1. Heat treatment: Heat treated to achieve a minimum wood core temperature of 56° C for a minimum of 30 minutes. Visit the American Lumber Standard Committee’s website for more details.
2. Fumigation treatment with methyl bromide. Visit the National Wood Pallet & Container Association’s website for more details.

[C]onsider the potential consequences of exporting non-treated solid wood packaged commodities into ISPM15 countries. If, for example, the foreign importing country chooses to stop the import process, they may refuse the import, require the freight be returned to origin, quarantine, or the packing and contents (e.g., packed crate) may be treated (fumigated or heat treated) before the import process, which can put the product at risk. In any case, final clearance and delivery will be delayed, and the goods could be damaged through the treatment process.

Ultimately, the customer suffers and the relationship between buyer and seller could be affected. Remember, alternatives to solid wood packaging include particleboard, plywood, oriented strand board, plastic skids, or even cardboard skids (made with specific weight limits).

• U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
• ISPM 15 Guidelines for Regulating Wood Packing Material in International Trade
• USDA Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
• USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) Forest and Fishery Products Trade Policy Information Portal

1. Start with negotiating the rate and minimum volume commitment.
   
2. After the rates are agreed upon, request that the carrier’s liability be increased to the Hague-Visby maximum limitation of 667 SDR’s per kilo, which is approximately double the Carriage of Goods by See Act’s (COGSA) maximum of $500 per package, or if not shipped in packages, $500 per customary freight unit. (The carrier is paying claims up to those limits for its customers from other nations when goods are destined to non-U.S. ports, so why shouldn’t U.S. importers and exporters have the benefit of these higher liability limits?)
   
3. An alternative request is that your cargo be subject to the highest liability limit of any cargo carried on the same vessel as your goods. (As a result of different liability terms in treaties applying between different origin and destination nations, there usually are three or four different liability limits on cargo traveling in the same ship.)
   
4. Request that whatever liability limits apply on your cargo while on the high seas, they not be extended to inland carriers. (This issue recently cost an Australian shipper over $1 million when dealing with an NVOCC. See the Norfolk Southern Ry. v. Kirby, U.S. Supreme Court decision Nov. 9, 2004, reported in "Supplement No. 1" to Transportation, Logistics and the Law.)
   
5. Request a greater time within which to report loss or damage if your inspection procedures cannot be completed within three days, as required by ocean carriers’ bills of lading.
   
6. Request the deletion of the clause that relieves the ocean carrier of liability for loss or damage if it results from the carrier’s negligent navigation or mismanagement of the ship. This is one of 17 defenses that ocean carriers have under their bills of lading. It is the most unconscionable defense in the law.
   
7. Request that the ocean carrier’s responsibility for your goods continue for the entire period that it has custody of them rather than “tackle-to-tackle” as provided in COGSA.