IATA E-Freight: Message Improvement Programme (MIP) EDI Handbook V2.0

IATA e-freight
Message Improvement Programme

(MIP)
EDI Handbook
V2.0
www.iata.org/e-freight IATA CARGO

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Disclaimer........................................................................................................................................ 4
2 Contacts .......................................................................................................................................... 5
3 Revision history ............................................................................................................................... 6
4 Glossary .......................................................................................................................................... 7
5 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 8
6 Part 1 - A guide to EDI................................................................................................................... 10
6.1 What is EDI? ......................................................................................................................... 10
6.1.1 Increase speed ................................................................................................................. 11
6.1.2 Improved accuracy ........................................................................................................... 11
6.1.3 Increased business efficiency ........................................................................................... 11
6.2 EDI business functions in Air Cargo...................................................................................... 11
6.2.1 Schedule and Availability information request and answer (FVR / FVA) ........................... 12
6.2.2 Space Allocation Request and Answer (FFR / FFA) ......................................................... 12
6.2.3 Air waybill data (FWB) ...................................................................................................... 12
6.2.4 Consolidation List (FHL) ................................................................................................... 13
6.2.5 Airline Flight Manifest (FFM)............................................................................................. 13
6.2.6 Status Information (FSA / FSU) ........................................................................................ 13
6.3 How you can exchange data electronically? ......................................................................... 14
6.4 What you need to make EDI work......................................................................................... 15
6.4.1 EDI Software .................................................................................................................... 15
6.4.2 Access to a Cargo Community System............................................................................. 16
6.5 Future developments in EDI.................................................................................................. 16
6.5.1 Legacy standards ............................................................................................................. 16
6.5.2 XML .................................................................................................................................. 16
7 Part 2 - An introduction to the Message Improvement Program .................................................... 17
7.1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 17
7.2 Why join the Message Improvement Program?..................................................................... 18
7.2.1 An airline should join because... ....................................................................................... 18
7.2.2 Forwarders should join because….................................................................................... 19
7.2.3 How to join........................................................................................................................ 19
7.3 MIP Objectives...................................................................................................................... 20
7.4 MIP and Cargo 2000 ............................................................................................................. 20
7.5 Scope of MIP ........................................................................................................................ 20
8 Part 3 - Common Quality Problems and Solutions......................................................................... 22
8.1 Consignee / Shipper information ........................................................................................... 22
8.2 Pieces and weight ................................................................................................................. 23
8.3 Airport Codes ........................................................................................................................ 23
8.4 Agent information.................................................................................................................. 23
8.5 Other Charges Codes ........................................................................................................... 23
8.6 Country codes....................................................................................................................... 23
8.7 Description of goods ............................................................................................................. 23
8.8 Timeliness............................................................................................................................. 23
8.9 Message Versions ................................................................................................................ 24
8.10 Removal of unnecessary spaces .......................................................................................... 24
8.11 How to ensure FWB shipper / consignee data compliance ................................................... 24
8.11.1 Shipper / consignee FWB Layout template................................................................... 24
8.11.2 Data element completion .............................................................................................. 25
8.11.3 System enhancements required for consignee / shipper compliance ........................... 26
8.12 How to ensure FWB agent data compliance ......................................................................... 26
8.12.1 FWB – Agent Layout template...................................................................................... 26
8.12.3 System enhancements required for agent compliance ................................................. 27
8.13 How to ensure FWB Other Charges Codes data compliance................................................ 27
www.iata.org/e-freight Page 2/34 IATA CARGO

MIP EDI Handbook
8.13.1 FWB – Other Charges Layout Template....................................................................... 27
8.13.3 System enhancements required for other charge code compliance ............................. 28
8.14 How to ensure FHL shipper / consignee data compliance..................................................... 28
8.14.1 FHL – Shipper / Consignee Layout Template ............................................................... 28
8.14.3 System enhancements required for consignee / shipper compliance: .......................... 29
8.15 How to ensure FHL Manifest Description of Goods Data Compliance .................................. 30
8.15.1 FHL – House Waybill Summary Details Layout Template ............................................ 30
8.16 How to ensure FHL Free Text Description of Goods Data Compliance................................. 30
8.16.1 FHL – Free text description of goods layout template................................................... 30
8.17 Description of goods compliance - general ........................................................................... 31
8.17.1 System enhancements required for description of goods compliance: ......................... 32
9 Appendix A - ISO Country codes ................................................................................................... 33

