F;ù
EUROPEAID/129783/C/SER/multi
Lot 1: Studies and Technical assistance in all sectors
“A Study on Common Border Crossings Points Management between
Schengen Area and Russia / Belarus”
Contract No. 2011/282801
STUDY REPORT
This project is funded by
the European Union
A project implemented
by B&S Europe
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 1
Common Border Crossings Management Project – Draft Final Report May 2012
Table of contents
Executive Summary
Glossary
Map showing major BCPs between Schengen Area and Russia and Belarus
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 2
2. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 2
3. CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES .............................................................................. 3
4. SCHEDULE OF FIELD VISITS ............................................................................................. 4
5. INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS RELATING TO BORDER CROSSING FACILITATION 5
6. DOMESTIC LEGISLATION IMPACTING ON BORDER CONTROL PROCESSES.............. 7
6.1 OVERVIEW OF RUSSIAN FEDERAL CUSTOMS SERVICE’S OPERATIONS AND FUTURE STRATEGIES
................................................................................................................................................. 8
6.2 OVERVIEW OF BELARUS STATE CUSTOMS COMMITTEE’S OPERATIONS AND FUTURE STRATEGIES
............................................................................................................................................... 10
7. BORDER CONTROL PROCESSES AS ACTUALLY PRACTICED .................................... 11
7.1. CURRENT SEQUENTIAL PROCESSES IN RUSSIA AND BELARUS.............................................. 14
8. DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES IN ACTUAL BORDER CONTROL MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES.............................................................................................................................. 20
9. CROSS BORDER COOPERATION BETWEEN BORDER CROSSING POINTS
MANAGEMENT AGENCIES ..................................................................................................... 23
9.1 AUTOMATED EXCHANGES OF INFORMATION ON CUSTOMS MOVEMENTS WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF
OPERATIONAL LEVEL COORDINATION BETWEEN CUSTOMS SERVICES .......................................... 25
10. THE LOGISTICS OF MOVEMENTS OF PASSENGERS AND GOODS AT BORDER
CROSSING POINTS ................................................................................................................. 26
11. THE IMPACT OF PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURES ON THE OPERATIONS OF
BORDER CROSSING POINTS................................................................................................. 30
12.
THE VIEWS OF BORDER MANAGEMENT AGENCIES ................................................. 33
13.
THE VIEWS OF TRANSPORT OPERATORS AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVE BODIES
34
13.1 SUMMARY OF THE VIEWS OF EU BASED TRANSPORT OPERATORS. ....................................... 35
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 2
13.2 SUMMARY OF VIEWS OF A RUSSIAN BASED TRANSPORT OPERATOR .................................... 36
14.
THE VIEWS OF DRIVERS. ............................................................................................. 39
14.1 SUMMARY OF DRIVERS’ QUESTIONNAIRES .......................................................................... 41
15.
THE RAIL FREIGHT SITUATION. ................................................................................... 43
16.
THE RAIL PASSENGER SITUATION. ............................................................................ 45
17.
CONCLUSIONS REACHED ............................................................................................ 46
17.1 ROAD FREIGHT ................................................................................................................. 47
17.2 ROAD PASSENGERS ......................................................................................................... 49
17.3 RAIL FREIGHT................................................................................................................... 51
17.4 RAIL PASSENGERS ........................................................................................................... 52
18.
RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 52
18.1 HIGH PRIORITY ISSUES...................................................................................................... 52
18.2 GENERIC BORDER MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES ................................................................ 54
18.3 TECHNICAL ROAD FREIGHT PROCEDURES .......................................................................... 56
18.4 GENERIC ROAD FREIGHT PROCEDURES ............................................................................ 56
18.5 GENERIC AND TECHNICAL ROAD PASSENGER PROCEDURES ............................................... 57
18.6 GENERIC AND TECHNICAL RAIL FREIGHT PROCEDURES........................................................ 57
18.7 GENERIC AND TECHNICAL RAIL PASSENGER PROCEDURES ................................................. 58
19. RECOMMENDATIONS ON BORDER CROSSING POINTS REQUIRING
PRIORITISATION OF MODERNISATION AND INTRODUCTION OF NEW PROCEDURES ... 58
TABLE 1 BORDER CROSSING POINTS VISITED BY THE PROJECT TEAM DURING THE STUDY ............ 62
TABLE 2 ALTERNATIVE BORDER CROSSING POINTS NOT VISITED DURING THE STUDY BUT INCLUDING
BCPS RECOMMENDED FOR MODERNISATION PROGRAMMES ........................................................ 63
MAP 1 LOCATION OF BCPS VISITED IN THE FIELD VISITS............................................................. 64
20.
BCP BASED TESTING OF RECOMMENDED MEASURES ........................................... 71
APPENDIX A – IDENTIFICATION OF CORE ROAD AND RAIL TRANSPORT CORRIDORS ...................... 74
APPENDIX B - BORDER MANAGEMENT AGENCY QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES ............................ 76
APPENDIX C - PUBLICATIONS CONSULTED ............................................................................. 150
APPENDIX E - ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................ 164
APPENDIX F – TERMS OF REFERENCE .................................................................................... 167
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 3
Executive Summary
The Project Team (PT), composed of the Team Leader, the Logistics Expert and the
Trade Facilitation Expert, together with an interpreter and translator, has completed its
interviews with Border Management Agencies, Freight Forwarders Associations and
Road Transport operators, and with individual drivers. The meetings with Border
Management agencies, including those responsible for infrastructure development, have
all been on the Schengen side of the border, with the exception of a meeting in Poland
with Belarusian Customs staff. Russian Agencies have been kept informed of Project
progress and contacts made.
The results of these interviews and other research have been used in producing
Conclusions and Recommendations for development and modernisation of border
management infrastructures and technologies and particularly of intra state and
interstate information sharing and cooperation procedures. These Conclusions and
Recommendations are summarised at the end of this Executive Summary and the
appropriate sections of the Main Body of the Report with background information being
included in the relevant Appendices, especially Appendix B which reproduces the
Questionnaires used for Field Visits to BCPs on the EU side of the border.
The required outputs of the Study were in relation to using assessments of the current
status of management of road and rail BCPs as outlined in Section 2.1 (a) to (e) of the
Terms of Reference
as reproduced at Appendix F, in order to produce
recommendations in relation to improving physical infrastructures and movement
capacities, developing agency cooperation within countries and between countries and
to coordinate the development of technologies and operational planning to achieve
these aims. Specifically, a list was to be produced of BCPs requiring modernisation.
All these issues were taken into account in the Study, but with a particular emphasis on
organisational, managerial and technological (IT) issues. This approach was taken on
the advice of the NDP TL Secretariat, which advised the Project Team that previous
studies had tended to relate to infrastructure issues.
Because the non-infrastructure modernisation issues are closely related to each other,
the Conclusions and Recommendations have been collated and presented on
functional lines in relation to particular modes of transport, particularly road freight. This
approach has been taken because specific capabilities and procedures have differing
levels of impact on specific modes of transport. This means that specific
recommendations in one transport mode ay relate to several separate output
deliverables. It also means that “modernisation” has several meanings depending on the
context of the recommendation. It does not simply mean expansion of rail lines or road
lanes, or of parking space and shelter facilities.
The Project believes that the opportunities for improving integrated BCP management
within the Schengen Area and between the Schengen Area and both Russia and
Belarus as Customs Union members are both technical and organizational. It is felt that
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 4
there is no single solution to the challenge of reducing delays in the movement of
people and goods while maintaining the security of physical and fiscal borders.
The interviews and written submissions by all parties interviewed have, however,
enabled the PT to reach a number of conclusions for which there is a wide and strong
consensus among the interviewees regarding what is needed to improve border
crossing procedures in the four separate but also related categories of road freight
traffic, road passenger traffic, rail freight traffic and rail passenger traffic.
In reaching this consensus, the PT has been able to identify the major transnational
transport connections between the Schengen Area and Russia and Belarus and has
accordingly produced a list of those road and rail BCPs which would require particular
improvements in management of border crossings. These were identified after taking
into account current and expected traffic volumes and possible procedural changes
such as liberalization of visa regimes. However, the Project Team noted particularly that
the non-infrastructure bottlenecks apply to all BCPs to some extent, and that
infrastructure issues impact on other issues and vice versa. This thinking has to be
considered throughout the Report. While physical infrastructure issues are highlighted,
such as the need for more bridges at river crossings, the modernization of procedural
issues are seen as being of significantly greater importance, both in the short and long
term.
The most important issue is felt to be an organizational one. There needs to be a
significant reduction in the number of processes involved in the movement of freight,
where the delays are greatest. Such reductions would be consistent with the letter and
spirit of the Conventions to which some or all of the Northern Dimension Partnership
states are signatories. The report therefore highlights the provisions of these
Conventions, together with the encouragement of moving to free flow systems for the
passage of goods and commercial and passenger vehicles. Such systems are defined
in detail in the Report and the PT’s calculations are that they can reduce crossing times
by up to 40%.
In relation to technical issues, key identity verification equipment and the operation of
the Schengen Information system can be slow or unreliable or both, leading to severe
entry delays. Communication networks speeds need to be increased considerably, with
significant excess capacity built in. Reliability and robustness of passport readers and
fingerprint readers needs to be improved significantly, especially for use in bad weather.
Reflecting the desirability of saving time, fingerprint checks might be limited to the
checking of just one finger.
Serious consideration needs to be given to much more detailed systematic use of
Advance Passenger Information (API) for both coach and rail transport. Tests between
Poland, Belarus and Russian during the Euro 2012 football championships will provide
experience.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 5
There needs to be much greater systematic cross border exchanges of Customs data
regarding common and separate assessments of risk in order to move to genuine
implementation of the aims of the TIR Convention which aims for generally unimpeded
movement.
There are opportunities for improving border security and revenue protection by
developing the use of Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) systems on national
and transnational bases, which would support tackling cigarette, alcohol and road fuel
smuggling into the EU and support the effective collection of Customs duties and VAT
on private cars imported into the Customs Union (CU).
Reaching agreement on such mutual exchanges will be challenging as there are
currently very different trading patterns with imports into the Customs Union being
generally of higher value with correspondingly greater risks for frauds such as
misdescription and undervaluation. However, the task should be made easier given
Russian’s accession to the WTO with resulting reductions in duty rates. These
measures should be accompanied by reductions in the number of sequential Customs
procedures required by Russian Customs and Belarus Customs on behalf of Russian
Customs, an aim recently highlighted by President Putin.
The most effective measures for reducing the costs burden on freight operators would
be for a major expansion in the use of queue management systems alongside the
provision of off road parking at suitably equipped terminals. For maximum impact, both
need to be introduced as queue management has not necessarily reduced crossing
times but has reduced the amount of time (and therefore costs) incurred in unproductive
waiting which is regarded as being working time for drivers. The project particularly
notes that the Estonian GoSwift system, introduced on a compulsory basis in 2011, is
now to be tested by Rosgrantisa on the Russian side of the Russian – Estonian border
from 1st July 2012.
The above measures are being introduced at several locations on the Schengen Area /
CU border and active discussions should take place regarding harmonizing procedures
on both sides of the border and on introducing queue management systems near
simultaneously. Improved portable sanitation facilities need to be provided as a matter
of urgency at several locations. .
The Project Team proposes that these measures be considered for early introduction on
at least one BCP in each of the core network corridors, together with at least one major
alternative route. Consideration should be given to the long term secondment of staff
between adjacent BCPs. Such deployments would provide experience which might be
used as a basis for considering the introduction of joint BCPs. Capabilities for a joint
BCP already exist at the Koroszczyn terminal on the Polish border with Belarus in
relation to the Kukuryki (Poland) – Kozlowiczy (Belarus ) BCPs.
The thinking in recommending the BCPs appropriate for early introduction of these
measures is that the Norwegian / Russian border crossings will link deep water ports of
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 6
increasing importance, and the Russian / Finnish choice is the direct link between
Moscow and St. Petersburg with Scandinavia. The proposals in the Baltic States are
intended to ensure more effective movements of passengers and goods to and from
both St. Petersburg and Moscow. The routes from Belarus to Lithuania and, especially,
Poland are suggested in order the meet the wider needs of the key Europe wide
transport corridor between Berlin, Warsaw, Minsk and Moscow and
to assist
modernization of links with the Kaliningrad region of Russia.
The suggested locations are Storskog (Kirkenes) – Borisoglebsk (Norway – Russia),
Valimaa – Trorfyanovka and Nuijimaa- Brusnichnoe (Finland – Russia), Narva –
Ivangorod and Luhamaa – Shumilkino ( Estonia – Russia), Terehova – Burachki and
Grebneva – Ubylinka ( Latvia – Russia), Kybartu- Chernyshevskoe ( Lithuania- Russia
– Kaliningrad) and Medininkai – Kamenny Log ( Lithuania – Belarus) and all the Polish –
Belarus crossing points in the immediate area of Terespol / Koroszczyn and Brest (
Kukuryki- Kozlowiczy and Terespol- Brest) together with Grzechotki-Mamonowo and / or
Bezledy -Bagrationovsk ( both Poland – Kaliningrad).
The PT recommends that the suggested modernisation measures be tested out by
carrying out objectively based trials of the recommended measures under close local
(BCP) regional and national supervision. Because the relationships between factors
impacting upon the speed of movements are complex, it is suggested that individual
factors be examined at individual BCPs, with the results being then examined alongside
similar trials of other factors at other BCPs. Given the relatively fast flows of commercial
freight at the Finnish – Russian border and the recent introduction of a queue
management system in Estonia, it is suggested that particular attention be paid to the
views of the BMAs on both sides of these particular borders.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 7
Glossary
AEO
ANPR
API
ASMAP
ATP
BCP
BG
BMA
BY
CBCP
CBM
CCTV
CIS
COMECON
CTN
CU
EC
ECICS
EDI
EE
EEAS
EORI
EU
FCS
FFAs
FI
Frontex
HBD
HQ
HS
IBM
IRU
IT
ITMS
KGD
KZ
LED
LT
LV
MUR
NATO
NCTS
Authorised Economic Operator
Automatic Number Plate Recognition
Advanced Passenger Information
Association of International Road Carriers (of Russia)
Agreement of the International Carriage of Perishable Foodstuffs
Border Crossing Point
Border Guards
Border Management Agency
Belarus
Customs Border Crossing Point ?
Coordinated Border Management
Closed Circuit Television
Commonwealth of Independent States
Council for Mutual Economic Assistance
Core Transport Network
Customs Union (Russian Federation, Belarus and Kazakhstan)
European Commission
European Customs Inventory and Chemical Substances
Electronic Data interchange
Estonia
(EU) European External Action Service
Economic Operators Registration and Identification
European Union
Federal Customs Service (of Russia)
Freight Forwarders Associations
Finland
Frontieres Exterieures – European Agency for the Management
of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the EU
Heart Beat Detector
Head Quarters
Harmonized System
Integrated Border Management
International Road Users (Association)
Information Technology
Integrated Transport Management System
Kaliningrad oblast of Russia
Kazakhstan
Leningrad oblast of Russia
Lithuania
Latvia
Murmansk oblast of Russia
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
New Computerised Transit System
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 8
NDP
NDP TL
NII
NORDIM
OSCE
PL
PSK
PT
RU
SIS
TIR
TOR
UN
UNECE
VAT
WCO
WTO
Northern Dimension Partnership
Northern Dimension Partnership for Transport & Logistics
Non-Intrusive Inspection
Northern Dimension Partnership on Transport and Logistics,
especially Final Report of 30.06.11
Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe
Poland
Pskov oblast of Russia
Project Team
Russia
Schengen Information System
Transports Internationaux Routiers
Terms of Reference
United Nations
UN Economic Commission for Europe
Value Added Tax
World Customs Organisation
World Trade Organisation
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 9
Map showing major BCPs between Schengen Area and Russia and Belarus
Storskog (NOR) - Borisoglebsk
Imatra - Svetogorsk
Nujamaa - Brusnichnoe
Vaalimaa - Torfianovka
Narva - Ivangorod
Koidulla – Kunichina Gora
Luhamaa - Shumilkino
Grebneva - Ubylinka
Terehova - Burachki
Silene - Urbany
Panemune - Sovietsk
Salchininkai - Beniakoni
Medidnkai – Kamenny Log
Kybartu - Chernyshevskoe
Bezledy – Bagrationovsk
Gronowo – Mamonovo
Grzhechotki – Mamonovo 2
Kuznitsa Bialostoka - Bruzgi
Bobrowniki - Berestovitca
Kukuryki - Kozlovichi
Terespol - Brest
Slawaticze - Dolmachevo
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 1
1. Introduction
The Project Team (PT) hereby submits its draft Study Report for approval by the NDP
TL Secretariat and its Steering Committee.
The Study Report fulfils the requirements of the Terms of Reference (TOR) to provide
a description and in depth analysis of current border control practices at Border
Crossing Points (BCPs) between the Schengen Area (EU Member States and Norway)
and both Russia and Belarus (as members of the Customs Union – CU – with
Kazakhstan). The Report also analyses procedures for communicating and coordinating
between agencies on both sides of the border and makes recommendations for further
development of these communications and resulting operational procedures. The
Report examines and assesses the logistical procedures applied at both road and rail
crossing points, and for both passengers and freight. Finally, the Report proposes a list
of BCPs which especially require improvements in BCP management.
All these analyses, assessments, proposals and recommendations need to be seen in
the context that they are all connected, and that they may well be applicable to other
BCPs in the border areas within the Project’s scope, and indeed beyond. In addition,
infrastructure improvements will be ineffective without accompanying changes and
adjustments in BCP management procedures. On the other hand, BCP's can improve
their performance in many cases by improved management, even without infrastructure
investments.
While physical infrastructure issues beyond the BCPs, especially regarding
modernization of road and rail networks, have not been subjects for detailed study, it
became clear during the Field Visits that road and rail network capacities had to be
taken into account. This was especially when considering the need for vehicle terminals
and traffic queue management systems.
2. Methodology
In accordance with the requirements of the TOR, the Project Team made use of multiple
sources within Border Management Agencies (BMA) and the private transport sector.
The main information tools were a BMA Questionnaire which was completed by
members of those Agencies, mainly after the Project Team had completed a series of
field visits to key road and rail BCPs in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Finland and Poland,
and a Driver’s Questionnaire. These are reproduced in the Appendices.
The views of the private sector were recorded in separate reports which are also
reproduced in Section 13. of the Study Report. In addition, the Project Team’s
summary of interviews carried out with drivers at or near BCPs in the EU Member
States and in Russia and Belarus is included at Section 14. Separate interviews were
carried out in several EU states and in Russia and, by telephone, in Belarus with
representative associations of road transport operators.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 2
The interviews took place during or around the series of Field Visits to key BCPs
previously identified in Phase One of the Project, or proposed by the host BMAs. As the
Project accepted the recommendations of the BMAs regarding the BCPs which should
be visited, rather than necessarily those the Project had identified as worthy of particular
attention, the list of BCPs which are, in accordance with the required outputs in the
TOR, particularly requiring improvements in management are not identical with the
BCPs actually visited. The Project believes these differences are not material, as the
management procedures identified and which are the subject of the Conclusions and
Recommendations at sections 17, 18 and 19 are common across most or all BCPs.
In all cases, the Project’s Summaries also included the views of the Project Team (PT)
as source documents for the Conclusions and Recommendations. The Summaries
of the views of the BMAs are not simply accounts of the key views of the BMAs but have
been used to make suggestions for future developments. As the BMAs have agreed
the contents of their Questionnaires and any amendments they have made have been
incorporated into the final versions of the Questionnaires, the Project is satisfied that
these are accurate assessments. .
3. Constraints and Opportunities
There were a number of constraints experienced during the Project’s research and Field
Visits. Partly due to time limitations, it was not possible to formally meet with the BMAs
of the Russian Federation. Obviously this is a major limitation. The Border Guard
Service of Belarus as lead BMA in Belarus was unable to provide the Project Team with
an invitation to visit Belarus and meet BMA personnel formally, though this has partially
been offset by a meeting with the Belarusian Customs. The PT is very grateful to Polish
Customs for arranging for these colleagues to join the PT in Poland.
These are significant constraints, especially as all the Conclusions and
Recommendations Sections are, wholly or partly, intended to be considered on both
sides of the border ideally simultaneously or near simultaneously. However, these
constraints were partially mitigated by the above mentioned meeting with Belarusian
customs as well as visits to selected BCP's as travellers. BMA staff interviewed in all
the EU States visited included personnel with specific responsibilities for cooperation
with their Russian or Belarusian counterparts. These colleagues stressed their
cooperation with their Russian and Belarusian colleagues, especially from Border
Guards and Customs. The PT believes that the opinions given to it are likely to be
reasonable and broadly very accurate representations of the views of their colleagues,
although clearly there are likely to be some differences from the actual views of their
counterparts.
Thanks to the assistance of the Polish Customs Service, the Belarus Customs
colleagues were able to join the Project Team’s visit to the Polish – Belarus border.
Their views are represented by the Project Team in Appendix B in the polish BMA
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 3
Questionnaire and in the issues highlighted in the Conclusions (Section 17) and in the
proposals made in the Recommendations (Section 18). The PT was able, when
deploying to the series of Field Visits by traveling from Lithuania to Belarus, and later
from Ukraine through Belarus to Poland, to observe passenger vehicle processing
procedures and systems for the arrival of EU and non EU ( Schengen visa holding)
persons. A similar opportunity also has been taken at the Russian – Estonian and the
Russian Finnish borders, which were crossed by the PT as well. There were also
opportunities throughout the Field Visits to interview truck drivers from the EU and CU
regarding their experiences in relation to freight traffic on both sides of the EU / CU
border.
There were some practical constraints regarding the delivery and analysis of data from
drivers as the questionnaires did take far more time to be returned than anticipated.
Drivers appear to be often away for more than one month and international mail, even in
EU member states from the remote border areas is slow. Furthermore, some
associations declined to meet the Project, and another gave only limited information,
relying on the Project Team to draw its own conclusion.
However, the Project does not believe that these constraints materially affect the
Conclusions and Recommendations listed at Sections 17, 18 and 19 below. There
was an obvious consensus among all the EU Border Management Agencies, including
regarding the views of their Russian and Belarusian counterparts. The responses from
drivers and transport operators showed a similar consensus. Therefore, the Project
Team believes that its findings are based on reliable evidence, obtained in sufficient
quantity.
The level of consensus from both the official sector and the private sector, and the
congruence of the
views within the EU with the imminent and longer term
modernization plans of the Belarus and Russian Federation BMAs in relation to what
are commonly agreed as key transport facilitation challenges give the PT a high degree
of confidence in its Conclusions at Section 17 below. We therefore believe that further
information which can be expected to be available in the near future will confirm the
basic validity of the Conclusions or identify where those Conclusions are incorrect or
require further study. Examples of such new data might include the early and longer
term results of imminent Russian Federation Customs moves towards reductions in the
number of Customs procedures at import and the June 2012 introduction of a
compulsory web based system for pre arrival declaration of imports of goods. Such
fresh data should allow early modification of our Conclusions, with some resulting
modifications of our Recommendations.
4. Schedule of Field Visits
In all the Field Visits the PT met Border Management Agencies of the Schengen Area
States at BCPs proposed by the PT
as being of particular significance on key
transport corridors, or which the Schengen area BMAs felt had facilities and capabilities
which were of particular relevance to the Study. During the Polish visit, representatives
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 4
of the State Customs Committee of Belarus crossed the border to join the meeting.
These colleagues were given details of the entire schedule, as were contacts in the
Customs Service of the Russian Federation, through introductions made by Finnish
Customs. However, some states proposed visits to other locations. These proposals
were accepted. However, the PT did not restrict its recommendations regarding the
BCPs to be prioritized for modernization to the sites visited.
The opportunity was taken at all Field Visits sites to issue drivers’ questionnaires and to
interview drivers informally. Some transport operators were interviewed separately at
around the same time. In order to ensure the maximum level of frankness, anonymity
was guaranteed.
The first set of BCP visits were to the Lithuanian Belarus border (Medininkai BCP with
Kamenny Log 2nd April) and the Lithuanian – Russian border (Panemune BCP with
Sovietsk 3rd April). The second visit was to the Latvian – Russian border ( Terehova –
Burachki and the Latgale Rail BCP at Zilupe ) on 4th April. The third visit was to the
Finnish – Russian Border ( Nuijamaa- Sosnovskoye / Brusnichnoe) on 16th April.
Following a meeting with Estonian BMA HQ staff in Tallinn on 17th April, visits were
made to the Estonian – Russian border at both Koidula – Pechory / Kunichina Gora
and Narva – Ivangorod on 18th and 19th April respectively with road and rail BCPs being
visited at both locations. The Polish – Belarusian border was visited at Koroszczyn
Terminal on 25th April in relation to the Kukuryki BCP and nearby at Terespol ( road and
th
rail BCP on the Polish side of the Bug river opposite Brest) on 26 April.
Members of the Project Team also carried out an informal Field Visit when travelling
between deployments, i.e. at Medininkai and Kamenny Log on 8 th April and at Brest –
Terespol road on 12th April.
5. International Conventions relating to Border Crossing Facilitation
A wide range of international Conventions provide for the regulation of the movements
of passengers, goods and, inter alia, commercial and private vehicles. The most
important of them are listed in Appendix D, together with wider and more detailed
descriptions of their provisions. Many of them have not been ratified by the Customs
Union States or by their Schengen neighbours. However, the most important
conventions such as the:

Convention on the Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System.

International Convention on the Harmonisation of Frontier Controls of Goods

International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs
procedures (1973 and 2006 amendments)

Customs Convention on the International Transport of Goods under Cover of TIR
Carnets (1975 with amendments)

Convention on Temporary admission (1990)
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 5
have been ratified by all reviewed countries.
By ratifying or acceding to these Conventions, the countries committed themselves to
undertake a number of commitments which can be summarised as follows:









