in
specifying external code lists, please see the UN/EDIFACT Message Design
Rules for EDI, Section 4.8, External code lists, at
http://www.unece.org/trade/untdid/download/99cf3.pdf. Also,external
code lists were a hot topic at the Atlanta EWG meeting this March. See
the EWG minutes at http://www.disa.org/paeb/atl-ewg.htm. Relevant
documents include: The use of 1131/3055 (1131_fr.rtf), and responses
1131_hf.doc and 1131_ma.DOC; T8 - Implementation Harmonisation Group
(SWG) Minutes (T8min.doc); Semantic Principles for Harmonized
Implementation of UN/EDIFACT Cross-sectoral principles (Sem_prin.doc);
and Usage of data elements 1131 and 3055 (IHG_G4.doc).
William J. Kammerer
FORESIGHT Corp.
4950 Blazer Memorial Pkwy.
Dublin, OH USA 43017-3305
(614) 791-1600 (voice)
(614) 791-1609 (fax)
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit FORESIGHT Corp., the world's leading supplier of EDI productivity
tools, at http://www.foresight-edi.com/
=======================================================================
To contact the list owner: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/edi-l%40listserv.ucop.edu/