MIP EDI Handbook
1 Disclaimer
The information contained in the publication is subject to constant review in the

light of changing business requirements, government requirements and
regulations. No subscriber or other reader should act on the basis of any such
information without referring to the applicable laws and regulations and / or
without taking appropriate professional advice. Although every effort has been
made to ensure accuracy, the International Air Transport Association shall not
be held responsible for loss or damage caused by errors, omissions, misprints
or misinterpretation of the contents hereof. Furthermore, the International Air
Transport Association expressly disclaims all and any liability to any person,
whether a purchaser of the publication or not, in respect of anything done or
omitted, and the consequences of anything done or omitted, by any such
person in reliance on the contents of this publication.
No part of this guide may be reproduced, recast, reformatted or transmitted in

any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without the
permission of:
Director Cargo Supply Chain Management, IDFS

International Air Transport Association
Route de l'Aéroport
33 P.O. Box 416
1215 Geneva 15 Airport
Switzerland

MIP EDI Handbook
2 Contacts
MIP
Constantin Syridis, Manager, Cargo Business Intelligence
Email: syridisc@iata.org
Website:
http://www.iata.org/whatwedo/cargo/efreight/MessageImprovementProgramme-MIP.htm
IATA e-freight
Contact the team at IATAe-freight@iata.org
Website: www.iata.org/e-freight

MIP EDI Handbook
3 Revision History
Revised by Changes Version Date

Patrick Murray Initial version v1 October 2007
Constantin Review and update of entire content v2 November 2009
Syridis
Bill Acheson Review v2 January 2010
Izzy Anderson Update content per airlines’ feedback v2 March 2010

MIP EDI Handbook
4 Glossary
Acronym Meaning
C2K Cargo 2000
CCS Cargo Community System – (Value Added Network for Cargo)
CIMP IATA’s Cargo Interchange Message Procedure Manual
CXML IATA’s new XML message format
EDI Electronic Data Interchange
FFA AWB Space Allocation Request Answer - for the purposes of this handbook referred to
as “ Freight Booking Request Answer”.
FFM Airline Flight Manifest Message
FFR AWB space Allocation Request – for the purposes of this handbook referred to as
“Freight Booking Request Message”.
FHL Consolidation List Message (House Manifest data message) or House Waybill details
FMA Message Acknowledgement Message
FNA Error Message
FSA Status Answer Message
FVA Schedule and Availability Information Answer Message
FSR Status Request Message
FSU Status Update Message
FVR Schedule and Availability Information Request Message
FWB Air Waybill Data Message
FZB House Waybill Data Message
GHA Ground Handling Agent
IATA International Air Transport Association
ISO International Standards Organization
MIP Message Improvement Program
ULD Unit Load Device
VAN Value Added Network – 3rd Party EDI Service Provider

MIP EDI Handbook
5 Introduction
In 2007, IATA introduced a global program of EDI improvement for the air cargo
industry, known as the IATA e-freight Message Improvement Program (MIP).
This program is focused on improving the quality and penetration of the
messages exchanged between forwarders and airlines, concentrating on the
most important and widely used CIMP messages, the FWB and FHLCIMP,
which are the electronic equivalent of respectively the Air Waybill and the
House Manifest. As part of this program, IATA is working with both stakeholder
groups to improve the quality and penetration of these messages.
The IATA e-freight Message Improvement Program is an industry project,

driven by IATA. There are many others within the airfreight community who
have also committed to the principles of electronic commerce, such as the IATA
Cargo 2000 group. The Cargo 2000 membership has agreed to implement full
global electronic commerce. It is expected that this will fundamentally enhance
trading relationships and foster competitive advantage for those that participate.
For the industry to move forward, it is important that stakeholders understand

the overall advantages and means of communicating electronically.
Stakeholders must also recognize that complete and accurate data is required
for customs reporting at the air waybill / house manifest and FWB / FHL level.
This guide introduces the standards that are available and the advantages of
complete and accurate EDI Message exchange.
This goal of this handbook are:
1. An easy-to-understand guide to EDI (Part 1)

2. An introduction to the Message Improvement Program (Part 2)
3. A guide to the most common problems and how to fix them (Part 3)
The initial audience for this handbook is IT development and data entry staff at
freight forwarders. The audience is expected to grow by stakeholder type as the
program matures and the handbook further develops. By tightening up on
system validations in accordance with CIMP standards, it will be possible to
achieve rapid improvements in the quality of the data exchanged between
forwarders and airlines.
As we can see from the latest measurements available from the Message
Improvement Program at the time of this writing, the FWB message quality for
e-freight consignments improved from 50% to 92% over the past 12 months.
This chart measures the percent of e-freight consignments for which messages
were received without any error or duplicates.