to ensure sufficient staff and infrastructure at BCP's, taking into consideration
traffic demands1,
to carry out only those controls that are absolutely necessary as established on
the basis of risk assessments2 especially in the case of transit shipments,
to the extent practically possible, to carry out multiple controls simultaneously or
with minimum delay,
to have customs clearance to take place away from the border as much as
possible,
to share information with each-other that facilitates the processes at the border,
in case of rail cargo crossings, to carry out both export and import controls as
much as possible at the same station near to the border (joint controls)
to give priority to vehicles carrying perishable foodstuffs and live animals,
provide facilities to create a competitive market in customs brokerage service at
the border crossing points,
to use IT based systems to the extent practically possible.
In addition to the above commitments made on relation to goods transport, countries
have to a more or lesser extent ratified certain conventions related to the passenger
traffic. These are discussed in detail in the annex to this document.
Notwithstanding the above, the fact that a Convention has not been ratified or acceded
to does not, of course, mean that the procedures required or suggested in a
Convention cannot be introduced under purely domestic legislation. However, we wish
to point out that in many cases there is the need for procedures to be introduced on
both sides of a border. Clearly, the effectiveness of the procedure is reduced
significantly if this is not the case. Throughout this Study, we
have made our
evaluations on this understanding, and that even if a Convention is not signed there
need not necessarily be valid reasons for not introducing its provisions.
Equally, the reverse applies. Because a Convention has been ratified does not mean its
provisions are necessarily implemented. This is especially the case regarding
Conventions which have major impacts on cross border movements, particularly
economic ones. The key Conventions here are in the view of the PT, the TIR
Convention ( International Transport of Goods under Cover of TIR Carnets) and
the International Convention on the Harmonisation of Frontier Controls of
Goods.. Many private and official sources made it clear that if the requirements of the
Convention were being more fully adhered to in the Customs Union, then movements of
goods would be significantly faster.
1
No specific target has been set for waiting delays or the duration of the BCP crossing process though two
hours waiting and two hours of processing should be considered as a maximum.
2
A high percentage of cargo inspected and / or X-rayed does not constitute controls based on risk assessment.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 6
It is for this reason that the PT has
highlighted in its Conclusions and
Recommendations at Sections 17, 18 and 19 below that the implementation of the
TIR Convention and the international Convention on the Harmonisation of Frontier
Controls of Goods should be a priority for the Customs Union states in close
cooperation with their EU neighbours, especially in relation to risk analysis procedures
and the logical resulting reductions in the number of physical inspections. We stress
that the implementation of the letter and spirit of these conventions and the resulting
reductions in the number of processes, with enhanced risk management based
supplementary checks, is our number one recommendation.
It is accepted that the TIR Convention does recognise the need to qualify the provisions
regarding the prevention of irregularities. Further discussion on how this might be done
in the context of developing and improving cross-border cooperation is provided in
Section 9 below - Cross border cooperation between Border Crossing Points
Management Agencies.
6.
Domestic legislation impacting on Border Control processes
As mentioned at Section 5. above, all of the states in the Partnership have ratified
several key international Conventions for facilitating the movement of persons and
goods across borders. Under common practice, this makes that the convention
provisions supersede domestic law. However, much of the actual implementation of
these procedures is implemented by domestic legislation or in the case of the EU
Member States and Norway3 sometimes by EU Regulations. (which also applies to
Norway in respect of the Schengen Agreement’s provisions).
The practical compliance of these states with the provisions of the Agreement is subject
to regular scrutiny by external evaluation teams.
The introduction of the Customs Union (CU) between Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus
as well as the easing of border controls between Russia and Belarus for movements of
persons has created a somewhat similar situation to that pertaining in the EU for
customs purposes and movements of persons. Each external border state is in effect
responsible for not just its own borders but the borders of the fellow members of the
respective Customs Union or free movement area. Therefore domestic legislation is
increasingly impacting upon the interests of those other states. Accordingly, such
legislation ought to take account of common interests of all the states.
It is for this reason that the PT now provides a detailed description of current and
imminent Russian legislation and practice in relation to Customs operations in Russia,
on the understanding that both the legislation and practice will impact on operations in
Belarus too.
3
Norway, as part of the EEA is bound to the provisions of EU Regulations like a member state. Furthermore,
in case of EU Directives, Norway is also obliged to transpose their provisions in to domestic legislation.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 7
We provide these details because we believe that the description of the current and
planned situations, and the criticisms made by drivers and transport operators provide
an extremely useful and important overview of current challenges and opportunities. We
also believe that the challenges are consistent with similar experiences of the EU states
in the past in relation to their own operations, and to their comments about areas of
operations where they would like to enhance cooperation with Russian (and by
extension) Belarus Customs.
We also stress that the reports by private sector sources regarding scepticism about the
concerns of short term negative impacts from the introduction of the compulsory
electronic pre- information system scheduled for 17th June 2012 are not unique.
Worldwide experience has shown that when new technologies are introduced, there are
often problems in the introduction period. It is for this reason that the PT includes in its
Recommendations a proposal to monitor the positive and any possible negative results
from a very early stage and to share the findings with Schengen Area neighbouring
states.
6.1 Overview of
strategies
Russian Federal Customs Service’s operations and future
Russian Customs (Federal Customs Service - http://www.customs.ru) is a part of the
executive branch of the Government. In 2006 the Government of Russian Federation
transferred public policy decisions and development of legal regulation in the area of
customs administration from the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade to the
Federal Customs Service (Resolution #459). The Federal Customs Service (FCS)
reports directly to the Government of Russian Federation.
Currently, the FCS is focused on implementation of the following initiatives, strongly
related to border crossing operations:
Integrated control (One-Stop control). The Federal Law #394-ФЗ (28/12/2010) fully
assigned all transport control activities and documentary control on behalf of the
Medical Sanitary, Phytosanitary and Veterinary control at the Border Crossing Points to
Customs.
Currently Customs fulfil (document) control on behalf of other Federal Control Agencies,
but according to road operators, around 30% of BCP’s throughput capacity was lost due
to insufficient training of customs officers in other forms of control delegated to them
and low integration of Information Systems of various agencies, which requires multiple
entry of the same data in several Information Systems. Further implementation of the
integrated border control will focus on elimination of these gaps.
Customs clearance in near-border Logistics Terminals. According to the ‘The
concept of customs clearance and control in areas close to the State Border of the
Russian Federation’ customs clearance will be mostly done in the frontier Logistics
Terminals. It applies to many, but not all types of goods.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 8
According to this concept, private sector will invest in construction of border Logistics
Terminals, with support from the State through Public-Private Partnership (PPP)
mechanisms. It is planned that many terminals will be located side-by-side with BCPs.
This will help eliminate transit declarations, which take several hours for opening at the
BCPs and closing at the customs clearance depots.
Several logistics terminals near the border have already been constructed. Logistics
terminal Ubylinka was put into operation by a private investor in 2011. It is located sideby-side with the BCP Ubylinka. According to various publications in the mass-media, it
does not work smoothly. Cargo still needs transit declarations and the total clearance
takes days rather than hours. The investor – the local logistics company - TecoTerminal 1 – apparently, is not happy about the work of local customs. Carriers, who
know about current operational challenges in the Logistics Centre Ubylinka drive past it
and do customs clearance in large towns (Moscow, etc.) or choose alternative routes
through Belarus.
Remote customs clearance and electronic declarations. Remote customs clearance
allows traders to clear goods, which arrived to the border logistics terminals, in their
towns. This technology helps to implement the concept of customs clearance in the
frontier logistics terminals. Active implementation of this technology started in 2010,
when it was defined in the Customs Code of the Customs Union (Article 193-6). This
technology requires that all internal and border customs are EDI or Internet connected
to the server of the Federal Customs Service. According to the FCS, 100% of customs
are now connected to the server and are ready to work with electronic declarations, and
90% of all declarations are submitted by traders through Internet channels.
The two other countries of the Customs Union also achieved significant progress in
implementing electronic declarations and remote customs clearance.
The logistics community believes that although this technology gives traders certain
flexibility in planning truck routes from the border to the final destination, it may cause
more physical inspection at the border. This is because the trader is represented in the
border terminal by a broker who may not be able to provide all answers about cargo to
the customs officer. Shipments with multiple types of products will most likely go through
physical inspection often.
Preliminary information
According to the Decision # 899 of the Customs Union Commission (09/12/2011),
preliminary information should be provided for all goods to be imported at least 2 hours
before crossing the border starting from 17 June 2012. Electronic preliminary
information provided by a trader or a carrier should contain information about the goods
(HS codes should be in HS6 format for transit goods and in HS4 for goods cleared at
the border), consignors and consignees, carriers and vehicles, declarants, planned
transloading (for transit goods) and applicable transport constraints (dangerous and
other goods).
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 9
Customs should review preliminary information and within 2 hours make a decision
about types of control applied to the cargo. The transit declaration is automatically
generated from preliminary information provided by the consignor or the carrier.
Mandatory preliminary information is closely linked to the implementation of Customs
Risk Management System. Requirements to the Risk Management System are provided
in the Customs Code of the Customs Union (Chapter 18, Articles 128-130) and in the
Federal Law #311-ФЗ on Customs Regulation in the Russian Federation (Article 162).
Unlike the Kazakh Law on Customs Affairs (Article 23), which defines the key objective
of their Risk Management System as the simplification of control procedures for the
Authorized Economic Operators, neither the Customs Code of the Customs Union, nor
the Federal Law #311-ФЗ set this goal for the Risk Management System.
Readiness of Russian Customs was one of the main issues raised by international road
carriers, who believe that borders crossing delays on and shortly after 17 June will
increase considerably.
6.2 Overview of Belarus State Customs Committee’s operations and future
strategies
The following comments by the PT are shorter than those for the Russian Customs
Service. However, our comments make it clear that the current draft Law on Customs
Regulation is intended to bring national Customs legislation, introduced before the CU,
into line with the requirements arising logically from the introduction of the CU. We also
note that, as was clear from our Field Visits to the Lithuanian and Polish borders with
Belarus, and our discussions with State Customs Committee colleagues from Minsk that
Belarus’ border management procedures will become of increasing importance to
Russia, given the location of key transport corridors through Belarus. An example of this
was the reporting of increased use of Belarus BCPs by transport operators from and
through Latvia for traffic destined for Russia, following the introduction of the CU.
The Belorussian State Customs Committee is regulated by the National Customs Code
(#204-3 adopted on 4 January 2007). Additional provisions, regulating customs
administration were stipulated in the Presidential Decree #228 (21 April 2008).
Since 2010 most issues of customs operations and administration in Belorussia are
regulated by the Customs Union Customs Code. Accordingly, Belorussian Customs is
working on replacing the provisions of the current national Customs Code, not covered
by the Customs Union Customs Code, by a new law on Customs Regulation. The Law
on Customs Regulation is going to be introduced in 2012 subject to the approval in the
Cabinet of Ministers and in the Parliament (in September).
The proposed Law will cover a number of topics not regulated by the CU Customs
Code, such as the organizational and administrative issues related to work of Belarusian
customs. This law will also regulate work of customs representatives, customs carriers,
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 10
and customs warehouses and will also define requirements to the Authorized Economic
Operators.
Belorussian Customs implement similar initiatives and programs as Russian Customs.
Within the concept program e-Customs (2011 – 2015) they plan to implement electronic
declarations, Singe Electronic Window for traders and One Stop control at the borders.
It is planned that Belorussia will follow the World Customs Organization (WCO)
recommendations and will soon leave only two Border Management Agencies (BMA) on
their borders – Border Guards and Customs. Two other initiatives related to logistics
infrastructure and border control technologies are implementation of Non-Intrusive
Inspection (NII) equipment and construction of logistics terminals. Unlike Russia, which
plans to build logistics terminals in close proximity to the borders, Belorussia plans to
build logistics terminals in regional (oblast) centers.
Belorussia achieved significant progress in implementing anticorruption measures. The
base document regulating anticorruption activities in Belorussia is the Law on
Anticorruption Measures (20 July 2006). The next important step was adoption of the
state program of anticorruption measures for 2007 – 2010, approved by the Presidential
Decree #220 (8 May 2007). Important component of the anticorruption program in
Belorussia was promoting feedback from the society and mass-media. International
road carriers reported that although Belorussian border control is slow and inefficient,
rent seeking by the BMA was negligible for the last several years.
7. Border Control processes as actually practiced
The BMAs who were visited by the PT during the Field Visits responded positively to the
request to complete the BMA Questionnaire. These are listed in full at Appendix B. The
Questions and Answers are intended to provide data which enable all aspects of the
required Project Outputs to be delivered. The emphases were on identifying the current
levels of traffic movements and delays, expected changes and how BMAs work with
each other and with their counterparts across the external border. For reasons
explained at section 5. above Constraints and Opportunities the formal meetings
were limited to those on the EU side of the external border, although the PT are
extremely grateful to the colleagues of the Belarus State Customs Committee who
participated in the Polish Field Visit. Their views and the key points of their presentation
on 25th April are taken into account in the Conclusions and Recommendations at
Sections 17, 18 and 19.
During the Field Visits, the PT discussed with Border Guards and Customs jointly the
past, current and expected future levels and natures of cross border traffic patterns. The
PT visited the traffic lanes and examined passenger and vehicle terminals and Queue
Management vehicle parks where these exist. The physical layouts of the BCPs were
observed, as were the procedures for the movements of persons and of freight. The
road infrastructures in the region were also noted, particularly as the PT travelled by car,
typically along the major transport corridors and there was therefore considerable
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 11
opportunity to examine the road infrastructures, which inevitably impact on the levels of
traffic.
Particular attention was paid to the nature and levels of cross border information
exchanges in all their forms, e.g. in relation to traffic management, on operational
“casework” issues in the customs and immigration fields, and in opportunities for
automated exchanges of customs import, export and transit data in a systematic
manner. In order to discuss these matters effectively, it was also necessary to discuss
and observe the working relationships and information sharing procedures between
BMAs within the BCP.
There was a clear consensus among BMAs regarding the key issues which needed to
be considered. Improvements to the physical infrastructure of BCPs and of the nearby
transport networks need to be considered together. Where BCPs and the access roads
between them are in urban areas ( often connected by lane restricted bridges) there
was seen to be a need to increase such lane capacity, such as by new bridges as once
planned at Ivangorod – Narva / Riigikula (Russia – Estonia) and whose status is now in
doubt, and as currently planned at Panemune – Sovietsk (Lithuania – Russia). Similar
points were raised at non- bridge locations such as Medininkai – Kamenny Log
(Lithuania- Belarus) and Terehova – Burachky (Latvia – Russia).
However, these nonetheless very important points were felt to be secondary to
improving the management of border crossing processing and the more efficient and
flexible use existing infrastructure. The introduction of queue management systems,
such as introduced on a compulsory basis in Estonia in August 2011 was felt to be a
major positive development and was being examined closely by other regional states.
The speed of handling of both freight (customs) and passengers (customs and border
guards) can be enhanced by the proper use of such queue management systems in
risk management, using the management system as a form of advanced passenger
information processing and analysis.
While it is crucial to note that the Estonian system does not necessarily reduce the
crossing time it does allow much more productive waiting time as the vehicles and their
drivers do not have to wait in a queue but can do other productive activities or at least
wait in terminal vehicle parks which have more comfortable facilities, especially sanitary
facilities, as was seen as Narva and Koidula in Estonia. Further explanations of the
opportunities the GoSwift system offers, as well as its values are found in the joint
Estonian / Russian audit of border crossing issues (March 2012), listed in Appendix C“Border Crossing of cargo at the land boundary between Estonia and Russia”. The
impact of this Report, and of GoSwift specifically, has been demonstrated by the
decision of Rosgranitsa, as the lead agency for the management of infrastructure issues
in relation to BCPs, to introduce trial operations of GoSwift at Russian BCPs, including
Ivangorod, from 1st July 2012.
The fact that such management systems do not necessarily reduce the time to cross
(but provide some certainty and reduce unproductive queue by allowing “ prebooking” of
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 12
the queue place) demonstrates that it is the actual border crossing processes which
matter. Crossing times varied enormously despite most BCPs visited having significant
numbers of vehicle processing lanes and these being well prioritized ( with special
lanes for passenger coaches, perishable goods, low risk goods as identified in advance
through existing (EU) or planned (Russia) web based pre arrival declaration systems,
or through Queue Management Systems). Given the ranges of times reported for
crossing, it is clear that other factors are more important. Crossing times from Finland
to Russia are generally shorter than crossing times from Estonia to Russia, where on
the Russian side there are a large number of sequential, and not simultaneous
processes, which are currently required by Russian Customs. Many operators on the
Finnish – Russian routes are Finnish registered, Russian owned companies, while
drivers are Russian nationals employed by these companies.
This suggests that there may be significant opportunities for making use of risk analysis
based on greater awareness of the identities and operational and ethical standards of
the operators, with more of them deemed to be low risk. These long crossing times from
Estonia occur despite the queue management system there, and are consistent with the
experiences of transport operators working between Latvia and Russia and Belarus and
between Lithuania and Belarus. At the Russian Finnish border there were reports of
relatively fast crossing times especially from Russia, whereas there were reports from
drivers elsewhere (e.g. from Estonia into Russia) of delays of as much as five days in
extreme cases. Factors given in relation to faster movements included the truck being
empty and being subject to fewer checks outwards. Factors given as exacerbating
delays were, not surprisingly, several sequential inspections (x rays, physical
examination) and bad weather, delays due to shift changes and incorrect completion of
import declarations, such as use of incorrect HS tariff codes. .
The need to consider reductions in processes as a priority alongside the simultaneous
monitoring of the management systems designed to allow significant reductions in the
crucially time consuming procedure of physical inspection of goods is demonstrated by
recent Latvian and Russian experience. Latvia has reported that a recent pilot scheme
for submission of transit data to Russia via the NCTS SPEED platform ( the EU New
Computerised Transit System for use by economic operators eligible to use Simplified
Procedures) has not - yet - resulted in reductions to crossing times. This pilot cross
border scheme has been carried out under an EU level project with Russia.
Clearly, other factors are impacting on the apparent lack of positive results. This
demonstrates the need to consider measures in the context of other developments and
not in isolation. In relation to this Latvian – Russian example, the PT would therefore
advise that, if adopted, our proposals be shared with the other participants in this pilot
scheme. Given the great interest in shown in Estonia’s use of their GoSwift system for
pre booking of vehicles’ place in BCP queues, and that system’s use in providing
greater time for the carrying out of risk analysis, Estonian involvement would be logical
in order to determine what the relevant additional factors might be.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 13
All BMAs stressed close cooperation between agencies within the BCP. Staff of Border
guards, customs and phytosanitary and veterinary staff were generally co located or
were easily contactable. In the EU States, essential private sector providers such as
insurance brokers (for vehicle insurance) and banks were generally collocated in
weather protected buildings. Times spent in the open at the BCPs themselves were
usually not excessive, though in urban BCPs such as at Narva passport check queues
at vehicle, as opposed to pedestrians, limited terminal space meant that significant
numbers of passengers in coaches and private vehicles had to queue in the open.
In the EU States visited, both road and rail passengers are normally cleared through
border controls and customs controls in close sequence.
However, there were examples of lack of awareness among some staff regarding the
practical process of carrying out of mandatory (fingerprint) checks on non EU citizens
and especially those requiring visas. The sending of enquiries into the SIS and the input
of suspect documents often took time and the system was not always available. The PT
had noted this when travelling into Poland from Belarus when deploying to the Field
Visits, and these challenges were highlighted by Border Guards. Together with wider
equipment reliability issues ( such as portable passport scanners for border guards and
X ray scanners for Customs) the overall issue of proper training in the use of equipment
and the need to take account of higher maintenance requirements – reflecting often
severe weather conditions – and the need for significantly greater communications
capacity to allow for speedier transmission times now and in the future - were seen as
the key technical equipment issues.
7.1. Current sequential processes in Russia and Belarus
The PT now produces in detail a diagram outlining the sequential processes applied in
BCPs in Russia and Belarus in relation to freight movements. The principle of highly
sequential, rather than near simultaneous processes also applies, to a lesser extent, to
the movements of vehicle passengers. It is noted particularly that where batch
systems are operated, with no movement until all participants in a group (e.g. of trucks)
have been processed, movement is significantly slower than when continuous flow
systems are applied. Different systems sometimes apply at nearby BCPs on the same
border, such as at the Russian – Finnish border, where a batch system is used at
Torfianovka whereas a free flow system is used at Brusnichnoe.
This section leads naturally into the further comments at Section 8. below.
The following Diagram shows border control process in Russian and Belorussian BCPs.
The depicted process shows sequence of control procedures for trucks entering from
the European Union to Russia/Belorussia. Exit from Russia and Belorussia includes the
same steps, except that passport control is done first for vehicles entering to the BCP
from the EU, and last – for vehicles going out to the EU.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 14
In Russian BCPs, Customs perform transport control and documentary control on behalf
of the phytosanitary and veterinary inspection. In Belorussian BCPs all controls are
implemented by separate agencies (i.e. Transport control by Transport inspection of the
Ministry of Transport, Phyto and Veterinary controls by inspectors of the Ministry of
Agriculture)
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 15
Diagram 1. Border control at Russian and Belarusian BCPs: entry from the EU
Entry gate,
from EU
Document control area
(Passport control line)
Physical
Inspection Area
Exit Gate,
to RU
Preliminary
document check
(Border Guards)
Immigration
card
Border control
checklist (BCC)
Physical Check
(by BG)
Passport control
(by BG)
BCC stamped
by BG
Suspected
infection
Medical Sanitary
control
Suspected
infection
No suspected
infection
(cargo, driver)
No infection
(cargo)
Transport
documentary
and physical
control
BCC stamped
by MSI
Weights
printed in BCC
Customs prelim
document check
and vehicle
examination
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 16
Entry Gate,
from EU
Document control area
(Passport control line)
Veterinary,
Phytosanitary
control needed
Veterinary,
Phytosanitary
control not
needed
Physical
Inspection Area
Exit Gate,
to RU
Veterinary or
Phytosanitary
Control
Suspected
infection
No infection
(cargo)
BCC stamped
Customs
documentary
control
Physical Inspection
required (Customs or BG)
Physical Inspection
not required
NII and Physical
Inspection
Transport docs
stamped
BCC stamped
by Customs
BCC and docs
stamped by
inspecting
agency
BCC with all
stamps collected
by BG
Normally trucks stop in 3 or 4 control areas, depending on the applied types of control:
 Entry Gate – all vehicles
 Document control area – all vehicles
 Physical Inspection Area – high risk vehicles
 Exit Gate – all vehicles
Entry Gate
Entry to the BCP normally takes several minutes. Border Guards check driver and
vehicle documents, and issue a Borer Control Checklist (BCC). This is some sort of a
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 17
runner, which needs to be filled with stamps and signatures of the control authorities.
The BCC has names of controls, and fields for stamps and signatures
Example of the Belorussian Border Control Checklist
:------------------------------------------------------------------:
:
Контрольный талон № ______
:
:
:
:Марка, регистрационный номер транспортного средства _____________ :
:
:
:Фамилия водителя ________________________________________________ :
:
:
:Количество пассажиров ___________________________________________ :
:
(прописью)
:
:
:
:Фамилия лица, пересекающего государственную границу в пешем
:
:порядке _________________________________________________________ :
:_______________ "__" ____________ 200_ г.
:
: (время)
(дата)
:
:
:
:
ВЪЕЗД (entry)
:
ВЫЕЗД (departure)
:
:---------------:-------------:--------------:---------------------:
: Зеленый канал :Красный канал:Зеленый канал : Красный канал :
: Green channel : Red channel :Green channel : Red channel :
:---------------:-------------:--------------:---------------------:
:
:
:
:
:
:---------------:-------------:--------------:---------------------:
: Подпись : Подпись : Подпись :
Подпись
:
: Signature : Signature : Signature :
Signature
:
:---------------:-------------:--------------:---------------------:
: Вид контроля :Время осуществления контроля:Отметка о прохождении:
:
:
:
контроля
:
:---------------:-------------:--------------:---------------------:
:
: начало : окончание :
:
:---------------:-------------:--------------:---------------------:
:Пограничный :
:
:
:
:---------------:-------------:--------------:---------------------:
:Таможенный :
:
:
:
:---------------:-------------:--------------:---------------------:
:Автомобильный :
:
:
:
:---------------:-------------:--------------:---------------------:
:
:
:
:
:
:---------------:-------------:--------------:---------------------:
:
:
:
:
:
:---------------:-------------:--------------:---------------------:
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 18
Document Control
After entry drivers park their trucks at the Border Guards documentary control area,
pass passport control and drive to the weighbridge. This control takes several minutes,
but with a queue can often take about one hour. Weights are printed on the back side of
the BCC.
Transport control can take more time for exit from Belorussia, because drivers often
obtain driving permits to the EU countries in the BCP. Bilateral driving permits are
purchased from the Transport control authority stationed at the BCP. This involves
payment of the required fee in the bank (located in the BCP) and preparation of the road
permit of the designated country (Poland, Lithuania, etc.) by the Transport authority.
Both steps can take from several minutes (without queues) to more than an hour (with
queues). Russian drivers obtain road permits outside of the BCP areas, normally
through local offices of the Russian International Road Carriers Association (ASMAP).
After weighting drivers park their vehicles in a designated location and arrive to the
customs control terminal for documentary customs control. Phytosanitary and Veterinary
certificates are checked here as well, either by customs (Russia) or by the Ministry of
Agriculture inspectors (Belorussia).
Documentary control and preparation of transit declaration take about half an hour. But
often drivers have to spend much more time in the terminal because of queues. Waiting
for 2-3 hours is considered normal, and waiting for more than 6 hours is not uncommon.
The Customs documentary control zone has a number of customs inspectors. In BCP
Torfianovka ( Russian – Finnish border) there are 12-14 inspectors in separate booths
in for entry to Russia, and 3-4 inspectors for exit from Russia. There may be separate
queues to inspectors (like in the BCP Torfianovka) or one common line (as at the BCP
Brusnichnoe). The common line procedure should be encouraged everywhere.
After document control, drivers can either get their documents stamped and allowed to
drive to the Exit Gate, or may be required to drive to the inspection area.
Physical Inspection Area
Trucks can end up in the Physical Inspection Area for a number of reasons. reasons.
As shown in the diagram 1 above, any of the border control agency may want to
conduct detailed control checks. Sometimes trucks can be even sent back to the NonIntrusive Inspection (NII) by Border Guards at the Exit Gate. About 25% of trucks are
sent to the Non-Intrusive Inspection by x-ray stationary or mobile units. This control
takes about 15 minutes, if a driver is lucky. But because of the large proportion of trucks
sent to the NII, trucks have to queue for the NII for many hours.
If control authorities are not satisfied by the results of the NII control, more detailed
physical inspection, often with full or partial unloading can be required. When unloading
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 19
is required, this results in delays for days. To minimize delays consignors can buy
unloading services of customs terminals (managed by ROSTEK).
Exit Gate
After several hours (if very lucky) or several days, trucks arrive to the Exit Gate. The
border guards verify that all documents have been checked and all required controls
have been completed. The Border Control Checklists are collected, and the departure
time is recorded.
8. Deficiencies and discrepancies in actual Border Control management
practices
This Section has reached its assessments based upon its own observations in the Field
Visits, and from the data supplied by the BMAs in their answers to the Questionnaires,
presented in Appendix B.. It particularly addresses issues in 2.1. a and b and d and e.
of the TOR, i.e. issues which are generic as they impact on most other BCP
management issues.
All BMAs were open and honest regarding the factors which limit the effectiveness of
border controls in ensuring the safe and speedy cross border movements of goods and
persons which maintaining proper border controls. The difficulties were made quite
clear to the PT and were usually visibly obvious. While there was no single reason for
extensive delays, the dramatic differences in crossing times for road freight, especially,
made it clear that several factors were particularly important.
Rail issues – passengers
Rail passenger movements were generally reported as being achieved satisfactorily,
without undue delay. The checking of passports on board long distance trains or in wellappointed passenger terminals which offer protection from the weather (e.g. Narva and
Koidula in Estonia regarding trains from St. Petersburg and Moscow respectively, and at
Terespol in Poland from Moscow and Minsk) involves processing times which are
acceptable given the length of the journeys. However, Estonian Border Guards advised
there concern about the risk of delays to both road and rail passengers in the event of
visa relaxations between the Schengen Area and Russia and Belarus. Therefore the
Project has noted in the Conclusions and Recommendations at Sections 17, 18 and
19 below, that the introduction of more and higher reliability mobile passport readers
should be actively considered and that consideration should be given to the introduction
of Advance Passenger Information (API) for long distance trains and coaches. The
inconvenience of this to passengers, and possible extra costs to them and the road and
rail operators would be at least partially offset if such travel were able to use priority
crossing procedures, reducing overall travel times.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 20
Rail issues – freight
Rail freight movements were generally reported as being achieved satisfactorily, without
undue delay. The general effectiveness of rail freight procedures is described in detail at
Section 15. below.
In general, the nature of rail freight is well known in advance to the BMAs of export,
import and transit countries. Customs clearance is normally not carried out at the
border. There are therefore seen to be no major challenges in relation to rail freight, and
the capacities examined at, for instance, the Polish Belarus and the Estonian – Russian
and Latvian – Russian borders appeared sufficient for current and expected traffic
levels.
However, following the carrying out of the Field Visits, Polish colleagues did point out to
the PT that there were significant opportunities for streamlining procedures through
greater use of the CIM / SMGS Consignment Note, which from experience on key east
west freight routes, has been a major step forward. This matter is suggested as a key
issue for consideration in future phases following on from this project.
This general effectiveness offers indicators as to what needs to be done in relation to
improving the admittedly more challenging situations regarding movements of
passenger vehicles, including coaches, and freight.
Generic road traffic issues
Queues varied greatly, with there generally being little link between the levels of road
network and BCP lane capacity and the levels of delays. At the risk of stating the
obvious, capacity increases on one side of the border lost much of their effectiveness if
there were no physical capacity increases on the other side (e.g. at Koidula – Pechory/
Kunichina Gora between Estonia and Russia, where the full benefit of the introduction
of terminals and queue management on the Estonian side will be limited until the
ongoing Russian vehicle park upgrades are completed).
Major examples of this situation were at Medininkai – Kamenny Log (Latvia – Belarus)
and Terehova – Burachky (Latvia – Russia) and Koroszczyn ( Kukuryki – Kozlowiczy)
freight and Terespol – Brest passenger vehicle crossings from Poland to Belarus. The
levels of delays were very severe at all these sites, with freight queues especially being
in excess of 10 kilometres and crossing times being well over 24 hours in some cases.
As previously mentioned, several drivers spoke not of hours but of days when
describing delays. Extensive funding has delivered significant new road capacity in
Poland in the Terespol and Koroszczyn area, while capacity is less extensive at
Medininkai and is limited at Terehova (although upgrades have started on the regional
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 21
network). The significant on BCP terminal facilities available at Koroszczyn are of
limited support to transport operators as the queues to get to the terminal are so long.
Road issues – freight
These observations made it clear that the main opportunities and challenges relate to
the number and effectiveness of processes required to cross. While the introduction of
queue management systems such as that introduced in Estonia has, as previously
noted, led to much more comfortable conditions at vehicle terminals for truck operators
especially, it has not necessarily reduced crossing times. Given that the delays are
much greater for trucks, it is clear that the solutions going forward need to involve the
introduction of fewer and simpler processes. These need to include the reduction on
the CU side in the number of physical checks ( e.g. x raying and physical examination
of cargo, and to a lesser extent weighing which is more automated) and , accordingly,
much greater use of Risk Analysis systems and procedures for automated clearance
with post clearance audit checks away from the border.
Concern was raised by several operators, and in the media, that the June 2012
introduction of compulsory electronic submission of customs preliminary information
in advance of arrival would actually lead to longer delays, at least in the short term.
Economic operators’ unfamiliarity with the new system might lead to increased numbers
of rejections, with vehicles being turned back or subjected to higher levels of physical
controls. Therefore, it is suggested that there is close cooperation between Russian and
Belarus Customs and their EU counterparts in order to share views on what degree of
licence can be allowed to operators for mistakes which are not felt to be significant. EU
experience in relation to the introduction of its own system would be likely to be highly
relevant.
The use of free flow systems as opposed to batching is strongly recommended. Delays
caused by batching (delays which are multiplied when applied to several processes,
such as passport control followed by Customs clearance ) were stressed by several
BMAs as a major cause of delays. See Section 10. below for a detailed description of
the benefits of free flow systems.
Road issues – passengers in private vehicles and in coaches
On the road borders, both sides face a set of challenges that, though in themselves are
only minor, accumulate to require substantial resources and therefore are a cause of
delays. All countries in the Schengen zone face challenges in relation to illegal migration
and the proper processing of asylum seekers and the use of false documents. There
was a clear need seen to coordinate on a regional basis the sharing of subject specific
information on refused persons and the use of false documents. There seem to be
weaknesses here. Persons refused entry into the EU in Estonia and who were returned
to Russia were identified as attempting to enter into Finland a few days later, with the
inevitable result that they were refused entry there. This problem is worsened by the fact
that, though these persons are attempting to cross illegally into Europe, their presence
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 22
in the CIS is fully legal and as long as they do not actually attempt to cross the border
outside of BCP's, there is nothing that can stop them from moving around.
Furthermore, there are also challenges for the EU states regarding smuggling of
alcohol, cigarettes and road fuel from Belarus and Russia where prices are much lower.
These are not risk areas for the CU but the need to carry out significant numbers of
physical examinations using risk analysis and spot checks means that delays can occur
at EU entry points. There are severe practical limitations to what can be done to reduce
these problems. It is suggested that all the States in the Partnership consider
maximizing the use of Border Guards to carry out Customs checks (i.e. first line physical
checks of vehicles), as several already do. Where BCPs do not yet have access to
central nationwide databases holding ANPR data, this should be introduced and
considered for extension to link several states. Such access would potentially increase
the effectiveness of risk analysis by identifying suspiciously frequent movements across
a border, where different BCPs are used in attempts to allay suspicion.
At the CU side, a major source of delays is the need for filling in a customs declaration
to fulfill the requirements in relation to temporary importation of (foreign) motor vehicles.
At present, the source of identification of a vehicle movement from an importation or
temporary importation point of view is the Customs declaration, the completion and
delivery of which does take time. Up to 10 minutes processing time by customs has
been noted4. Consideration should be given to evaluating other means of recording the
import or temporary import, perhaps taking the example of Ukraine, which has abolished
the use of a manual Customs Declaration.
The coordinated national and transnational use of ANPR data in relation to vehicle
movements, especially passenger vehicle movements would potentially have significant
benefits for the Customs Union. The centralization of movement data would also make it
easier for Border Guards to cooperate with customs in identifying the passengers in,
and particularly the drivers of, vehicles of potential interest from both the perspective of
identifying the smuggling of goods.
Such measures would also be consistent with the general viewpoint of the PT that
basic customs checks be undertaken by Border Guards as improvements in passport
integrity technology frees up resources for other purposes. The PT noted that at several
BCPs Customs and Border Guards worked exceptionally closely together, to an extent
that they might almost be regarded as one service, so such measures are considered
feasible.
9. Cross border cooperation between Border Crossing Points Management
Agencies
4
At the Belarus – Poland border, when the vehicle is crossing the border at the particular crossing for the
first time.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 23
This part of the Report addresses the requirements of Section 2.1. d and of the TOR,
i.e. communication and common decisions and personnel knowledge.
The PT accepts that its comments here must be considered as being largely based on
the views of EU Member States BMAs. With the exception of the meeting with Belarus
State Customs Committee at Koroszczyn terminal and the Kukuryki and Terespol BCPs
in Poland in April 2012 the PT was not able to meet BMA representatives from the CU,
although it did seek to keep them informed through the host BMAs before, during and
after the Field Visits.
The PT’s assessment of the situation regarding cross border cooperation between
BMAs is drawn from our observations during the Field Visits and the cross border
cooperation section of the Questionnaire. While the effectiveness of such cooperation
is a separate issue from such internal cooperation between the BMAs of a single
country, the PT believes the two need to be looked at together.
There are considerable bases for developing operational and tactical (case by case)
cooperation, especially regarding increasing the quantity and particularly the quality of
risk analysis. The operational / organizational issue of regulating traffic flow between
BCPs used by Belarus and Polish Customs should be considered for adoption
elsewhere, to the extent that it is not currently adopted. There are well established 24/7
procedures overseen by senior officers and their deputies on both sides which ensure
that vehicles are only released from the truck BCP when sufficient space is available
for them to cross. This does not in itself speed up clearance times, but does allow
drivers to rest to some extent and to make use of refreshment facilities. However, given
the sheer volume of freight traffic at Koroszczyn ( Kukuryki-Kozlowiczy), even with this
system there were still delays of 8 to 10 hours (and in some cases of up to 24 hours) in
the area between the Polish controls and the Belarus controls, i.e. after the Polish
terminal. There were no refreshment facilities in this area, which clearly demonstrates
the sheer scale of the challenges on this key east – west route.
There were, at all BCPs visited, arrangements whereby specific BMA staff and their
deputies or replacements had direct responsibilities for exchange of information on
operational and tactical matters, staff often referred to as Border Delegates. There were
normally regular formal meetings on topics of mutual interest, especially on
organizational issues. These were typically monthly or quarterly, with other meetings
held as necessary. “Hotlines” were established at several BCPs, such as at Koidula in
Estonia for contact with Pechory / Kunichina Gora BCP. In that case, given the very
close cooperation between Estonian Border Guards and Customs, the link was in effect
for all services.
There have also been cases of short term deployments of BMA personnel between
BCPS. In April 2012 Russian Border Guards were due to be based at Terehova during
Operation ZAPAT, a joint exercise against illegal migration. In June 2012, there will be
extended cooperation between all the BMAs of Poland, Belarus and Russia regarding
ensuring speedy processing of football supporters travelling to Poland for the European
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 24
football championships. These special measures will, the PT was informed, involve
some forms of API use.
The PT has noted these positive developments in the Conclusions and
Recommendations at Sections 17, 18 and 19 below, and suggested that they be
developed further with more special joint cross border operations, the results of which
should be shared with all other States in the Partnership and not merely within the
States taking part in a particular exercise. The information exchanges through the
methods of formal regular meetings, and hotline notifications on urgent organizational
(traffic flow) or tactical situations do have some gaps. All BMAs and especially Customs
pointed out that there was a need to coordinate cooperation in relation to the
considerably different Customs risks situations for the EU states and the CU states
regarding
smuggling of excise dutiable goods and drugs into the EU, and the
undervaluation and misdescription of consumer goods into the CU.
It is the view of the PT that both automated exchanges of data enabling the accuracy
of export and import valuations and regular operational meetings should take place.
These operational meetings would seek to build upon the automated exchanges of core
declaration data by discussing ways of dealing with particular tactical cases of mutual
concern, within the context of dealing with the generic challenges, rather than simply
dealing with each case as it comes. In view of the importance of this issue, it is now
discussed further, immediately below.
9.1 Automated exchanges of Information on Customs movements within the
context of operational level coordination between Customs Services
The following comments seek to make proposals which strike a balance between the
desirability of reducing passage times by implementing the provisions of the TIR
Convention regarding the free flow of goods, while ensuring that the very real revenue
and public protection issues of concern to the CU and the EU are taken into full
account. This section particularly addresses the requirements outlined in the TOR at
2.1. (b) and (d). interoperability of technologies and procedures and communication and
common decisions.
In relation to the clause requiring the avoidance of detailed scrutiny of goods at an
external border customs post, the TIR Convention allows in accordance to Article 5 (2)
of the Convention: “....to prevent abuses, Customs authorities may in exceptional cases,
and particularly when irregularity is suspected, carry out an examination of the goods at
such offices”
Clearly, systems need to be in place to prevent such abuse. The PT has therefore
recommended that extensive and early efforts be taken to introduce long term automatic
sharing of risk profiling information and the mutual recognition of Authorised Economic
Operators between Schengen Area states and Customs Union states.
It is recognised that there are domestic data protection issues here and that there is
also the need to recognise key national interests in all states regarding the regulation of
law enforcement agencies IT systems. However, the introduction of international good
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 25
practices in relation to making significant reductions in the number of Customs
processes, and in reducing physical inspections is consistent with government and
Customs Service policy in the Russian Federation and, by extension, with that of its
Customs Union partners. A recent speech by President Putin, while still Prime Minister,
highlighted the significant reduction in the number of Customs processes as a key
priority for Customs to implement. Equally, the Russian Customs Service regularly
publishes figures regarding the percentages of freight movements which are subject to
intensive (physical) examinations. The publication of these figures implies recognition of
the need to move to a more developed risk management system.
Such risk management systems inevitably benefit significantly from the timely exchange
of information between neighbouring states, especially those which are the points of
entry to or from their respective customs unions.
Accordingly, the PT highlights in its Recommendations the need for enhanced
exchanges and the carrying out of special joint information exchange exercises, and the
long term deployment of staff between states in relation to both the operational and “IT
technical” aspects of information exchange.
The PT believes that the carrying out of such recommendations should be notified
before, during and after the results to all Customs agencies of the Northern Dimension
Partnership. While we believe that all states would benefit from the carrying out of such
recommendations, we would especially suggest that there be such exchanges between
Poland and Belarus in view of the volume of traffic, and between Lithuania and Belarus
in relation to transit traffic between the Kaliningrad region of Russia and Russia itself.
The nature of the information to be exchanged would, of course, be matters for the
BMAs themselves but we suggest that examples would include high consumer demand
electronic goods imported into the CU and which are felt to be prone to serious
undervaluation, as well as capital goods which may be free of Customs duties and may
therefore be misdescribed, with the goods actually being different and subject to duties.
In relation to exports from the CU, EU MS may be able to help regarding the verification
of the integrity of the reported importers of goods which are suspected of being
vulnerable to false export fraud from the CU. But we suggest that the key ways of
reducing physical inspections would be to agree on criteria for mutual recognition of
Authorised Economic Operators and the monitoring of their future compliance.
Given that transport operators reported that clearance times were relatively short when
entering or leaving Finland, there would also be opportunities for comparing the reasons
for this with challenges experienced between Russia and Estonia and Latvia
respectively.
10. The logistics of movements of passengers and goods at Border Crossing
Points
Introduction
This section of the Report addresses particularly the requirements of Section 2.1 c of
the TOR – terminal logistics.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 26
It is common practice to use a so called “batch” system to the flow of especially cargo
vehicles through a BCP. Though not apparent immediately, this can have substantial
influence on the overall throughput in a 24 hour period in comparison to a flow system
due to delays caused by bottlenecks5 caused by infrastructure. This section attempts to
explain and visualise the practical implications of the use of one or another system. The
relative benefits of the “batch” system are summarised in the Table at the end of the
Section.
The common process
To illustrate the difference, a simplified but not completely unusual process is taken as
an example. The process concerns the following processes:
 weighbridge,
 customs clearance
The processing duration for the weighbridge is 5 minutes, while the customs processing
takes 20 minutes, but there are 4 windows, allowing for 4 vehicles to be processed at
the same time. For simplicity of the explanation, it is assumed that there are no time
delays going from one process to the other, or there are no queue's anywhere.
In addition, the calculations reflect current practice as reported by drivers, that the next
batch is only allowed into the BCP when the entire previous batch has been processed
and has left the BCP at the other end.
We do not however make the assumption that, like in normal practice for batch systems,
all vehicles in the batch will first need to clear the first process before the second
process can start, but we assume instead that the every vehicle clearing the first
process can immediately proceed to the second process.
5
A bottleneck process is a process of which the throughput capacity is the smallest of all processes at a BCP. Most likely, these are
processes that require specific pieces of hardware that are expensive to acquire and of which there is often only one. Managing the bottleneck, by
for example ensuring that its process is only used in particular cases when justified by identified risks is one option that comes at very little or no
cost. Alternatively, but already far more expensive is to increase the quantity of equipment available for the bottleneck process. More on
managing bottlenecks can be found in the book “the goal” from Ely Goldrat.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 27
batch size 10
time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse
process duration
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
6th
7th
8th
9th
10th
Weighbridge
5
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Customs 1
20
Customs 2
20
Customs 3
20
Customs 4
20
time lapse from begin first process
20
20
20
20
20
20
25
30
35
20
20
20
40
45
50
55
20
60
Maximum process duration for individual vehicle:
Time required to process 10 vehicles:
65
70
70 Minutes
50+20 = 70 minutes
Continuous flow
time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse time lapse
process duration
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
6th
7th
8th
8th
10th
Weighbridge
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Customs 1
20
Customs 2
20
Customs 3
20
Customs 4
20
time lapse from begin first process
20
20
20
20
20
20
25
25
25
20
20
20
25
25
25
25
Maximum process duration for individual vehicle:
Time required to process 10 vehicles:
20
25
25
25 Minutes
50 + 20 = 70 minutes
As can be noted from above, the application of a batch system substantially increases
the waiting time for individual vehicles in the worst case scenario, in the example, it is 70
minutes for the batch processing versus 25 minutes for a continuous flow system. With
regard to the duration of the total process (e.g.) from the total of 10 vehicles being
processed, in this particular case, there is no difference in duration, for each situation,
the total time to process 10 vehicles is 70 minutes.
However, the numbers hide a more important difference, which does severely affect the
total capacity to process vehicles in a certain period of time. In case of the batch
processing approach, the there are several work stations that do not have any work for
a certain period of time either before the first customer arrives (in case of customs) or
after the last customer has left, such as in case of the weighbridge. As time dissipates
when it goes forward, the lost production cannot be recovered easy. In the above
example, the processing capacity of a continuous flow system would be at least 20%,
but up to 40% higher than in the batch processing approach.
If we once more take the example, in case of batch, the throughput in 70 minutes would
be 10 vehicles, regardless what happens. In case of the continuous flow, the maximum
throughput that can be achieved in the same 70 minute period at the bottleneck (the
weighbridge) would be 14 vehicles, an improvement of 40%. This would then also
provide for a more constant workflow at the customs posts and increase its capacity
there through reducing idle time.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
25
Page 28
Concluding, a critical assessment is essential of all processes at a BCP over a period of
to identify the bottleneck processes6 . There is no single process that is solely or even
very largely responsible for delays, though the PT felt that the replacement of batch
systems with flow systems was perhaps the biggest step which could be taken.
Table Batch v Flow
Batch size
st
10
st
nd
rd
th
Process duration, min
1
2
3
4
Weighbridg
e
5
5
10
15
20
Customs 1
20
25
Customs 2
20
Customs 3
20
Customs 4
20
Total time in the BCP
th
Time lapse from arrival of a truck at the BCP (from 1 to 10 )
th
th
th
th
6
7
8
9
25
30
35
40
45
45
30
50
50
70
55
40
30
th
10
65
35
25
th
5
35
40
60
45
50
55
60
65
70
Maximum duration of stay of a vehicle in the BCP is 70 minutes
Time required to process 10 vehicles is 70 minutes
Total number of vehicles in the BCP area at the same time is 10
Batch size
st
1
st
Process duration, min
1
Weighbridg
e
5
5
Customs 1
20
25
Customs 2
20
Customs 3
20
Customs 4
20
Total time in the BCP
th
Time lapse from arrival of a truck at the BCP (from 1 to 10 )
nd
2
5
rd
3
5
4
th
5
th
5
5
th
6
5
th
7
5
5
25
25
5
25
25
th
10
5
25
25
25
25
th
9
25
25
25
th
8
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
Each vehicle is processed within 25 minutes since arrival at the BCP
Time required to process 10 vehicles is 70 minutes
6
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 29
Total number of vehicles in the BCP area at the same time is 5
11. The impact of physical infrastructures on the operations of Border Crossing
Points.
This section deals especially with Sections 2.1. a and c of the TOR, i.e. joint planning of
infrastructures and superstructures at the BCPs, and, to some extent, terminal logistics.
However, it should be noted that clear divisions between these issues and the other
issues in the TOR cannot really be made as they are all closely interlinked.
As has been previously pointed out, the PT stresses that physical infrastructure issues
are very important and need to be considered in relation to all other issues which are
the subject of the Study. It therefore follows that in the Conclusions and
Recommendations at sections 17, 18, and 19 below, comments and proposals which
are not related to physical infrastructure matters may be relevant to such matters. The
reverse is also true. The PT also repeats its view that physical infrastructure issues are
secondary to the necessity to simplify border crossing procedures in reducing crossing
times.
Throughout the following comments the PT draws distinctions between transport
infrastructure and BCP infrastructure, while again noting that they are intimately
interlinked. Transport infrastructure is defined for the purposes of the Study as being the
cross border road and rail networks, including the approach roads and rail lines leading
to the BCPs. The BCP infrastructure refers to the building facilities and road and rail
networks actually at the BCPs, including the vehicle lanes within the BCP area. Given
their crucial impacts on the conditions in which persons and goods can move across,
the vehicle parks and off BCP terminals are considered as being both BCP
infrastructure, as well as transport infrastructure, even if they are not actually located
at a BCP. Without effective queue management systems, provision of terminal parking
and reductions in the number of border crossing processes, improvements to the road
transport infrastructures are likely to be much less than fully effective. Without
improvements to transport infrastructure, improvements in simplifying and reducing the
border crossings procedures themselves are still going to be limited by physical
limitations, even though the simplification of processes is felt to be the more important
issue.
The PT is grateful to the representatives of the Roads and Civil Aviation Dept. of the
Ministry of Transport and Communications in Lithuania who met the PT during the
Lithuanian Field Visit, and the representative of the State Real Estate Co. which is
managing BCP upgrading in Latvia, and doing so in close consultation with counterparts
in Russia, including Rosgranitsa. These colleagues gave their views on long term
infrastructure proposals and ideas. Their information was broadly similar to the opinions
provided by the BMAs in the other states visited, and was used extensively in producing
the proposals regarding the transport corridors and BCPs which were felt appropriate
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 30
for priority modernisation and capacity enhancement. See Section 19 below and
Appendix A.
Transport infrastructures
The PT travelled extensively in South-eastern Finland and in all the Baltic States,
including to the border with the eastern frontier of Kaliningrad, and in North Eastern
Poland. As a result, the major road networks for traffic to and from St. Petersburg,
Moscow and Minsk were observed for considerable distances. It was noted that the
corridors which would logically have the greatest levels of traffic had, not surprisingly,
had the longest queues.
At Koroszczyn (Kukuryki- Kozlowiczy) and Terespol ( opposite Brest) on the Polish –
Belarus border, queues for trucks waiting to enter Belarus were as much as 15 km in
length, despite the recent significant upgrading of the Polish road network in the region
to reflect the location on the Moscow – Minsk – Warsaw – Berlin corridor. At Medininkai
on the Lithuanian- Belarus border they were similarly very long, reflecting the location on
a major secondary route which is very close to the main St. Petersburg to Warsaw and
Berlin corridor via Estonia and Latvia. They were also extremely long at Terehova in
Latvia at the crossing with Burachky in Russia as that is on the key corridor Moscow –
Riga.
Conversely, queues were significantly shorter entering Russia from Koidula and Narva
in Estonia, reflecting that these corridors are either not as long (to Tallinn) or act as
alternatives to each other (St Petersburg to Riga). However, queues were of course
limited at these locations due to the use of the GoSwift compulsory queue management
system alongside the use of well-appointed vehicle terminals for pre booked vehicles (
Koidula and Narva city) and well-appointed truck terminals ( at Sillamae near Narva).
The existence of the GoSwift system meant that the vehicle parks were not full as
vehicle users had already pre booked their place so did not need to arrive “in advance”.
Extensive publicity has also been given to measures to prevent abuse of the system,
with extensive CCTV and resulting spot checks which can identify the booking ticket to a
specific vehicle (this anti-fraud measure was stressed to the PT as being vital to ensure
public confidence). It is for these reasons that the PT urges the active introduction of
queue management systems and vehicle terminals along the Estonian model, which it
was pointed out is intended to be self-financing in that the rents the operators pay to the
state will repay the costs of introduction within a reasonable time frame. The recently
announced plan to test GoSwift at Russian crossing points on the border with Estonia
(from 1st July 2012) is a major step forward.
It is accepted that such measures will face greater challenges along routes which
experience very high traffic volumes, and that the building of terminals (essential for the
fully effective use of queue management systems) also takes time. It was stressed to us
by Lithuanian Transport Ministry colleagues and BMA agencies at the BCPs in Latvia
and Lithuania that while transport corridors were scheduled to be upgraded, with more
lanes, current budget limits meant that these were some years away, with completion
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 31
typically not before 2020. However, we note that while queue management systems will
not necessarily reduce the crossing time (a point openly admitted ) it will greatly reduce
the uncertainty about the length of time and enable the waiting time to be either more
productive or more comfortable, or both. For example, the excellent BCP terminal
facilities at Koroszczyn ( for the Kukuryki BCP) in Poland cannot be fully used to
drivers’ advantages due to the absence of a queue management system linked with
terminals located before the BCP itself.
It was noted that at Nuijamaa – Sosnovskoye/ Brusnichoe on the Finnish – Russian
border ( visited as a proxy for the main Finnish – Russian BCP at Vaalimaa, queues
were much shorter which the PT believes is linked to the reported much faster
movement of trucks from Finland to Russia, which further suggests that the cooperation
between Finnish and Russian BMAs on risk evaluation is actually a key factor here. The
experiences of all BMAs on both sides of the border should be shared throughout the
Partnership States.
In conclusion, the PT believes that where possible road networks should be upgraded
on both sides of the border at all the locations listed in Section 21. As priorities for
modernisation, but that these should be supported by the introduction of off BCP
terminals and queue management systems, as even higher priorities. As an interim but
very important measure, portable and reasonably weather proof toilet facilities should
be established at regular intervals along the approach roads to BCPs subject to long
queues. These would have considerable psychological impacts, especially if they could
be heated in winter, although this may not be practical..
BCP infrastructures
Within the narrow definition explained earlier, the BCPs visited had generally good
infrastructures. This statement has to be qualified as the PT did not visit the BCP
buildings on the CU side.
The number of traffic lanes was generally adequate, with flexibility in their use so that
vehicles could be diverted to a “faster” lane if needed. This enhanced the effectiveness
of lanes which were normally designated for specific use ( e.g. commercial perishable
goods, passenger coaches, and EU or CU citizens). The issues limiting effectiveness
were organisational, rather than physical.
The on- BCP terminals were in all cases reasonably well appointed with proper
protection against weather conditions and good sanitary facilities. Several BMAs felt
that physical limitations in the number of traffic lanes between the BCPs were a major
limiting factor. However, as other BCPs were able to process traffic reasonably quickly
while still subject to limitations on the number of lanes, the PT was reinforced in its view
that that the reliability of technical equipment such as mobile passport readers,
document and identity verification systems ( as required in the Schengen area and of
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 32
similar interest to CU States) are more important, alongside the need to reduce physical
checks for road freight.
That said, the PT particularly notes the views of Lithuanian BMAs regarding the need to
increase lane capacity between Medininkai and Kamenny Log, and the concerns of
Latvian BMA staff regarding the age of the facilities at Terehova and elsewhere, which,
given the financially driven delays to the national transport infrastructure upgrade are
increasingly needed.
The PT believes that any external physical upgrades plans, whether to the BCPs
themselves or to the regional transport infrastructures, should be discussed in advance
with the neighbouring EU or CU state, as coordination of efforts are likely to be more
effective. It is accepted that in the case of road network upgrades, which in the short
term can cause disruption, mutual upgrades should be carried out in sequence in order
to minimize disruption.
Further details of the physical infrastructure situations at the BCPs themselves are given
in the BMA Questionnaires, reproduced at Appendix B.
12. The views of Border Management Agencies
The issues in this Section are related to all of the specific aspects of border
management listed in Section 2.1. of the TOR, i.e. a to e. These need to be in both
individual and collective contexts, so this section of the Report and the related Appendix
are key to overall understanding of the descriptions, conclusions and recommendations
made.
The views of the Border Management Agencies (BMAs) regarding how they operate
their BCPs are listed in the Questionnaires at Appendix B. The Questionnaire has
been written in order to maximise the expression of views which enable the PT to
assess current and future situations in relation to meeting the key Output Objectives of
the study. These include evaluations of current and future capacities of the BCPs in the
context of overall movements of persons and goods by road and rail between the
Schengen Area and the CU. The identification of recent qualitative and quantitative
changes and expected future developments has also been sought. Specifically, the
Questionnaires have sought to identify areas for particular cooperation in relation to
exchanging information and sharing operational practices between BMAs within a
country and across the Border.
The Questionnaires were, in several cases, actually written by the PT based on the
discussions held with the representatives of the BMA's and then amended by the BMAs
as required to provide a full refection of their views. In other cases, the BMAs completed
the questionnaires. Where the PT produced the original versions, all amendments were
included in the final version. The PT believes that there are high degrees of correlation
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 33
between these versions, which is evidence of common appreciations of the current
situations, opportunities and challenges.
The PT did, in completing the Questionnaire responses, seek to imply responses which
would enable the Study’s objectives to be achieved, by suggesting issues which were
particularly important opportunities and challenges, and to go beyond the present
situations towards expected future needs.
The PT noted a high degree of consensus regarding the challenges ahead, regardless
of the locations visited. These are highlighted in the Conclusions and in the
Recommendations at Sections 17 and 18. below, and in the managerial action
Recommendations at Section 19. The PT therefore believes that there considerable
opportunities for future cooperation between all the countries of the partnership,
especially in relation to the reduction in the number of border crossing processes and
the corresponding need for much use of risk analysis and information sharing, and
mutual recognition of risk priorities. Such exchanges would need to involve automated
continuous real time systems, and exchanges of staff for both short term and extended
periods. In relation to technical equipment, ANPR systems need to be fully accessible
on a national, and not just BCP basis, and the results shared across the EU / CU
external border. Given the priority to consider the likelihood of significant increases in
movements of persons if the CU or its members reaches a visa free agreement with the
EU more and more reliable portable passport readers were commonly seen as a
priority, as were document and identity verification systems. The significance of the
PT’s interest in calculating fingerprint identity verification times for Schengen visa
holders was fully understood by BMAs who have concerns about delays in the systems,
including periods of unavailability.
There was less consensus regarding the issue of vehicle terminals in the context of
introduction of queue management systems. Several agencies did not see the
introduction of terminals as a priority which was achievable in a realistic time frame,
while accepting that a queue management system itself was needed. While the PT
understands this, it remains of the view that such a system, combined with the creation
of vehicle terminals near the BCP is an absolute priority, behind only the introduction of
fewer and simplified border crossing procedures. The two are connected in that an
effective queue management system can be linked to API systems and thereby to more
effective risk management systems.
13. The views of Transport Operators and their representative bodies
This Section of the Report is deliberately placed immediately after the Section relating
to the collective views of BMAs, as it gives the private sector operators’ outlook. As
such, the section largely relates to the specific aspects of border management outlined
in section 2.1. a and c. of the TOR – infrastructure of BCPs and terminal logistics, but in
reality relates to all of them, a to e.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 34
13.1 Summary of the views of EU based transport operators.
As the views expressed in this immediate section have many similarities with those of a
Russian based operator as given in 13.2, the PT has felt it necessary to produce
summaries of both points of views, despite the risk of duplication. The PT believes that
these views, from both sides of the Schengen area / CU external border, are extremely
important as they are consistent with the PT’s view that while no single measure or even
set of measures would solve the major border crossing delays problems, the need to
reduce the number of procedures required for freight movements, and to simplify those
procedures, are crucial.
To obtain the views of transport operators, meetings have been held with the Finnish,
Estonian, Latvian road haulage associations as well as those in the Russian Federation.
Due to the fact that they did not respond to any correspondence or were available for a
phone call, the Lithuanian association has not been met. The Polish association could
not be met due to time constrains, as they are based far outside the project area and a
meeting would involve substantial travel.
In summary, the concerns of the companies are different depending on which country
they are based. Finnish registered companies that are involved in transport to Russia
are mostly Russian owned and employ Russian drivers. The association did not report
significant problems recently on the Russian - Finnish border, though this may well be
due to the substantial drop in traffic since the crisis, combined with the reduction of
import of new motor vehicles as a result of the increase in local manufacturing of
western brands. The reduction in motor vehicle transport reduced the number of
journeys by perhaps as much as 100.000 on an annual basis. In addition, the use of
Russian ports has been made more attractive, further reducing the transit traffic though
Finland.
With regard to the borders more southward, the associations there reported substantial
problems with BCP performance, leading to long queues, both virtual 7 and physical. The
waiting times may be as long as 60 – 70 hours for both passenger and freight vehicles,
depending on the specific location. The delays have significant cost to exporter and
transport operators alike, the direct cost at the Latvian – RU/BY borders alone has been
put on around 25 million Euro in 2011 alone. .
The associations expressed their frustration on the inability of the EU and Russia to
agree on the exchange of customs data. Right now, in cases of export they first must
provide this to the EU and after that the entire process is repeated for Russia / Belarus
with related cost and time delays.
Though possibly a temporary phenomenon, the Baltic transport operators complained of
their borders being clogged up by Polish trucks returning from Russia / Belarus loaded
with cheap fuel from Russia and Belarus. This has been caused by the restriction in
7
Such as the Estonian Go-Swift system.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 35
Poland that no more than 600 litre of fuel can be carried into the EU, regardless the size
of the fuel tank of the truck. As this takes place through border crossings that were not
designed to handle such traffic, it is causing additional delays at the border.
Most operators are sceptical of the prospects of any changes in the near future, not in
the least due to the fact that constrains are not caused by physical infrastructure or
even the need to carry out particular procedures, but as several representatives on both
sides of the border put it, there are “beyond the border” factors at work at several
locations. They see queue parking areas at the borders as long overdue, together with
the need for more of a terminal model for the BCP's though they acknowledge that
these will not be a complete solution. The terminals and queue parking arrangements
will help to avoid the fines now caused by exceeding the driving hours regulations during
queuing and reduce the cost of crossing a border somewhat.
The companies identified issues with incompatible customs and other information
systems that make the border crossing process very slow at most BCP's leaving the EU.
There are on the Russian side 8 different IT platforms in use, which all need to be
supplied with some information. The process is time consuming and would benefit of
unification of systems. There is the feeling that since the entry into force of the Customs
Union, things have gone worse rather than better.
Corruption, either small scale (opportunistic) or large scale (institutionalised) has been
identified at nearly all border crossings in both directions.
13.2 Summary of views of a Russian based transport operator
The following comments are a summary by the PT, based upon the views expressed by
a Russian based transport operator during a face to face interview. with a PT member.
All the views and opinions expressed are those of that operator. The PT regards these
views as potentially very significant and this is reflected in the large number of
recommendations made which are based upon these comments, and those of the EU
based associations as described above. However, the PT stresses that it is suggesting
that operational exercises be carried out in order to test out the validity of the current
and expected concerns expressed by the operator.
One main concern is the new Russian Customs requirement for pre-arrival information
for crossing RU border. It will go into effect on 17 June 2012. Cargo owners or carriers
will be required to submit information to customs several hours before crossing the
border. This information contains 45 fields, which is deemed to be excessive amount of
information. The EU SPEED project tried to make information about cargo and which is
available in the EU, also available in the Federal Customs Service portal. But the FTS
portal requires additional information about cargo and drivers. Information about cargo
should be provided in HS6 format (other sources talked about HS10).
Currently, the FTS portal is available only in Russian and works with Cyrillic letters only.
North Western customs tries to promote and educate users before the deadline on 17
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 36
June. In the end of 2011 7% of carriers provided preliminary information, now it is about
12%. Probably much more information gets into FTS server directly from consignors.
Drivers are already provided with computer access for 2 hours to key-in required
information. But it is unlikely that the number of computers provided by RU customs will
be sufficient, especially taking into account driver’s lack of experience in using the
system. ASMAP will provide additional laptop access points with mobile internet at and
after 17 June.
The FTS portal is created according to the Order #52 of the Federal Customs Service.
The Order is put in such a way that only ROSTEK and its affiliates can meet its
requirements for customs representative
Currently, only the consignor, carrier or ROSTEK can put the preliminary information
into the system. Drivers said that when they arrived at the BCP with proof of preliminary
information upload (a printout with a bar code), inspectors claimed that they did not
have information in their system and could send drivers to ROSTEK. ROSTEK (North
West) would input preliminary information for a driver but at fee. It is already agreed
between RU customs and the Association that after 17 June ROSTEK will not be
involved in provision of preliminary information, because this causes a conflict of
interest.
It is not unlikely that the FTS portal idea will fail and FTS will have to return to the usage
of data from TIR-EPD system, which has better interface and data formats and proved
to be accurate and dependable.
There is a risk that preliminary information will slow down control procedures, because
inspectors will have to compare information in the FTS portal with paper documents.
Any discrepancies will result in thorough inspection (x-ray, physical)
RU customs often apply unreasonable penalties and procedures to carriers, who have
minor discrepancies in their documents. This is probably because they are motivated to
register more violations of any kind without considering risk impact. E.g. in Torfyanovka,
customs stopped a road carrier who carried the Boeing flight simulator worth of million
dollars. Its real weight differed by 400 kg from the documents. Although customs duties
do not depend on weight, customs decided to stop the cargo. Its owner decided not to
pay and the cargo remained stuck at the border. Meanwhile Russian airlines cannot get
this equipment for training of their pilots.
A new development in Russia is the setting up border terminals, where goods should
be cleared before moving any further into Russia. There were far-fetched justifications
that these terminals will reduce risks of smuggling, eliminate congestion in big towns
and create employment opportunities in border areas. This is a political decision and
such terminals are being set up at the borders.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 37
One additional argument for setting up these terminals from RU customs was that they
do not trust their own customs terminals (SVH) inside Russia.
Many ancillary operations at the border are conducted by ROSTEK and its affiliated
companies. Loading-unloading during physical inspection was supposed to be done free
of charge (according to the RU Customs Code). But this might result in long waiting
time, thus carriers had to use ROSTEK terminal services. It is not clear how it works
now, according to Customs Union Customs Code
One day of waiting at the border costs approximately between 200 Eur (Euro 0, 1) and
300 Eur (Euro 3,4,5 trucks). These figures are normally used in carriers’ claims to the
controlling authorities. One day of work is 500-700 Eur. 600-700 km international trip
(across 1 border) costs 1000 EUR (domestic rate in RU is 1$/km - http://www.dellaru.com/price/ http://www.della-ru.com/price/)
In the Finnish destination, the workload between RU and EU carriers is shared 50 to
50. In Pskov destination – RU-30/EU-70, mostly because of constraints with bilateral
road permits. In Pskov oblast Russian drivers work alongside LV, LT, EE drivers, and
every country has bilateral quotas with Russia. Finns do not limit number of permits,
because they are interested to keep their ports working at full capacity and Finnish road
operators are not interested to carry cargo to Russia.
Russian authorities recommend using alternative routes when Torfianovka is congested.
But freight forwarders fix routes with consignors in contracts. Prices are based on
distances through Torfianovka. The road through Nuijamaa-Brusnichnoe is longer (from
southern ports - Kotka, Hamina, etc), and in addition it is narrow, and often gets icy
because of the fog from Saimen channel. In addition, it has a step ascent between FI
and RU BCPs ( around 8% slope according to Google Earth).
ASMAP proposed building a new passenger vehicles terminal between Konvenranta
and Kondratievo (60°42'05" N, 28°03'05" E, leaving Vaalimaa – Torfianovka for freight
traffic only.
Torfianovka has sufficiently large area – 32 hectares (25 ha in Vaalimaa), but inefficient
procedures. It has all chances to increase throughput capacity considerably.
Russian carriers are facing new challenge. Soon they will have to pay for usage of
roads. The fee is 3.5 RUR/km for usage of all roads in Russia. It is estimated that this
new fee will be equivalent to 1000 USD/month, or 20% of revenue. It is not clear if (or
how) foreign carrier will pay for road usage.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 38
14. The views of drivers.
This Section provides comments which are largely related to Section 2.1 c and d. of the
TOR, i.e. terminal logistics and common planning and procedures (agency
interoperability).
Drivers’ interviews
As part of the information gathering effort, a two pronged approach has been taken.
First, drivers have been interviewed “on site”, e.g. at BCP waiting queue's. Secondly,
questionnaires have been handed out to those drivers that have indicated to be
prepared to spend the time and effort to fill one and return it to the team.
The interviews were held on the roadside in the queue by the translator and the logistics
experts and were based on some base questions that were used to guide the
discussions. The guiding questions were as follows;
Time use

