IANA Day 1: The Gap Between “Cleared” and “Movable” Freight

Article

The key takeaway from Day 1 at the IANA Intermodal Freight Expo was clear: a container may be cleared by Customs yet remain operationally unavailable. This gap between regulatory clearance and physical accessibility has significant implications for terminals, railroads, drayage carriers, chassis providers, shippers, and the overall cost of moving freight.

On the first day in Long Beach, I listened to leaders focused on the core elements of intermodal operations: policy, terminal management, safety, and execution. Two themes emerged: leveraging better data to improve cargo flow and approaching routine truck inspections as an operational discipline rather than merely a compliance requirement.

Key highlights

• Customs clearance does not always mean a container is ready to move.
• Trusted-trader signals could help terminals plan container placement before the freight becomes a problem.
• Better pre-positioning has implications for rail, drayage, chassis utilization, and cargo dwell.
• CVSA’s Kerri Wirachowsky emphasized that many out-of-service issues—especially tire-related defects—can be prevented before the truck ever leaves the yard.
• The common thread: intermodal performance is often determined by everyday operational details, not just by major infrastructure announcements.

A container may be cleared, but it is not always accessible.

One of the day’s most practical conversations came during the Q&A with Michael Rutherford, the first Assistant Secretary for Multimodal Freight Infrastructure and Policy at the U.S. Department of Transportation.

Rutherford’s office has a broad freight mandate: national freight policy, data-sharing initiatives, grant programs, research, cross-modal coordination, and cargo-security work. The role itself matters because it creates a dedicated senior-level freight voice within DOT—one that spans rail, trucking, ports, terminals, and the broader supply chain rather than looking at each mode in isolation.

However, the most impactful takeaway was not a policy announcement, but a practical terminal operations question:

What is the difference between a container that is cleared and one that is actually movable?

This distinction is more significant than it may initially appear.

A container may be cleared by Customs yet remain buried in a terminal stack, blocked by other containers, or placed in a location requiring additional handling, making it inaccessible for drivers, rail operators, or consignees. While the paperwork may indicate readiness, operationally the freight is not accessible.

This distinction is critical because the supply chain moves equipment, not documents.

A drayage carrier dispatching a truck needs to know whether the container can be grounded, accessed, and pulled—not simply whether a release has been issued. A terminal needs to manage finite space, labor, equipment, appointment windows, and vessel discharge patterns. A railroad needs reliable handoffs to protect train plans and asset turns. A shipper needs cargo moving toward its destination rather than accruing uncertainty, dwell time, and potentially additional costs.

"Cleared" refers to regulatory status, while "movable" indicates operational readiness. Both are essential for effective freight management.

Using Data to Improve the Stack

Rutherford’s view was that trusted-trade signals could be used earlier in the process to influence how cargo is staged and positioned within a terminal.

This development warrants close attention.

The Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism, or CTPAT, is a voluntary Customs and Border Protection program built around supply-chain security practices and partnerships with the trade community. In the context of terminal operations, the opportunity is not simply to label trusted cargo. It is to make that information actionable before a container becomes inaccessible.

Think about what better pre-positioning could mean:

• A terminal could use trusted-cargo information in its stowage and yard-planning decisions.
• Cleared or lower-risk containers could potentially be located where they are easier to retrieve.
• Drayage carriers could make more productive dispatch decisions.
• Chassis providers could see better equipment turns if trucks spend less time waiting on inaccessible cargo.
• Railroads could receive more predictable volumes at ramps and terminals.
• Shippers could gain a more realistic picture of when cargo is truly available to move.

Implementation challenges remain. Terminals must balance security requirements, vessel discharge schedules, stack density, labor constraints, appointments, export flows, rail cutoffs, and equipment availability. No single data point can address this complexity.

Still, the direction is right: use data earlier, and use it to improve the physical flow of cargo—not merely to report on delays after they occur.

For the freight market, this underscores that visibility alone is insufficient. While dashboards may indicate a container is cleared, the more important question is whether the cargo is accessible, dispatchable, and progressing through the network as intended.

This is where improved operational data and cost intelligence are essential. At FreightFA, we help freight teams gain clarity on transportation costs, as expenses from sitting, rehandling, or delays often impact multiple parties. These costs appear as detention, missed appointments, additional drayage miles, chassis inefficiencies, labor expenses, and service failures.

Safety Starts Before the Gate

The second session that stood out came from the safety and security committee, particularly comments from Kerri Wirachowsky, director of inspection programs at the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance.

Read the full article

This page carries the opening of the article. The full article is for subscribers of The FreightFA Brief: https://freightflowadvisor.substack.com/p/iana-day-1-the-gap-between-cleared