MIP EDI Handbook
MIP EDI Handbook
6 A Guide to EDI
6.1 What is EDI?

EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) is the application of computer and
telecommunications technology to the exchange of business documents, such
as air waybills and other information.
With EDI, no paper documents are exchanged (where legally feasible). Instead,
the documents are transferred in a standard electronic format, via various
telecommunications means (e.g. network, wan, internet, etc.), between your
computer and your trading partner’s computer. This has the advantage of
speed, accuracy and less manual effort than would be required using paper
documents and re-entering the data manually in different computer systems.
In short, with EDI:
Ê Electronic data replace paper documents (where legally feasible)

Ê A telecommunications network replaces the physical document
delivery
Ê Manual processing is reduced or eliminated
Data exchanges along the supply chain are usually achieved combining various
technical solutions and processes. A typical solution, as describe below, require
a solution provider to convert messages from one format to another to allow the
exchange of messages between two systems. Additional options can be found
in chapter 4 of the e-freight Handbook.

MIP EDI Handbook
The use of EDI provides some immediate benefits for all the participants in the
supply chain. These include:
Ê Increased Speed
Ê Improved Accuracy
Ê Increased business efficiency
6.1.1 Increase speed

Using EDI provides an immediate increase in the speed with which information
is captured and exchanged between trading partners:
Ê Sending an electronic message to any location on the globe

requires only seconds. It is thus available for processing to suit your
timetable. Compare this with the time taken to physically deliver a
document.
Ê Reduction in time spent entering and amending data.
Ê Unlike fax, the data is available immediately for use by computer
applications.
6.1.2 Improved accuracy

The electronic transfer of business data can help improve accuracy in a number
of different ways:
Ê The data used in EDI documents is typically derived from a

database or computer application, where it has been subject to
prior validation.
Ê During transfer across the communications network the integrity of
each electronic document is always maintained, whatever the size.
The delivery of incomplete documents is avoided.
Ê Data is transferred from machine-to-machine with little or no human
intervention. Errors resulting from the copying of information from
one paper document to another or the keying of data into a
business application are virtually eliminated.
6.1.3 Increased business efficiency

All of the above points translate into business efficiencies and are areas for
potential savings resulting from reduced cycle times, reduced overheads and
reduced administrative costs, as well as improved availability of information.
Such savings may provide those companies, who have implemented EDI
exchange with a business advantage over their competitors.
6.2 EDI Business Functions in Air Cargo

While the IATA e-freight Message Improvement Program is focused on the
quality and penetration of FWB and FHL messages there are other areas of
EDI message exchange, which are available to industry participants such as:
Ê Schedule and Availability information request and answer (FVR /

FVA)
Ê Space Allocation Request message and answer (FFR / FFA)
Ê Airline Flight Manifest (FFM)
Ê Status Request (FSR) / Status Answer (FSA) / Status Update
(FSU)

MIP EDI Handbook
Prior to sending these messages, message originators will need to work with
the message recipients as to the recipient’s system supports the above
messages. While IATA recommends to always use the latest available version
of messages, there is also a need to agree which version of the message is
exchanged.
6.2.1 Schedule and Availability Information Request and Answer (FVR /

FVA)
Many airlines accept EDI requests for schedule and space availability
information sent using the appropriate CIMP messages, and will return
information obtained directly from their HOST computer system.
You will find this information invaluable when planning the forwarding of your
shipment and for working out specific routes, direct flights and connections for
specific dates, etc.
Schedule queries can be made in respect of:
Ê Direct flights for a specific routing

Ê Connections
Ê Information relating to a specific date
Ê Information for the coming month
The availability of information provided can include:
Ê Flight number
Ê Departure and arrival times
Ê Capacity for free-sale, including weight and volume
6.2.2 Space Allocation Request and Answer (FFR / FFA)