How long have you been waiting in the queue?

Is this normal or is it often much more?

Are you often crossing this border?
Destination

Where are you coming from and going to?

How long will it take to drive there?
Border Crossing process

What kind of customs documents you have most of the time? (TIR / T1 / other)

Does it work properly or are there any specific problems with the documents?

If you have perishable goods such as fruit and vegetables, do you get priority?

Empty trucks, do they wait in the queue or does that go faster?

What about the transport inspection at the other side? Are they giving you a hard
time?

Can you tell us a little more about the process of crossing the border here from
your perspective? What is good and what is bad?

What about corruption?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 39
It should be noted that these questions are guidance for the discussion, but many other
subjects were covered along the way. Generally, drivers were, despite having
sometimes spent many hours, up to days in the queue, very friendly and responsive.
The drivers interviewed were Latvian, Russian, Belarusian, Polish, Lithuanian and
Estonian and the interviews took place mostly at Latvian, Lithuanian, Estonian borders
as well as the Polish – Belarus border. In summary their replies are as follows:
Drivers spend anywhere between three hours (for perishable goods) and three days
waiting at the border. The border crossing process itself can be easy on the (outgoing)
EU side, but takes a minimum of 5 – 8 hours8 on the other (Belarus, Russia) side,
though this also depends on the location of the crossing. This delay is despite the use of
TIR Carnets for nearly all cargos, which are supposed to make the crossing process
simple and easy. Processing TIR carnets on the outgoing side is generally easy, though
at some BCPs, it may be a problem or not possible at all 9. The total crossing process10,
including the waiting process “between borders”, can be as long as 12 to 24 hours just
at the border between Poland and Belarus. If time spent on the approach roads to the
BCP are considered, crossing times can be much higher, with drivers reporting the
delays as being “days”.
Contrary to the Russian Customs practice, the Belarusian customs does not apply an
additional seal to the cargo travelling under a TIR carnet but leaves the seal earlier
applied as sufficient proof of closing. However, Belarus customs requires goods with a
value of over 135.000 Euro (about 60.000 Euro of taxes to be paid) to travel escorted
convoys across the BY territory. The cost of this is about 300 – 400 USD and convoys
depart only once per day. This is during the winter in early morning and during the
summer (when asphalt is hot and driving restrictions apply11), during the night. The
convoy services are provided by the police.
There are no separate queues for TIR / Empty on either side of the border, but as most
vehicles are using a TIR carnet, the queue is in fact a TIR queue.
Crossing into Belarus involves up to 10 different controls, even with a TIR carnet. The
control processes sometimes involve X-raying the truck. To detect contraband and also
the mandatory radiological checks (for further on steps, see the summary of the driver
questionnaires). Though controls themselves do not take that much time, there is a lot
of waiting between the different control steps, which is the cause of the accumulation of
delay. Partially, this is also caused by the use of a batch system for controls at the BY
side.
There is no corruption on the Belarusian side of the border, though several drivers
reported that at the Polish side minor problems with the documents can be solved for a
8
Perishable goods, for general cargo, it can take up to 24 hours.
Problems were reported at the PL-BY border, while Narva crossing does not open TIR carnets. In Narva, a
terminal some 25KM from the border must be used to open carnets.
10
The time from entering the outgoing BCP to leaving the other side.
11
In Belarus, heavy vehicles are not allowed to be in the road when the temperature of the asphalt is over 30
degrees centigrade. This has been imposed to reduce damage to the generally excellent roads that the country
possesses.
9
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 40
small fee. Given the randomness of the process of assigning controls to customs
officers, this appears to be an opportunistic event rather than a structured,
institutionalised problem.
Drivers are aware of the Estonian E-queue system, though many are not exactly certain
how it works. It should be noted that many drivers expressed their frustration with the
borders and the delays, but also were rather cynical about the prospect of
improvements. In effect, no one believes that there will be any improvement any time
soon in the process of crossing the border. Most drivers indicated that the largest issue
that they would like to see solved as soon as possible is the absence of a queue parking
with facilities such as toilets and showers. This absence of a parking affects their ability
to continue their journey after crossing the border but also is uncomfortable, as they
cannot even sleep without a break as long as they are in the queue.
14.1 Summary of drivers’ questionnaires
The team distributed questionnaires to drivers through associations as well as in direct
face to face meetings with drivers on the roadside at or near the BCPs visited, such as
in the queue depicted below at Medininkai (Lithuanian side of the Lithuania – Belarus
border). Interviews were also held at these locations.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 41









In many places, especially on the CU side, batch systems are used for entry into
the BCP area, batches can be between 10 and 15 vehicles, according to reports,
Routing slips are reported for every BCP,
Queue lengths are reported between 0 and 10 Km,
Waiting times in the queue are anywhere between half an hour and one day for
the best performing borders (RU-FI), up to 60 hours for other borders,
Drivers have to move their vehicles generally once per hour when they are in the
queue in order not to lose their place, though cases of up to 4 times per hour are
reported,
Parking was reported to be both sufficient and insufficient, though this may be
due to the different crossings and the different crossing times,
Typical Controls reported by nearly all drivers are:
 passport control,
 customs control
 sanitary control
 phytosanitary control,
 traffic inspection
 weight controls for vehicles that are not empty
The duration of controls, depending on the type, has been reported to be
between “fast” (one minute) and up to 5 hours, generally though, most controls
themselves last between a few minutes and up to half an hour, in extreme cases
controls are reported to last several hours,
waiting time between controls can be between 1 minute and one hour. Drivers
reported in a substantial number of cases waiting for up to one hour for a one
minute inspection12.
Most noteworthy are the consistent reports of long waiting times between controls
despite the fact that some of these controls are minor. This is consistent with the use of
a batch system, but also of the fact that there are bottlenecks in the processes at the
BCP. Furthermore, it may point at unnecessary controls that are in practice no more
than “going through the motions”.
12
This was reported several times and most likely refers to situation where drivers actually do not have any
business at a particular department (for example when empty), but simply need to go through the entire cycle to
collect their stamps on the routing slips.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 42
15. The rail freight situation.
This Section by its nature covers all parts of Section 2.1. of the TOR regarding specific
aspects of border management which are to be addressed.
Rail Crossings in general between the EU and Russia and Belarus
The Rail Crossings between the EU and Russia / Belarus pose their own, unique
problems though they are not as severe as the delays faced at the road crossings. The
team has analysed the process of both passenger and freight transportation by rail and
the findings are discussed below.
The EU and Former Soviet Rail system
Rail systems in the EU differ substantially as a result of the soviet legacy of the wide
gouge railway. Where for example Latvia and Lithuania were equipped with 1435mm
(normal European) rail tracks at the turn of the 19 th century, during the Soviet time these
were converted to the Russian 1520mm track. Thus, trains travelling from Poland to
Belarus / Ukraine and from Poland to Lithuania need to change their boogies (wheel
sets) to be able to continue their journey. Finland uses a track width of 1524mm,
though this is within the tolerances that are allowed for track construction, so trains can
drive from Finland to Russia without problem.
The above differences in rail profile have significant implications for train speeds. It
implies that on the border (or near to the border) there will always be significant delays
due to re-loading or change of boogies.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 43
The border crossing process for cargo trains.
Most, if not all, cargoes on the trains are travelling under customs seal to and from their
station of departure or arrival, mostly ports or large inland railway terminals. There are
no customs clearance procedures at the borders themselves though a document check
is / may be carried out. To illustrate the process, an example is taken from one of the
border crossings between Estonia and Russia.
Entry to the EU
The railway crossing itself is a single track which crosses from Estonia into the Russian
Federation. The track is served by two designated locomotives, one from Estonia and
one from Russia. These locomotives shuttle between the two countries over a relative
short distance and provide the actual crossing. If available, a radiation scanner and an
X-ray are applied to the train. The x-ray is used to determine potential inclusions in the
cargo of illegal goods. Mostly, smuggled goods are cigarettes and alcohol, which are
even when purchased in Russia legally, much cheaper than in any EU country. The
locomotives are, upon arrival searched for illegal goods which may be carried by the
locomotive driver (again cigarettes and alcohol). The drivers are subject to passport
control and need visas, even though they are only a few hundred metres into the
territory and the area is a closed customs territory. Where no X-ray is available,
cameras are used to monitor the train (especially open bulk carriages) for persons
attempting to cross illegally.
The customs post receives approximately one hour advance notice of arrival of a train,
but not necessary of the cargo it is carrying. The balance of goods however is as such
that trains to the EU carry;

Liquid Fuels (crude oil as well as diesel and petrol)

bulk goods such as coal and various ores

Wood (mostly unprocessed)

Empty containers
From the EU into Russia, mostly trains carry:

Liquid Fuel (Jet Fuel)

Containers with consumer goods

empty bulk wagons
The trains stop at the nearest terminal from the border (this can be a station or a
designated terminal) and here the locomotive is changed to one that provides the long
distance transport to either an inland cargo station or to its final destination. Trains stay
from one hour to up to a day at the border terminal / near station. Customs clearance is
carried out at either the cargo station or the final destination, depending on need. In
case X-ray is present and something is noticed on the pictures of the scan, action can
be taken immediately or at the final destination.
During the change of locomotive, customs check is limited to a check that wagon and
container numbers correspond to the documentation.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 44
Furthermore, in the case of Poland and southward, e.g. the countries which are not
directly connected to the Russian railway system such as the Baltic States and Finland
and are not party of the SMGS, the consignment notes must be changed from SMGS 13
to CIM14 and the other way around as appropriate. This process takes place on the
cargo station close to the border. Polish colleagues have stressed that effective use of
their common SMGS / CIM consignment note is a major step forward for ensuring
speedy and accurate clearance and subsequent monitoring of goods and therefore the
Project recommends that best practice in this procedure be used as a model for
clearance of goods.
In addition, in the case of trains crossing from Poland to Belarus, Ukraine and the Baltic
States, there is the need to reload the cargo at the point where the railway track
changes from European Gauge to the Russian wide track. This process is in itself is a
significant delaying factor, which would only be solved if one of the tracks were
converted to another gauge.
Main conclusions
There is not much to be improved in relation to the process of crossing and clearing
cargo trains. The crossing process is relatively straight forward and does not involve
long delays that relate to the border management itself. Border security and customs
efficiency in stopping illicit goods could be improved by the installation of X-Ray
equipment at all rail Border Crossings. Considering the cost of this equipment, both in
acquisition and operation, it would be advisable to consider an agreement in sharing the
raw scans between countries. 15 Unification of the types of consignment notes would
also improve cargo flows, though this is largely unrelated to the border crossing process
itself, and therefore, as mentioned previously, Polish experience in introducing the
common SMGS / CIM consignment note should be considered as a model for such
unification.
16. The rail passenger situation.
This Section of the Report largely addresses parts c, d. and e of Section 2.1 of the
TOR, namely terminal logistics, communications and common decisions and personnel
knowledge.
Transport of passengers does not fundamentally differ from the transport of goods,
though it is worth noticing the differences between the countries and its implications for
speed of crossing now and in the future. In effect, two main approaches of rail crossing
are found in the region:
-
Passport and customs control on a driving train,
-
the train is stopped and held for a certain period to complete passport and
13
SGMS: Agreement on International Railway Freight. Communications
CIM: International Agreement International Carriage of Goods by Rail
15
It has been noted that a lot of duplication in equipment takes place, all to be paid by taxpayers. A typical
BCP seems to need two of everything, even in the case of very expensive equipment.
14
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 45
customs formalities.
The first process, passport control on a moving train is currently only applied only on the
Finnish – Russian border. All other crossings have passport control on a stationary train.
When the train is stopped for passport control, this results in a delay of from 40 up to 55
minutes16 at both sides of the border. This time is also used to change locomotive.
The control, regardless of if this takes place on a driving or stationary train also involves
extensive search of all spaces in the train to ensure nothing is hidden. Portable passport
scanners are used to scan passports and visas. The equipment works fine in the warm
confinements of the train, but less good in the cold.
In the case of trains travelling to / from Belarus (for example the Paris to Moscow train),
there is the need to change the boogies (wheel sets) of the train to / from the European
gauge. This process can take several hours and mostly takes place at the Brest
(Belarus) train station.
Alternatively, the passport and customs control takes place on the driving train
(Finland), which removes a factor that causes lengthened journey times. The process is
the same, but its viability depends on the distance from the departure station to the
border and the number of stations between departure and border.
In most cases, such as the stations visited during the assessment (Narva, Zilupe (near
Terehova), Koidula17), the last station before the border (where the train stops for the
passport control) is a border control post in itself and passengers departing from that
station are checked before entering the train. Passengers arriving from the other side of
the border are also checked on arrival at the particular border station.
Passenger trains are subject to relatively long stoppages at borders that could be
avoided or reduced by for example joint controls (in case there is a control on a
stationary train, or controls on a driving train. However, the benefit / cost of this must be
considered in the light of the length of the train journey. For example, in the case of the
slow moving overnight sleepers travelling between Riga / Minsk, Moscow and St.
Petersburg and some of the other Baltic Train lines, it does not really matter to
passenger if journeys take 15 hours instead of 16.
17. Conclusions reached
The PT’s Conclusions need to be considered together with the Recommendations
which follow on naturally at Sections 18 and 19. They are subject to the qualification
that it was not possible to actually visit BMAs in Russia and Belarus, although drivers
and transport operators were interviewed in Russia and PT members did observe
operations on the Belarus side of the Lithuanian and Polish external border. The PT
also met Belarus Customs colleagues when at the Polish BCPs.
As with the recommendations, the Conclusions reached address all specific aspects of
border management, as outlined in the TOR, especially at 2.1. They also address the
16
17
The Riga – Moscow time spends 55 minutes at the Russian side of the border for incoming passenger control
Koidula has currently no passenger traffic, but has been constructed in such way that this is possible.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 46
findings which are used in the Recommendations to deliver the required outputs of the
Study, as listed in Section 3.1 of the TOR ( deliverables a to d). However, the findings
and recommendations do, by their nature, cover multiple aspects of border
management. The categories in Sections 2.1. and 3.1. of the TOR are not exclusive.
They need to be examined together with other categories, especially as
recommendations in relation to one aspect usually impact on several other aspects. .
The Project has therefore produced both its Conclusions and Recommendations along
transport category and functional lines, with an emphasis on road traffic and particularly
road freight. That section immediately below at 17.1 provides several examples where
the categories interact, such as the use of the Estonian GoSwift traffic management
system which impacts on both terminal logistics and communications and common
decisions.
The Conclusions are as follows.
17.1 Road freight
1. There is a lack of implementation of both the letter and spirit of international
conventions on the speedy and efficient movement of goods, especially in
relation to the TIR Convention, and the International Convention on the
Harmonisation of Frontier Controls of Goods. This lack of implementation is seen
by the PT as the most important issue in relation to cross border delays, even
above the need to introduce queue management systems and to build vehicle
terminals.
2. This lack of implementation is demonstrated by the excessive level of physical
checks on consignments of goods.
3. The lack of implementation is also demonstrated by a lack of effective use of risk
management systems in several states, which is a reason for the excessive level
of physical checks.
4. These limitations are made more severe by a lack of sufficient staff for
examination and risk analysis purposes.
5. There is a lack of flexibility in determining which errors in the supply of data and
documents are material or not. Many drivers and several transport operators
found their declarations rejected due to spelling errors.
6. There is a lack of vehicle terminals at several BCPs. This leads to long queues
on public roads in conditions which lack proper sanitary facilities and, crucially,
require truck and passenger coach drivers to be on duty for working time
purposes, only to move their vehicles a few metres forward at a time. . This
situation is particularly serious at borders which are on rivers (as many are) as
the scope for physical expansion of the number of traffic lanes between BCPs is
limited by bridge size or the additional cost of building bridges.
7. The use of batch systems for movements of trucks (and to a lesser extent for
passenger vehicles ) is time consuming and inefficient, and greatly reduces the
actual capacity of the BCP in relation to its design capacity. The situation
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 47
becomes even more problematic when batching is used for separate sequential
processes, as no vehicles can proceed until all work on the batch of vehicles is
completed. This is also inefficient in the use of processing booths which are not
fully utilized as once the booth is clear it is not in use again until all the vehicles in
the batch have been processed at the other booths.
8. The levels of delays within BCPs in Russia and Belarus are also substantive, as
a result of what drivers feel are excessive levels of examinations of documents
and of cargos, especially those in transit under Customs seal. There is often
insufficient use of pre arrival information, where available, for risk management
purposes, resulting in more vehicles being examined, and in greater depth, than
international good practice suggests. However, the challenges here are
understood by all parties consulted.
9. The limitations on use of pre arrival information in assessing risk have impacts on
processing times in a number of ways. Russian Customs carries out physical
inspections on a significantly higher proportion of freight consignments than do
EU states. These checks have significant impacts on processing times. Physical
inspections which use specialized equipment such as X ray scanners take much
time due to the limited numbers of such expensive equipment which are
available. Because of such limitations, large scale use seriously limits the daily
capacity of BCPs by creating a bottleneck that cannot easily be enlarged. This is
a clear example of the Project’s belief that procedural issues are key to improving
border management. While physical infrastructures such as lane capacity –
especially on bridges – are obviously important, these are seen as secondary to
processing and management matters issues.
10. The lack of integration of IT systems, especially in the Customs Union, requiring
the entry of the same data in several different systems is a major factor that
increases the duration of the actual processing without adding value to the
process.
11. There is limited use of continuous or automated risk profile information sharing
between the Schengen Area and the CU. While generic risk profiling information
is exchanged, all parties consulted stressed that the needs and priorities of the
Schengen Area and the CU are different, with the CU placing much greater
emphasis on fraud risks through undervaluation of goods. There is a need to
coordinate and enhance the quantity and especially the quality of operational risk
assessment information between the Schengen Area and the CU, taking into
account the greater dependence of the CU on import duties and that the true
unit values of goods imported into the CU tend to be significantly higher than
goods exported to the EU. This obviously leads to greater opportunities for
valuation fraud.
12. The EU electronic pre arrival data input system is not always as reliable as had
been hoped for and electronic documents often need to be matched with paper
ones. While the individual processing times are not great, the numbers of data
are such that the delays mount up. The PT has noted the persistent concerns of
all BMAs about the reliability of availability to databases, particularly information
heavy ones. These concerns have potential implications for the Russian
electronic pre arrival data input system due to be introduced in June 2012. The
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 48
transport operators’ community has suggested that the introductory period after
17th June 2012 may lead to increases in levels of physical inspections due to the
electronic declarations being improperly submitted. This poses considerable
risks and is consistent with common experiences throughout the world that new
technologies often take some time to be perfected. This situation is therefore a
risk, but is also an opportunity to examine any weaknesses or to make early and
maximum use of successes
13. There is insufficient use of queue management systems such as the Estonian
GoSwift system which has been compulsory in Estonia since 1 ST August 2011.
These systems are typically linked with the introduction of vehicle parks and are
used by both freight and passenger vehicles. They are also key components of
introducing Advance Passenger Information and Risk Management systems.
They are under active consideration across the states studied, including in the
CU. While such systems do not necessarily reduce the length of the queue they
make it virtual rather than physical , or reduce crossing times, which are also
dependent on the other factors identified as causing delays, they do make the
use of the waiting time more productive, reducing costs, and enable drivers to
wait without being deemed to have been driving, which is crucial for working time
directive purposes.
14. There are delays travelling beyond the border into the CU as a result of differing
approaches to the treatment of goods travelling under TIR status, where special
arrangements have to be made if the universal value limit of 60,000 euros of
duties ( Customs duties and VAT combined) if exceeded. Truck operators report
that it is often difficult to arrange national guarantees in Russia and Belarus. As
a result, they often have to travel in Customs arranged convoys (as they have no
guarantees) and this causes significant delays.
15. There are insufficient rest and refreshment facilities near a number of key BCPs.
This is compounded by the lack of sufficient highway lanes, leading to long
queues of up to and exceeding 15 km. There is a serious lack of temporary
mobile sanitary facilities in some locations. All parties consulted pointed out that
while there are long term infrastructure upgrade plans, the current and expected
near future financial situation means that highway capacity will not increase for
many years.
16. There were reports from truck drivers of corruption among some BMA staff, (e.g.
into or from Poland, and into Russia). However such claims were not made
universally and some drivers specifically said that bribes were neither sought nor
offered.
17.2 Road passengers
1. Several EU Border Guard Services expressed concern about the need to consider
all aspects of passenger processing modernisations together, rather than in
isolation. Such an approach would be more likely to maximize the speedy but
secure processing of passengers’ details and of their movements. The agencies
made these comments in the context of their expectations of significant increases in
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 49
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
passenger traffic following any introduction of a visa free travel agreement between
the EU and the Russian Federation or the CU as a whole.
Given that many road crossings are inherently capacity limited because they are in
urban areas, thus limiting the number of lanes, delays to private and commercial
passenger movements will inevitably limit the number of lanes available to freight
traffic and vice versa. Several crossings in both urban and rural areas have
considerable numbers of processing lanes and indeed terminals nearby (Koidula in
Estonia and its counterpart Pechory in Russia, and at Koroszczyn in Poland on the
Belarus border) but suffer severe delays due in part to lack of lanes. However, as
previously mentioned, the management of processing of movements does remain
the key to reducing these delays.
In the Schengen Area the processing of passengers is broadly effective given
current levels of passengers. The limitations are more due to road capacity.
However, in some urban locations such as Narva on the Estonian – Russian border
there was limited capacity for the reception of coach passengers, leading to
travellers waiting in the open before passport control. While an EU funded
programme is increasing such capacity, simultaneously on both sides of the border,
and will provide more weather proof indoor facilities for passport checks, these
increases will still be challenged to deal with expected increases in movements.
There are generally sufficient traffic lanes for processing passengers, both private
vehicles and in coaches. The challenges generally lie in between the BCPs,
especially where bridges are used The latter vehicles are generally prioritized
through use of specific lanes for particular types of traffic, especially passenger
coaches. However, these prioritization procedures are sometimes abused by private
cars and, as is the case with truck lanes, offer scope for corruption with priorities
being given in return for payment..
There is generally a lack of lanes which are capable of being used in both
directions. Where these are present, such as in Estonia (Narva, where lane capacity
is crucial as it is a built up area) they contribute to speeding up the throughput of
vehicles, and contribute to the ability to react quickly to the movement of emergency
service vehicles and high priority traffic such as trucks with perishable goods, or for
in lane customs and border guard inspections of private cars, typically in relation to
cigarette smuggling.
The general lack of off BCP (terminal based) parking and, separately, of a queue
management system also impacts on the movement of passenger vehicles, though
to a lesser extent than for trucks. There is a limited amount of risk management
used in selection of vehicles for detailed examination of personal documents and for
use in Customs checks. The risk management profiles are complex to create as
widespread differences in process of consumer goods and especially of excise
goods (cigarettes, alcohol and road fuel) mean that large numbers of vehicles and
users would meet the risk profiles. The use of queue management systems and
separate but related Advance Passenger Information (API) systems would go some
way towards improving profiles and thereby traffic flows, while protecting revenues.
Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) systems and, additionally closed
circuit TV
(CCTV) are generally widely available. These are used in relation to
traffic management and to an extent in risk management. Some countries have
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 50
ANPR systems which are linked nationally, so that checks can be made
automatically or instantaneously manually to identify BCP movements of the same
vehicle through other BCPs. Such capabilities are extremely useful. Other states
use centralized systems where BCPs have to manually check vehicle ownership.
While these systems are available 24/7, the time required to do this puts pressure
on staff and would cause processing delays and be likely to lead to less complete
and effective prioritization of traffic.
8. There was widespread and deeply felt concerned expressed by BMAs that some
equipment was unreliable, especially in cold weather or in severe rain. This was
particularly the case regarding portable passport scanners which would be, and are,
invaluable for checking passengers in vehicle queues and to avoid or reduce the
need to leave coaches.
9. A connected, but separate issue, was the equally widely expressed view that the
examination of documents and other special identification checks carried out under
Schengen requirements, such as yearly fingerprint checks and resulting uploads
and downloads in relation to visa holders, and for the transmission of identified
suspect documents and data on the persons involved. These processes are often
very slow indeed, particularly at peak times which are not that different across the
entire Schengen Area. Such delays cause significant onward delays in processing
persons and are compounded by access to the databases being down. This has
very major implications in the context of visa liberalization.
10. There was, generally, a missed opportunity to carry out combined passport (border
guards) and Customs checks while in the often long queues, when vehicles are
stationary or semi stationary for considerable periods of time, and when vehicles
were irrevocably committed to crossing as there was no room to turn back easily.
17.3 Rail freight
The situation regarding rail freight is generally satisfactory.
Traffic is normally well within capacity, and crossing points generally have adequate
capacity for shipping goods. There are at the rail BCPs sidings enabling trains to be
divided and combined. Most goods entering the EU from the CU are actually cleared at
the first cargo station beyond – not at – the border , or at the final destination, or at a
modal transloading station. Advance notification of import declarations was considered
acceptable, enabling document checks to be carried out together with physical
inspections of trains on a 24/7 basis and, where available, X ray examination. The
latter, such as at Koidula in Estonia or Zilupe in Latvia, are mainly used to detect
smuggling of goods under the train or hidden in cargos and to identify illegal migrants
hiding on freight trains. The major crossing point of Terespol in Poland is due to receive
an X ray scanner in 2013. The Project was informed by Belarusian colleagues that there
were currently no X ray scanners for rail freight in Belarus. The installation of such
equipment would obviously be desirable. However, given the considerable costs
involved in purchase and maintenance, it may be worth EU and CU states considering
an agreement to share “raw” scans of cargos.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 51
As described at Section 15. above, the Polish introduction of a common CIM /. SMGS
Consignment Note ( SMGS being used by countries with direct access to the Russian
rail system, i.e. the Baltic States and Finland, with CIM being used by Poland and other
states without such access) should be considered as a model for clearance procedures
and subsequent monitoring.
17.4 Rail passengers
The systems for the processing of rail passengers by Customs and Border Guards are
well established at all locations visited and generally work well.
Passenger checks are carried out on the train itself using mobile passport readers
(Russia – Finland) or at railway stations which are themselves BCPs (e.g. at Narva and
Terespol) where many passengers leave or board, going through controls in so doing.
There are currently no formal API systems and these would in any case be mainly
effective on long distance, often overnight. However Estonian Border Guards have an
arrangement with their national rail operator which provides long distance passenger
services to and from Russia. Information about passengers who are felt to be
suspicious at the time of booking is notified to the Border Guards in advance. Such a
system might for the basis of an API system, although it is accepted that there are
practical difficulties compared with API use for air passengers.
18. Recommendations
The Recommendations follow on logically from the Conclusions. They are not
necessarily given in order of priority, because such priority is difficult to define and if
offered might lead to an excessively rigid response. Prioritisation will inevitably be an
issue best decided by operatives in HQs and at BCPs and on transport routes.
As was mentioned in Section 17. the Recommendations are given in largely functional
categories, which nonetheless do address all categories which are specifically required
to be addressed in the TOR ( reproduced at Appendix F, with specific subjects to be
addressed and required outputs being listed at Sections 2.1 and 3.1).
18.1 High priority issues
Urgent consideration should be given to the introduction of queue management systems
and the creation of vehicle terminals, ideally on both sides of the border simultaneously.
Several states are looking actively at the recently introduced Estonian scheme, and
which has been made compulsory in Estonia, and which Russia has recently
announced it will test on the Russian side of the Estonian border at all the major BCPs
including Ivangorod, from 1st July 2012. Such systems are intended to be self-financing
which would free up scarce funds for road infrastructure enhancement, especially the
building of more bridges. It is accepted that this is a long term challenge.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 52
The Customs Services should cooperate more closely in providing data (sanitized if
necessary to comply with data protection legislation) between each other to assist in
creating more detailed and relevant risk profiles for the importation and export of
goods. The profiles will differ significantly between the CU and the EU / Schengen Area.
There would therefore be differences in the data provided. We place this
recommendation so highly as this point was made very strongly by many border
management agencies and by private sector operators. The recent joint report by the
Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation and the National Audit Office of Estonia (
Border crossing of cargo at the land border between Estonia and Russia – March 2012see Appendix C) highlighted that while there was very close cooperation between the
Border Guard services of Russia and Estonia, the cooperation was significantly less so
between the two customs services.
This is a major and complex task and consideration should be given to the secondment
of staff between BCPs at the same crossing for significant periods of time, to ensure
that the actual implementation of simplified procedures takes place, based upon the
proactive use of complete and relevant data. Key Performance Indicators should be
created to ensure early monitoring of results, simultaneously on both sides of the
border, and in agreeing on what data categories are material and which are less
material in that errors can be tolerated, at least in relation to allowing immediate
crossing without return or the obtaining of wholly correct documents. Such deployments
should also be developed further by Border Guards, noting the very recent planned
exchange of staff between Lithuania and Belarus in relation to illegal migration. In the
longer term, consideration should be given to the manning of joint BCPs where most or
ideally all relevant procedures are carried out at one site.
The practice by both Border Guards and Customs of processing vehicles and their
drivers and passengers in batches should be ended wherever practicable.
Truck drivers have reported extra delays when leaving Russia by a different crossing
from the one that they have been “ booked” for, after diverting due to excessive delays
at the originally intended crossing. This may be because the diversion may be deemed
suspicious, but – whatever the reason- the diversion of a vehicle to a less congested
crossing should not, in itself, be a reason for delay.
The communications network capacities between computer systems, and thereby the
resulting transmission speeds and system reliabilities of both Customs and Border
Guards systems should be increased significantly, with wide margins built in for future
rapid growth in demand. This is especially important in relation to ensuring the
maximum effectiveness of any visa liberalization agreement. Similar attention should be
given to sharing experiences between all the States regarding the performance and
reliability characteristics of their current or planned portable passport readers and
mobile X ray scanners, in order that protection and maintenance good practice may be
shared.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 53
Serious consideration should be given to the introduction and expansion of the use of
API for both motor coaches and passenger trains. The costs of this to transport
operators might be partly offset by the attraction of reduced passenger clearance times
and resulting faster journeys. It is accepted there are practical challenges here. The
experience of Russian, Belarusian and Polish (and, indeed, Ukrainian) Border Guards
Services during the trial operations of such systems during the Euro 2012 football
championships offers opportunities for a model.
The degree of compliance with both the letter and spirit of international conventions
such as the TIR Convention should be reviewed by all states in the NDP, in relation to a
jointly agreed list of Key Performance Indicators measuring compliance and noncompliance.
18.2 Generic Border Management procedures