Most airline systems can receive FFR messages, defined as a Freight Booking
Request (AWB space allocation request). In response, the airline will send an
FFA message, defined as a Freight Booking Request Answer (AWB space
allocation answer). This can also be a booking rejection message.
Where manual intervention is required the system may respond with an

appropriate message.
Situations requiring manual intervention could include:
Ê Freight requiring special handling, e.g. live animals, dangerous

goods, valuables, etc.
Ê Freight booked on flights to which restrictions apply, e.g. narrow-
bodied aircraft, network optimization requirements, etc.
Ê Freight bookings over the airline’s weight / volume tolerance
6.2.3 Air Waybill Data (FWB)

A major advantage of electronic commerce is the availability to achieve one-
time data capture of AWB data. The AWB is entered once – at the source – and
the transmitted data can then be used at successive stages through the
system, without need for it to be re-entered. This minimizes message editing,
reduces errors and smoothes the flow of the cargo.

MIP EDI Handbook
Details of FWB and other EDI message formats are provided by IATA and are
published in the IATA CIMP Manual.
6.2.4 Consolidation List (FHL)

Some countries require House Manifest data to be sent to their import customs
authority. In most cases the forwarder is obliged to send the data to the carrier
for resending by the carrier to the Customs authority in the country of
destination.
In some cases the forwarder may send the information directly to Customs
bypassing the need to send the FHL to the airline. The IATA e-freight
Handbook provides recommendations as to who should send which message
to whom.
Details of FHL and other EDI message formats are provided by IATA and are
published in the IATA CIMP Manual.
6.2.5 Airline Flight Manifest (FFM)

Many airlines send an electronic version of the manifest (FFM) to the
destination-handling agent. This is normally sent at flight departure time and
contains details of the ULDs and their contents loaded on a specific flight. This
information is used by the handling agent at destination to prepare for the
breakdown of the incoming flight.
The FFM is also required prior to the aircraft arrival by some Customs
authorities for risk analysis.
6.2.6 Status Information (FSA / FSU)

Many airline systems are able to provide customers who use electronic
commerce with information on the status of a shipment as it moves from point
of origin to its final destination.
There are two methods, which result in the generation of EDI status messages
from the airline to the forwarder:
Ê Freight Status Request (FSR)

Ê This is a request message, which the customer can issue at
any time.
Ê The airline will reply using a Freight Status Answer message
(FSA). This is a single status message which provides the
latest current status of the shipment.
Ê Freight Status Update (FSU)

Ê This is an unsolicited message which is sent to the customer at
specific events during the shipment lifecycle.
Ê Each FSU reports a single event as it occurs for a shipment or
partial shipment. The recipient’s system must accumulate and
sort these FSUs to obtain a full picture of the history and
current status of the shipment or part.
Ê According to the CIMP there are a wide range of events that
can trigger the sending of an FSU message, as shown in the
table below. However, airlines may not support all of the
message status listed below.
Ê The customer, in consultation with the airline, must select those
that are most appropriate to their needs.

MIP EDI Handbook
In exchange for correct and complete FWB / FHL messages, airlines within the
program should send certain status “FSU” messages, or their equivalents. As
part of the MIP program, the minimum FSU messages with status codes that
are to be sent to the forwarder, in exchange for FWB messages are the RCS,
DEP, RCS and NFD statuses as described below. Other possible statuses can
be found in the Cargo Interchange Message (CIMP) Procedure.
6.3 How You Can Exchange Data Electronically?

There are a number of mechanisms by which information can be exchanged as
described in Chapter 4 of the e-freight handbook. Currently, the most widely
used are Value Added Networks (VANs) or - as they are more commonly
known in the freight industry – CCSs (Cargo Community Systems).
Cargo Community Systems

Cargo Community Systems facilitate the transfer of data between trading
partners by allowing all the participants in the cargo logistics chain to
communicate with each other via EDI, using set standards and procedures.
They also provide the conversion facilities required to enable one company’s
computer system to talk to another completely different system used by a
trading partner.
Utilizing a Cargo Community System, businesses can send all of their files to a
single destination. The Cargo Community System then routes data to each
recipient’s own electronic mailbox or systems.
The typical links provided by a Cargo Community System are shown below.

MIP EDI Handbook
As the use of EDI grows, Cargo Community Systems are beginning to
communicate with each other (interoperability). This is developing into a truly
global network for the cargo community.
The advantages of using a Cargo Community System include:
Ê Cost efficiency
No need to maintain permanent communications links between
trading partners – remembering that airlines and forwarders may be
involved in a number of trading relationships.
Ê Security
A Cargo Community System allows the user to send and receive
data only to and from their own electronic mailbox. This allows the
exchange of information between trading partners whilst ensuring at
no time do they have unauthorized access to in-house systems.
Ê Tracking
Most Cargo Community Systems provide a detailed tracking
information service. This allows the sender to monitor the progress
of electronic documents from transmission to receipt and will provide
an audit trail for messages.
Ê Error checking and validation
When a message is sent to a Cargo Community System the address
of the recipient is automatically checked. Messages are also
validated for completeness and compliance to the specified
standard. Incorrectly addressed documents or those which fail
validation checking are discarded and the sender notified of the
error.
Cargo Community Systems also maintain a check on the completeness of the

data. This ensures that if there is a break in transmission incomplete
documents are not sent.
6.4 What You Need to Make EDI Work

In order to make EDI work for you, you will need:
Ê EDI Software to generate and receive messages

Ê Access to a Cargo Community System
These are further outlined below.
6.4.1 EDI Software

EDI Software is normally required to perform three tasks:
Ê Data preparation
Ê The construction of data into a format suitable for transmission –
and the translation of received EDI messages into useful data
Ê Control the sending and receiving of data via the chosen Cargo
Community System
It may be important, depending on your business, to ensure that the EDI

software is integrated with your in-house systems.
There is now a wide variety of software available to carry out the many EDI
functions. Your usual IT supplier should be able to advise you further.

MIP EDI Handbook
6.4.2 Access to a Cargo Community System
There are a large number of Cargo Community Systems providers based
around the world which can offer connections to airlines, forwarders and other
stakeholders.
6.5 Future Developments in EDI
6.5.1 Legacy Standards

As described above, the most popular current implementation of EDI involves
the exchange of CIMP and EDIFACT formatted messages over leased data
lines and using third party VANs (or Cargo Community Systems) as
intermediaries.
This time-tested process serves the industry well and is less expensive than
handling paper documents.
6.5.2 XML
Some stakeholders are now pursuing alternative communication methods (e.g.,
SMTP, Web Services, etc.) utilizing lower cost transmission over the Internet.
The newer, more flexible XML messaging standard is becoming more
universally accepted and if adopted by all trading partners, could reduce costs
further.
Such developments could make the replacement of paper documents with

Electronic Data even more desirable.
Currently, IATA is actively engaged in the development of new XML messages

(CXML). Here are some of XML messages that have been developed:
Ê Shipper Declaration of Dangerous Goods
Ê Shipper Invoice
Ê Packing List
Ê Certification of Origin
Ê Waybill
Ê House Waybill
Ê House Manifest
Ê Shipper Letter of Instruction
Additional information can be found at

http:/www.iata.org/stbsupportportal/efreight/materials.htm

MIP EDI Handbook
7 Introduction to the Message Improvement Programme
The primary objective of IATA e-freight is to eliminate the need to transport

paper documents for air cargo. To achieve this goal, numerous business,
technical, legal and regulatory requirements must be met. Two such
requirements are that the documents that accompany an e-freight shipment will,
wherever possible, be replaced by electronic messages and that the data in
these electronic messages must be 100% complete and accurate for all
shipments. IATA e-freight stakeholders will not replace paper documents with
electronic messages unless they have confidence in the quality (completeness /
and accuracy) of the data in those messages.
To provide a coordinated approach to improving message quality, the IATA e-

freight project has, together with industry stakeholders, established an e-freight
message improvement program. This program today has over 50 participants
(airlines and forwarders) and enables them to share learnings, resolve common
problems and provides standard, simple measures to track progress.
The Message Improvement Program (MIP) is an integral part of the IATA e-

freight project. Airlines and forwarders involved with local e-freight
implementations are required to participate, but the program is also open to
non-e-freight stakeholders that will benefit from improved message
performance before they implement e-freight.
For current updates visit the MIP page on the IATA web site at
http:/www.iata.org/stb/efreight/messageimprovementprogram-mip.htm
For current updates about the e-freight project, please visit