The establishment of joint BCPs manned by personnel from both sides of the
border should be considered. There should be long term secondments of staff
between adjacent BCPs while the question of joint BCPs is being considered.
New IT based technologies for improving the receipt of data enabling earlier
identification of freight and passengers for prioritized swift movement should be
introduced.
Such systems often involve complex technologies so they must be thoroughly
tested before introduction.
The demands on IT systems are and will be very high so there should be
significant extra capacity built in to allow for increasing demands and use which,
without extra capacity, will significantly reduce data transmission times.
The impact of the new Russian web based pre arrival Customs information
system, scheduled to be introduced on 17th June 2012, should be notified as
soon as possible and on a regular on-going basis to neighbouring states
regarding both the effect on clearance times, levels of physical inspections and
on identification of risk. Neighbouring states should agree with Russian Customs
on how they might publicise these impacts to economic and transport operators
in their countries in order to maximize the levels of compliance and reduce the
levels of non-compliance required by the new system.
The international conventions which the EU and CU States have ratified should
be implemented in letter and spirit, especially the provisions of the TIR
Convention requiring the unimpeded passage of goods unless there is good
reason to carry out further checks.
Queue management systems such as the Estonian GoSwift system introduced in
2011 should be introduced as a matter of high priority. With the results, positive
and negative, to be notified on a regular and formal basis to neighbouring states
within the EU and the CU
Such queue management systems should be supplemented by the introduction
of off BCP Vehicle terminals where road freight and passenger traffic can wait in
reasonably comfortable conditions. Evidence from Estonia is that such queue
management systems and the provision of the associated terminals can be self-
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 54







financing. Such terminals are felt to be particularly desirable at the Polish –
Belarusian border at Koroszczyn ( Kukuryki – Kozlowiczy) and Terespol - Brest.
As a short term measure, more portable sanitary facilities should be introduced
on approach roads which are subject to long queues, and this should be done as
a matter of urgency.
The use of batch systems for the movement of goods and persons from and into
Russia and Belarus should be replaced by flow systems. Project Team
calculations show that such systems might reduce the capacity of any BCP by at
least 20% and possibly by 40. Similar arguments apply to a lesser extent to
passenger vehicles. Such systems would also offer opportunities to reduce
alleged corruption regarding queue jumping. Drivers and transport operators
made clear their views that such bribery occurred at Russian BCPs (e.g.
Ivangorod) and in Poland (Koroszczyn/ Kukuryki).
The number of Customs procedures in the CU should be reduced significantly,
with more procedures being carried out inland or through Post Clearance Audit.
Such a need has already been recognized by the Russian government and is
now national policy, as highlighted in a recent speech by then Prime Minister
Putin.
Long term cross border cooperation between Border Management Agencies in
the Schengen Area and the Customs Union should be increased, with
consideration being given to automatic transmission of generic Risk Management
criteria material which identifies the “risk status” of goods from the point of view
of the transmitting agency, (though not necessarily person or company specific
material).
Such information exchanges should be used to create a joint understanding of
the common risk criteria used by BMAs, and of the separate risk criteria and
priorities used in the Schengen Area and in the Customs Union. For reasons
explained earlier in the Report, it is suggested that such work should especially
take place between Poland and Belarus, Lithuania and Belarus together with
Russia in relation to Kaliningrad traffic, and between Russia and Latvia using
experiences of Estonia and between Russia and Finland. The results should be
shared with all the other states participating (and with Ukraine in view of the
similarity of the risk challenges there).
Such exchanges should be supplemented by regular short term secondments of
staff between Schengen Area BMAs and Russian and Belarusian BMAs in order.
These should be used in joint special exercises on high risk or high priority border
management issues, and to review the effectiveness of previous special
exercises such as the Russian / Belarus / Polish plans to use road and rail API
data during the Euro 2012 Football championships, and Estonian plans to use a
form of API to process passengers on the new increased rail passenger
schedules between St Petersburg and Tallinn from May 2012. The June 2012
introduction by Russian Customs of a compulsory electronic pre arrival data input
system in June 2012 would make such secondments of staff very timely.
The possibilities of greatly increasing the use of API for road and rail traffic
should be considered. It may be possible to consider the further prioritization of
prioritized movements of road passenger vehicles whose passengers have been
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 55


recorded under API. This may be commercially viable if higher fares and the
inconvenience of submitting API information are offset by faster movement
across borders.
Consideration should be given to something similar regarding the movements of
goods supplied from, to or by Authorised Economic Operators (AEOs) with the
States involved agreeing on mutual recognition of AEO lists, subject to strict
safeguards. Views given in Finland showed that transport times for road freight
into Russia are significantly reduced due to the operators being well known to,
and verified by, Russian Customs.
Given the views expressed by truck drivers about corruption all agencies should
consider training their staff in a wider range of tasks. This would enable them to
be deployed at short notice (ideally at the beginning of a shift) to a range of tasks.
This would reduce the capability to offer bribes, as those making the offer would
be much less likely to know that a corrupt person was on duty.
18.3 Technical road freight procedures





As many technical procedures as possible should be moved away from the BCP.
An example would be drive through vehicle weighing which could be done at a
vehicle terminal and recorded in conjunction with recording of movement through
the BCP via queue management systems and ANPR recordings.
There should be mutual recognition of all states’ Customs seals, with compulsory
notification electronically if the seals are subsequently found to be tampered with.
More X ray machines should be made available on, ideally, a fixed and mobile
basis, together with suitably heated facilities for their use. These would enable
simultaneous as opposed to sequential examination of vehicles.
There should be closer cooperation between all states in this severe winter
weather region regarding the technical specifications of X ray machines and their
maintenance schedules. The need for reduced times between maintenance, due
to severe weather demands, was highlighted during the Field Visits.
Russian and Belarusian Customs should liaise with Polish Customs regarding the
possibility of joint training sessions in use of X ray scanners at Polish Customs’
training facility in Gdynia.
18.4 Generic Road freight procedures
1.
2.
There needs to be much greater publicity, including on websites, regarding the
key requirements for the submission of accurate import, export or transit
documents. Mistakes or omissions which will result in the rejection of the
documentation should be described clearly. Many drivers and operators
explained that minor errors resulted in them having to get new documentation
and a result their place in the queue was lost.
Such events also create
opportunities for corruption.
There should be a reduction in the number of trucks which are required to use
escorted convoys in the CU. Given that convoys are required for high value
consignments, there need to be simplifications of procedures for providing
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 56
3.
national guarantees where the value of duties and taxes on the goods exceeds
50,000 euros. The June 2012 electronic pre arrival system will offer opportunities
for such simplifications.
Given that there are often rest and recreation facilities within BCPs, BMAs should
cooperate with each other in assisting truck drivers by not releasing vehicles to
cross until they receive notification from counterparts that the route is clear. This
is particularly important where the crossing is at a bridge which is inevitably
limited regarding the number of lanes.
18.5 Generic and technical road passenger procedures
1. More use should be made of mobile passport readers, with consideration being
given to using them in vehicle queues.
2. The Schengen Area and CU states should cooperate on agreeing common technical
standards for weather proof portable passport readers.
3. Staff training should be reviewed regarding
the processing of identity checks
required under Schengen procedures for verifying visas, such as fingerprint scans.
Delays due to staff lack of familiarity were noted at the Polish – Belarus border.
4. The EU and CU states should highlight the severe pressures on the Schengen
Information System and its reliability problems at peak times. Border Guards made
clear that the slow upload and download times caused queue backlogs at peak
times.
5. All BCPs should have direct access to vehicle registration and ownership data and
to ANPR derived data regarding movements of vehicles across all a country’s
BCPs. This is vital for improving risk profiling and reducing the number of physical
checks required to be carried out. It is accepted that both the Schengen states and
the CU face particular challenges regarding the smuggling of fuel, cigarettes and
alcohol.
6. API systems should be introduced or extended based on experience in the June
2012 Football Championships ( Russia- Belarus – Poland) and consideration
should be given to allowing passengers on API coaches to remain on the coaches
with their documentation being checked using mobile scanners or collectively at
the passport counter after having been delivered by the driver.
7. Where queue management systems and API are not made compulsory, system
users should be able to use priority lanes and priority passport counters.
18.6 Generic and technical rail freight procedures
1. X ray scanners should be introduced at all rail BCPs which currently do not possess
them.
2. There should be secondments of staff between rail BCPs regarding joint training in
use of X ray scanners, e.g. between Brest and Terespol when the latter receives a
scanner in 2013.
3. The EU States which supply high value goods to the CU (e.g. aviation fuel) should
be invited to supply data to the CU Customs Services regarding the latters’
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 57
requirements in relation to the introduction of the electronic pre arrival declaration
system in June 2012.
4. All States should consider the exchange of staff on special exercises in relation to
revenue protection and especially security. Exchanges in relation to heroin
smuggling and illegal migration risks from rail convoys of NATO equipment being
withdrawn from Afghanistan from 2013, or from a deterioration in domestic security
situations in Afghanistan after that date, may provide experience which may be
useful in making security preparations for the 2018 World Cup in Russia.
5. All States should consider studying Polish practices in relation to the creation of the
common CIM / SMGS consignment note.
6. The joint Russian / Estonian audit services’ report of March 2012 on border cargo
procedures (road and rail) between Estonia and Russia has highlighted the need to
consider building veterinary inspection facilities for live animals imported into the EU
by rail at Narva.
18.7 Generic and technical rail passenger procedures
1. All states should consider the introduction of passport checks on the train while
moving or, in severe weather, while at the BCP ( where the rail gauges change,
delays are required anyway so checks on board at the BCP do not result in
significant delays to the journey).
2. In order to enable more effective and less disruptive Customs and Border Guards
checks on board, API systems should be set up for long distance trains. As such
trains are typically likely to include asylum seekers, such information would provide
significant advance warning and enable extra resources to be deployed to process
such persons.
3. Special exercises should be carried out jointly by the Schengen Area and CU
Customs and, especially, Border Guards, regarding joint risk profiling and in
developing with rail operators current Memoranda of Understanding regarding the
advance notification of suspect passengers by the train operator to the Border
Guards in the country of destination. Such a system is currently used by Estonian
Border Guards in relation to long distance trains from Russia.
19. Recommendations on Border Crossing Points requiring prioritisation of
modernisation and introduction of new procedures
The suggested BCP locations for implementation of the Recommendations are
presented here in order of geographical location, from north to south.
The BCP locations are listed in Table 1 below ( those BCPs which were visited) and in
Table 2 ( those not visited but deemed appropriate for inclusion in modernisation
programmes).
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 58
The recommended locations are not listed in order of priority, as the PT believes that
the states which are members of the Partnership would wish to have at least one BCP
in their country considered for prioritization of modernization.
Storskog (Kirkenes) – Borisoglebsk (Norway – Russia)
Vaalimaa – Trorfyanovka and Nuijimaa- Brusnichnoe (Finland – Russia)
Narva – Ivangorod and Luhamaa – Shumilhino ( Estonia – Russia)
Terehova – Burachki and Grebneva – Ubylinka ( Latvia – Russia)
Kybartai - Chernyshevskoe ( Lithuania- Russia – Kaliningrad) and Medininkai –
Kamenny Log ( Lithuania – Belarus)
6. All the Polish – Belarus crossing points in the immediate area of Terespol /
Koroszczyn and Brest ( i.e. Kukuryki- Kozlowiczy and Terespol – Brest) in relation
to the introduction of queue management systems and more freight and
passenger terminals, in order to reduce currently extremely long queues.
7. Grzechotki-Mamonowo and / or Bezledy -Bagrationovsk (both Poland –
Kaliningrad)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
During the final selection of Border Crossing points for field visits, the Project Team took
into account such factors as:
 Location of BCPs on main regional transport corridors
 Traffic volumes
 Reported length of queues and other problems
 Implementation of new systems and technologies (e.g. GoSwift electronic queuing
system, etc.)
 Reasonable geographic coverage, i.e. visiting at least one BCP in every border
segment
 Support from BMA authorities of selected host countries
 Close proximity to railway border crossings
There were a number of factors which led to these decisions. Volumes of current and
expected future traffic were important factors, but not the only ones. Each Schengen
Area country was considered in order that current practices regarding border
management and ideas and plans for the future would be shared across all the states in
the Partnership. As the situation on one side of an external border is inevitably related
to the circumstances on the other side, it follows that there would need to be
consideration of the equivalent BCPs in Russia and Belarus.
Where there is reasonable geographical proximity or the relative absence of other or
BCPs, the proposed BCPs are recommended in order to act as examples where good
practice in implementing modernisation would be cascaded in order to be in
neighbouring states or in current or future alternative routes in the same state. It was
also taken into account that a particular border should not be neglected. It was for this
reason that crossings between Russia (Kaliningrad) and Poland were proposed. It is
admitted that these choices were somewhat speculative as although the PT wished to
visit BCPs in the region it was not possible to arrange such visits and during the visit to
Koroszczyn (Kukuryki BCP opposite Kozlowiczy, and Terespol opposite Brest) all time
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 59
was allocated to discussion of challenges and opportunities at these very high volume
crossing points. The proposed Kaliningrad – Poland BCPs are therefore suggested in
relation to modernisation of border management procedures, rather than infrastructures
as such, as the PT has been told, subject to the completion of the Field Visits, that
modernisations have been carried out.
The choice of the (only) BCPs on the Norwegian – Russian border was also chosen for
the reason that each border had to be represented, and also as good practice
experience tested out there would be of use in relation to any future expansion of
capacity in the far north of the Russian – Finnish border.
The selection of BCPs was also linked to the layout of the road and rail networks
(although in the case of rail routes the PT found that procedures were efficient and that
the methods used in relation to rail freight and rail passenger movements such as the
very beginnings of movements towards API systems and especially the clearance of
commercial freight at inland clearance depots would serve as examples for road freight).
During its travelling between BCPs to carry out the Field Visits, the PT observed traffic
movements along main road corridors and the major alternatives, such as at Kukuryki –
Kozlowiczy on the main Berlin – Warsaw – Brest - Minsk – Moscow corridor, and at
Medininkai in Lithuania which is both an alternative route for that corridor and the most
direct routing from Moscow to Kaliningrad. The desirability of ensuring that routes, and
related BCPs, to both Moscow and St Petersburg were supported was also a factor.
The inclusion of the Finnish routes from Russia and related crossings reflects the fact
that these routes relate to movements to and from both St. Petersburg and Moscow,
and the potential impact of the introduction of a visa free regime between Russia and
the EU, given the relative proximity of Helsinki and St Petersburg to each other. There
was also the need to consider the importance of freight links between Sweden,
Denmark and Norway and St Petersburg and Moscow, given the lack of realistic
alternatives through northern Finland or via Denmark or Germany.
The decision regarding the Estonian and Russian locations was to encourage the widest
possible sharing of best practice in relation to Estonian implementation of their GoSwift
queue management system and to also take account of the potential impact of a visa
free agreement given the proximity of Tallinn and St. Petersburg. The selection of Narva
– Ivangorod is made in order to demonstrate the impact of recommended changes in
the context of locations where physical expansion of capacity is currently limited due to
the BCPs being in the centre of the cities. That location is also proposed in order to
place the effectiveness of queue management systems in their full context, i.e. in
physically restricted areas and also in locations where there is room for physical
expansion such as at Luhamaa – Shumilkino in Estonia and Russia. There would also
be particular scope for linking the use of the queue management system in Estonia with
the impact on freight clearance times resulting from Russia’s introduction of the
compulsory electronic pre arrival declaration system to be introduced in June 2012. As
there are plans for physical expansion of BCP capacity at Narva – Ivangorod through
building a bridge north of the city centres, to be linked with new terminal capacity on the
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 60
Russian side and the existing terminal capacity in Estonia, this would also enable
preparations to be made in advance for the most effective use of that capacity. This
could be useful for the planned capacity increases between Kaliningrad and Lithuania
through the building of a new bridge between Sovietsk and Panemune.
The recommendation in relation to the Latvian – Russian crossings at Terehova –
Burachki and Grebneva – Ubylinka (Latvia – Russia) are to reflect the locations as
relating to Moscow and St Petersburg traffic respectively and also that these routes are
to some extent alternatives to each other. Terehova is felt to be in need of physical
refurbishment while Grebneva has recently received extra equipment. Their needs and
opportunities thereby complement each other and both face similar challenges given the
limited transport infrastructure in the approaches to the BCP.
As previously mentioned, in relation to Lithuanian – Belarusian crossings, the
Medininkai – Kamenny Log route is the main alternative to the Moscow- Minsk –
Warsaw – Berlin corridor, and on the direct route (Kybartai) and indirect route (
Panemune) to Kaliningrad. Medininkai faces considerable challenges because of the
high demand on this route, with very long queues. However, its relative proximity to
Vilnius offers opportunities for terminal based queue management systems, using
existing parking facilities in the Vilnius area. The PT noted the effective use of existing
parking spaces in Narva city as well as the building of a new facility outside at Sillamae.
The proposal regarding Kybartai - Chernyshevskoe reflects the location of the BCPs
on the most direct route between Kaliningrad and Moscow.
In relation to the Polish – Belarus border, the PT highlights that the location of
Koroszczyn ( Kukuryki) and Terespol road freight and road passenger BCPs on the
main Berlin – Moscow corridor is reflected in the sheer volumes of traffic and the wide
variety of that traffic. The testing out of the recommendations regarding non-physical
infrastructure methods of simplifying crossings is felt by the PT to be crucial for
determining what will work and what will not, either with or without modifications. While
there are alternative routes for very long distance traffic ( it was stressed to the PT that
there was a lot of this) there are fewer alternatives for short haul traffic, without incurring
proportionately serious delays. The situation there demonstrates how excellent and
modern onsite terminal facilities (including space for a joint BCP if this could be
arranged) is of limited effectiveness because of delays in crossing into Belarus. These
delays are linked to the need to carry out clearance checks on behalf of the CU as a
whole and the continuance of relatively high numbers of physical checks on movements
of passenger vehicles and, especially, trucks. There is also a clear need to consider the
early testing of queue management systems in connection with the introduction of
nearby but off BCP vehicle terminals. Some sites were seen which appeared to the PT
to be suitable for such terminals, although it is accepted that much of the surrounding
area is marshy or restricted in use.
The proposal to include Grzechotki-Mamonowo and / or Bezledy -Bagrationovsk (both
Poland – Kaliningrad) is made in order to maintain the principle of including routes
which would act as alternatives to other proposals. Introduction of new management
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 61
procedures at Grezchtoki – Manonowo is more likely to be cascaded to the nearby
Gronowo – Manonowo BCP than to Bezledy – Bagrationovsk so the latter is suggested
as an additional or alternative BCP to Grezchtoi – Manonowo. These proposals are also
made to ensure modernisation between Poland and Kaliningrad in order to avoid
excessive pressure on the more direct routes to St Petersburg and Moscow through
Lithuania.
Table 1 below shows major BCPs between (EU) Schengen Area and Russia and
Belorussia which were visited during the Field Visits. (Source: Project Team Consultant,
based
on
map
of
http://www.geographicguide.net/europe/maps-europe/mapeurope.htm. It will be noted that these are on major transport corridors.
Table 1 Border Crossing Points visited by the Project Team during the study
BCP EU
BCP CU
Medininkai
(LT)
Kamenny Log (BY)
A3 (E28) – M7:
54°32'35" N
25°42'15" E
Vilnius – Minsk
54°32'50" N
25°41'25" E
Panemune
(LT)
55°05'10" N
21°54'30" E
Terehova
(LV)
56°21'20" N
28°11'10" E
Sovietsk (RU-KGD)
55°04'55" N
21°54'15" E
56°21'20" N
28°11'50" E
Riga - Moscow
56°23'30" N
28°07'05" E
56°20'35" N
28°16'10" E
Nujamaa (FI)
Brusnichnoe (RULED)
57°50'10" N
27°35'40" E
Klaipeda – Kaliningrad
A12 (E22) / M9:
Posin’ (RU-PSK)
Koidula (EE)
A12 (E77) / A216:
Burachki (RU-PSK)
Zilupe (LV)
60°57'40" N,
28° 32' 50" E
Roads
2 April
2012
3 April
2012
4 April
2012
Railway Crossing
4 April
2012
13 / A127:
16 April
2012
Lappenranta – Vyborg
60°56'00" N,
28°33'40" E
Kunichina Gora
(RU-PSK)
Visited on
23 April
2012
63 / A212:
Tartu – Pskov
18 April
2012
57°49'55" N
27°35'50" E
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 62
Koidula (EE)
57°50'14" N
27°35'05" E
Narva (EE)
59°22'40" N
28°11'45" E
Narva (EE)
Pechory-Pskovskie
(RU-PSK)
18 April
2012
57°50'15" N
27°37'55" E
Ivangorod (RU-LED) 1 / E20:
59°22'35" N
28°12'40" E
Tallinn – St
Petersburg
Ivangorod (RU-LED) Railway Crossing
59°22'07" N
28°12'00" E
59°22'04" N
28°14'03" E
Vaalimaa (FI)
Torfyanovka (RULED)
60°36'20" N,
27°51'10" E
Railway Crossing
60°35'40" N,
27°54'30" E
E18 / M10:
St Petersburg – Kotka
– Helsinki
Kukuryki
Kozlovichi
68 / M1 (E30):
52°06'40" N
23°33'40" E
52°07'15" N
23°34'15" E
Warsaw – Minsk –
Moscow
Terespol
(PL)
Brest (Varshavski
Most) (BY)
52°04'15" N
23°38'35" E
52°04'25" N
23°39'35" E
2 / H450 (E30):
Warsaw – Minsk –
Moscow
19 April
2012
19 April
2012
23 April
2012
25 April
2012
26 April
2012
Table 2 Alternative Border Crossing Points not visited during the study but
including BCPs recommended for modernisation programmes
Table 2 shows BCPs which were considered for visiting but were not visited for various
reasons (no timely approval from national BMA or very strong similarity to alternative
BCPs visited during the Study. Those BCPs which are not listed in bold text are
included in the proposals for modernisation prioritization.
BCP NOR
BCP RU
Roads
Storskog
(NOR)
Borisoglebsk (RUMUR)
69°39'30" N
30°12'15" E
69°39'20" N
30°12'15" E
Luhamaa
(EE)
Shumilkino (RUPSK)
57°38'30" N
57°38'40" N
E105:
Kirkenes – Murmansk
7 / A212 (E77):
Tartu – Pskov
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 63
27°22'25" E
27°23'15" E
Grebneva
(LV)
Ubylinka (RU-PSK)
A13 (E262) / A116:
56°52'25" N
27°50'00" E
Pskov - Daugavpils
56°52'10" N
27°49'50" E
Kybartu (LT)
54°38'35" N
22°44'40" E
Bezledy (PL)
54°22'10" N
20°39'40" E
Chernyshevskoe
(RU-KGD)
A7 (E28) / A229:
Kaunas - Kaliningrad
54°38'30" N
22°44'30" E
Bagrationovsk
(RU-KGD)
51 / A195:
Warsaw - Kaliningrad
54°22'20" N
20°39'35" E
Gronowo
(PL)
Mamonovo (RUKGD)
54°26'00" N
19°53'45" E
54°26'20" N
19°54'05" E
Grzhechotki
(PL)
Mamonovo 2 (RUKGD)
54°25'10" N
20°03'45" E
54°26’ N
20°05’ E
Bobrowniki
(PL)
Berestovica (BY)
53°07'20" N
23°53'55" E
65 / P99 (to M1):
Domachevo (BY)
63 / P94:
53°07'25" N
23°53'25" E
Slawaticze
(PL)
51°46'00" N
23°35'10" E
51°45'45" N
23°36'05" E
54 / A194:
Gdansk - Kaliningrad
S22 / P156:
Berlin – Elblag - Kaliningrad
Warsaw –Minsk – Moscow
Warsaw – Minsk – Moscow (35
km from E30)
Map 1 Location of BCPs visited in the Field Visits
Source: Consultant, based on map of http://www.geographicguide.net/europe/mapseurope/map-europe.htm
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 64
Nujamaa – Brusnichnoe
Vaalimaa – Torfianovka
Narva – Ivangorod
Koidula – Kunichina Gora
Terehova – Burachki
Panemune – Sovietsk
Medininkai – Kamenny Log
Kukuryki - Kozlovichi
Terespol – Brest
Photos of BCPs
The following photos are reproduced in order to demonstrate key findings, Conclusions
and Recommendations in the Study Report
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 65
Picture 1. Russian Finnish border. Truck waiting area in Torfianovka (Russia), facing
towards the BCP (in further left side of the picture) in direction of Vaalimaa (Finland).
Note that the waiting area is certainly not full, demonstrating that movements are fairly
quick into the BCP.
Picture 2. Truck waiting area before at BCP Vaalimaa (Finland)
Note that the waiting area is busy, indicating longer waiting times for entry into Russia.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 66
Picture 3. Truck waiting area at BCP Vaalimaa (Finland)
This further photograph confirms the view that the waiting area for entry into Russia is
rather full, on the most direct route between Helsinki and St. Petersburg.
Picture 4. Layout of Russian BCP Brusnichnoe opposite Finnish BCP Nuijamaa
FI
Duty Free Shop
Cargo Customs Terminal
RU
Passenger Passport and
Customs Terminal
Cargo Passport
Terminal
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 67
The two step approach for trucks will be noted (Customs, then passport) whereas for passenger
traffic these are at the same terminal.
Picture 5. Passenger transport waiting area in Narva (Estonia)
The waiting area is relatively empty, as a queue management system is in operation
meaning people have already pre booked before arriving at the waiting area. This
means their time can be spent more productively. Facilities are fairly limited, but this is
because the waiting area is in a built up area. Facilities at a rural area like Koidula are
more extensive (nearing completion as of April 2012).
Figure 5. Road Border Crossing Point Koidula (Estonia) opposite Kunichina Gora
(Russia)
The relatively large number of traffic lanes into Russia will be noted, together with the
categorisation of their use.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 68
Picture 6. Koidula car park with GoSwift queuing system (Estonia)
The traffic light system is used to notify the registration number of the vehicles (s) which
should proceed to the BCP itself, which is located on the same site.
Picture 7. Passenger border crossing in Narva (Estonia)
The BCP is obviously in the city centre and is receiving coach passengers from Russia.
Customs and Border Guards processing is co-located. More sheltered waiting space is
being built in both Narva and Ivangorod using EU funding.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 69
Picture 8. Queue of passenger cars between Narva bridge and Border Crossing
Point (Estonia)
This photo taken in the direction of movement after crossing the bridge from Russia and
on approach to the BCP at Picture 7 shows the limits imposed by geography.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 70
20. BCP based testing of recommended measures
As outlined in the Executive Summary there is no single measure, or even set of
measures, which the PT believes would largely resolve the problems faced in ensuring
significantly reduced crossing times for persons, vehicles and goods. However, there
are some measures which are felt to be more important than others and the PT now
presents proposals for testing out their effectiveness.
It is felt to be essential for the testing exercises to be objective and fair that individual
issues are tested first, before moving on to the testing of several issues simultaneously
at the same place or places. It is felt to be equally important that local (BCP), regional
and national managers are involved in evaluating all steps of the testing process. This is
because the tests would need to be known to all participants as being experimental. Any
lack of impact would not necessarily mean that the participants had been less than
effective in implementing the measure. It might be that the measure was in itself
inappropriate, or external events had had an impact on the outcome. A measure
appropriate in one set of circumstances might be inappropriate in another.
The results, with all the qualifying circumstances taken into consideration, would then
need to be shared with other BCPs, including where appropriate those across the
border. Further steps would then need to be taken, such as abandoning the measure,
repeating it at a different time of year, at a different location or a combination of these.
Decisions would need to be reached regarding which measures should be combined.
This would all take considerable time.
This list is not given in order or priority, and is certainly not exhaustive. The term
“implement” means in this context implementing on a temporary and experimental basis.
1. Repeat the special measures being introduced between Russia, Belarus and
Poland for movements of passenger coaches during the Euro 2012
Championships. How were crossing times impacted? Were like for like detections
of violations increased or decreased. Such exercises would obviously be of
relevance for planning for the 2018 World Cup.
2. Implement the undertaking of both BG and customs duties by BG staff regarding
persons and non-freight vehicles, as was implemented until a few years ago in
Belarus. What is the impact on crossing times, and on detections of smuggled
goods (on the understanding that the detections are then handed over to
Customs). Does the freeing up of Customs staff for more in-depth checks on
freight have a positive effect on Customs work. Do suspected smugglers
suddenly stop using the BCPs using such experimental systems, and go
elsewhere.
3. Implement the current Estonian system whereby the train operator on long
distance passenger routes from Moscow and St Petersburg notifies Estonian BG
of suspect persons. Is this reducing the processing time for these persons, and
do enquiries confirm or dismiss the suspicion? There are obvious common
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 71
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
interests here for the CU and EU / Schengen Area in relation to travellers from
Afghanistan should there be an upsurge of refugees.
Test out the revenue impact from a major reduction in the proportion of physical
checks on freight consignments into the EU. Are declared values reduced, and if
so, how soon and by how much. Are there suspicious changes to the types of
goods declared or to the volumes declared?
Deploy customs officers to the adjacent BCP across the border on a mutual basis
for an extended period of time with a specific set of instructions on a small
number of important activities, in order to share best practice. What are the
results? Such deployments might well be carried out simultaneously at a wide
range of BCPs.
In relation to BCPs with particularly severe delays for freight, and with high levels
of rejections of pre arrival information entries, carry out tests involving relaxations
of the information requirements, by accepting that omissions or mistakes in
certain information categories are not considered material for the purposes of the
test exercise. Comparisons of crossing times could then be made with crossing
times at the same BCP when there is no relaxation of document completion
criteria. Such tests would in effect act as tests of the effectiveness of the
introduction of the new Russian pre arrival system to be introduced in June 2012.
This should be accompanied by measures to ensure that trucks which decide to
change their exit BCP due to congestion are not delayed unless there are other
grounds for suspicion.
The PT has highlighted what it sees as the potentially very significant impact
introducing free flow systems for the movement and processing of passenger
vehicles and freight, whereby vehicles move continuously rather than in small
groups which only move on to the next process after all persons or vehicles in
the group (the “batch”) have been processed. Where batch systems are in use,
the PT suggests that experiments be carried out simultaneously at several BCPs
to determine what changes in processing times occur, both. The resulting
analysis would examine comparative changes at the BCP alongside comparable
data from similar test exercises at other BCPs.
Consideration should be given to carrying out several medium term exercises in
sharing operational and numerical risk analysis criteria between the EU States
and Russia and Belarus, in relation to a list of risk priorities provided by the other
State (i.e. each State is assisting the other state by sharing ideas on how it would
identify the risks which are seen as priorities by that other state, rather than
merely requesting information to assist itself). Has such sharing resulted in
reductions in physical checks and thereby in reduced crossing times? Has it
resulted in higher or stable detection rates of irregularities? Has it resulted in
revenue receipts remaining as high as would have been otherwise expected, or
higher?
There is a specific reason for proposing that each state provide a regular
exchange of information in relation to the revenue protection and public safety
responsibilities of the BMAs on the other side of the external border. While there
are common interests, there are also, especially in relation to Customs matters,
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 72
many differences in emphasis. The EU states face challenges in relation to the
smuggling of excise goods such as cigarettes and road fuel. The CU states face
challenges in relation to the gross undervaluation of imported consumer goods.
In both cases the sheer volumes of transactions mean that case by case
notifications of information of interest may well not be enough to enhance the
effectiveness of risk analysis systems on a significant and sustainable basis.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 73
Appendix A – Identification of Core road and rail transport corridors
This Appendix should be examined in relation to Section 19 of the main body of the
Study Report - Recommendations on Border Crossing Points requiring
prioritization of modernization.). and the Map showing major BCPs between
Schengen Area and Russia and Belorussia, presented at the beginning of this
Report. Particular attention is drawn to Table 1 in Section 19, which lists major BCPs
located on what the PT has identified as being core transport corridors. The
identification of these routes and related BCPs is based upon the traffic volumes
identified during research for the Study’s Inception Report, and the descriptions of the
Core Transport Corridors as outlined in reports such as Preparing the Northern
Dimension Partnership on Transport and Logistics, (Final Report, as updated 30th June
2011).
The core corridors are seen as including in practice, the road and rail links between
Moscow and St Petersburg through Finland to Scandinavia, and through Latvia and to
some extent Estonia. They also include the road and rail routes between Moscow and
Minsk to Warsaw and Berlin, and finally Rotterdam and Paris. Other routes within the
Northern Dimension Partnership in the proximity of those corridors are seen as being
supplementary to the main corridors, e.g. between Minsk and Vilnius to the Baltic Coast
and Poland, reflecting the extreme pressures on the Moscow – Minsk – Brest – Warsaw
Corridor. The PT also felt it needed to take account of each Partnership state’s interest
in ensuring that its own access to any modernisation is assured.
The PT has also considered the desirability of regarding routes between the EU states
and both Moscow and St Petersburg as priorities. It is for these reasons that routes
between Tallinn and St Petersburg and between Riga and St Petersburg (via Estonia)
as well as between Riga and Moscow are considered.
The PT’s Recommendations at Sections 19 and 20 of the Main Report are made in
this light. Where appropriate, the Recommendations relate to transport infrastructure
beyond the immediate area of the BCPs. In particular, the PT has placed great
emphasis in creating off- BCP vehicle terminals to be used together with effective queue
management systems and, even more importantly, alongside the introduction of
improved logistical systems such as free flow movement and much reduced numbers of
border crossing processing procedures. Such terminals and related systems will not be
fully effective without upgrades to the road networks nearby. However, the PT saw
several examples where road network upgrades had not prevented the persistence of
very long queues, indicating that modernisation issues need to be looked at together,
and not in isolation.
It was not possible to carry out a Field Visit to the Norwegian – Russian border.
However, the PT has recommended that the direct road links between northern Russia
and Northern Norway be prioritised in cooperation with the proposed recommendations
for other BCP combinations in the other Partnership states. This is because the
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 74
geographical distance from more populated areas far to the south means that are far
fewer alternative corridors, so this border needs to be looked at directly. Also, the wider
transport infrastructure needs are likely to be new, rather than upgrades of existing
systems.
In relation to the BCPs between Russia (Kaliningrad) and Poland visits were proposed
in the Inception Report. However, it was not subsequently possible to carry out these
proposed visits. Therefore, the decision to include the two suggested BCPs as suitable
for early prioritised introduction of border management procedures modernisation was
somewhat speculative, but was made to ensure that all borders were included. These
BCPs have recently undergone partial infrastructure modernisation, which is a major
reason for emphasising modernisation of procedures. .
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 75
Appendix B - Border Management Agency Questionnaire Responses
These are listed in the chronological order in which the Field Visits took place.
Lithuania – Belarus Border: Medininkai – Kamenny Log 2nd April 2012
Infrastructure and logistics
1. What are the current capabilities for processing freight vehicles (and their crews),
commercial road passenger vehicles and private passenger vehicles? Do you have
multiple manned clearance and passage points (e.g. Border Guard desks)?
There are multiple lanes for exit and entry of private vehicles, buses and separately
freight vehicles (5 each inwards for cars and buses and freight vehicles, and 5 and 4
outwards). There is a special lane inwards for vehicles subjected to closer checking
(“level 2”), together with a vehicle park for such vehicles arriving from Belarus. This has
limited capacity. There are multiple document checking lanes.
Rail freight traffic with Russia / Belarus is largely transit traffic to and Kaliningrad and
therefore Lithuanian resources are concentrated on other transport routes under the
terms of the Lithuanian – Russian agreement on such transits.
Broadly, the capacity situations at all of Lithuania’s core international BCPs with Russia
and Kaliningrad are at full capacity. The current and planned transport strategies
recognise this and increases in traffic lanes are seen as priorities. Prognoses of
transport flows are available and the Border Crossing Management Strategy to 2017 is
a cross government programme.
2. What are your current capabilities for processing freight trains? And for passenger
trains? Do you have sidings on the line or lines?
Nearest railway BCP near Medininkai is Kena railway BCP and nearest railway from
Panemune is Pagegiai railway BCP. There are 9 train lines in Pagegiai railway BCP (7
spare lines that can be used for examination). There are visual control possibilities
including overlooking passing train carloads from pedestrian overpass above and
physical control possibilities in sidelines.
Main Russian transit flow on railway crosses Kena railway BCP and Kybartai railway
BCP.
In Kybartai railway BCP there are 17 train lines. Kybartai railway BCP Customs post
territory coincides with Kybartai railway station, that is owned by government railway
company AB “Lietuvos geležinkeliai“. There are multiple ways to examine passing trains
with passengers or cargo in Kybartai railway: 1) overlook passing trains from pedestrian
overpass above train lines; 2) passengers are examined when train is halted at a train
station for a period of time, that is set by railway company, but coordinated with the
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 76
customs; 3) suspicious passengers may be detrained for further examination in customs
room; 4) train carloads with cargo can be examined more closely in train sidelines; 5) if
customs officers suspect, that particular carloads are of a great risk but are not able to
inspect them thoroughly in Kybartai, then these suspicious trains (carloads) are
redirected to Vilnius Vaidotai train station, where customs have very good equipment to
perform necessary examination of a carload.
In Kybartai BCP as well as in Kena and Panemune BCP‘s there are State Veterinary
Service. In both Kybartai and Kena BCP‘s radiation gates are also located. Stream
capacity in Kybartai - from 10 to 20 trains (500 to 1000 carloads) per 24 hours.
In Kena BCP there are 9 train lines. Possibilities for examining passenger and cargo
trains are practically the same as in Kybartai BCP. In Kena BCP there are also static
carload scales and powerful x-ray designed specifically to inspect carloads. In all railway
BCP Licence plate recognition system is in use (able to read all carloads licence plate
numbers).
3. Are your facilities manned at the same levels at all times (24/7)? If not, how do they
differ, and at what times?
Yes in the case of road crossings. For rail, manning is for periods immediately before,
during and immediately after scheduled crossings. Customs staff work 24 hour shifts,
Border Guards 12 hour shifts. Customs staff at major BCPs often have to travel long
distances to work.
4. Are your facilities affected by particular weather conditions? If so, by which
conditions and how? Have there been any changes in the last 10 years to deal with
these situations, and to what extent have they been effective? Are any further
changes planned?
Yes. Some scanners are not effective in very cold conditions. Equipment does age
faster. Examination facilities are generally protected from the weather, but heating is a
big challenge.
5. What changes have occurred in the last five years to the volumes of traffic (road
freight, commercial road passenger traffic, private passenger traffic, and rail freight
and rail passenger)?
Figures have fallen since the 2008 economic crisis but previously higher figures indicate
potential volumes in future. Currently 60% of lorries inwards from the Customs Union
are empty. If these figures fell significantly, there would be serious implications for
waiting times and examination procedures. There have been big increases in Polish
lorries (15% of total) since Poland imposed capacity limits on diesel fuel being carried as
own vehicle fuel. 33% of inwards freight vehicles are Russian, 28% Lithuanian, 14%
Belarusian.
Inwards freight figures show 36% of lorries arrive without TIR carnet.
Outwards 3% are empty and 72% are under TIR. There have been no material changes
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 77
in status or volume figures since the introduction of the Russian, Belarus and
Kazakhstan Customs Union. But there have been regarding processing times. For
exports / transits into Belarus itself export procedures are simplified. All figures are for
2011.
Freight traffic levels through Belarus from Russia and East Asia are expected to
increase significantly in the immediate and long term. This is recognised in the Border
Management Strategy to 2017 and in Belarus’ similar Strategy but it is felt that Belarus
feels it needs a programme coordinator similar to Rosgranitsa in Russia (where all
agencies liaise together regarding Lithuanian-Kaliningrad BCPs).
A meeting regarding the common planned capacity increases at Medininkai and
Kamenny Log (Belarus) for late April / early May 2012. The EU has recently discussed
with Belarus authorities their proposals for upgrades at Kamenny Log.
6. What impacts have the changes at 5. had to staffing levels of border guards,
customs, police and other regulatory agencies?
Customs Staffing levels have remained the same, but new facilities for veterinary and
phytosanitary inspections have been built. As reflected in the need for Customs staff to
work 24 hour shifts, Lithuania has significantly fewer customs staff per head of
population than Latvia or other comparable size EU States. Border Guards have 25%
more staff than in past, enabling more shifts to be worked with staff available for peak
time needs and as Mobile Teams.
7. What changes have occurred in relation to the provision of essential privately
provided services ( e.g. duty free shops and insurance agencies) ? Have these had
positive or negative impacts on traffic flows?
These facilities are provided closely together in the main BCP building, which is located
directly next to the traffic lanes. There are negative impacts on traffic flows compared to
the situations if off site terminals were used together with electronic queuing systems.
8. What changes are in progress or are planned regarding the transport routes to or
from your crossing point (s), such as upgrades of rail lines to double track, or
increasing the number of highway lanes? What qualitative and quantitative impacts
do you expect these to have?
All planned changes are subject to the National Transport Strategy to 2017. Funding
has recently been cut heavily. However the Strategy is still in force and prioritises (a)
physical capacity increases, (b) improvements to equipment and their use, particularly
IT based information systems, and (c) electronic queue management and terminal
based parking. All Ministries and
9. What changes are in progress regarding increases to the physical capacity of your
crossing point (s)? What impact do you expect these to have?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 78
An outwards off BCP lorry park is planned with electronic queue management which
reflects Estonian experience. Recent changes mean that there is earlier on site
presentation of import and transit documents, with automatic Risk assessment being
carried out. This enables empty vehicles to be prioritised. See also 8. above. There are
new more powerful relocatable scanners in Medininkai, Kybartai and Panemune road
BCP as well as a new upgrade of Licence plate recognition system scheduled.
At Panemune terminal systems are in operation for freight vehicles, with the terminal
being several kilometres from the bridge crossing BCP. A new bridge is planned
alongside construction of a new Russian BCP / terminal, which will substantially
increase capacity and flow rates as the physical limitations of the current bridge and the
town centre Russian BCP counter act the benefits of the terminal system on the
Lithuanian side. This terminal is used for all key facilities in a similar manner to
Medininkai.
10. What changes have occurred to the volumes and types of traffic in recent years
which have been expected? What changes have occurred which have been
unexpected?
Volumes are now rising after the economic crisis. Passenger car and buses traffic has
risen significantly for cross border shopping reasons. Smuggling of tobacco products for
personal use and small to medium scale resale has risen significantly, with serious
revenue impacts.
11. Do you have the facilities to change the movement flows directions in order to meet
changes in direction of high volume traffic?
No, but outward bound vehicles subject to special examination can be diverted to
inward bound examination facilities, thereby avoiding bottlenecks. The main limitations
leading to queues are the situation on the other side of the border and the lack of
access roads infrastructures, including terminals.
12. Did the introduction of the Russian and Belarus Customs Union (2010/11) lead to
changes in volumes and nature of traffic, and what impacts, if any, did these
changes have?
Yes. There are delays as Belarus agencies are now carrying out checks for the
Customs Union as a whole, equivalent to Lithuanian checks on behalf of the EU
(Customs) and the Schengen Area (persons).
Organisational Systems and Procedures
13. Which government agencies are based at crossing points? Do such arrangements
apply at all crossing points, or only some?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 79
All Border Management Agencies are based at all international full capacity BCPs.
Where BCPs are limited to non-commercial traffic or movements of local residents only,
representation is limited to the respective agencies. The Agencies are Border Guards,
Customs, Veterinary Service and Phytosanitary Service.
14. If the presence of agencies differs between crossing points, what criteria are used in
deciding which agencies should be placed at which crossing points? Are such
decisions taken in cooperation with neighbouring states?
See 13. Levels of staffing also take account of volumes of traffic and BCP capacity. In
effect, the decisions are taken with the views of the neighbouring state taken into
account as the status of the BCP is common on both sides.
15. How do the agencies present at the crossing points cooperate with each other and
with representatives of transport operators? Are they located in common premises
or in different locations at the same site? Are there any common coordination
centres, and if so at which sites? Are there plans for such centres, and if so where?
Freight forwarders and insurance providers are based in the main BCP terminal
building, usually right next to Customs. Border Guards checking points and Customs
document presentation points are normally right next to each other, with Risk
Management checks being done in close proximity. There are no common coordination
centres as such. Border Guards will introduce a new Movements Management system
from 2013, with a new Single Window system from 2015.
16. Do the agencies use risk management systems (whether automated or nonautomated) in selecting persons, vehicles or cargo for detailed examinations? If so,
is this done using pre arrival information and to what extent is it done? What types of
systems and procedures are used? Are there any differences in availability of such
systems depending on the nature of the border crossings?
Yes, with extensive sharing of operational material between staff of the Border
Management Agencies who are located very closely together. Pre arrival information is
used extensively through a document presentation facility before the arrival at the traffic
lanes. The aim is that if cleared, goods will go through within one hour. Operational
information can be immediately checked against the various RM systems, including the
Schengen Information System. These systems are available at all the full status BCPs,
with other BCPs being manned and equipped as appropriate to their status.
17. Are the necessary procedures carried out by the border crossings agencies carried
out simultaneously or in sequence? What changes, if any, are in progress or
intended in relation to simultaneous checking?
They are in sequence, but these are in very close proximity. Full Single Window / One
Stop Shop status is due from 2015. Particular care will be needed for phytosanitary and
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 80
veterinary examinations in order that the new Medininkai examination facilities can be
fully used to examine suspect goods while allowing free flow of other products.
18. What systems are used in relation to use of pre arrival data (road freight and rail
freight)? What systems, if any, are used in relation to pre arrival data for passengers
(rail and motor coach)? Is such data shared with other agencies? How is the data
accessed?
All freight road importers submit EDI declarations, but the NCTS availability is often
limited. Reliability needs to improve. Rail freight data is provided electronically in
advance by the rail operator. There is currently no pre arrival data for bus / coach
passengers. There is no direct access to the data of one agency by another, but staff
from each agency are in close proximity and share as necessary.
19. What procedures apply to the access to, and use of, data from private sector
transport operators at or in the immediate vicinity of the crossing points?
This is done as necessary by operational staff based at the BCP. However, this is
mainly limited to Customs Brokers and insurers and not the transport companies or their
associations.
20. What changes are planned for the next few years in relation to the procedures
referred to in Q. 13-19?
See also 15 and 17 above. Changes are as always subject to budget limitations,
especially regarding the impact of BCP transport infrastructures including introduction of
terminals and automated queuing systems. The new Single Window system from 2015
is a key priority.
21. What key requirements would be needed to ensure that procedural changes would
be most effective? Are these being planned, or considered?
See 15, 17 and 20. Introduction of a Terminal with electronic (email, mobile phone)
queuing systems are vital. More reliable NCTS. New Single Window System from 2015.
All are planned and are in the national Border Management Strategy which is very
similar to those of neighbour EU States. However, to be effective, comparable physical
and procedural modernisations are required on the Belarus and Russian sides. Systems
such as the Estonian Go Swift which records bus passenger API (Advance Passenger
Information) needs to be introduced.
Terminal facilities are planned for Medininkai by end 2012. Is this correct? See also 9.
above.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 81
Technical Capabilities
22. What are the most significant systems you have for recording movements of
vehicles? Are they linked to recording the movements and clearance of freight?
Closed circuit TV and ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition). These can be
cross checked with Schengen Information System and national vehicle registration
databases and national criminal intelligence databases on a 24/7 basis. These can be
linked to freight recording systems (e.g. EDI and NCTS).
23. What systems do you have for the processing of people? Do you have automatic
scanners for the checking of passports? Where such systems have been introduced,
what impact have they had on the processing times?.
See 22. There are radiation and metal detectors. Passports are scanned, not, keyed in.
These have reduced processing times, but movements through the BCP are still
dependent on the situation on both sides of the border.
There are multiple checking booths. Bus passengers’ passports are checked collectively
on submission by driver. Passports are scanned.
24. Are extra staff deployed at periods of peak activity for movements of people?
Yes, new shift systems and increases in staff for Border Guards mean that more staff
can be deployed for secondary checks.
25. What equipment do you have for dealing with EU customs entry systems such as
the New Computerised Transit System and the mandatory pre arrival / pre departure
electronic declaration systems ( EU States Border Crossing Points only)?
See 18. NCTS availability reliability needs to be improved ( this also applies for Border
Guards to SIS).
26. What impacts have such systems had on clearance times and on the detection of
serious violations of Customs and Tax regulations?
Clearance times have improved on the Lithuanian side but there is room for
improvement. There is a need for more mobile x ray scanners which can be deployed
across the country according to need to detect smuggling (e.g. cigarettes). These would
enable faster clearance while protecting revenues.
27. Are the findings from use of such systems shared with Russia and Belarus? If so,
what impacts have such sharing had on clearance times and detections of serious
violations in Russia and Belarus?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 82
Yes, with agencies on both sides appointing “Border Delegates” tasked to exchange
operational case information and ideas on procedural and technical progress. These do
need to be developed into a continuous process.
28. What equipment is available for scanning of cargo containers? Are these available
for rail containers as well as for road containers? What impacts have they had on
examination times and resulting clearance times? What impact have they had on the
detection of violations?.
There are extensive facilities for weighing vehicles and thereby also containers. There
are x ray scanners for containers but these need to be made more mobile and easy to
use. They make examinations quicker and more effective, as shown by big increases in
detections of cigarettes in often elaborate concealments including in vehicle panels.
However clearance times are largely related to the number of vehicle lanes throughout
the BCP. Lack of these prevent staff capacity being fully used.
29. Is extra equipment such as mobile scanners made available at peak times? If so,
what impact do they have on clearance times?
See 28. More, and more reliable, equipment is needed.
30. What equipment, if any, is affected by severe weather? Are there any plans to deal
with such challenges?
See 4. In addition to scanning equipment requiring certain level of heat to operate,
some inspection areas are not heated though they are covered. Equipment also wears
out faster. There are no specific plans to deal with these situations as funding is a
challenge.
National Cooperation and Cross Border Cooperation
31. Is there an overall coordinating Agency for operations of official agencies at the
crossing points ( e.g. equivalent of the Border Authority in Russia)? What
responsibilities does any such agency have, especially in relation to cooperation with
the other official agencies at the crossings?
Ministry of Transport is responsible for BCP and road infrastructure management. It
coordinates with Belarus counterparts where Border Guards are in effect the lead
agency for BCPs, and with Rosgranitsa for Russia. Among the Border Management
Agencies, each agency cooperates with its counterpart, but after very close consultation
with other BMAs so often the consultation is joint.
On some operational procedures at the Kaliningrad – Lithuanian border (Panemune and
Kybartai) the individual border management agencies had some flexibility in cooperating
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 83
with Lithuanian counterparts, but there is now less flexibility as Rosgranitsa is in control
of BCPs and requests needed to be cleared with it.
32. How the official agencies cooperate in relation to
evaluation of pre arrival data?
the receipt, processing and
Nationally, by close coordination among co located staff with indirect access to each
other’s databases. Internationally, by series of meetings between the “Border
Delegates” as needed on operational matters and several times per year on strategic
and long term matters. Staff at Medininkai were informed about BCP use restrictions in
Belarus, but Lithuanian Border Control agencies are not informed about long term
modernisations within Belarus. Closer mutual consultation is vital, including regarding
Lithuanian plans. See also 41.
33. How do the official agencies cooperate in relation to carrying out simultaneous or
sequential processing of vehicles, passengers, freight and rail freight and
passengers?
Nationally, see earlier answers, especially 17. and 32. While checks are currently
sequential, there is very close proximity cooperation.
Internationally, there is a need to improve automated and non - automated processing,
especially of road and rail passengers to free up extra resources (transport lanes) for
freight.
34. Do the official agencies share common coordinating centres at crossing points? If
not, are they linked with regional or national multi-agency coordinating centres?
Nationally, no at the BCPs themselves, but they are all directly linked with their agency
national HQs, which do share information including by access to national law
enforcement agency information centres.
Internationally (cross border) no. There are no officers based on the other side of the
BCP.
35. Do the official agencies have direct access on site to each other’s databases ? If not,
do they have easy indirect access ( e.g. by contacts with representatives of the other
agencies located at the same crossing, especially if located in the same room as
part of a multi-agency coordinating team)?
Nationally, no to direct access, but yes to easy indirect access.
Internationally, no.
36. Is relevant automated or non-automated data from one agency entered onto the
databases or other records of the other agencies?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 84
Nationally, yes, as required, as it often is.
37. Are there formal or informal multi-agency teams involved in processing of
passengers and examination of goods or vehicles? If so, are they available 24/7, or
at peak times of day, or at peak periods of the year?
Nationally, in practice, yes and on 24/7 basis. However, BCPs such as Medininkai are
operating at physical capacity so demands on staff time on their specific duties are high
( note shift lengths).
38. Are there any joint crossing points operated with staff from the official agencies of
the neighbouring state or states? If so, where are they and which agencies are
present? How effective have they been in improving traffic flows? How effective
have they been in detecting serious violations of immigration and customs laws, or in
detecting other criminal or administrative violations?
No. Staff in all agencies and in Belarus and Russia are well aware of the values of such
jointly manned BCPs.
39. What information is exchanged between the agencies on one side of the crossing or
another?
See 32. Border Delegates with formal responsibilities are used.
40. How such information is exchanged, e.g. agency to agency or via central
coordinators, face to face exchanges, landline to landline, mobile to mobile, or by
email or electronic special alert systems?
Dedicated phone calls, with immediate follow up by email, fax.
41. What procedures are in place for management level cooperation between the
agencies on both sides in relation to pre notification of procedural changes or of
special circumstances which may impact on operations?
Border Delegates and respective regional managers meet at least 4 times per year to
discuss such matters. See also 32. While general advanced information is good, there
is room for improvement on both operational outcomes and capacity and procedural
developments and improvements.
42. Are any changes planned to the ways of exchanging operational information
between crossing points on both sides of the border? If so, when?
Not immediately, but staff on both sides of the border are well aware of ways of
improving the situation, including by the use of joint special exercises.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 85
The Border Crossing Management Strategy to 2017 has improved internal IT systems
use of them as a priority and this offers opportunities for better cooperation with
counterpart agencies.
43. Are there any changes planned to the national organisational and information
structures of the official agencies at the border crossings (e.g. common access to
information databases)?
Nationally, all staff are preparing for increased use of national databases as the
quantity and quality of information improves and staff become more familiar with use of
information sources.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 86
Mini Questionnaire
Infrastructure /
Logistics
Room to expand
Yes
Rail sidings
X
Lorry Parks away
from traffic lanes
X
Numbered
queuing system
in parks
BCP manned
24/7
Traffic lanes
capable of use in
both directions
Weather proof
inspection areas
X
X
X
Planned (when?) Other Comments
Limited capacity to increase lanes. Not
actively planned yet but included in 2017
Strategy.
Not applicable at Medininkai. Yes at
Panemune.
No outwards. Vitally needed. Yes inwards, but
only to limited extent. Needs clearly
understood.
In current plan. Recent active studies carried
out.
X
X
X
Yes
Organisational
Systems /
Procedures
Are there Joint
Agency offices
on site
(Coordination
Centre)
Are Automated
X
Risk
Management
Systems used?
Are such systems
integrated with
other agencies’
systems?
Are checks done
simultaneously
for all agencies?
Do Freight
Forwarders
No
X
Capable of modification to do this.
However, heating required in some areas.
Weather does impact on inspections and
equipment.
No
Planned (when?) Other Comments
X
Not currently planned. There is close
cooperation by very close proximity personnel.
Effectiveness limited in reducing clearance
times due to lack of Advance Passenger
Information.
X
However, operating personnel work closely
together.
X
Currently sequential, but in close cooperation.
If physical control of goods is decided by
customs it is performed simultaneously for all
agencies
Yes, through Customs Brokers, located in
secure and weather proof facilities.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 87
Associations or
major transport
operators have
representatives at
BCPs?
Do Customs
X
staffs have
access to New
Computerised
Transit System
data and
Customs Union
wide data
systems?
Does rail
X
management
staff have access
to the same data
as road
management
staff?
Technical
Capabilities
Are closed circuit
TV cameras in
operation at
BCPs?
Are Passport
scanners
available?
Are Passport
scanners used
Do staff have
direct access to
Vehicle
registrations
data?
(Automated
Vehicle
Registration
scanning)?
Do staff have
direct access to
Customs e –
declarations?
Yes for Lithuanian staff (NCTS) though
availability reliability needs improving. Neither
country has access to the other system.
Staff responsible for rail freight monitoring do
receive manifests in advance. Border Guards
do not receive rail or road passenger data in
advance.
X
X
X
X
No, only to ANPR data (Automated Number
Plate Recognition). However, this can be
followed up with near immediate access to
registration details and automatically
highlights vehicles of interest.
X
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 88
Are freight
(container)
scanners
available (road /
rail, mobile)?
Are there major
systems
upgrades or
introductions in
progress or
planned within
next five years?
X
Yes in all cases, though numbers are limited
and reliability can be affected by severe
weather. There are reliability issues with
mobile scanners.
X
However, these are very much subject to
funding and may well be delayed by several
years.
Cross Border
Cooperation
Are any BCP
Coordination
Centres jointly
manned by both
countries?
Are any non BCP
based
Coordination
Centres jointly
managed by both
countries?
Are Customs
declarations
shared
automatically with
neighbour BCPs?
If so, is this done
simultaneously
(real time or near
real time)?
Is vehicle, driver
X
or passenger
information
shared
automatically or
by immediate
telephoning?
Are lists of
suspects or
X
X
X
There are liaison officers from both Customs
and Border Guards based in Lithuania from
Russia and Belarus, and vice versa.
Additionally, liaison officers on 3 levels – Local
(head of the post), Regional (head of territorial
customs house), and National (deputy head
director general and Customs communication
centre).
No.
X
Not applicable.
Yes, by immediate telephoning in cases of
operational need.
X
This is done as needed.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 89
persons of
interest shared
on a regular and
timely basis?
Are persons
specifically
designated for
information
exchanges
available 24/7?
X
Yes. The designated persons are “Border
Delegates”. The Head of the Post is one, and
when absent the head of the shift deputises.
Latvia – Russia Border: Terehova – Burachki 4th April 2012
Infrastructure and logistics
1. What are the current capabilities for processing freight vehicles (and their
crews), commercial road passenger vehicles and private passenger vehicles? Do
you have multiple manned clearance and passage points (e.g. Border Guard
desks)?
At the road BCP Terehova – Burachki there are multiple lanes for exit and entry of
private vehicles, buses and separately freight vehicles. There are 8 entry lanes for
freight, buses and private cars and 9 exit lanes. The Russian side of the BCP has 10
lanes into Russia, and 9 out. There are facilities for detailed checking of passengers in
the BCP terminal directly next to the checking booths. There is a separate Customs
building for detailed examinations of vehicles. Located on inwards section, this can be
accessed from the outwards sections without disrupting traffic.
Outward practical capacities to Russia are somewhat higher than inward capacities due
to capacity limits on Russian side. Planned capacities for freight vehicles is 300 per day
outwards and 200 inwards Current average daily freight movements are 260 outwards
and 240 inwards. There have been significant increases in quarter 1 of 2012 over 2011.
2. What are your current
capabilities for processing freight trains? And for
passenger trains? Do you have sidings on the line or lines?
The rail BCP Zilupe (Latgale) is a few kilometres north of the road BCP. There are two
passenger trains per day and 8 freight trains. Both Customs and Border Guards man
the crossing 24/7. There are no API (Advanced Passenger Information) facilities or
automated passport checking equipment for use on board. Freight traffic manifests are
supplied in advance for documentary checking. Scanners are used to check freight
trains, but, if necessary, control is carried out in the next intermediate rail BCP Rezekne
most detailed examination with unloading and physical checking of goods is done on
arrival at final destination (normally Riga inwards).
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 90
3. Are your facilities manned at the same levels at all times (24/7)? If not, how do
they differ, and at what times?
Yes in all cases. Both Customs and Border Guards staff work 12 hour shifts,
4. Are your facilities affected by particular weather conditions? If so, by which
conditions and how? Have there been any changes in the last 10 years to deal
with these situations, and to what extent have they been effective? Are any
further changes planned?
Yes. Some mobile scanners are not effective in very cold conditions. Equipment does
age faster. Detailed vehicle examination facilities are protected from the weather in a
large dedicated building, but heating is a challenge. Baggage X ray ( functional since
1998) and metallic scanners are located in the main BCP building for bus and private
car passengers. A portable metal detection device is used in the rail BCP.
5. What changes have occurred in the last five years to the volumes of traffic (road
freight, commercial road passenger traffic, private passenger traffic, and rail
freight and rail passenger)?
Volumes are now rising significantly after falling during the first years of the economic
crisis. Outwards freight vehicle levels have risen significantly in Q1 2012 over Q1 2011
to 21, 650 from 15,000 and combined inwards and outwards movements now exceed
capacity. This is fully recognised in the national transport strategy and is reflected in the
installation of toilet facilities in highway side booths located at regular intervals on the
approaches to the BCP.
The number of freight trains is constant at about 3,800 per year, with rail passenger
numbers being stable at about 80,000 per year.
6. What impacts have the changes at 5. had to staffing levels of border guards,
customs, police and other regulatory agencies?
Staffing levels for both Customs and Border Guards have remained basically the same,
but with increased specialisation of tasks and concentration of Border Guards
manpower at the BCP itself (including rail), such as an expert on detection of forged or
suspicious personal identity documents. There are in effect no green border staff.
7. What changes have occurred in relation to the provision of essential privately
provided services ( e.g. duty free shops and insurance agencies) ? Have these
had positive or negative impacts on traffic flows?
These facilities are provided closely together in the main BCP building, which is located
directly next to the traffic lanes (Customs Brokers and Insurance Agencies). Due to the
physical location of the BCP, there are no duty free shops on the Latvian side.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 91
8. What changes are in progress or are planned regarding the transport routes to or
from your crossing point (s), such as upgrades of rail lines to double track, or
increasing the number of highway lanes? What qualitative and quantitative
impacts do you expect these to have?
All planned changes are subject to the National Transport Strategy. This Strategy is
being coordinated with Belarus and, especially, Russia (Rosgranitsa) with the emphasis
being on improving access roads on both sides. A major upgrade of the main immediate
access routes on the Latvian side (towards Rezekne) is underway now. Funding is a
challenge and it will not be possible to upgrade all BCPs simultaneously. Plans to
upgrade the lateral roads north of Terehova on the Latvian side, together with changes
in Russia, will mean that Terehova – Burachki need to be seen as BCPs for Latvian –
Moscow traffic and BCP Grebneva – Ubilinka for Latvian St. Petersburg traffic.
9. What changes are in progress regarding increases to the physical capacity of
your crossing point (s)? What impact do you expect these to have?
There have been planned upgrades agreed five years ago but funding has prevented
implementation. The intergovernmental monitoring report of 2011 has in Latvia been
used to create the March 2012 Latvian Government BCP Infrastructure Report. The
proposed roads widenings will not be effective increase of BCP throughput capacity
from both the Latvian and Russian sides.
While the BCP infrastructure at Terehova is in general need of refurbishment, this is
especially the case for the veterinary and phytosanitary examination areas.
refurbishment.
10. What changes have occurred to the volumes and types of traffic in recent years
which have been expected? What changes have occurred which have been
unexpected?
See also Q1. Volumes are now rising after the economic crisis. Passenger car and
buses traffic has risen significantly for cross border shopping reasons. Smuggling of
tobacco products for personal use and small to medium scale resale has risen
significantly, with serious revenue impacts.
11. Do you have the facilities to change the movement flows directions in order to
meet changes in direction of high volume traffic?
No, but outward bound vehicles subject to special examination can be diverted to
inward bound examination facilities, thereby avoiding bottlenecks. The main limitations
leading to queues are the situation on the other side of the border and the limited
capacity of access roads, and obsolete infrastructures of BCPs, including terminals.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 92
12. Did the introduction of the Russian and Belarus Customs Union (2010/11) lead
to changes in volumes and nature of traffic, and what impacts, if any, did these
changes have?
Yes. Since RU-BY-KZ customs union was established, a part of traffic flow shifted to
Belarusian BCPs – Patarnieki (LV)- Grigorovshchina( BY), Silene (LV) – Urbani (BY).
Organisational Systems and Procedures
13. Which government agencies are based at crossing points? Do such
arrangements apply at all crossing points, or only some?
All Border Management Agencies are based at all international full capacity BCPs, i.e.
on RU border – BCP Terehova, Grebneva, and on BY border – BCP Paternieki, Silene).
Where BCPs are limited to non-commercial traffic or movements of local residents only,
representation is limited to the respective agencies. The Agencies are Border Guards,
Customs, Veterinary Service and Phytosanitary Service.
14. If the presence of agencies differs between crossing points, what criteria are
used in deciding which agencies should be placed at which crossing points? Are
such decisions taken in cooperation with neighbouring states?
See 13. Levels of staffing also take account of volumes of traffic and BCP capacity. In
effect, the decisions are taken with the views of the neighbouring state taken into
account as the status of the BCP is common on both sides.
15. How do the agencies present at the crossing points cooperate with each other
and with representatives of transport operators? Are they located in common
premises or in different locations at the same site? Are there any common
coordination centres, and if so at which sites? Are there plans for such centres,
and if so where?
Customs brokers and insurance providers are based in the main BCP terminal building,
usually right next to Customs. Border Guards checking points and Customs document
presentation points are normally right next to each other, with Risk Management checks
being done in close proximity. There are no common coordination centres as such.
16. Do the agencies use risk management systems (whether automated or nonautomated) in selecting persons, vehicles or cargo for detailed examinations? If
so, is this done using pre arrival information and to what extent is it done? What
types of systems and procedures are used? Are there any differences in
availability of such systems depending on the nature of the border crossings?
Yes, with extensive sharing of operational material between staff of the Border
Management Agencies who are located very closely together. Customs pre arrival
information is used extensively through a document presentation facility before the
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 93
arrival at the traffic lanes. Operational information can be immediately checked against
the various RM systems. These systems are available at all the full status BCPs, with
other BCPs being manned and equipped as appropriate to their status.
17. Are the necessary procedures carried out by the border crossings agencies
carried out simultaneously or in sequence? What changes, if any, are in progress
or intended in relation to simultaneous checking?
They are in sequence, but these are in very close proximity. Simultaneous checking is
recognised as a priority need and discussions with Estonian and Lithuanian colleagues
on their experiences is close (e.g. re Estonian GoSwift system at Narva –Ivangorod).
18. What systems are used in relation to use of pre arrival data (road freight and rail
freight)? What systems, if any, are used in relation to pre arrival data for
passengers (rail and motor coach)? Is such data shared with other agencies?
How is the data accessed?
All Customs data is submitted electronically, including pre arrival and pre departure
information and transit data via NCTS. Rail freight data is provided electronically in
advance by the rail operator. There is currently no pre arrival data for bus / coach
passengers. There is no direct access to the data of one agency by another, but staff
from each agency are in close proximity and share as necessary.
19. What procedures apply to the access to, and use of, data from private sector
transport operators at or in the immediate vicinity of the crossing points?
This is done as necessary by operational staff based at the BCP. However, this is
mainly limited to Customs Brokers and insurers and not the transport companies or their
associations.
20. What changes are planned for the next few years in relation to the procedures
referred to in Q. 13-19?
See also 15 and 17 above. Changes are as always subject to budget limitations,
especially regarding the impact of transport infrastructures, especially of BCP
infrastructure and competent services’ control facilities and equipment, impact of BCP
transport infrastructures including introduction of terminals, improvement of access
roads and automated queuing systems.
21. What key requirements would be needed to ensure that procedural changes
would be most effective? Are these being planned, or considered?
See 15, 17 and 20. The priority of customs is to link various customs IS and IT tools, for
example ANPRS with x-ray, scales data and ECS. Introduction of a Terminal with
electronic (email, mobile phone) queuing systems would be beneficial. However, to be
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 94
effective, comparable physical and procedural modernisations are required on the
Belarus and Russian sides. Systems such as the Estonian Go Swift which records bus
and railway API (Advance Passenger Information) need to be introduced.
Technical Capabilities
22. What are the most significant systems you have for recording movements of
vehicles? Are they linked to recording the movements and clearance of freight?
Closed circuit TV (CCTV) for Border Guards and ANPR (Automatic Number Plate
Recognition for Customs). These can be cross checked with Schengen Information
System and national vehicle registration databases and national criminal intelligence
databases on a 24/7 basis. However, CCTV needs to be extended to the entire BCP
area, and there needs to be much closer integration of both surveillance and entry and
exit data. At present, coordination of these relies very much on person to person
contact.
23. What systems do you have for the processing of people? Do you have
automatic scanners for the checking of passports? Where such systems have
been introduced, what impact have they had on the processing times?
Passports are scanned, not, keyed in. These have reduced processing times, but
movements through the BCP are still dependent on the situation on both sides of the
border.
There are multiple checking booths. Bus passengers’ passports are checked collectively
on submission by driver. Passports are scanned.
24. Are extra staff deployed at periods of peak activity for movements of people?
Yes, for Border Guards, who no longer feel need to carry out green border activities .
This frees up some staff for Border Guards meaning that more staff can be deployed
for secondary checks. However, the numbers of extra staff for both services are limited.
Customs does not have the capacity to increase staff levels.
25. What equipment do you have for dealing with EU customs entry systems such
as the New Computerised Transit System and the mandatory pre arrival / pre
departure electronic declaration systems ( EU States Border Crossing Points
only)?
The computers at BCP are obsolete and in fact their data storage capacity is not
appropriate for dealing with various/ many IS simultaneously.
26. What impacts have such systems had on clearance times and on the detection
of serious violations of Customs and Tax regulations?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 95
Clearance times have improved on the Latvian side but there is room for improvement.
There is a need for a more reliable fixed x ray scanners as currently a mobile scanner is
overused, leading to reliability problems which are also related to the damaging impact
of the weather and the cold.
27. Are the findings from use of such systems shared with Russia and Belarus? If
so, what impacts have such sharing had on clearance times and detections of
serious violations in Russia and Belarus?
Yes, with BGs on both sides contacting each other Agency to Agency. Each incoming
BG shift is briefed about information received from counterparts. Designated BG
contacts do alert each other about suspicions which would be of interest to the other
country, or both. While Russian agencies do ask particularly about information on
persons they deem suspect (currently having no equivalent of the Schengen
Information System for the CIS or the Customs Union) they do supply data of interest to
Latvia and the EU. There are 4 management level meetings per year, a useful
procedure which needs to be developed.
Latvian customs is involved in an EU level pilot project on information exchange/
submission to Russian customs on transit freight via NCTS SPEED platform. In practice
it has proved that the clearance time for cargoes with transferred data to Russia has not
been shortened.
28. What equipment is available for scanning of cargo containers? Are these
available for rail containers as well as for road containers? What impacts have
they had on examination times and resulting clearance times? What impact have
they had on the detection of violations?
There are facilities for weighing vehicles and thereby also containers. However, at
Terehova the axial scales are out of order, and the platform scales date from 1998.
There is a mobile x ray scanner for vehicles it is overused and there is a need for fixed
x-ray (appropriate for weather conditions). They make examinations quicker and more
effective, as shown by big increases in detections of cigarettes in often elaborate
concealments including in vehicle panels.
There is a scanner at the rail BCP Zilupe which is actively used in relation to both cargo
examination and to detect illegal migrants.
29. Is extra equipment such as mobile scanners made available at peak times? If so,
what impact do they have on clearance times?
See 22, 28 and especially 26. No extra equipment such as mobile scanners made
available at peak times. More, and more reliable, equipment is needed.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 96
30. What equipment, if any, is affected by severe weather? Are there any plans to
deal with such challenges?
See 4. In addition Customs inspection areas are not heated well enough. Equipment
also wears out faster. Better weather proof conditions would assist for severe weather
months.
There is a need for a more reliable fixed x ray scanners as currently a mobile scanner is
overused, leading to reliability problems which are also related to the damaging impact
of the weather and the cold.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 97
National Cooperation and Cross Border Cooperation
31. Is there an overall coordinating Agency for operations of official agencies at the
crossing points ( e.g. equivalent of the Border Authority in Russia)? What
responsibilities does any such agency have, especially in relation to cooperation
with the other official agencies at the crossings?
Ministry of Interior is responsible for BCP operational; management and the Ministry of
Transport for road infrastructure management. They coordinate
with Belarus
counterparts where Border Guards are in effect the lead agency for BCPs, and with
Rosgranitsa for Russia. Among the Border Management Agencies, each agency
cooperates with its counterpart, but after very close consultation with other BMAs so
often the consultation is joint.
32. How the official agencies cooperate in relation to the receipt, processing and
evaluation of pre arrival data?
Nationally, by close coordination among co located staff with indirect access to each
other’s databases. Internationally, by regular contact by designated liaison staff at each
BCP as needed on operational matters and several times per year on strategic and long
term matters (see also 27). Closer mutual consultation is vital, including regarding
Russian and Belarusian plans. See also 41.
33. How do the official agencies cooperate in relation to carrying out simultaneous or
sequential processing of vehicles, passengers, freight and rail freight and
passengers?
Nationally, see earlier answers, especially 17. and 32. While checks are currently
sequential, there is very close proximity cooperation.
Internationally, there is a need to improve automated and non - automated processing,
especially of road and rail passengers to free up extra resources (transport lanes) for
freight.
34. Do the official agencies share common coordinating centres at crossing points? If
not, are they linked with regional or national multi-agency coordinating centres?
Nationally, no at the BCPs themselves, but they are all directly linked with their agency
national HQs, which do share information including by access to national law
enforcement agency information systems (e.g. for one call 24/7 access to national
Vehicle Registration Details).
Internationally (cross border) no. There are no
BCPs.
common coordination centre at the
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 98
35. Do the official agencies have direct access on site to each other’s databases ? If
not, do they have easy indirect access ( e.g. by contacts with representatives of
the other agencies located at the same crossing, especially if located in the same
room as part of a multi-agency coordinating team)?
Nationally, no to direct access, but yes to easy indirect access.
Internationally, no.
36. Is relevant automated or non-automated data from one agency entered onto the
databases or other records of the other agencies?
Nationally, yes, non -automated data is available, if required.
37. Are there formal or informal multi-agency teams involved in processing of
passengers and examination of goods or vehicles? If so, are they available 24/7,
or at peak times of day, or at peak periods of the year?
Nationally, in practice, yes – the daily work of BCPs on 24/7 basis could be evaluated
as informal multi-agency team work. However, BCPs such as Terehova are operating
at physical capacity so demands on staff time on their specific duties are high. No extra
multi-agency teams involved at peak times of day, or at peak periods of the year.
38. Are there any joint crossing points operated with staff from the official agencies of
the neighbouring state or states? If so, where are they and which agencies are
present? How effective have they been in improving traffic flows? How effective
have they been in detecting serious violations of immigration and customs laws,
or in detecting other criminal or administrative violations?
No. Staff in all agencies and in Russia and Belarus are well aware of the values of such
jointly manned BCPs.
39. What information is exchanged between the agencies on one side of the crossing
or another?
See also 32. For BGs, there are also a number of joint special exercises on mutual
risks, e.g. Operation Cordon in 2011 and imminent April 2012 Operation ZAPAT where
Russian Border Guards will be based at Terehova as part of an illegal migration
exercise (one week).
An agreement has been reached with the Federal Customs Service of the Russian
Federation on level of BCPs’ shifts managers to exchange information (by phone) on
unplanned traffic interruptions and their causes.
As well it is agreed on exchange of information on weight indicators of railway
containers and wagons running through BCP Zilupe (Latvian side) and BCP Posenj
(Russian side).
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 99
Previous warning agreement on emergency situations on the Belarusian-Latvian border
has signed and used to ensure a coordinated actions of the officials of Belarusian and
Latvian customs authorities at the Belarusian-Latvian BCPs if an emergency situation
occurs.
40. How is such information exchanged, e.g. agency to agency or via central
coordinators, face to face exchanges, landline to landline, mobile to mobile, or by
email or electronic special alert systems?
Dedicated phone calls, with immediate follow up by email, fax.
41. What procedures are in place for management level cooperation between the
agencies on both sides in relation to pre notification of procedural changes or of
special circumstances which may impact on operations?
Border Delegates and respective regional managers meet at least 4 times per year to
discuss such matters. See also 32. While general advanced information is good, there
is room for improvement on both operational outcomes and capacity and procedural
developments and improvements.
42. Are any changes planned to the ways of exchanging operational information
between crossing points on both sides of the border? If so, when?
Staff on both sides of the border are well aware of ways of improving the situation,
including by the use of joint special exercises such as Condor and ZAPAT (see 39)
The Latvian Customs authorities together with Russian customs colleagues are
improving and developing ways and methods of exchanging operational information
between crossing points on both sides of the border.
43. Are there any changes planned to the national organisational and information
structures of the official agencies at the border crossings (e.g. common access to
information databases)?
Nationally, all staff are preparing for increased use of national databases as the
quantity and quality of information improves and staff become more familiar with use of
information sources.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 100
Mini Questionnaire
Infrastructure /
Logistics
Room to expand
Yes
Rail sidings
Lorry Parks away
from traffic lanes
X
X
Numbered
queuing system
in parks
BCP manned
24/7
Traffic lanes
capable of use in
both directions
Weather proof
inspection areas
No
X
X
X
Planned (when?) Other Comments
Limited capacity to increase lanes.
Reasonable space in area for an off BCP
terminal.
Most clearance is done in Rezekne. .
No. Vitally needed. This is clearly understood
as shown by awareness of waiting times often
exceeding 24 hours. Basic toilet facilities are
available on approach road but with no
weather protection.
In current plan. Recent active studies carried
out.
X
X
X
Yes
Organisational
Systems /
Procedures
Are there Joint
Agency offices
on site
(Coordination
Centre)
Are Automated
X
Risk
Management
Systems used?
Are such systems
integrated with
other agencies’
systems?
Are checks done
simultaneously
for all agencies?
Do Freight
X
Capable of some modification
However, heating required in some areas.
Weather does impact on inspections and
equipment.
No
Planned (when?) Other Comments
X
Not currently planned. There is close
cooperation by very close proximity personnel.
Effectiveness limited in reducing clearance
times due to lack of Advance Passenger
Information.
X
However, operating personnel work closely
together.
X
Currently sequential, but in close cooperation.
Yes, through Customs Brokers, located in
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 101
Forwarders
Associations or
major transport
operators have
representatives at
BCPs?
Do Customs
X
staffs have
access to New
Computerised
Transit System
data and
Customs Union
wide data
systems?
Does rail
X
management
staff have access
to the same data
as road
management
staff?
Technical
Capabilities
Are closed circuit
TV cameras in
operation at
BCPs?
Are Passport
scanners
available?
Are Passport
scanners used
Do staff have
direct access to
Vehicle
registrations
data?
(Automated
Vehicle
Registration
scanning)?
Do staff have
direct access to
Customs e –
secure and weather proof facilities.
Yes, Latvian customs staff has access to
NCTS, ITMS, EORI, ECICS and SMS.
Staff responsible for rail freight monitoring do
receive manifests in advance. Border Guards
do not receive rail or road passenger data in
advance.
X
However, cover is not total and needs
extending.
X
X
X
No, only to ANPR data (Automated Number
Plate Recognition). However, this can be
followed up with near immediate access to
registration details and automatically
highlights vehicles of interest.
X
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 102
declarations?
Are freight
(container)
scanners
available (road /
rail, mobile)?
Are there major
systems
upgrades or
introductions in
progress or
planned within
next five years?
X
Yes in all cases, though numbers are limited
and reliability can be affected by severe
weather. There are reliability issues with
mobile scanners.
X
However, these are very much subject to
funding and may well be delayed by several
years.
Cross Border
Cooperation
Are any BCP
Coordination
Centres jointly
manned by both
countries?
Are any non BCP
based
Coordination
Centres jointly
managed by both
countries?
Are Customs
declarations
shared
automatically with
neighbour BCPs?
If so, is this done
simultaneously
(real time or near
real time)?
Is vehicle, driver
X
or passenger
information
shared
automatically or
by immediate
telephoning?
Are lists of
suspects or
X
No. However Russian Border Guards do
deploy to the Latvian BCP for special
exercises.
X
There are Law Enforcement liaison officers (
based at Embassies) exchanged between
Russia and Latvia.
X
No.
X
Not applicable.
Yes, by immediate telephoning in cases of
operational need.
X
This is done as needed.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 103
persons of
interest shared
on a regular and
timely basis?
Are persons
specifically
designated for
information
exchanges
available 24/7?
X
There are specially nominated persons on
both sides.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 104
Finland – Russian Border Nuijamaa- Sosnovskoye ( Brusnichoe) 16th April 2012
Infrastructure and logistics
1. What are the current capabilities for processing freight vehicles (and their
crews), commercial road passenger vehicles and private passenger vehicles?
Do you have multiple manned clearance and passage points (e.g. Border Guard
desks)?
Passenger and cargo traffic are separated into two terminals. Due to the Nuija
Coordinated Border Management Model Customs officials conduct border and
customs checks in the Cargo Traffic Centre (freight vehicles and their crews). In
passenger traffic the Finnish Border Guard conducts border checks and Customs
checks. Vehicle checks on lanes can be conducted jointly. In passenger traffic there
is a total of 14 checkpoints on the entry side (4 in the lane inspection building, 4 in
two fast lane booths, 6 in the passenger traffic centre) and 10 on the exit side (4 in
the lane inspection building, 2 in one fast lane booth, 4 in the passenger traffic
centre). There are a total of four customs clearance booths in passenger traffic.
During peak seasons i.e. Christmas holidays, an additional customs booth (primarily
for invoice stamping) is set up in the exit side lane inspection building to improve
traffic flow.
2. What are your current
capabilities for processing freight trains? And for
passenger trains? Do you have sidings on the line or lines?
Only road traffic at BCP Nuijamaa.
3. Are your facilities manned at the same levels at all times (24/7)? If not, how do
they differ, and at what times?
At BCP Nuijamaa the majority of the traffic is passenger traffic consisting of
Russians travelling to the Lappeenranta-Imatra-Kouvola area on short shopping
trips. Therefore traffic from Russia to Finland is most intensive in the morning and
respectively returning traffic in the evening. During the night time traffic volumes are
low. Peak hours on the entry side are between 09:00-14:00 and on the exit side
between 13:30-19:00. The most intensive day of the week is Saturday. Checkpoints
area manned flexibly according to the prevailing traffic situation. There are
approximately 20 border guards in each shift; Customs has 12 officers per shift.
4. Are your facilities affected by particular weather conditions? If so, by which
conditions and how? Have there been any changes in the last 10 years to deal
with these situations, and to what extent have they been effective? Are any
further changes planned?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 105
Local climate & weather conditions affect the conduct of border checks so that
checks are conducted indoors (temperatures below -0°C in 2009-2010: 88 days,
2010-2011: 52 days, snow cover ca. 75 cm for both winters). Working conditions in
fast lane booths may deteriorate in harsh weather conditions (rain, snow) as checks
are conducted through a small window. Customs has not even tested mobile
connection to carry out customs clearance.
5. What changes have occurred in the last five years to the volumes of traffic (road
freight, commercial road passenger traffic, private passenger traffic, rail freight
and rail passenger)?
The total passenger numbers have increased significantly in the past three years
following a small slump in 2009 due to the global economic situation. In the first
three months of 2012 passenger numbers have increased by 16%.
- 2009: 1 910 715
- 2010: 2 315 601 (+21%)
- 2011: 3 153 596 (+36%)
Truck traffic has changed as follows:
- 2009: 137 229
- 2010: 171 001 (+25%)
- 2011: 192 886 (+13%)
During the first quarter 2012 truck traffic has increased 2%.
6. What impacts have the changes at 5. had to staffing levels of border guards,
customs, police and other regulatory agencies?
In practice the number of border guard personnel has remained the same for the
past years. In 2012 five new border guards graduated from the Border & Coast
Guard Academy and in 2013 an additional 23 new border guards will be deployed to
BCP Nuijamaa. Number of Custom officers has risen from 97 to 103 during these
three years.
7. What changes have occurred in relation to the provision of essential privately
provided services ( e.g. duty free shops and insurance agencies) ? Have these
had positive or negative impacts on traffic flows?
The only privately provided service is the Global Blue tax free refund point which is
located after the exit side border checks near the physical border with Russia. The
number of tax free customers has increased dramatically with the increasing
passenger traffic. However there have been no developments so far to improve the
refund point’s infrastructure. Future developments are likely to focus on increasing
parking space and facilities for tax free refund procedures.
8. What changes are in progress or are planned regarding the transport routes to or
from your crossing point (s), such as upgrades of rail lines to double track, or
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 106
increasing the number of highway lanes?
impacts do you expect these to have?
What qualitative and quantitative
The most significant developments that are currently in progress (planning phase)
focus on the actual BCP area. The aim is to construct more lanes and border control
points to meet the demands of the increasing passenger traffic. Preliminary plans
have been drafted to upgrade the Nuijamaa-Lappeenranta highway and the Saimaa
canal road from Brusnitsnoje to Vyborg, however only the upgrade of highway
Lappeenranta-Nuijamaa has got financing and the construction work will start
probably during the spring 2013.
9. What changes are in progress regarding increases to the physical capacity of
your crossing point (s)? What impact do you expect these to have?
The physical capacity of the BCP will be increased in the near future in various
development phases. The first phase will concentrate on the exit side, where more
lanes will be added to existing control points, the queuing lanes will be extended and
1-2 completely new control points will be constructed. The second phase will
concentrate on the entry side, where two new lanes will be added to the lane
inspection building, queuing lanes will be extended and widened and 1-4 completely
new control points will be constructed. The construction plans for the new control
points are still “works in progress” and have not been finalized.
These above mentioned plans are to improve the fluency of personnel traffic.
10. What changes have occurred to the volumes and types of traffic in recent years
which have been expected? What changes have occurred which have been
unexpected?
Traffic was estimated to increase more steadily and especially the increase of
passenger traffic turned out to be more dramatic than was originally expected. The
effects of the prospective visa freedom between Russia and the EU on border
crossing traffic will be considered in future development projects.
11. Do you have the facilities to change the movement flows directions in order to
meet changes in direction of high volume traffic?
Entry/exit side control points are permanently separated and cannot be utilized in
both directions. However there are other options that allow us to control traffic flows
in a flexible manner i.e. the Cargo Traffic Centre can also be opened for passenger
traffic during peak times.
12. Did the introduction of the Russian, Kazakhstan and Belarus Customs Union
(2010/11) lead to changes in volumes and nature of traffic, and what impacts, if
any, did these changes have?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 107
Customs Union launched the heavy increase in passenger traffic due to changes in
regulation of tax free import of passengers.
Organisational Systems and Procedures
13. Which government agencies are based at crossing points? Do such
arrangements apply at all crossing points, or only some?
The Finnish Border Guard and the Finnish Customs.
14. If the presence of agencies differs between crossing points, what criteria are
used in deciding which agencies should be placed at which crossing points? Are
such decisions taken in cooperation with neighbouring states?
15. How do the agencies present at the crossing points cooperate with each other
and with representatives of transport operators? Are they located in common
premises or in different locations at the same site? Are there any common
coordination centres, and if so at which sites? Are there plans for such centres,
and if so where?
The Nuija Coordinated Border Management Model is implemented at BCP
Nuijamaa. The model means enhanced co-operation between Customs & Border
Guard in the following four aspects:
 Regulation of traffic flow
 Customs & Border checks on lanes
 Control of driver’s sobriety & right to drive
 Border Checks for Cargo Traffic
In practice the model means:
 further training for both authorities (cross-training of officials)
 shared equipment, databases & facilities (e.g. vehicle inspection building)
 joint field checks
o statutory tasks of both authorities are carried out during laneinspections
o physical checks can be conducted by both authorities and exposed
violations are directed to the responsible authority for further measures
 common briefing in the beginning of each shift to determine use of resources
and focuses for shift
 Customs carry out first line border checks in cargo traffic on behalf of BG
Cooperation with transport operators is conducted primarily with Lappeenranta
Airport Authorities and Saimaa Canal cruise operators. In addition training sessions
are organized for national bus operators regarding carrier sanction regulations.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 108
Customs has signed a memorandum of understanding with local Finnish bus
company to reveal cross border criminality.
16. Do the agencies use risk management systems (whether automated or nonautomated) in selecting persons, vehicles or cargo for detailed examinations? If
so, is this done using pre arrival information and to what extent is it done? What
types of systems and procedures are used? Are there any differences in
availability of such systems depending on the nature of the border crossings?
Tailored profiles and requests for measures can be inputted into the national Border
Check Application RATAS on national-regional-local levels. Alerts pop up at border
control points when personal details, document details or travel motives are inputted.
In addition further intelligence information is provided by the District’s Crime
Prevention Unit. The Customs Licence Plate Recognition System gives alerts that
are linked to vehicles by Customs, Border Guard or Police. Customs has also Tiedis
and Arex systems that includes pre information concerning vehicle and cargo traffic.
17. Are the necessary procedures carried out by the border crossings agencies
carried out simultaneously or in sequence? What changes, if any, are in
progress or intended in relation to simultaneous checking?
Border and customs checks are conducted in sequence, on after the other. However
due to the Nuija-model lane checks can be conducted simultaneously and in cargo
traffic customs officials carry out first line border checks and customs clearance
procedures with a “one stop shop principle”. All passengers can be subjected to
additional II-line checks when necessary; these checks are conducted in separate
facilities away from I-line activities.
18. What systems are used in relation to use of pre arrival data ( rail freight and rail
freight)? What systems, if any, are used in relation to pre arrival data for
passengers (rail and motor coach)? Is such data shared with other agencies?
How is the data accessed?
Advanced passenger information is received electronically in the form of passenger
lists or crew manifests by email on flights to and from Lappeenranta Airport and on
cruises, pleasure boats and cargo ships sailing through the Saimaa Canal. The lists
are processed manually by border guards at the BCP. In cargo traffic pre arrival
information has to be given by Arex.
19. What procedures apply to the access to, and use of, data from private sector
transport operators at or in the immediate vicinity of the crossing points.
According to national legislation the Finnish Border Guard may demand passenger
details from operators on external traffic. Basis for pre info on cargo traffic is based
on EU legislation.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 109
20. What changes are planned for the next few years in relation to the procedures
referred to in Q. 13-19?
The further deepening of the Nuija Coordinated Border Management Model is
planned for the near future. New cooperation modes may include extending invoice
stamping, vehicle insurance and microchip checks for pets to Border Guards from
Customs.
Border Control processes are being evaluated critically in order to prepare for the
increase of traffic and ensuring the high quality of checks. Tactical level changes
may be implemented in the new future.
Technical capabilities related to the conduct of border checks and the systems used
are constantly being developed. The procedural and technical requirement set by the
VIS Regulation (i.e. finger print checks) will be implemented by 2014. The functions
of RATAS (i.e. regarding advanced passenger information checks) are also being
developed.
21. What key requirements would be needed to ensure that procedural changes
would be most effective? Are these being planned, or considered?
Functioning infrastructure and adequate and professional personnel are in a central
position in the effective implementation of procedural changes.
Technical Capabilities
22. What are the most significant systems you have for recording movements of
vehicles? Are they linked to recording the movements and clearance of freight?
RATAS, LIPRE and AREX
23. What systems do you have for the processing of people? Do you have
automatic scanners for the checking of passports? Where such systems have
been introduced, what impact have they had on the processing times.
Border check equipment consists of work stations, BGIII document scanners and a
number of fingerprint scanners. The BCP also has two mobile border check
appliances which can be utilized at airport and harbour patrols. Automated border
check systems are not yet available at Nuijamaa.
24. Are extra staff deployed at periods of peak activity for movements of people?
Yes. The number of personnel in each shift is planned according to traffic estimates
and other operational requirements. Passenger numbers and traffic estimates are
made jointly once a month with Russian counterparts.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 110
25. What equipment do you have for dealing with EU customs entry systems such
as the New Computerised Transit System and the mandatory pre arrival / pre
departure electronic declaration systems ( EU States Border Crossing Points
only).?
Normal working stations 10 pcs in cargo traffic centre, three in passenger traffic
centre.
26. What impacts have such systems had on clearance times and on the detection
of serious violations of Customs and Tax regulations?
Since there still are paper document in use, for example TIR Carnet, handling time
has doubled after getting these computerized systems.
27. Are the findings from use of such systems shared with Russia and Belarus? If
so, what impacts have such sharing had on clearance times and detections of
serious violations in Russia and Belarus?
In monthly meetings with our Russian counterparts information has been changed,
but only in special cases. This change of information has not had any significant
impact on clearance times generally. In certain case may have happened so.
28. What equipment is available for scanning of cargo containers? Are these
available for rail containers as well as for road containers? What impacts have
they had on examination times and resulting clearance times? What impact have
they had on the detection of violations?.
The BCP’s heart beat detector can used to scan cargo containers and large
passenger vehicles i.e. busses. The HBD’s use is determined by risk analysis.
Customs has a mobile x-ray unit for all kinds of vehicles. It has reduced the need of
unloading trailers or containers.
29. Is extra equipment such as mobile scanners made available at peak times? If so,
what impact do they have on clearance times?
Mobile border check devices are available but not efficient due to local weather
conditions. The HBD can be set up on lanes to be used from a vehicle. Mobile x-ray
unit can be basically used in two shifts but it is also working in other customs posts.
Roughly half of the working hours it stays in Nuijamaa.
30. What equipment, if any, is affected by severe weather? Are there any plans to
deal with such challenges?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 111
Use of technical devices outdoors is limited due to weather conditions (rain, snow,
frost).
National Cooperation and Cross Border Cooperation
31. Is there an overall coordinating Agency for operations of official agencies at the
crossing points (e.g. equivalent of the Border Authority in Russia)? What
responsibilities does any such agency have, especially in relation to cooperation
with the other official agencies at the crossings?
The responsibilities of different agencies are clearly outlined in national legislation
and cooperation contracts. No agency is solely responsible for overall coordination.
All functions are carried out in cooperation.
32. How the official agencies cooperate in relation to the receipt, processing and
evaluation of pre arrival data?
There is one custom officer in Nuijamaa Customs who is responsible for doing risk
analyse of cargo traffic together with national RAC.
33. How do the official agencies cooperate in relation to carrying out simultaneous
or sequential processing of vehicles, passengers, freight and rail freight and
passengers?
See Q.15
34. Do the official agencies share common coordinating centres at crossing points?
If not, are they linked with regional or national multi-agency coordinating
centres?
No. The regional Police-Customs-Border Guard unit is located in Hamina near BCP
Vaalimaa.
35. Do the official agencies have direct access on site to each other’s databases ? If
not, do they have easy indirect access ( e.g. by contacts with representatives of
the other agencies located at the same crossing, especially if located in the
same room as part of a multi-agency coordinating team)?
All PCB-authorities have direct access to most of each other’s databases. Limitations
may apply due to the respective duties of individual staff.
36. Is relevant automated or non-automated data from one agency entered onto the
databases or other records of the other agencies?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 112
All databases are used flexible and the input of information is determined by the
function of the database itself, not the agency.
37. Are there formal or informal multi-agency teams involved in processing of
passengers and examination of goods or vehicles? If so, are they available 24/7,
or at peak times of day, or at peak periods of the year?
See Q.15
38. Are there any joint crossing points operated with staff from the official agencies
of the neighbouring state or states? If so, where are they and which agencies
are present? How effective have they been in improving traffic flows? How
effective have they been in detecting serious violations of immigration and
customs laws, or in detecting other criminal or administrative violations?
We do not have joint posts.
39. What information is exchanged between the agencies on one side of the
crossing or another?
Information is exchanged on the following topics
- ad hoc joint investigations to deal with cases at hand
- traffic situation and flow
- information of persons refused entry from the previous month
- other contemporary issues
40. How such information is exchanged, e.g. agency to agency or via central
coordinators, face to face exchanges, landline to landline, mobile to mobile, or
by email or electronic special alert systems?
Face to face meetings once a month, contact phone and fax between BCPs across
the border. Customs authorities have also mobile phone and email connections.
41. What procedures are in place for management level cooperation between the
agencies on both sides in relation to pre notification of procedural changes or of
special circumstances which may impact on operations?
Cooperation with the Russian Border Authorities is conducted in the Border Delegate
framework. On the tactical level information may be shared by the BCP’s command
or acting shift leaders. Plus that customs has working groups in certain matters and
director general level meetings.
42. Are any changes planned to the ways of exchanging operational information
between crossing points on both sides of the border? If so, when?
No changes are evident.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 113
43. Are there any changes planned to the national organisational and information
structures of the official agencies at the border crossings (e.g. common access
to information databases)?
See Q.20
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 114
Mini Questionnaire
Infrastructure /
Logistics
Room to expand
Rail sidings
Lorry Parks away
from traffic lanes
Numbered
queuing system
in parks
BCP manned
24/7
Traffic lanes
capable of use in
both directions
Weather proof
inspection areas
Yes
No
X
X
Passengers are directed indoors for checks.
Organisational
Systems /
Procedures
Are there Joint
Agency offices
on site
(Coordination
Centre)
Are Automated
Risk
Management
Systems used?
Are such systems
integrated with
other agencies’
systems?
Are checks done
simultaneously
for all agencies?
Do Freight
Forwarders
Associations or
major transport
operators have
representatives at
BCPs?
Yes
No
Planned (when?) Other Comments
X
Planned (when?) Other Comments
2013
X
X
Third lane on highway 13 for parking of
trucks, est. 2013-14
New system for departing trucks, est. 2013
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Lane-checks can be conducted
simultaneously.
X
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 115
Do Customs
staffs have
access to New
Computerised
Transit System
data and
Customs Union
wide data
systems?
Does rail
management
staff have access
to the same data
as road
management
staff?
X
NCTS
X
If you mean Customs officers?
Technical
Capabilities
Are closed circuit
TV cameras in
operation at
BCPs?
Are Passport
scanners
available?
Are Passport
scanners used
Do staff have
direct access to
Vehicle
registrations
data?
(Automated
Vehicle
Registration
scanning)?
Do staff have
direct access to
Customs e –
declarations?
Are freight
(container)
scanners
available (road /
rail, mobile)?
Yes
No
Planned (when?) Other Comments
X
X
X
X
X
Those who do customs clearance work.
X
Road
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 116
Are there major
systems
upgrades or
introductions in
progress or
planned within
next five years?
X
Cross Border
Yes
Cooperation
Are any BCP
Coordination
Centres jointly
manned by both
countries?
Are any non BCP
based
Coordination
Centres jointly
managed by both
countries?
Are Customs
declarations
shared
automatically with
neighbour BCPs?
If so, is this done
simultaneously
(real time or near
real time)?
Is vehicle, driver
or passenger
information
shared
automatically or
by immediate
telephoning?
Are lists of
suspects or
persons of
interest shared
on a regular and
timely basis?
Are persons
X
specifically
designated for
No
Planned (when?) Other Comments
X
X
X
X
X
Joint investigations to deal with unclear cases
are an exception.
X
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 117
information
exchanges
available 24/7?
Estonia
There were visits to two groups of BCPs on the Estonian – Russian border, to Koidula
– Pechory / Kunichina Gora on 18th April and Narva – Ivangorod (all crossing points
in that area) on 19th April 2012. The Questionnaire relates to both visits and to a
meeting with national HQ staff of the Police (Border Guards) and Customs in Tallinn
National Police HQ on 17th April.
Infrastructure and logistics
1. What are the current capabilities for processing freight vehicles (and their
crews), commercial road passenger vehicles and private passenger vehicles?
Do you have multiple manned clearance and passage points (e.g. Border Guard
desks)?
Estonian road BCPs use Terminal Parking systems for cars, buses and small
commercial vehicles and separately for trucks. These have been recently introduced
or upgraded at Narva and Koidula, with terminals being located at the BCP (Koidula)
or at available spaces some distance away (Narva and Sillamae). The operations of
these systems and the related GoSwift electronic booking and management system
are key to understanding Estonian vehicle border crossing procedures. GoSwift’s
electronic booking system has been compulsory since 1st August 2011
(www.estonianborder.eu and www.eestipiir.ee).
In relation to actual vehicle lanes at BCPs, these are divided into use by cars / small
commercial vehicles, trucks and risk management systems identified vehicles. Lane
use can be varied according to priorities and needs 9e.g. perishable goods). Border
Management Agency staff have wide discretion within regulations to prioritise
movements. Tourist coaches are not prioritised compared with fixed schedule buses.
Capacity is currently well within present levels of road traffic but geographical limits
at the bridges at Koidula and Narva (the latter in the city centre) limit overall
movements into Russia. Should Russia expand its own movements outwards
including by use of terminals and equivalents of GoSwift, Narva inwards capacity
would be exceeded ( note that Rosgranitsa in cooperation with GoSwift in Russia is
from 1st July 2012 testing out the GoSwift system at all major crossing points with
Estonia, i.e. at Ivangorod – Narva, at Shumilkino- Luhamaa and at Kunichnaja Gora
– Koidula). Construction of a new bridge crossing 10 km north of the city centre at
Riigikula had been considered since the 1970s but at present the Russian
Federation has indicated that funds are not currently available.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 118
Facilities for separate or joint second phase checking by Customs and Border
Guards exist at both Koidula and Narva though parking space is limited at Narva.
2. What are your current
capabilities for processing freight trains? And for
passenger trains? Do you have sidings on the line or lines?
A new rail terminal has been introduced at Koidula (August 2011) with capacity
limited only by line capacity. Facilities for passenger train passenger processing
exist. At Narva there are similar facilities though without X ray equipment (unlike
Koidula). In practice, freight is cleared in Tallinn or outside Estonia at final
destination.
Strict timetables are laid down at Narva for processing passengers (Tallinn –
Moscow – 45 minutes on Estonian side and 60 minutes on Russian side) and these
are met unless specific border management incidents occur. A new Tallinn – St.
Petersburg passenger train starts in May 2012 which will increase passenger
throughput significantly, and this has shorter processing times (30 minutes on
Estonian side and 45 minutes on Russian side).
There is currently no equipment for processing passports on board but such kit is
due to arrive in late April 2012 although extensive checks are required to ensure it
works.
There is considerable siding space at both Koidula and Narva.
3. Are your facilities manned at the same levels at all times (24/7)? If not, how do
they differ, and at what times?
Yes. An exception is a pedestrian only BCP at Narva pedestrian bridge where no
crossings take place at night, although possibilities are being discussed to extend
opening hours and to allow other nationalities to use it. Under an EU funded trilateral
programme involving Russian Estonia and Latvia, this will be extended to 24 hours.
At peak periods, 24/7 Customs coverage can be supported by more staff from
regional mobile teams who are diverted from inland Customs work.
4. Are your facilities affected by particular weather conditions? If so, by which
conditions and how? Have there been any changes in the last 10 years to deal
with these situations, and to what extent have they been effective? Are any
further changes planned?
Yes. Portable passport scanners lose battery power in extreme cold and become
less effective in rain. Mobile Customs X ray scanners can become unreliable at -35
degrees. Maintenance schedules for all affected equipment have been increased,
with maintenance being carried out at twice the frequency of manufacturers’
recommendations.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 119
5. What changes have occurred in the last five years to the volumes of traffic (road
freight, commercial road passenger traffic, private passenger traffic, rail freight
and rail passenger)?
See also 10. below. Detailed statistics are available. Falls seen since 2007 due to
economic situation have now stabilised and some categories have increased
significantly. Movements of persons at Narva have risen to 3.42 million per year
from 2.8 million in 2007. There were some falls since 2010 following restrictions on
personal imports of cigarettes from Russia, with 2009 being the highest at 3.8
million, which is well above the 2007 figure. There have been big increases in
movements of tourist buses, which are used as road fuel carriers / smugglers.
At Narva – Ivangorod truck movements fell significantly from 2007 but have now
stabilised. Due to increasingly detailed checks by Russian Customs on inwards
lorries to Russia waiting times have increased considerably. Movements into
Estonia have therefore fallen by less than exits.
At Koidula rail traffic (freight only) has risen from 16 per day to 22 (total in both
directions). The terminal can handle 30 per day.
6. What impacts have the changes at 5. had to staffing levels of border guards,
customs, police and other regulatory agencies?
Staffing levels are sufficient at present. The years of traffic decline have been used
to improve traffic management and introduce or plan extra capacity (currently
available at Koidula, with pressure on vehicle passenger traffic at Narva to be eased
by another EU funded joint passenger terminal upgrade at Narva and Ivangorod).
However, growing tourist traffic from the St Petersburg Region would put great
pressure on staff resources, particularly when any visa waiver agreement would be
reached with Russia.
7. What changes have occurred in relation to the provision of essential privately
provided services (e.g. duty free shops and insurance agencies)? Have these
had positive or negative impacts on traffic flows?
The terminal management procedures for passenger vehicles and trucks are all
managed by private companies under long term contracts which require provision of
necessary services by law. These include delivery of advance vehicle registration
detail which can be accessed by law enforcement agencies, as can related
surveillance cameras.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 120
The truck terminal at Sillamae (Narva) has extensive rest and recreation facilities.
These are due to be introduced at Koidula where the terminal building is in final
stages of construction.
Advance delivery of import entry documentation to Russian Customs can be made
via offices of a Russian company (Rostek, associated with Russian Customs) at both
Narva and Koidula terminals.
8. What changes are in progress or are planned regarding the transport routes to or
from your crossing point (s), such as upgrades of rail lines to double track, or
increasing the number of highway lanes? What qualitative and quantitative
impacts do you expect these to have?
See also answers above, especially re the proposals for a new bridge crossing at
Narva- this is key to addressing the physical capacity of the Narva crossing, as the
bridge capacity is a the crucial limiting factor. However, increased passport checking
booths inwards at Narva will assist by speeding passage of buses. For Customs
movements, greater cooperation on exchange of risk information will be required to
enable reductions in Russian clearance times, especially outwards from Estonia.
On railway crossings (passenger) on board passport checking equipment will, if reliable,
assist in coping with expected significant increases in passengers through both Koidula
and Narva.
9. What changes are in progress regarding increases to the physical capacity of
your crossing point (s)? What impact do you expect these to have?
See 8. The key elements for road traffic are the imminent upgrades of facilities for
refreshments and recreation ( but not yet on site overnight accommodation) to the
freight and passenger vehicles terminal at Koidula to match those available for trucks at
Narva (Sillamae). For passenger vehicles at Narva the terminal is located within
travelling time of facilities in the city.
It is crucial to note that while the terminal system does save a lot of waiting time, it does
not necessarily reduce the time required to cross a border, particularly where customs
clearances are required. It does however enable time limited drivers to remain within
their hours as they can wait off BCP or off terminal, resting or doing other activities.
At Koidula (Pechory) Russian Customs are developing a semi- terminal system which
should reduce the amount of waiting time, though parking spaces themselves are still
fairly limited.
10. What changes have occurred to the volumes and types of traffic in recent years
which have been expected? What changes have occurred which have been
unexpected?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 121
See also 5. above. The 2010 restrictions on carriage of tobacco products has led to
smuggling using cars as well as by other means across the river at Narva. This has
led to delays due to need for Customs to examine passenger vehicles in detail, and
for Border Guards to devote considerable resources from passport checking to
green border patrols at the Narva River. There have also been increasing cases of
highly organised people smuggling where false documents are used with detected
and refused persons (e.g. from Cameroon or DR Congo) being returned to Russia
and then being detected a few days later attempting to enter Finland, methods which
suggest high degrees of support and organisation.
Traffic was estimated to increase more steadily and especially the increase of
passenger traffic turned out to be more dramatic than was originally expected. The
effects of the prospective visa freedom between Russia and the EU on border
crossing traffic will be considered in all future development projects.
11. Do you have the facilities to change the movement flows directions in order to
meet changes in direction of high volume traffic?
No at both Narva and Koidula, due to the capacities of the bridges. However, at both
BCPs there are either lanes (Koidula) or prioritisation procedures (Narva and Koidula)
enabling priority traffic to move more quickly, including through accelerating their
location in the queue management system. Examples include for fixed schedule buses
and the carrying of perishable goods.
Use of traffic management at the vehicle parks stages is particularly important at Narva /
Sillamae as the capacity to remove vehicles to parking spaces immediately at the BCP
is limited in Narva as the BCP itself is in the city centre, as it is in Ivangorod.
12. Did the introduction of the Russian, Kazakhstan and Belarus Customs Union
(2010/11) lead to changes in volumes and nature of traffic, and what impacts, if
any, did these changes have?
Yes. The Customs Union launched the heavy increase in passenger traffic due to
changes in regulation of tax free import of passengers. This is reflected in the statistics
from Russia and back into it.
Freight checks have increased significantly on the Russian side.
Organisational Systems and Procedures
13. Which government agencies are based at crossing points? Do such
arrangements apply at all crossing points, or only some?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 122
At Koidula Border Guards and Customs are present, with Customs delegated to carry
out the work of veterinary and phytosanitary staff. Facilities are on site. At Narva, both
facilities and staff are available from these agencies.
Where Customs are not immediately available (e.g. due to being involved in
examinations) Border Guards are authorised to carry out Customs checks until Customs
arrive.
Radiological detection equipment is available at all crossings including foot passenger
crossings.
14. If the presence of agencies differs between crossing points, what criteria are
used in deciding which agencies should be placed at which crossing points? Are
such decisions taken in cooperation with neighbouring states?
See also 13. The decisions are based on known and expected operational needs
with, wherever possible, equipment and training being provided before a need is
confirmed.
Operational cooperation issues, including forward looking ones, are discussed at
both formal (mandatory) and informal meetings with Russian authorities (Customs to
Customs, Border Guards to Border Guards, and jointly). A recent (March 2012)
joint report by the respective government auditors of Estonia and Russia has made
recommendations for improving cooperation between the Customs Services of both
states. It is hoped that these recommendations will become instructions. Therefore
this document is seen as critically important.
15. How do the agencies present at the crossing points cooperate with each other
and with representatives of transport operators? Are they located in common
premises or in different locations at the same site? Are there any common
coordination centres, and if so at which sites? Are there plans for such centres,
and if so where?
The operations are extremely close at all points (road and rail) where both or all are
present. Staff have their own radio channels as well as common ones. Staff are colocated and have indirect immediate access to databases through their colleagues from
the other service. They are located in common premises so although there are no formal
common coordination centres in practice the arrangements mean there are.
The Border Guards and Customs have access to the GoSwift traffic management
system used to support the effective operation of the vehicle parks, and this is used for
Risk Management purposes and in effect for Advance Passenger Information
purposes.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 123
16. Do the agencies use risk management systems (whether automated or nonautomated) in selecting persons, vehicles or cargo for detailed examinations? If
so, is this done using pre arrival information and to what extent is it done? What
types of systems and procedures are used? Are there any differences in
availability of such systems depending on the nature of the border crossings?
See 15. and also 18. below. Yes, extensively. The GoSwift system is used for Risk
Management checks. Suspect rail passengers’ details are provided by the rail
operator (Estonian railways) in advance for passengers originating in Russia or at
Tallinn. Over 75% of GoSwift vehicle bookings are made in advance of arrival at the
terminal, but the figure is about 25% for lorries which reflects that their actual wait for
crossings is still considerable. There is also extensive CCTV surveillance which can
be used, and queue space is lost if the vehicle registration plates are not kept
visible.
For passenger vehicle traffic advance passenger information details are not yet
available, other than for private car driver / person making the booking.
There are currently differences in the availability of bookings for trucks ( not cars or
vans) at Narva – Ivangorod due to capacity limitations for arrival on the Ivangorod
side.Bookings cannot currently be made for the periods 0500-0800 and 1700-2000.
There is a Russian company (Rostek) with offices at Koidula and Narva (Sillamae)
truck terminals for the purposes of receiving pre arrival documents for use by
Russian Customs. The benefits are felt to be limited, as Russian Customs still
operates a batch system at import and export. No vehicles can move until all
vehicles in the batch ( normally 10) complete import or export procedures.
At the both CBCP-s the risk management systems are based on the several internal
and external databases. Internal are:
TOTS (Customs irregularities and physical checks results)
- X-Ray reports
- PIRE, COMPLEX and other customs systems
- RIHO (national risk profiles system)
- Videorecords database (video recording system in CBCPs )
- ANTS (Automated Numberplate Recognizing System)- ANTS is very useful
system. It supports traffic and risk analysis by organizing and producing an
enormous traffic database. It remote maintenance with automated administrative
alarms, there is a possibility to search archived recognized plates with image.
ANTS sends automatically alarms and information to mobile phones and
workstations.
External databases:
• KAIRI (police information gathering database, connections between different
subjects)
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 124
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Central Commercial Register (online service based on the central database of
Estonian registration departments of the courts. This central database includes
digital data from the commercial register, the register of non-profit associations
and foundations and the commercial pledge register)
Estonian population register (personal data about citizenship, addresses,
relations)
CRMS-RIF, CIRCA
X-Tee (vehicles owners and users)
Traffic Insurance Fund (administers the information system of traffic insurance
and register of traffic insurance
Phone numbers (request from cell operators)
Internet sources (Google)
17. Are the necessary procedures carried out by the border crossings agencies
carried out simultaneously or in sequence? What changes, if any, are in
progress or intended in relation to simultaneous checking?
Border and customs checks are conducted in sequence, on after the other. However
checks can be and are conducted near simultaneously and in cargo traffic customs
officials carry out first line border checks and customs clearance procedures with a
“one stop shop principle”. All passengers can be subjected to additional II-line
checks when necessary, these checks are conducted in separate facilities away
from, but immediately nearby, I-line activities.
18. What systems are used in relation to use of pre arrival data ( rail freight and rail
freight)? What systems, if any, are used in relation to pre arrival data for
passengers (rail and motor coach)? Is such data shared with other agencies?
How is the data accessed?
See 16. Customs get every day pre- information about Tallinn-Moscow passenger
train staff. It is a list of the staff´s data, which can be used in risk analysis.
19. What procedures apply to the access to, and use of, data from private sector
transport operators at or in the immediate vicinity of the crossing points?.
According to national legislation the Estonian Customs Service
passenger details from operators on external traffic ( air, ferry,
operators, including on passengers). Currently, Border Guards can
from air and ferry passengers. Negotiations are at an early stage to
bus and train information for API purposes.
may demand
bus and rail
obtain details
extend this to
Data is also used from the GoSwift system, which is now compulsory for all vehicle
traffic. There are checks by national HQ and external auditors to ensure that data
protection legislation is complied with.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 125
See 16.for rail traffic,
system.
although this early warning of suspects is not a full API
20. What changes are planned for the next few years in relation to the procedures
referred to in Q. 13-19?
Border Control processes are being evaluated critically in order to prepare for the
increase of traffic and ensuring the high quality of checks. Tactical level changes
may be implemented in the new future. Particular priorities are the effective
implementation of within the required time passenger checks at Narva rail BCP (new
route from St. Petersburg), possible passenger rail traffic at Koidula, hopefully rail X
ray at Narva, and successful testing from April 2012 of on train passport checking
equipment.
Particular challenges are seen as being big increases in all kinds of movements due
to any visa agreement with Russia, and special events such as the 2018 World Cup.
Technical capabilities related to the conduct of border checks and the systems used
are constantly being reviewed and developed, e.g. the procedural and technical
requirement set by the VIS Regulation (i.e. finger print checks) will be implemented
by 2014.
21. What key requirements would be needed to ensure that procedural changes
would be most effective? Are these being planned, or considered?
See also Technical Capabilities section immediately below. Computer capacity
demands for effective required operation of Schengen Information System checks
(e.g. fingerprint checks) and the sending of data on suspect persons are very high.
The checks are sometimes slow, leading to significant processing delays. Downtime
due to technical problems outside Estonia can be considerable. These are major
concerns.
Technical Capabilities
22. What are the most significant systems you have for recording movements of
vehicles? Are they linked to recording the movements and clearance of freight?
GoSwift.
Yes, they are linked to pre entries for Customs purposes (Risk
Management and NCTS)- and especially ANTS and PIRE for trucks.
23. What systems do you have for the processing of people? Do you have
automatic scanners for the checking of passports? Where such systems have
been introduced, what impact have they had on the processing times.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 126
Border check equipment consists of work stations, BGIII document scanners and a
number of fingerprint scanners. There are no automated passport scanners at land
BCPs (i.e. passport checking without the presence of a Border Guard). However, all
BCPs have scanners for recording and checking personal details and validity of
documents. Entry processing times are normally only seconds, unless
supplementary checks are required such as finger print verification.
24. Are extra staff deployed at periods of peak activity for movements of people?
Yes. The number of personnel in each shift is planned according to traffic estimates
and other operational requirements, including in cooperation with Russian
counterparts.. Customs deploys additional staff from mobile teams.
25. What equipment do you have for dealing with EU customs entry systems such
as the New Computerised Transit System and the mandatory pre arrival / pre
departure electronic declaration systems ( EU States Border Crossing Points
only).?
These are fully installed and manned at all BCPs., and used in close cooperation
with GoSwift and Customs own Risk Management Systems and intelligence
databases. .
26. What impacts have such systems had on clearance times and on the detection
of serious violations of Customs and Tax regulations?
Since there still are paper document in use, for example TIR Carnet, handling time
has doubled for these paper declarations after getting these computerized systems
However, most of documentation work is done in advance, not in the CBCP. That
gives a chance to make quicker risk analysis of the declaration before the vehicle
will come to the CBCP. This pre arrival system therefore makes the border crossing
faster due to the ability to prioritise movements according to risk.
.
27. Are the findings from use of such systems shared with Russia and Belarus? If
so, what impacts have such sharing had on clearance times and detections of
serious violations in Russia and Belarus?
Yes. There are regular meetings by both BG and CU with their Russian
counterparts. Persons in charge of cooperation from agencies on both sides (“Border
Delegates”) have each other’s phone contacts, as do their deputies. However, most
exchanges are on operational matters rather than strategic ones such as goods
prioritisations. This change of information has not had any significant impact on
clearance times generally. In certain case may have happened so. Lorries are
sometimes sent back due to technical infringements.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 127
A crucial point is that Russia’s Customs priorities differ from those of EU states, with
valuation of goods for import duties and VAT purposes being of particular Russian
concern.
28. What equipment is available for scanning of cargo containers? Are these
available for rail containers as well as for road containers? What impacts have
they had on examination times and resulting clearance times? What impact have
they had on the detection of violations?.
Full radiological and X ray scanners are available at all vehicle crossing points,
together with mobile scanners. An exception is Narva rail BCP where there is
currently no X ray scanner.
The scanners are effective in making detections, especially of deep consignments,
typically of cigarettes, and therefore do improve clearance times for second tier
(deep search) examinations. Given the nature and scale of private car smuggling,
some checks are done by x ray but others by physical examination.
The nature of most inwards rail cargo traffic (raw materials, especially oil) is such
that smuggling risks within cargos are low. However, the scanners do provide
reassurance as unexpected items can be detected and eliminated as being risks.
Rail crews are subject to selective in depth checks in relation to cigarette and alcohol
smuggling.
The mobile X ray units are useful for increasing the speed of checking of freight.
They are reliable in all but the most severe cold weather conditions.
29. Is extra equipment such as mobile scanners made available at peak times? If so,
what impact do they have on clearance times?
Yes. They do have positive impacts on clearance times but most examinations are in
any case done outside the normal flow of traffic as the checks are based upon risk
analysis.
30. What equipment, if any, is affected by severe weather? Are there any plans to
deal with such challenges?
Use of technical devices outdoors is limited due to weather conditions (rain, snow,
frost). This is partly limited by regular maintenance in excess of manufacturers’
recommendations.
National Cooperation and Cross Border Cooperation
31. Is there an overall coordinating Agency for operations of official agencies at the
crossing points (e.g. equivalent of the Border Authority in Russia)? What
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 128
responsibilities does any such agency have, especially in relation to cooperation
with the other official agencies at the crossings?
The responsibilities of different agencies are clearly outlined in national legislation
and cooperation contracts. No agency is solely responsible for overall coordination.
All functions are carried out in very close cooperation. The operators of the private
and passenger terminals and the freight terminals are required to meet strict
regulatory conditions (e.g. establishing sufficient numbers of surveillance cameras
24/7 and providing data access to Border Management agencies) that in effect their
facilities are agreed in advance with the needs of BG and Customs.
32. How the official agencies cooperate in relation to the receipt, processing and
evaluation of pre arrival data?
There is the very closest cooperation with all Border Guards and Customs at the
same locations working together. Intelligence Officers / Risk Analysis staff have
particularly close links. In addition to separate BG and Customs radio networks,
there is a joint network.
33. How do the official agencies cooperate in relation to carrying out simultaneous
or sequential processing of vehicles, passengers, freight and rail freight and
passengers?
See previous answers, especially 15. Checks are sequential, but where risk
management information is available to one agency and is relevant to the other (e.g.
from GoSwift, NCTS) the checking is in effect nearly simultaneous. This is mainly
for freight or vehicles identified with owners / users.
34. Do the official agencies share common coordinating centres at crossing points?
If not, are they linked with regional or national multi-agency coordinating
centres?
Not formally. However, the relationships are so close that they act as common
coordinating centres and as regional centres, liaising closely with their similarly close
linked agency HQs in Tallinn. .
35. Do the official agencies have direct access on site to each other’s databases ? If
not, do they have easy indirect access ( e.g. by contacts with representatives of
the other agencies located at the same crossing, especially if located in the
same room as part of a multi-agency coordinating team)?
No, but much of the data is common to both services (e.g. from GoSwift).
Intelligence Database and Risk Management Systems data is freely shared subject
to data protection legislation. Limitations may apply due to the respective duties of
individual staff. Customs can sometimes use the Border Guard database PKIS, but
it is based on the personal connections with border guard officers.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 129
36. Is relevant automated or non-automated data from one agency entered onto the
databases or other records of the other agencies?
All databases are used flexibly and the input of information is determined by the
function of the database itself, not the agency. So much relevant data is found on
several databases across the Agencies.
37. Are there formal or informal multi-agency teams involved in processing of
passengers and examination of goods or vehicles? If so, are they available 24/7,
or at peak times of day, or at peak periods of the year?
See Q.15 and 33. Such teams are created according to need. As mentioned, where
Customs personnel are not present, Border Guards can carry out their duties (e.g.
green / blue border on the Narva river for illegal entrants and cigarette smugglers
using rafts or wet suits). Both Services have the same shift patterns, which
encourages team building.
38. Are there any joint crossing points operated with staff from the official agencies
of the neighbouring state or states? If so, where are they and which agencies
are present? How effective have they been in improving traffic flows? How
effective have they been in detecting serious violations of immigration and
customs laws, or in detecting other criminal or administrative violations?
No. Cooperation is achieved through formal and informal meetings ( formal ones
being required at regular intervals by regulation) and by dedicated hotline phones at
both rail and road BCPs. Regional Heads also have formal Border Delegate
responsibilities as part of their duties.
39. What information is exchanged between the agencies on one side of the
crossing or another?
Information is exchanged on the following topics
- ad hoc joint investigations to deal with cases at hand
- traffic situation and flow
- Priority traffic (e.g. fixed schedule buses, perishable goods)
- information of persons refused entry and about to be sent back
40. How such information is exchanged, e.g. agency to agency or via central
coordinators, face to face exchanges, landline to landline, mobile to mobile, or
by email or electronic special alert systems?
See 38. These links include email but not special alert systems. There are grounds
for improvement.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 130
41. What procedures are in place for management level cooperation between the
agencies on both sides in relation to pre notification of procedural changes or of
special circumstances which may impact on operations?
Cooperation with the Russian Border Authorities is conducted in the Border Delegate
framework. On the tactical level information may be shared by the BCP’s command
or acting shift leaders. Similar systems are operated by Customs.
42. Are any changes planned to the ways of exchanging operational information
between crossing points on both sides of the border? If so, when?
Not formally, but the need for changes are recognised, especially in order to deal
more effectively with current and future challenges, such as:
1. (Narva) the plans for a new bridge crossing north of the city centre
2. The need for more systematic exchanges of Customs information based on each
country’s needs
3. Effectiveness of new on train passport scanners in Estonia from April 2012
4. Possible rapid increases in passenger movements after any relaxation of the EU
visa requirements for Russian citizens
43. Are there any changes planned to the national organisational and information
structures of the official agencies at the border crossings (e.g. common access
to information databases)?
See various replies, especially regarding 21. ( lack of spare computer capacity
ahead of anticipated increases in data transfers within acceptable time limits and
with acceptable reliability). There are no significant organisational agencies planned
as all staff are familiar with current structures.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 131
Mini Questionnaire
Infrastructure /
Logistics
Room to expand
Yes
No
Planned (when?) Other Comments
X
X
Rail sidings
X
Lorry Parks away
from traffic lanes
X
Numbered
queuing system
in parks
BCP manned
24/7
Traffic lanes
capable of use in
both directions
Weather proof
inspection areas
X
Yes (Koidula) although overnight
accommodation is nearby, not on site. No in
Narva city, though new vehicle bridge is
proposed which would have space. GoSwift
system limits queuing on site so terminal
capacity is adequate (Koidula and Sillamae).
Sidings capacity is adequate at Narva, and
especially at new Koidula terminal.
At both Sillamae and Koidula. This limits but
does not eliminate queues out at Narva. No
such systems at Ivangorod but with limited
system at Pechory.
Separate park in Narva for cars / buses vans.
For trucks, outside at Sillamae.
X
X
X
Traffic management system partially reduces
need for this. Physical limitations at Narva
also apply.
Passengers are directed indoors for checks.
Facilities are limited at Narva though some
extra space is scheduled for 2014 under joint
EC Russia programme which includes
Ivangorod.
Organisational
Systems /
Procedures
Are there Joint
Agency offices
on site
(Coordination
Centre)
Are Automated
Risk
Management
Systems used?
Yes
No
Planned (when?) Other Comments
X
However, inter agency cooperation within
Estonian BCPs is exceptionally close.
X
X
Are such systems X
integrated with
These make extensive use of pre arrival
information from GoSwift, compulsory for all
vehicles since 01.08.2011. Key Customs
systems making such use are ANTS,PIRE,
COMPLEX, NCTS.
All Estonian agencies make use of them.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 132
other agencies’
systems?
Are checks done
simultaneously
for all agencies?
X
Do Freight
X
Forwarders
Associations or
major transport
operators have
representatives at
BCPs?
Do Customs
X
staffs have
access to New
Computerised
Transit System
data and
Customs Union
wide data
systems?
Does rail
management
staff have access
to the same data
as road
management
staff?
Technical
Capabilities
Are closed circuit
TV cameras in
operation at
BCPs?
Are Passport
scanners
available?
Are Passport
scanners used
Do staff have
direct access to
Vehicle
registrations
data?
Yes
X
X
Lane-checks can be conducted
simultaneously. While most others are
sequential, there are carried out immediately
afterwards.
NCTS
X
Yes, for freight. No for passengers, though
Estonian Railways in Estonia and Russia does
supply information about persons of interest,
on request and proactively.
No
Planned (when?) Other Comments
On a large scale, and at GoSwift terminals.
X
X
X
Automatic barriers prevent movement if
vehicle plates are dirty and do not allow ANPR
recording.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 133
(Automated
Vehicle
Registration
scanning)?
Do staff have
direct access to
Customs e –
declarations?
Are freight
(container)
scanners
available (road /
rail, mobile)?
Are there major
systems
upgrades or
introductions in
progress or
planned within
next five years?
Cross Border
Cooperation
Are any BCP
Coordination
Centres jointly
manned by both
countries?
Are any non BCP
based
Coordination
Centres jointly
managed by both
countries?
Are Customs
declarations
shared
automatically with
neighbour BCPs?
If so, is this done
simultaneously
(real time or near
real time)?
Is vehicle, driver
X
Those who do customs clearance work.
X
Road, mobile and rail ( Koidula only for rail,
not yet at Narva).
X
Automatic on train passport scanners to be
tested from April / May 2012.
Yes
No
Planned (when?) Other Comments
X
Coordination is done on the spot by
appropriate BG and CU would have a need,
closely supervised by each service’s Border
Delegate for the Region / location. All
Regional Heads have specific formal
responsibilities, including for carrying out
mandatory liaison meetings.
No. see immediately above.
X
X
No. This is an area requiring careful further
development.
X
Not applicable.
X
There are dedicated hot line telephones
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 134
or passenger
information
shared
automatically or
by immediate
telephoning?
Are lists of
suspects or
persons of
interest shared
on a regular and
timely basis?
Are persons
specifically
designated for
information
exchanges
available 24/7?
readily available,, as well as the special
responsibilities of the Border Delegates.
X
X
This is done as required.
Yes. The Border Delegates and their Deputies
have specific responsibility.
Poland – Belarus Border – Koroszczyn and Terespol – Brest 24th to 26th April 2012
Infrastructure and logistics
1. What are the current capabilities for processing freight vehicles (and their
crews), commercial road passenger vehicles and private passenger vehicles? Do
you have multiple manned clearance and passage points (e.g. Border Guard
desks)?
Koroszczyn ( Kukuryki) handles freight traffic. is designed to clear up to 2,000 vehicles
during one twelve-hour shift - in both directions., Current optimal capacity is 500 trucks
each way per 12 hour shift. Number of 500 vehicles has been agreed as the optimal to
be cleared during one shift and included as reference in the concluded System of Early
Warning on crisis situations at the border BCPs on the common border. If that number is
not cleared and there are still more vehicles waiting for clearance, the system is
launched – Customs of the neighbouring country is notified about it and requested to
undertake necessary steps to improve the situation. But the number of 500 does not
reflect the real, designed capacity of the BCP.
Capacity of the BCP in Kukuryki depends on the smooth admittance of the vehicles by
the Belarusian side (export direction). At the moment Polish Customs is able to clear
700 vehicles during one the twelve-hour service.
Terespol BCP a few kilometres south handles private vehicles, small vans and coaches.
There are multiple lanes at both road crossings, with special lanes inwards and
outwards for priority traffic ( diplomatic and perishable goods). Terespol has lanes which
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 135
can be used in both directions, and also direction signals diverting traffic outwards into
the most suitable lane. However, delays are often caused because drivers frequently
ignore these instructions.
2. What are your current
capabilities for processing freight trains? And for
passenger trains? Do you have sidings on the line or lines?
The Terespol rail BCP processes both cargo and passengers, as does the equivalent
Belarus rail terminal. Both are equipped for changing carriages from narrow gauge (
Poland and other EU) to wide gauge ( Belarus and other CIS states), but carriages are
not changed at the BCP in Terespol, and the goods are transhipped to the respective
coaches in Miedzyrzec and adjacent loading terminals. There are extensive sidings and
a separate freight clearance terminal about 15 km beyond the border at Miedzyrzec.
3. Are your facilities manned at the same levels at all times (24/7)? If not, how do
they differ, and at what times?
Both road crossing points and the Rail BCP have high traffic levels. Border
Management Agencies staffing levels reflect this. At peak times extra staff can be
brought in from Regional HQs ( e.g. Biala Podlaska for Customs). Special measures will
apply during the Euro 2012 Championships in June as passenger movements by road
and rail are expected to be high in both directions on both Belarusian / Russian and
Ukrainian routes. These measures will be used as tests for future high volume period
operations.
,
4. Are your facilities affected by particular weather conditions? If so, by which
conditions and how? Have there been any changes in the last 10 years to deal
with these situations, and to what extent have they been effective? Are any
further changes planned?
Facilities inside the Koroszczyn (Kukuryki) terminal are extensive for recreation, though
they do not have overnight sleeping accommodation. The facilities were built in the late
1990s and still have much life in them. They are not affected by weather conditions
though queue delays extending to the approach roads mean that drivers cannot use the
terminal facilities next to the truck park.
Clearance of passengers takes place on trains or at the control hall in the building of the
railway BCP so the weather conditions have no substantial effect on carrying out of
checks Rail BCP facilities mean that passengers are not affected by weather as they
are either on the train or inside the heated terminal.
5. What changes have occurred in the last five years to the volumes of traffic (road
freight, commercial road passenger traffic, private passenger traffic, and rail
freight and rail passenger)?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 136
Following downturns at height of the economic crisis, there have been significant
increases with Koroszczyn showing 18% increases in movements in 20111 over 2010,
with import movements up 24% and export movements up 15%. However, especially
since the start of the Russian / Belarusian and Kazakh Customs Union in 2010, the
total number of export movements is significantly higher than the number of imports.
Koroszczyn lies directly on the main transport corridor Moscow – Minsk – Warsaw –
Berlin- Rotterdam / Brussels / Paris. See also 10. below.
The following table shows the figures for recent years, and that numbers of exporting
vehicles are significantly higher than numbers of importing vehicles, a significant
proportion of the latter being empty.
2009
Import
Export
Number of vehicles crossing the Number of vehicles crossing the
border
border
114776
209295
2010
Import
Export
Number of
Increase as
Number of
Increase as
vehicles crossing
compared to
vehicles crossing
compared to
the border
previous year
the border
previous year
136994
19%
261265
27%
2011
Import
Export
Number of
Increase as
Number of
Increase as
vehicles crossing
compared to
vehicles crossing
compared to
the border
previous year
the border
previous year
166925
22%
295423
13%
Significant increases have been seen on crossings in the region with Ukraine.
6. What impacts have the changes at 5. had to staffing levels of border guards,
customs, police and other regulatory agencies?
Staffing levels are adequate though extra numbers are always welcome. Both Customs
and Border Guards, and the equally 24/7 deployed veterinary and phytosanitary staff
can be supported by staff deployed by their regional commands from other duties (e.g.
from regional Customs Offices – HQs – such as at Biala Podlaska).
7. What changes have occurred in relation to the provision of essential privately
provided services ( e.g. duty free shops and insurance agencies) ? Have these
had positive or negative impacts on traffic flows?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 137
These are well accommodated at the relevant terminals, especially at Koroszczyn. Tax
free shopping does involve the deployment of significant staff to stamp VAT refund
claims for shoppers from the CU leaving the EU, as does the need to check for
smuggling of cigarettes from Belarus. This is a major impact on flows inwards at
Terespol road as despite extensive use of risk analysis much traffic is classified as high
risk and is directed accordingly by traffic signals.
8. What changes are in progress or are planned regarding the transport routes to or
from your crossing point (s), such as upgrades of rail lines to double track, or
increasing the number of highway lanes? What qualitative and quantitative
impacts do you expect these to have?
There has been extensive EU funding of roads on the main corridor from Koroszczyn.
However, due to the sheer length of queues, traffic often tails back for 15 km onto the
approach roads and on to the main corridor roads. Traffic demands therefore exceed
the Koroszczyn capacity of 500 trucks per 12 hour shift.
See 1. above for further comments on actual and theoretical capacity, and for the
detailed procedures used for communicating between Polish and Belarus agencies
regarding regulating such traffic flows at Koroszczyn.
9. What changes are in progress regarding increases to the physical capacity of
your crossing point (s)? What impact do you expect these to have?
There are no immediate plans for upgrading capacity. While significant space exists in
the area for introduction of more traffic parks for trucks alongside a queue Management
System, there are limitations due to the wetland nature of much of the land around the
Bug river, and also the need to protect wildlife there. Expansion would also need to be
coordinated with Belarus which faces similar challenges.
See 1. above re the systems currently in use regarding regulating the flows, especially
regarding traffic waiting to cross from Koroszczyn into Belarus.
10. What changes have occurred to the volumes and types of traffic in recent years
which have been expected? What changes have occurred which have been
unexpected?
See also 5. above. The unusually high levels of increases in movements of trucks
between Poland and Belarus is probably due to the introduction of the Belarus / Russian
/ Kazakhstan Customs Union as well as Poland’s strong economy. Traffic increases at
Koroszczyn have been greater than the still significant increases at crossings to
Ukraine. These increases continue, despite the limitation of 600 litres of road fuel
imposed on trucks into Poland, which has led to some drivers filling up with cheaper fuel
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 138
in Belarus and returning to Poland via Lithuanian crossings. Traffic would otherwise
have been expected to be even higher.
Terespol rail BCP, which also serves as a departure and arrival point for long distance
h passengers ( e.g. Prague and Paris), has seen a significant increase in genuine and
bogus asylum seekers. Border Guards have a team permanently available at the rail
terminal, which has suitable interviewing and holding facilities.
11. Do you have the facilities to change the movement flows directions in order to
meet changes in direction of high volume traffic?
See 1. above. Yes, at Terespol where 5 lanes used in the central part of the BCP on
immediate approaches to the passport controls are reserved for official vehicles.
However, they can be and are used frequently as extra checking lanes in both
directions.
Ability to switch directions at Koroszczyn is limited as the actual crossing by bridge over
the Bug is several km away from the terminal and access is by a secure Customs road
which has high fencing along its whole length.
12. Did the introduction of the Russian and Belarus Customs Union (2010/11) lead
to changes in volumes and nature of traffic, and what impacts, if any, did these
changes have?
See 5. and 10. above. Belarus now has to deal with clearances of goods for both
Russia and Kazakhstan. This has increased their workloads significantly.
Organisational Systems and Procedures
13. Which government agencies are based at crossing points? Do such
arrangements apply at all crossing points, or only some?
All major crossing points have full representation. Customs, Border Guards,
Phytosanitary and veterinary services are all based 24/7 at Koroszczyn and Customs
and Border Guards at Terespol rail BCP. There is also an extensive support from the
police which supports traffic safety at the approach roads, where queues in excess of
15 km can occur.
Border stations only of the veterinary and phytosanitary branches are located only in
Koroszczyn. In disputable cases of controlling animals accompanying passengers
Customs Branches in Terespol (road and rail ones) contact the County veterinarian.
Similar arrangements apply at other BCPs outside the Terespol region.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 139
14. If the presence of agencies differs between crossing points, what criteria are
used in deciding which agencies should be placed at which crossing points? Are
such decisions taken in cooperation with neighbouring states?
The decisions are reached according to past, current and expected demand.
Neighbouring states are informed through specific liaison officers or other Polish
Embassy staff in the relevant state ( e.g. Border Guard Liaison Officers in Belarus,
Russia and Ukraine).
15. How do the agencies present at the crossing points cooperate with each other
and with representatives of transport operators? Are they located in common
premises or in different locations at the same site? Are there any common
coordination centres, and if so at which sites? Are there plans for such centres,
and if so where?
The Agencies have their own premises, very closely located together in the terminals at
Koroszczyn and Terespol rail. Border Guards have their own building on the Terespol
road site. There are no formal coordination centres, but unit heads are responsible for
coordination and regular meetings take place on matters of specific and common
interests, with staff alerting counterparts to urgent operational issues as and when they
arise.
16. Do the agencies use risk management systems (whether automated or nonautomated) in selecting persons, vehicles or cargo for detailed examinations? If
so, is this done using pre arrival information and to what extent is it done? What
types of systems and procedures are used? Are there any differences in
availability of such systems depending on the nature of the border crossings?
Yes, extensively. The nature of the large cross border “shopping” traffic between Poland
and Belarus and Ukraine means that Automatic Number Plate Recognition systems are
used extensively. Non automated passenger profiling is also crucial and this involves
close Border Guard – Customs liaison, especially regarding cigarette smuggling in
private cars and small vans.
The joint recognition by Belarus and Poland (EU) of the accuracy of TIR carnet data
and partial exchanges of data between the EU pre arrival e declarations system and its
imminent Customs Union equivalent would be a vital
17. Are the necessary procedures carried out by the border crossings agencies
carried out simultaneously or in sequence? What changes, if any, are in progress
or intended in relation to simultaneous checking?
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 140
In sequence, but in cooperation with each other. Increased use of each other’s
databases and the entry of common information onto these is occurring.
18. What systems are used in relation to use of pre arrival data (road freight and rail
freight)? What systems, if any, are used in relation to pre arrival data for
passengers (rail and motor coach)? Is such data shared with other agencies?
How is the data accessed?
Freight: NCTS for EU transit arrivals, EDI for importers and TIR carnet for exports as
well.
There is currently very little API data for passenger traffic. However, special exercises
are planned for the June 2012 European football championships, especially for motor
coaches from Russia and Ukraine. The results will act as test beds for possible wider
use.
There is no direct data sharing / access where staff can access other agencies’
databases. However, this is done indirectly by close personal consultation with
members of other agencies.
19. What procedures apply to the access to, and use of, data from private sector
transport operators at or in the immediate vicinity of the crossing points?
There are many customs brokers and freight forwarders ( or their associations) based at
the Koroszczyn terminal, including on 24/7 bases. Passenger travel operators are also
based at the rail BCP (including long distance coach operators)., Their presence
enables close liaison.
20. What changes are planned for the next few years in relation to the procedures
referred to in Q. 13-19?
Greater coordination of use of pre arrival information (freight). Possible extension of API
enabling block presentation of passports inwards to EU, and faster processing of
passengers on long distance through trains. Currently these checks are carried out on
board, but the train is stopped for about one hour, even when the gauge changeover
has occurred.
21. What key requirements would be needed to ensure that procedural changes
would be most effective? Are these being planned, or considered?
See 20. re API.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 141
The biggest step forward on speeding up movements of freight trucks would be mutual
pre arrival clearance and recording and mutual recognition of Customs seals, thereby
greatly reducing the number of physical checks, which are currently very high inwards
into Belarus. There would also need to be mutual recognition of degrees of tolerances
of technical errors such as discrepancies between the TIR carnet details and electronic
declarations, where these mistakes are not material.
Advance sharing of systematic pre arrival information would also be a big step forward,
including in recognising validity of export from the EU or from the CU.
These are obviously major steps, which would involve much discussion and
consideration. The Russian Government’s recently (April 2012) announcement of
reductions in the number of customs procedures would, if also implemented by Belarus
as they would logically be, lead to significant reductions in BCP processing time both
inwards and outwards, with beneficial impacts on Polish BCPs.
The use of a batch system by Belarus for movements of vehicles causes delays. No
movements are made from each procedure until all vehicles in the batch have been
processed. This causes significant delays and resulting tail backs into Poland.
See also 26.
Technical Capabilities
22. What are the most significant systems you have for recording movements of
vehicles? Are they linked to recording the movements and clearance of freight?
ANPR for all vehicles. They are not directly linked, but are indirectly. The ANPR data is
used as a key risk management tool, and for monitoring vehicle progress which is
essential for ensuring the effectiveness of cross border queue management telephone
calls. .
23. What systems do you have for the processing of people? Do you have
automatic scanners for the checking of passports? Where such systems have
been introduced, what impact have they had on the processing times?
Scanners are available and used. Mobile passport scanners are widely available at
freight, and road and rail passenger terminals. Reliability of passport scanners in very
cold weather is not as big as problem as in other countries as checks are done on board
trains or in heated terminals. They have reduced waiting times.
Mandatory identity checks required on the validity of passports and the genuineness of
EU visas and their link with the person carrying the passport can be very time
consuming, and the equipment is not always reliable, nor are the databases always
available. This can on occasion cause severe delays.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 142
24. Are extra staff deployed at periods of peak activity for movements of people?
Yes. See 6. above.
25. What equipment do you have for dealing with EU customs entry systems such
as the New Computerised Transit System and the mandatory pre arrival / pre
departure electronic declaration systems ( EU States Border Crossing Points
only)?
See 21. above.
26. What impacts have such systems had on clearance times and on the detection
of serious violations of Customs and Tax regulations?
These have improved clearance times inwards and the access to pre arrival information
before TIR carnet inspection has led to more focused and effective risk management.
However, much smuggling has been and is carried out in small vans and passenger
vehicles, which are not subject to delivery of pre arrival information. Traditional profiling
based procedures are used here. Given the scale of the smuggling problem, queues
cannot be avoided.
27. Are the findings from use of such systems shared with Russia and Belarus? If
so, what impacts have such sharing had on clearance times and detections of
serious violations in Russia and Belarus?
Discussions have taken place and continue to do so. However, as the risk profiling and
nature of traffic are very asymmetric, much work still needs to be done here. Export
movements to the CIS are much greater and import movements, and values are
significantly higher. Many trucks returning from the CU are empty.
28. What equipment is available for scanning of cargo containers? Are these
available for rail containers as well as for road containers? What impacts have
they had on examination times and resulting clearance times? What impact have
they had on the detection of violations?.
X ray scanners are available and widely used with considerable effect. They have
significantly increased detections and deterred smuggling. Delays into Belarus are
partly caused by the very extensive use of x rays there.
Polish Customs has an X ray use training centre in Gdynia and Belarus Customs, which
currently lacks rail BCP scanners and recognises that X ray use is a skill requiring
careful training, would be interested in cooperating with this centre.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 143
Rail freight is x rayed at the inland clearance terminal but there is no x ray yet at
Terespol for rail transit traffic - this is expected in 2013.
Rail passenger traffic is subject to x ray examination for regional trains which run
between Terespol and Brest.
29. Is extra equipment such as mobile scanners made available at peak times? If so,
what impact do they have on clearance times?
Yes, with some beneficial effects. Demand is however high across the whole border
region.
30. What equipment, if any, is affected by severe weather? Are there any plans to
deal with such challenges?
The extensive use of equipment inside terminals limits the impact. But mobile passport
scanners and to some extent mobile x ray scanners can become unreliable in cold
weather.
National Cooperation and Cross Border Cooperation
31. Is there an overall coordinating Agency for operations of official agencies at the
crossing points ( e.g. equivalent of the Border Authority in Russia)? What
responsibilities does any such agency have, especially in relation to cooperation
with the other official agencies at the crossings?
No, but there is close cooperation with the Transport Ministry which leads on the
physical infrastructures. There is close cooperation between agencies at the BCPs and
the Heads of each Service, and their Deputies, have specific responsibilities for
ensuring proactive cooperation.
32. How the official agencies cooperate in relation to the receipt, processing and
evaluation of pre arrival data?
This is done on an as needed basis, as currently pre arrival data held is a Customs
matter as there is no API data. The Euro 2012 tests of API for passengers will be used
to draw up future operating procedures for cooperation.
33. How do the official agencies cooperate in relation to carrying out simultaneous or
sequential processing of vehicles, passengers, freight and rail freight and
passengers?
These are largely sequential, but with profiling and selection of passengers and
suspect passenger vehicles being done in close cooperation. Road and rail freight is
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 144
largely a Customs only responsibility, but suspect drivers and operators are alerted to
border guards.
See also 15.
34. Do the official agencies share common coordinating centres at crossing points? If
not, are they linked with regional or national multi-agency coordinating centres?
See 15. Regional centres do also share operations and plans, such as regarding
deployment of staff at periods of high activity.
35. Do the official agencies have direct access on site to each other’s databases ? If
not, do they have easy indirect access ( e.g. by contacts with representatives of
the other agencies located at the same crossing, especially if located in the same
room as part of a multi-agency coordinating team)?
No, but see 18. for description of how this is done indirectly.
36. Is relevant automated or non-automated data from one agency entered onto the
databases or other records of the other agencies?
Yes, following contact by the originating agency and evaluation of its relevance by the
receiving agency. Vehicle registration and usership data obtained from ANPR CCTV
systems is an example of data held by several services.
37. Are there formal or informal multi-agency teams involved in processing of
passengers and examination of goods or vehicles? If so, are they available 24/7,
or at peak times of day, or at peak periods of the year?
Yes. See 3. above. The number of staff available in normal conditions ( i.e. staff already
on site) means they are available 24/7. Border Guards has enabled this availability as it
does not now do continuous green border checks in the Terespol region as Belarus
maintains patrols and the nature of the area around the river Bug discourages illegal
crossing.
38. Are there any joint crossing points operated with staff from the official agencies of
the neighbouring state or states? If so, where are they and which agencies are
present? How effective have they been in improving traffic flows? How effective
have they been in detecting serious violations of immigration and customs laws,
or in detecting other criminal or administrative violations?
No. However, the truck BCP terminal at Koroszczyn was designed for such use,
including by private sector operators such as brokers and freight forwarders, so such
structures could be set up quite quickly.
.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 145
39. What information is exchanged between the agencies on one side of the crossing
or another?
Data is exchanged on an as needed basis on operational matters. A key duty of BCP
heads and their deputies is to maintain real time contact by phone with their Belarus
counterparts regarding the level of queues building up on the Polish side, especially as
the BCP’s lorry park fills up.
40. How such information is exchanged, e.g. agency to agency or via central
coordinators, face to face exchanges, landline to landline, mobile to mobile, or by
email or electronic special alert systems?
This is done on an as needed basis. Operational staff do contact their counterparts to
discuss areas of common interest in operational cases.
41. What procedures are in place for management level cooperation between the
agencies on both sides in relation to pre notification of procedural changes or of
special circumstances which may impact on operations?
See 39. Especially. Agencies on both sides treat the need to minimise delays in the
immediate BCP area and on the crossings in between to a minimum.
42. Are any changes planned to the ways of exchanging operational information
between crossing points on both sides of the border? If so, when?
Consideration is being given to sharing the impressions of how EDI (goods) and API
(persons) procedures are working.
43. Are there any changes planned to the national organisational and information
structures of the official agencies at the border crossings (e.g. common access to
information databases)?
There are active plans whereby Polish agencies will have access to relevant parts of
each other’s databases through their own databases. In effect, such data would be
common, and commonly available.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 146
Mini Questionnaire
Infrastructure /
Logistics
Room to expand
Yes
Rail sidings
X
No
X
Lorry Parks away
from traffic lanes
X
Numbered
queuing system
in parks
BCP manned
24/7
X
X
Traffic lanes
capable of use in
both directions
Weather proof
inspection areas
X
Organisational
Systems /
Procedures
Are there Joint
Agency offices
on site
(Coordination
Centre)
Are Automated
Risk
Management
Systems used?
Yes
Are such systems X
integrated with
other agencies’
systems?
Truck and passenger vehicles BCPs: yes,
with several potential sites for vehicle parks.
Situation complicated by wetlands nature of
surrounding area and restrictions due to
wildlife protection. Rail: Yes for freight using
nearby clearance terminals. Current
passenger facilities are adequate.
Sidings can be used by carriages of either
gauge.
Existing parks are next to lanes, but note
comments above regarding suitable nearby
sites.
All crossing points have considerable
numbers of Customs and Border Guards
staff.
Yes at passenger vehicle BCP Terespol. Five
such lanes.
X
X
Planned (when?) Other Comments
Areas are all well protected.
No
Planned (when?) Other Comments
X
However, agencies are very closely colocated. Truck BCP terminal building
Koroszczyn also has significant space
originally intended for use by Belarus
agencies as a joint BCP.
Automated Number Plate Recognition
Systems are used in supplying the Risk
Management Systems, as well as for selective
checking by both Customs and Border guards
based on non-automated Risk Profiling.
However each maintains and uses their own
systems too.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 147
Are checks done
simultaneously
for all agencies?
Do Freight
Forwarders
Associations or
major transport
operators have
representatives at
BCPs?
Do Customs
staffs have
access to New
Computerised
Transit System
data and
Customs Union
wide data
systems?
Do staff have
direct access to
Vehicle
registrations
data?
(Automated
Vehicle
Registration
scanning)?
Do staff have
direct access to
Customs e –
declarations?
Are freight
(container)
scanners
available (road /
rail, mobile)?
Are there major
systems
upgrades or
introductions in
progress or
planned within
next five years?
X
No, but in close proximity in location and time.
X
The truck terminal at Koroszczyn has well
equipped facilities which these organisations
use.
X
X
X
Polish staff have access to NCTS. They do
not have access to Belarus / Customs Union
systems. There is a need to enhance
cooperation both ways between the two
services.
This is a major information tool for both
Customs and Border Guards.
X
X
X
X
Yes, and at the passenger vehicle BCP at
Terespol. They are key items. A rail freight X
ray machine is due in late 2013. However, a
scanner exists at the rail clearance terminal at
Miedzyrzec.
. The Russian government has announced
plans for major simplifications of the number
of Customs Procedures in Russia with the
specific aim of reducing clearance times,
including compulsory electronic pre arrival
declaration. This ought to lead to similar
reductions by Belarus acting as the Customs
Union’s external border.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 148
Cross Border
Cooperation
Are any BCP
Coordination
Centres jointly
manned by both
countries?
Are any non BCP
based
Coordination
Centres jointly
managed by both
countries?
Are Customs
declarations
shared
automatically with
neighbour BCPs?
If so, is this done
simultaneously
(real time or near
real time)?
Is vehicle, driver
X
or passenger
information
shared
automatically or
by immediate
telephoning?
Are lists of
X
suspects or
persons of
interest shared
on a regular and
timely basis?
Are persons
X
specifically
designated for
information
exchanges
available 24/7?
X
There is specific space provided at
Koroszczyn for this capability. It was originally
designed as a joint terminal.
X
X
Not applicable.
This is done when needed on operational
risks issues. It is also done on a very regular
basis between designated counterparts in
order to keep queues to minimum levels. This
need often arises.
See above re queue management issues.
Each contact person has deputies to ensure
24 / 7 coverage.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 149
Appendix C - Publications Consulted
Preparing the Northern Dimension Partnership on Transport and Logistics, Final
Report, updated 30th June 2011
This Report establishes the managerial and organizational framework and conceptual
base for the current Project and parallel and near parallel projects. It presents detailed
data on expected growth in trade volumes within and across the Northern Dimension
area to 2030. These figures and the associated scenarios have been taken into account
throughout the current Project.
UNECE and OSCE: Handbook of Best Practices at Border Crossings: A trade and
Transport Facilitation Perspective ( 2012) – www.osce.org/eea/88200
This is a very detailed publication which covers the whole range of subjects to be
considered in relation to road and rail BCP practices in relation to the transport of
goods on a commercial scale. The Project’s own Report may be considered as review
of operational procedures supplementing the more strategical and organizational views
of the Handbook.
UNECE: Study on the Standards and Codes for Interagency Exchange of Data and
Documents for International Trade - Moscow March 2011.
This report covers in considerable detail the ways and means of cross border
exchanges of import, export and transit data for a wide range of purposes, including for
ensuring the proper collection of Customs duties and VAT.
Federal Law 311 – 03 (of 28th December 2010) on Customs Regulation in the
Russian Federation.
This law lays down that the Federal Customs Service is the lead service for the border
control responsibilities of the Medical Service and the Phytosanitary and Veterinary
Services. It also laws down in Article 18 the three main functions of the Customs
Service. These are ensuring the speed of operations and reduction of non-physical
barriers, the full and timely collection of customs duties, and fighting crime and
administrative offences. The Service publishes annual Key Performance Indicators
(KPIs) in relation to these functions.
Border crossing of goods and cargo at the land border between Estonia and
Russia (a parallel report by the Account Chamber of the Russian Federation and the
Estonian Audit Commissioners- March 2012). This Report lays out the common
interests and needs of the Russian Federation and Estonia in speeding up the
movements of goods, especially by standardisation and simplification of procedures.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 150
It is regarded by the BMAs of both countries as a key basis for future joint and separate
developments and the PT urges the closest attention to the report by all NDP TL partner
agencies. The recent ( 1st July 2012) introduction of trials of the GoSwift traffic
management booking system by Rosgranitsa and GoSwift Russia at the Russian –
Estonian border crossings highlights the intention to proceed to early implementation of
the Report’s recommendations. Estonian and Russian initiatives which are described or
proposed in the March 2012 are the source of a significant number of
recommendations made in the main body of the report, and referred to in the closing
sections of the Executive Summary. .
Estonian Ministry of Economic affairs and Communications: Need for Secure and
Safe Truck Parking Areas ( 25th October 2010).
This Presentation outlines the principles and practices behind the establishment of
secure and safe parking areas, which, together with the introduction of Queue
Management Systems, are seen as essential for enabling the crossing of borders,
especially by freight vehicles, to be made less demanding.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 151
Appendix D – International Conventions relating to Border Crossing Facilitation:
Further Review
See also Section 5. of the Main Report: International Conventions relating to Border
Crossing Facilitation
.
Review of international agreements for border crossing facilitation.
Borders serve two purposes for countries. On the one hand, they are to ensure the
territorial integrity of a country by marking where one country ends and another country
starts. On the other hand, by means of border crossings, they are to serve as points to
facilitate the movement of persons and goods, and thereby improving relationships
through people to people contacts, as well as facilitating trade. The function of
supporting the movement of passengers and goods across the border must be
executed while ensuring the said border security as well as protecting revenues from
trade taxation by ensuring that smuggling is kept under control.
The two functions of the border, security and facilitation are, though not mutually
exclusive, somehow at odds with each-other. Though a 100% secure border probably
does not exist, lots of controls can make the border as secure as possible, though at the
cost of long delays and inconvenience.
To strike the balance between security and facilitation, countries have sought to agree
on certain standards of control, most importantly by reducing the number of duplications
of checks as well as through risk management. These have been embedded into
international conventions and agreements. By its nature, the crossing of national
borders, weather it is as a private person or a professional transporting cargo, is an
affair affected by the environment on both sides of the border. To ease the process of
crossing, there are international agreements or conventions that aim to facilitate some
of the processes. To function proper, each agreement needs to be signed up to and
implemented by both countries sharing a border. Below a non-exhaustive list of
agreements that are of relevance for the Schengen zone – Russia / Belarus borders.
It should be noted that, in general the conventions are superseding domestic legislation
and are applicable for the signatory countries without further legislation and prevail
when domestic legislation would contradict any of the provisions.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 152
Agreement on the International Carriage of
Perishable Foodstuffs and on the Special
Equipment to be Used for such Carriage
(ATP)
Convention on Temporary Admission (1990)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Finland
x
x
x
Latvia
x
x
x
Lithuania
x
x
x
x
x
x
Poland
x
x
x
x
Russian
Federatio
n
x
x
x
European
Union
x
x
Customs Convention on the Temporary
Importation of Commercial Road Vehicles
x
x
Customs Convention on the Temporary
Importation of Private Road Vehicles
x
x
Customs Convention on Containers, 1972
European Convention on Customs Treatment
of Pallets used in International Transport
x
x
x
International Convention on the Simplification
and Harmonization of Customs procedures
(1973 and 2006 amendments)
Convention on Customs Treatment of Pool
Containers used in International Transport
x
Estonia
x
International Convention on the Harmonization
of Frontier Controls of goods
x
x
x
International Convention on the Harmonized
Commodity Description and Coding System
International Convention to Facilitate the
Crossing of Frontiers for Goods Carried by
Rail
Convention on international customs transit
procedures for the carriage of goods by rail
under cover of smgs consignment notes (not
in Force)
International Convention to facilitate the
crossing of frontiers for passengers and
baggage carried by rail
Country / Agreement
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Convention Concerning Customs Facilities for
Touring (Tourism)
Customs Convention on the International
Transport of Goods under Cover of TIR
Carnets
x
x
Norway
Page 153
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Belarus
Short summary of the content of the conventions.
International Convention to Facilitate the Crossing of Borders For Passengers
and Baggage by Rail. (1952)
The convention aims to promote the speediness of the crossing of border passengers
by rail through two measures that may be taken together or separately, namely;

joint controls at one designated station on the railway line between two countries,

envisaging the establishment of joint controls (or controls by one country) on a
moving train with the aim to reduce the wait at border stations.
The document provides for the broad procedures to carry out both types of border
controls as well as the order in which they must be carried out. It also establishes that,
in case of joint controls at border stations, there must be an equal number of stations
designated on each side of the border, insofar possible.
Convention on International Customs Transit procedures for the carriage of
goods by rail under cover of SMGS consignment notes (not in Force).
The SMGS consignment note is a document mostly in use by the countries that were
part of the Soviet Sphere of Influence. Relevant for this publication is that the SGMS
note is used in the Russia – Belarus – Kazakhstan customs union. Latvia, Lithuania and
Estonia became signatories as separate Republics during their incorporation in the
USSR and unless revoked, they are committed to the convention. In addition, Poland as
part of the COMECON has signed up to the convention as well, though it is not clear
what the status of the agreement is at this moment.
The convention, to date only ratified by Ukraine establishes the liability for taxes and
duties of railway companies for goods in transit under the SMGS consignment note. In
fact, when goods are in transit the railways are fully responsible for any taxes and duties
(until discharged), though unless otherwise stipulated, there is no need to furnish a
guaranty for the potential tax liability.
International Convention to Facilitate the Crossing of Frontiers for Goods carried
by rail.
The convention is very similar in structure as the earlier discussed convention on
Passenger Traffic by rail. The aim once more is to ease the process of crossing and to
reduce double checks. To this end, the convention envisages joint controls at
designated border stations along main railway lines. The number and location of
stations is to be agreed bilaterally, but in general the aim should be to have a similar
number of stations designated at each side.
If, for whatever reason it is not possible to use one station, the conventions envisages
that in each direction both outgoing and incoming controls are carried out at the same
station. This is understood to be in practice that outgoing controls are carried out on the
territory of the receiving country.
Convention on the Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System.
The Harmonised System (HR) replaces the old “customs nomenclature” that was in
place earlier and served to provide reference for the purpose of calculating customs
duties and quota use. The old system was fragmented with different countries using
their own codes and international traders were forced to reclassify the products when
crossing borders. The HS participants18 committed themselves to use the agreed codes
18
There are territories that, though not being a signatory are in practice applying the HS for their customs and
statistical operations.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 154
without modification or addition for the purpose of both customs operations as well as
statistical reporting.
The HS is in principle a 6 digit code of headers and subheaders, though the convention
allows countries to go beyond this in the level of detail by adding additional digits, but
only as long as the main 6 digit code is not affected.
Countries undertake to incorporate the use of the HS in their domestic legal framework
both for tariff and for statistical purposes.
International Convention on the Harmonisation of Frontier Controls of Goods.
The most important convention for the movement of freight is the convention on the
harmonisation of frontier controls of goods. It is also the agreement that, if implemented
in the letter and spirit has the largest possible impact on the flows of cargo through
BCP's. As there are a lot of commitments in relation to this agreement made by the
participants, some of the main provisions of the convention are discussed in detail
below. This may be either as a quotation from the original English text, or summaries of
specifically the annexes to outline what their relevance is in the process of trade
facilitation.
On the organisation of controls in general the convention text reads;
…..........“Article 5 Resources of the services To ensure that the control services operate satisfactorily,
the Contracting Parties shall see to it that, as far as possible, and within the
framework of national law, they are provided with:
(a) qualified personnel in sufficient numbers consistent with traffic requirements;
(b) equipment and facilities suitable for inspection, taking into account the mode of
transport, the goods to be checked and traffic requirements;
(c) official instructions to officers for acting in accordance with international
agreements and arrangements and with current national provisions.
Article 9 - Documents.
1. The Contracting Parties shall endeavour to further the use, between themselves
and with the competent international bodies, of documents aligned on the United
Nations Layout Key.
2. The Contracting Parties shall accept documents produced by any appropriate
technical process, provided that they comply with official regulations as to their
form, authenticity and certification, and that they are legible and understandable.
3. The Contracting Parties shall ensure that the necessary documents are
prepared and authenticated in strict compliance with the relevant legislation.
Article 10 - Goods in transit
1. The Contracting Parties shall, wherever possible, provide simple and speedy
treatment for goods in transit, especially for those travelling under cover of an
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 155
international Customs transit procedure, by limiting their inspections to cases
where these are warranted by the actual circumstances or risks. Additionally, they
shall take into account the situation of land-locked countries. They shall endeavour
to provide for extension of the hours and the competence of existing Customs
posts available for Customs clearance for goods carried under an international
Customs transit procedure.
2. They shall endeavour to facilitate to the utmost the transit of goods carried in
containers or other load units affording adequate security”.............
In addition, countries undertake to provide facilities such as sanitation and
communication to drivers at the BCP.
More specifically, the annexes provide for some more detailed information on
arrangements that shall be put into place, more precisely;
…........“ANNEX 1
Article 3 - Organization of Controls
1. When several controls have to be carried out at the same place, the competent
services shall make all appropriate arrangements to carry them out simultaneously,
if possible, or with the minimum delay. They shall endeavour to co-ordinate their
requirements as to documents and information.” ..........
In addition, further annexes related to other than Customs controls provide for;
ANNEX 2 - MEDICO-SANITARY INSPECTION, ANNEX 3 - VETERINARY
INSPECTION, ANNEX 4 - PHYTOSANITARY INSPECTION
Principles
Wherever carried out, (Medico-Sanitary, Veterinary, Phytosanitary) inspection shall
comply with the principles laid down in this Convention, and particularly in annex 1
thereto.
1. The control services shall see to it that the necessary facilities at frontier points
where medico-sanitary, Veterinary, Phytosanitary) inspection may take place are
provided.
2. (Medico-Sanitary, Veterinary, Phytosanitary) inspection may also be carried out
at places in the interior of the country, if it is clear from the certificates produced
and from the transport techniques employed, that the goods cannot deteriorate or
cause contamination / infestation during carriage.
3. Within the framework of Conventions in force the Contracting Parties shall
endeavour to reduce, as far as possible, the physical controls of perishable goods
en route. Goods in transit Within the framework of Conventions in force the
Contracting Parties shall, as far as possible, dispense with the (Medico-Sanitary,
Veterinary, Phytosanitary) inspection of goods in transit in those circumstances
where there is no risk of contamination / infestation.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 156
Co-operation
1. (medico-sanitary, Veterinary, Phytosanitary) inspection services shall cooperate with the corresponding services of other Contracting Parties so as to
expedite the passage of perishable goods subjected to
(Medico-Sanitary,
Veterinary, Phytosanitary) inspection, inter alia, through the exchange of useful
information.
2. When a consignment of perishable goods is intercepted during (MedicoSanitary, Veterinary, Phytosanitary) inspection, the competent service shall
endeavour to notify the corresponding service of the country of exportation within
as short a time as possible, indicating the reasons for the interception and the
measures taken concerning the goods.
Furthermore, in particular in relation to road border crossing procedures, the convention
parties are committed to facilitate the reduction of pressure on the border by ensuring
that most customs clearance can take place away from BCP at inland customs
terminals, both in transit but also import / export traffic.
In addition, to avoid weighing procedures that are repeated over and over again, the
countries agree to accept the “International Vehicle Weight Certificate”, conditions for
which issue are established in the convention.
With regard to the BCP's in particular, parties are by means of Annex 8, Article 6
committed to;
….........”In order to ensure that the required formalities at border crossing points
are streamlined and accelerated, the Contracting Parties shall meet, as far as
possible, the following minimum requirements for border crossing points open for
international goods traffic:
(i) facilities enabling joint controls between neighbouring States (one-stop
technology), 24 hours a day, whenever justified by trade needs and in line
with road traffic regulations;
(ii)separation of traffic for different types of traffic on both sides of the border
allowing to give preference to vehicles under the cover of valid international
Customs transit documents or carrying live animals or perishable foodstuffs;
(iii) off-lane control areas for random cargo and vehicle checks;
(iv) appropriate parking and terminal facilities; (v) proper hygiene, social and
telecommunications facilities for drivers;
(vi) encourage forwarding agents to establish adequate facilities at border
crossings with the intention that they can offer services to transport operators
on a competitive basis.
The parties also undertake to give priority to vehicles carrying perishable goods,
specifically those carried in ATP approved units.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 157
Container Convention (1972) - (for countries that signed the 1990 convention,
these are bound by the latest convention)
The convention aimed to facilitate the transport of goods by container and for that
purpose, it stipulates that containers shall be given access to a customs territory for a
period of up to three months free of duties and taxes. This period can be extended if
necessary. The convention allows that containers brought into a territory in the context
of an international journey are used for maximum one domestic journey, after which
they must be re-exported. Containers that are owned or leased to legal or natural
persons based in the territory are not subject to the provisions of the convention and
must pay taxes when importing containers that have been purchased abroad.
In addition to providing the tax regime on the container itself, it also provides for the
certification requirements and the model of the certificate (the certification plate) to be
affixed on the container for the purpose of transport of goods under customs seal.
The convention can be acceded also by customs unions on behalf of its members.
Convention on the customs treatment of pool containers. (1974)
Pool containers are used when shipping lines, forwarders and container owners agree
to make the containers they own available to each-other at different locations. This is to
alleviate the problem that it is difficult to predict where demand for a container from a
specific owner will come from. The ultimate purpose is to ensure that the containers
need not be moved empty over a long distance, while empty containers are available
nearby owned by another company in the pool.
The agreement on pool containers envisages the same customs treatment as the
container convention (discussed above) but allows members of the pool to use
containers from the pool available on the territory to be used for domestic transportation
as far as the operator has made available containers to the pool. This is to avoid having
to return an empty container from abroad to carry out domestic transport, while a field of
empty containers is available for use but owned by other pool members.
International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs
procedures (1973 and 2006 amendments)
The convention deals with customs procedures rather than with BCP procedures,
though there are some important commitments that the convention contains. In addition,
the convention contains annexes that are serving the purpose of providing guidance as
to how the commitments under the convention can be achieved. The commitment are
summarised as follows:
8. the implementation of programmes aimed at continuously modernizing Customs
procedures and practices and thus enhancing efficiency and effectiveness,
9. the application of Customs procedures and practices in a predictable, consistent
and transparent manner, the provision to interested parties of all the necessary
information regarding Customs laws, regulations, administrative guidelines,
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 158
procedures and practices,
10. the adoption of modern techniques such as risk management and audit-based
controls, and
11. the maximum practicable use of information technology, co-operation wherever
appropriate with other national authorities, other Customs administrations and the
trading communities,
12. the implementation of relevant international standards, the provision to affected
parties of easily accessible processes of administrative and judicial review,
European Convention on Customs Treatment of Pallets used in International
Transport
The pallet convention provides for the same treatment as container to pallets in a pool.
In other words, (multiple use) pallets can be temporary imported free of taxes and duties
or the need to provide guaranties, provided that a similar number and value of pallets is
re-exported from the country. In case of a pallet pool, the ownership of the pallets is of
no relevance.
Customs Convention on the Temporary Importation of Private Road Vehicles
(1954)
The convention reflects the time when it was draw up 1954, when motor vehicles were
relatively far more expensive and rare than they are today and cross border travel was
less common than it is today. To facilitate travel the convention envisages the duty free
temporary importation of road vehicles into a territory by persons that are not normally
resident in that country for private use. To control this, customs organisations of
receiving countries may require a “carnet de passages en douane”, which is a document
issued by an authorised organisation that provides for a financial guaranty covering the
possible taxes in case of failure to re-export the vehicle within the prescribed period. (up
to one year)
In addition, the convention allows countries to require proof of authorisation to cross the
border with a vehicle in case the user is not the registered owner of the vehicle.
Customs Convention on the Temporary Importation of Commercial Road Vehicles
(1956)
The convention was aimed to extend the benefits of relatively easy “temporary
importation” of commercial vehicles along the same line as earlier was done with private
vehicles. This was to facilitate international road transport and the convention
envisages the duty free temporary importation of commercial road vehicles into a
territory by (legal) persons that are not normally resident in that country for professional
use. To control this, customs organisations of receiving countries may require a “carnet
de passages en douane”, which is a document issued by an authorised organisation
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 159
that provides for a financial guaranty covering the possible taxes in case of failure to reexport the vehicle within the prescribed period. (up to one year)
In addition, the convention allows countries to require proof of authorisation to cross the
border with a vehicle in case the user is not the registered owner of the vehicle. In case
not sufficient proof has been furnished of authorisation, the vehicle may be rejected
entry.
In addition, the vehicle maybe refused access in case it is driven by a person who has
been involved in serious infringements of customs or fiscal legislation or has broken the
terms of temporary importation regimes.
Customs Convention on the International Transport of Goods under Cover of TIR
Carnets (1975 with amendments)
The most important convention, together with the International Convention on the
Harmonisation of Frontier Controls of Goods is the TIR convention. Its key aim has been
to facilitate transit of goods in their way to a third country as well as reducing the need
for frontier customs clearance of goods in the receiving country. Its main principles can
be summarised as follows:
If transported by road vehicle or container that is approved for transport under
customs seal and covered by a TIR carnet goods;

“(a) shall not be subject to the payment or deposit of import or export
duties and taxes at Customs offices en route,

(b) Shall not, as a general rule, be subjected to Customs examination at
such offices
However, in order to prevent abuse, the Customs authorities may, in exceptional
circumstances and particularly when irregularity is suspected, carry out a full or
summary or full examination of the goods”.
A “Customs Office en route” is defined as:
“........ any frontier Customs office of a contracting party where a road vehicle
merely passes through ….............”
Under this interpretation, a frontier Customs office at the country of destination which is
not indicated on the TIR carnet as being the “Customs office of destination” is expected
to let the cargo pass through without further examination.
The guarantor (the issuer of the TIR carnet) undertakes to pay the duties and taxes in
case these become payable and the customs administration of the claiming country is
not able to obtain payment from the person first responsible (the one that controlled or
received the goods). According to the TIR handbook (version 2010): “The monetary
limits to the guarantee are determined for each country separately. The maximum
recommended amount to be claimed from each national association is at present limited
to $US 50,000 for each TIR Carnet (US $ 200.000 for Tobacco/Alcohol TIR Carnets)”.
There are special provision for “bulky goods”, such as motor vehicles carried on
specialised car transporters and other heavy and indivisible goods.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 160
Convention Concerning Customs Facilities for Touring (Tourism) – (for countries
that signed the 1990 convention, these are bound by the latest convention)
The Touring convention, concluded in 1954 aimed to promote the development of
tourism by clarifying and unifying what travellers can carry across border without having
to pay duties. The convention is old and items described in it as “personal effects” have
long become obsolete. However, the spirit of the convention is that travellers can carry
personal effects such as clothes but also camera's, portable TV sets and other items
used for recreation such as sport equipment across borders without duties provided
these are used (not new). In practice, there is limit of one item of each under the
convention. (e.g. one camera, one TV set, one radio etc.)
In addition, the convention provides for a small quantity of alcoholic beverages to be
imported free of duties.
Most important is to note that the convention does not automatically apply when:

substantially more is carried (imported) than envisaged under the convention,

in the case of frontier traffic,

to persons not yet at the age of 17 years,
Convention on Temporary Admission (1990)
Some of the conventions above, related to temporary admission are also covered in the
“Convention on Temporary Admission” of 1990. The Istanbul Convention, as it is
called covers a far broader area in its annexes such as:
1. Goods for display or use at exhibitions, fairs, meetings or similar events,
2. professional equipment for the press or for sound or television broadcasting,
3. containers, pallets, packings, samples and other goods imported in connection
with a commercial operation,
4. goods imported in connection with a manufacturing operation,
5. goods imported for educational, scientific or cultural purposes,
6. travellers' personal effects and goods imported for sports purposes,
7. tourist publicity material,
8. goods imported as frontier traffic
9. goods imported for humanitarian purposes annex,
10. means of transport,
11. animals
12. goods imported with partial relief from import duties and taxes
The convention is a modernised version of some of the acts that are however still valid
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 161
and cover the same subjects. Though most of the countries reviewed have ratified the
1990 convention most did not ratify the conventions of the 1950's such as the container
convention, the convention on temporary admission of motor vehicles etc. However, for
those countries that did ratify two conventions covering the same subject, the latest (the
1990) convention replaces the
Agreement on the International Carriage of Perishable Foodstuffs and on the
Special Equipment to be Used for such Carriage (ATP) (1970 with revisions up to
January 2011)
The ATP agreement covers the carriage of perishable foodstuffs across borders and is
largely a technical document that prescribes the equipment to be used, the
temperatures on which foodstuffs are to be carried, the methods of recording values
and the measurement tolerances. The agreement requires the equipment used to be
tested and certified for different classes of foodstuffs, which are carried at certain
temperatures. The certificates are expected to be mutually recognised under the
agreement.
Other legal issues affecting border controls.
Apart from the above mentioned conventions and agreements, road BCPs are also
affected by the different weights and sizes of heavy goods vehicles across Europe.
Generally, within Europe the maximum vehicle weight of an articulated vehicle (tractor +
semi trailer) is 40 metric tons, provided it has at least 5 axles. In case of the carriage of
a 40' container, the weight limit is in many places 44ton.
The Russian Federation (as well as Ukraine) has an exceptionally low weight allowance
of 3819 metric tons, resulting in frequent overloading as well as substantial loss of
carriage capacity for freight. The two tons difference represent a loss of nearly 10% of
possible cargo weight.
What the Countries have signed up to in relation to goods transportation in
summary;
The conventions are wider ranging, but if we consider those that are signed up to by all
parties, the following commitments have been made;
1. to ensure sufficient staff and infrastructure at BCP's, taking into consideration
traffic demands20,
2. to carry out only those controls that are absolutely necessary as established
on the basis of risk assessments21 especially in the case of transit shipments,
19
Only Armenia has a lower limit with maximum 36 metric ton.
No specific target has been set for waiting delays or the duration of the BCP crossing process though two
hours waiting and two hours of processing should be considered as a maximum.
21
A high percentage of cargo's inspected and / or X-rayed does not constitute controls based on risk
assessment.
20
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 162
3. to the extent practically possible, to carry out multiple controls simultaneously
or with minimum delay,
4. to have customs clearance to take place away from the border as much as
possible,
5. to share information with each-other that facilitates the processes at the
border,
6. in case of rail cargo crossings, to carry out both export and import controls as
much as possible at the same station near to the border (joint controls)
7. to give priority to vehicles carrying perishable foodstuffs and live animals,
8. provide facilities to create a competitive market in customs brokerage service
at the border crossing points,
9. to use IT based systems to the extent practically possible.
The commitments in relation to passenger transport;
The situation in the field of passenger transport is somehow more complicated than the
above discussed commitments related to goods transport. With regard to the control of
rail passengers, countries have agreed as much as possible to:
1. carry out controls in moving trains in order to reduce the delays for
passengers,
2. if this is not possible, to carry out joint controls at border stations,
3. the time to carry out the controls is envisaged not to be more than 40 minutes
for a passenger train,
With regard to movement of tourists, the Convention text sets the allowances for tourist
as to what they can carry in their luggage. This reflects the state of technology at the
time and, if applied today would negatively influence tourism or international travel in
general. Items identified in the convention for example are:

one camera with twelve plates or five rolls of film;

one miniature cinematograph camera with two reels of film;
The 1990 Convention on Temporary Admission, which applies to those countries that
have ratified both the 1950's and the 1990 convention, envisages allowing the same
equipment for tourists, but provides for the modern versions.
Furthermore, with regard to the temporary importation of private motor vehicles, the
(1954) convention related to this foresees the use of the “carnet de passage en douane”
providing a guaranty for the re-export of private vehicles after the expiry of the period.
The 1990 Convention introduces the A.T.A carnet for all items, including motor vehicles.
In practice however, most countries allow vehicle onto their territory without customs or
other declaration for those not resident.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 163
Appendix E - Acknowledgments
The Project Team gratefully acknowledges the cooperation and assistance of the
following persons in the preparation of this report, before, during and after the carrying
out of the Field Visits. They, and other colleagues, were invaluable in providing
information and in reviewing the proposals of the Project Team. The Team accepts full
responsibility for the views expressed in its Study Report.
Belarus ( meeting during Polish Field Visit 25th and 26th April 2012)
Mr. Aleksandr Adereiko, Head of Legal Dept., State Customs Committee HQ Minsk, and
Mr. Andrei Planin, Deputy Head of Department for Organisation of Customs Control,
State Customs Committee HQ Minsk, who both attended the meetings with Polish
Customs and Border Guards on 25th and 26th April.
Estonia (Field Visit 17th to 19th April 2012)
From the Border Guard Department of the Police and Border Guard Board: Capt. Helen
Neider-Veerme, Head of the Border Guard Cooperation Bureau, Capt. Tarmo Normak,
leading border official of the Border Security Bureau, Lt Col Priit Järvpõld, Head of the
Border Security Bureau. From the international Cooperation of the Tax and Customs
Board: Vello Valm and Jaanus Rand participated at the meeting. , Maj. Valmar Hinno,
Head of the BG Koidula BCP, Customs and Border Guards representatives at Koidula
road and rail BCP, Col. Aimar Koss, Head of BG Bureau, at East Prefecture., Narva
Customs and BG representatives at Narva road and rail BCP.
Finland (Field Visit 16th April 2012)
Kimmo Sainio, Head of BCP BG detachment, Nuijamaa. Petri Kukkonen, Head of
Nuijimaa Customs. Lt. Col Jaakko Ritola, Finnish National Police (Border Guards) HQ,
Helsinki. Pirjo Kotro, Finnish Customs Service International Cooperation Dept., Helsinki.
Latvia (Field Visit 4th April 2012)
Sabine Dubulte Latvian Customs with regional and BCP Customs and BG staff Latgale
road (Terehova) and rail (Zilupe) BCPs. Lasma Bogdane, Customs HQ Riga. Jurijs
Kondratenko State Real Estate Co, Riga.
Lithuania ( Field Visit 2nd and 3rd April 2012)
Vitalis Vareikis, Karolis Braudaskas (both Customs HQ Vilnius) and Heads and Staff of
BCP Customs and BG (inc. Mr. Getosas, Customs Head).Mr. Majauskas Head of
Customs, Panemune. Mr. Rimantas Satkauskas ( Unit Head) , Mr. Tomas Pilukas, Mr.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 164
Ramunas Rimkus, Road and Civil Aviation Dept., Ministry of Transport and
Communications, Vilnius.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 165
Poland (Field Visit 24th to 26th April 2012)
Marek Newiadomski, Polish Customs International Cooperation Dept. Warsaw, Mr.
Waldemar Micewicz, Deputy Director of Customs Chamber (Regional Customs HQ) in
Biala Podlaska, Mrs. Marzena Pawlonka, Deputy Chief of Customs Biala Podlaska Had
of Regional Customs Biala Podlaska, Mr. Jerzy Kowerda, Head of Customs at
Koroszczyn (Kozlowiczy) BCP, Mr. Artur Barej, Head of Border Guards Terespol, Mr.
Jaroslaw Nestorowicz, Chief of the Veterinary Service at Koroszczyn BCP, Mrs. Barbara
Gromysz as Head of Customs for railway BCP Terespol and Mr. Jan Zyszozczuk, Head
of Road BCP. Polish Phytosanitary Service were also met on 25 th April. Mr. Jaroslaw
Chywc, collaborator of customs supervision of the Customs Chamber in Biała
Podlaska, attended throughout the meetings and also acted as Interpreter.
Russia
The Project Team has, on the advice of Finnish Customs, informed Mr. V Alekseyev in
the St. Petersburg HQ of Federal Customs Service of the Russian Federation informed
of the Field Visits, and especially of the meetings with Belarus colleagues.
Private Sector operators
In agreement with the various transport operators and representative organisations
interviewed, their identities remain anonymous.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 166
Appendix F – Terms of Reference
Specific Terms of Reference
A Study on Common Border Crossing Points Management between Schengen
Area and Russia/Belarus.
FWC COM 2011 - LOT 1
1. BACKGROUND
The Northern Dimension policy
The Northern Dimension (ND) is a common policy of the EU, Russia, Norway and
Iceland, with Belarus also playing an increasingly important role in the cooperation. The
Northern Dimension was first initiated in 1999, and it gained new momentum after the
adoption of a revised Action Plan in 2006. The Northern Dimension aims to promote
security and stability in and around the wider Baltic Sea region and to address the
special regional development challenges of the region such as long distances, wide
disparities in the standards of living, cold climatic conditions and insufficient transport
and border crossing facilities.
The Northern Dimension is based on the principle of equal partnership among the
partner countries. The cooperation takes place in the form of meetings of senior
representatives from the participating countries as well as in the four partnerships: the
Environmental Partnership (NDEP), the Partnership for Public Health and Social Wellbeing (NDPHS), the Partnership for Transport and Logistics (NDPTL) and the
Partnership for Culture (NDPC).
The Partnership for Transport and Logistics (NDPTL) is one of the newest partnerships.
It was established in October 2009. The NDPTL activities are supervised by the
Steering Committee, which is composed of senior officials of all the participating
countries. The Secretariat of the NDPTL, which provides administrative and technical
support to the Steering Committee, became operational in January 2011, and it is
hosted by the Nordic Investment Bank (NIB) in Helsinki.
With the general aim of promoting international trade in the Northern Dimension geographical
area, the specific aims of the NDPTL include:
 Facilitating improvements in the major transnational transport connections
between the partner countries with the view of stimulating sustainable economic
growth at the local/regional and global levels;
 Accelerating the implementation of transport and logistics infrastructure projects
along the major transnational connections, and facilitating the approval of
projects of mutual interest;
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 167


Accelerating the removal of non-infrastructure related bottlenecks, affecting the
flow of transport in and across the region, and facilitating the improvement of
logistics in international supply chains;
Providing effective structures to monitor the implementation of the proposed
projects and measures.
Border management, transport and logistics issues in the Northern Dimension
region
The Northern Dimension geographical area spreads from Denmark and Germany in the
South West to the Russian North Western federal district in the North East.
One of the hurdles for transport in this region is related to the crossing of the Schengen
borders with Russia/Belarus, in particular when the borders are crossed physically by
road or rail. Carriers and passengers are still facing long queues and waiting times at
the BCPs between Russia/Belarus and the bordering Schengen countries. One of the
reasons for these delays is that institutional efforts are mainly concentrated on higher
country levels, while the results at particular BCPs at large extent are dependent from
local planning, organization and internal logistics at each individual ВСР.
There is a need to address these hurdles because the effective functioning of the
border crossing points (BCP) is an essential factor affecting the overall success of the
interaction between the transport systems of the countries in Northern Dimension area.
Best practices testify that successful results along the external borders of Schengen
countries may be best achieved through an integrated approach, coordinated planning
and harmonized working methods of the BCPs on both sides of the border.
Some efforts have already been taken to analyse the problems, to make improvements
and to achieve an integrated approach at the BCPs:

A dialogue is taking place between the EU and Russia in relation to the matters
of customs cooperation. The EU-Russia Strategic Framework for customs
cooperation agreed by Commissioner Šemeta and the Head of Russian Customs
A. Belyaninov in December 2010 is being implemented by EU-Russia Customs
Cooperation Sub-Committee and EU-Russia Customs Working Group on
Customs Border Issues.

Also, the Russian Federation has established a special agency in October 2007
to develop and maintain Russia's border-crossing points - the Federal Agency for
the Development of the State Border Facilities of the Russian Federation
(Rosgranitsa).

Some earlier studies have been carried out as regards customs and border
management bottlenecks, e.g. Technical Assessment of the Border Control
Infrastructure at selected Border Crossing Points in the St. Petersburg/Pskov
Region performed recently (July 2010) by the International Organisation for
Migration under the EU funded project Enhancement of Management of the RF
Border Checkpoints.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 168
Further efforts are however still needed to make the crossing of borders smoother at the
Russian/Belorussian – Schengen borders. The Northern Dimension area needs a clear
roadmap and expedient, harmonized and complex guidelines and recommendations,
which may be applied at every BCPs in uniform way on both sides of the border.
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE ASSIGNMENT
 Global objective
The overall objective of this action is to carry out a study of opportunities for integrated
BCP management between the Schengen area and Russia/Belarus.
 Specific objective(s)
The specific objectives of the action are:
- to analyse the current situation of traffic flows and border management rules,
methodologies and practices at selected BCPs between the Schengen area and
Russian Federation and Belarus;
-to assess the opportunities for integrated BCP management between the Schengen
area and Russia/Belarus;
- to identify a list of road BCPs on the Schengen countries - Russia/Belarus border that
are vitally requiring improvements.
 Requested services, including suggested methodology
1.
Assessment of the current status of management of road BCPs
For implementation of this task the consultant will visit a number of BCPs, at least one
road and one rail (except Norway- Russia border) BCP on the borders between the
Schengen area and Russia/Belarus.
These BCPs will be selected and agreed with NDPTL Secretariat, which will coordinate
the selection with the member(s) of the NDPTL Steering Committee in close
cooperation with institutions, responsible for the management and operations of BCPs
in the Partnership countries (Belarus, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway,
Poland, Russia).
The consultant will interview forwarding companies from every of ND countries to
indicate problematic in border crossing from point of view of the BCP client.
The assessment shall address specific aspects of the border management as listed
below:
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 169
a. Joint planning of infrastructure and superstructure at the BCPs.
The consultant will analyse the current practices of planning of the BCPs and accesses
on both national sides of the BCPs. Special attention should be given identification of
potential means of improvement of cooperation between institutions responsible for
development of border crossings infrastructure.
b. Interoperability of technologies and procedures.
The consultant will analyse and assess the level of correspondence of the technologies
and procedures used on the two national sides of the BCPs.
c. Terminal logistics.
The consultant will analyse and assess the practice of movement of persons, passenger
cars and freight vehicles through the BCPs, including remote access.
d. Communication and common decisions.
The consultant will analyse the practices of communication and coordination between
institutions, operating at the two national sides of the BCPs in the process of making
decisions regarding procedures to be applied to passengers and vehicles. Possibilities
to arrange one-stop-window and integrated IT system of all control bodies at BCP, as
well as joint border controls (where feasible) will also be estimated.
e. Personnel’ knowledge
The consultant will analyse the personnel’s knowledge about technologies, procedures,
terminal logistics and other organizational details concerning the opposite national part
of the BCP and will propose measures to keep necessary and equal level of personnel’
knowledge at the BCP.
3.
The conclusions and recommendations
The Consultant will draw up conclusions and recommendations for the improvement of
BCP management basing on the findings of the screening study performed under this
assignment.
 Required outputs
The required output of this assignment is a Study on Common Border Crossing
Points Management between Schengen Area and Russia/Belarus that shall contain
at least the following information (see also "specific objectives" above):

A description and in depth analysis of the current practices of BCPs
management;
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 170

Analysis and assessment of the current practice of communication and
coordination between two national parts of the BCP. Recommendations for
communication and coordination between institutions, acting in each of two
national BCPs in the process of decision making regarding procedures to be
applied to individuals, passenger' cars and trains, freight vehicles and trains;

Analysis and assessment of the terminal logistics: practice of movement of
persons, passenger' cars and trains, freight vehicles and trains through BCPs
including accesses to the BCPs. Measurement of the time needed to cross the
border and to complete procedures with the help of surveys;

A proposed list of road and rail BCPs on the Schengen countries Russia/Belarus border that would require improvements in management of
border crossing.
The study output is expected to support the actions of the NDPTL and promote
partners' cooperation on removal of bottlenecks and improvement border crossing
management in the ND region.
The Contracting Authority reserves the right to disseminate the report to the
interlocutors of the NDPTL and other interested parties, as well as to publish the report
or parts of it.
3. EXPERTISE REQUIRED
Number of requested experts per category
Senior expert(s): maximum 3 persons
Number of man-days per category:
Senior expert(s): maximum160 man-days
Expertise required
In order to successfully complete the assignment expertise is required on management
of road and rail border crossing points.
The minimum requirements for the team of experts are the following:
Qualifications and skills
 At least one of the experts must have a University degree, preferably in transport
and logistics, business, economics, or equivalent professional experience;
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 171




At least one of the experts must have a University degree in spatial planning or
equivalent professional experience;
At least one of the experts must have good knowledge of the legal environment,
related to the border crossing issues;
The team members shall have strong analytical capacity and excellent
communication and presentation skills;
Skills and experience in ICT would be an advantage.
General professional experience
1. All the experts in the team must have at least 10 years of general professional
experience in their respective fields (transport and logistics, traffic planning and
engineering, spatial planning, management of border crossing points, ICT)
Specific professional experience
2. One of the experts must have at least 3 years of professional experience relating
to the international operations in road and rail transport and logistics, carriage of
passengers;
3. At least one of experts should have experience in border crossing management
issues in Schengen are countries;
4. At least one of the experts must have at least 3 years of professional experience
relating to services related to the organisation of border crossing point in Eastern
Europe, the Balkans and/or the CIS countries. Direct experience of working with
Russian and/or Belorussian institutions responsible for development of border
management procedures, planning and operations would be an advantage;
5. One of the experts must have at least 3 years of professional experience relating
to planning of territories for logistic operations, road and rail infrastructure. Good
knowledge of technologies being used at the BCPs including ICT is compulsory.
Language skills
 All experts in the team should be fluent in written and spoken English.
 At least one of the experts in the team must be fluent in written and spoken
Russian.
4. LOCATION AND DURATION

Starting period
The provisional starting date for the project is Monday 21 November 2011. The actual
starting date shall be agreed with the Project Manager once the specific contract has
been signed.

Foreseen finishing period or duration
6 months from the starting date.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 172

Planning (including the period for notification for placement of the staff)
The assignment shall be implemented in three phases as follows:
Phase
1
Phase
2
Phase
3
Objective
Inception phase including a desk
study on the available resources on
BCPs management issues in RF
and Belarus
Field visits to the selected border
crossing points and forwarding
companies, analysis of acquired
information, writing a draft output
report.
Finalisation of the report following
feedback from the NDPTL' working
group members and the Secretariat
of the NDPTL
Approximate
duration
25 working days
Estimated
timing
November –
December 2011
85 working days
January -March
2012
50 working days
April - May 2012
The Contractor shall agree with the Project Manager on the actual starting date of the
assignment. Later on, the Contractor / experts shall notify the Project Manager about
the planned dates of the field visit(s).

Location of the assignment
Phases 1 and 3 may mainly be carried out at the home base of the experts with
potential visits to relevant institutions in Russia/Belarus and Schengen zone.
Phase 2 of the assignment, field visits to selected road BCPs, shall be carried out in the
Russian Federation, Belarus and countries of the Schengen zone in line with the
agreement of the consultant with stakeholders.
5. REPORTING

Content
In addition to the actual project output (the Study on Common Border Crossing
Points Management Between Schengen Area and Russia/Belarus) presented in the
section 2 above, the consultant shall provide the following administrative reports relating
to the implementation of the contract:
An inception report shall be submitted to the Contracting Authority 6 weeks after the
project start (by e-mail only). It shall contain an updated work plan, including a list of the
BCPs selected for the screening study, and a timetable for the implementation of the
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 173
project. It is assumed that the Consultant will establish during the inception phase
working contacts with the Secretariat of the NDPTL and with relevant national (or
regional) authorities of the countries of BCPs selected for the study. The report should
not exceed 5 pages.
A final report shall be submitted to the Contracting Authority at the end of the project
implementation (by e-mail only). It shall contain information on the services provided
under the contract, any problems encountered and lessons learned, as well as other
relevant information, including on financial implementation. The report should not
exceed 5 pages.

Language
All reports shall be submitted in English.

Timing for submission and comments, when relevant, for approval
The actual project output - the Study on Common Border Crossing Points
Management Between Schengen Area and Russia/Belarus – presented in the
section 2 above, shall be submitted separately from the administrative inception and
final reports.
A draft of the study report must be submitted to the Contracting Authority by e-mail at
least 6 weeks before the end of the project, so that the stakeholders (including the
NDPTL Steering Committee) have sufficient time to discuss the recommendations and
give their feedback before the study is completed.
The study shall be presented in English and it shall not exceed 100 pages.

Number of report copies
The final version of the study shall be submitted to the Contracting Authority in two
paper copies as well as in electronic format.
6. ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION
- Interviews if necessary indicating for which experts/position
No expert interviews shall be concluded during the evaluation of offers.
 Request for a succinct methodology
A short methodology for implementing this assignment shall be part of the offer.
 Management team member presence required or not for briefing and/or
debriefing
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 174
Briefing and de-briefing sessions shall be carried out between the representatives of the
Contracting Authority and the expert. No Management team presence is required.
 Other authorized items to foresee under ‘Reimbursable’
N/A
 Operational conditionality for intermediary payment if any
No intermediary payment is foreseen.
 Tax arrangements
N/A
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 175
The content of this publication is the sole responsibility of B&S Europe and can in no way be
taken to reflect the views of the European Union.
Definition of the Core Transport Network in the Northern Dimension area, FWC COM Lot 1
Page 1