http:/www.iata.org/stb/efreight
7.1 Executive Summary

Today, the air cargo industry almost exclusively relies on paper-based
processes to support the movement of freight. The average shipment (MAWB)
generates more than 30 documents that are used and / or handled by the
various parties involved -shippers, freight forwarders, handling agents, export
and import brokers, airlines, and last but not least, Customs and other
government authorities.
The long-term vision for the industry is to eliminate the need to produce and
transport all paper for all stakeholders. This is paperless e-freight and e-
Customs. However, before the paper can be removed from the transport
process, e-freight stakeholders must have confidence in the quality
(completeness and accuracy) of the data in those messages.
To address this, the IATA e-freight Message Improvement Program (MIP) aims
to measure the quality and penetration of electronic documents exchanged
between supply chain partners, in order to allow stakeholders to reduce
unnecessary duplicate messages and manual corrections. This is also
supporting the philosophy of entering data once at source and share with all
partners in the chain. As the e-freight project scope includes new messages to
the program, the MIP may be expanded accordingly.

MIP EDI Handbook
The Message Improvement Program Strategy Document describes:
Ê The scope of IATA e-freight MIP
Ê The methodology to be used for measuring and increasing both
quality and penetration
Ê The governance for MIP
Ê The benefits, risks and issues
Ê The format to be used by airlines and CCS for submission of
monthly data
Ê The reports that IATA produces for Airlines, Freight Forwarders and
the Industry.
The latest version of this document can be found at:

http:/www.iata.org/stb/efreight/messageimprovementprogram-mip.htm
7.2 Why Join the Message Improvement Program?

Participation into MIP is mandatory for airlines and freight forwarders involved
in e-freight implementations. Other airlines and freight forwarders can also join
the program in preparation for e-freight. Based on the statistical results
compiled and provided by IATA, stakeholders will then work together to solve
the problems and achieve the objectives of the program.
By participating in the program, airlines and freight forwarders are agreeing that
aggregated industry or country reports, specified as part of this document, can
be shared amongst all participants. Confidential reports for one particular airline
or one particular forwarder will not be shared. Participation, for an Airline, is
defined as providing shipment data on a monthly basis (15th of the month) to
IATA. While it is recognised that an airline may be unable to submit all data files
that are complete in every respect, the goal is for all participants to do so as
soon as possible.
7.2.1 Why an Airline Should Participate in MIP?

Improved message quality is a pre-requisite for e-freight implementation.
Without complete and accurate messages e-freight is not viable. However,
there are also direct and immediate benefits to be achieved by improving
message quality. Once airlines determine their baseline performance they
should develop business cases to evaluate the financial benefit associated with
improved message performance.
Direct benefits for the airline can come from:

Ê Reduced cost of Air Waybill / House Manifest data entry for which
no FWB / FHL has been supplied.
Ê Reduced cost of amending incorrect FWB / FHL data.
Ê Reduced message costs for rejected FWB / FHL messages and
duplicate / messages.
Advantages of receiving correct FWB / FHL data in advance of the physical

document:
Ê Reduction in Customs fines caused by incorrect FWB / FHL data.
Ê Aspects of Customer Service, such as delays at freight acceptance,
due to the receipt of incorrect FWB / FHL data.

MIP EDI Handbook
Costs for an airline participating in the IATA e-freight program are likely to come
from:
Ê Development of the reports required by IATA to participate in the
program.
Ê Increased message costs through increased penetration and
potential additional messages types exchanged.
Ê Resource costs analyzing and addressing problems.
7.2.2 Why Forwarders Should Participate in MIP?

Improved message quality is a pre-requisite for e-freight implementation.
Without complete and accurate messages, e-freight is not viable for the
forwarder.
Airline participants in the IATA e-freight Message Improvement Program will

send RCS / RCF and DEP messages or the agreed equivalents, to freight
forwarders in exchange for correct and accurate FWB messages.
This has advantages for both the forwarder and the airline in that:
Ê The agent does not need to phone the airline constantly for status
updates
Ê Airline does not need to spend time answering queries
Some forwarders have expressed the desire to remove the need to deliver the
AWB / HAWB to the airline. This can only be done if the FWB / FHL messages
are complete and accurate. It will be the responsibility of the forwarder to
ensure complete and accurate messages are sent to the airline before he can
truly move to a paper-free environment.
7.2.3 How to Participate?

The steps for an airline or a forwarder to participate into MIP are the following:
1. Read carefully the latest available MIP Strategy document.

2. Formally agree to it by sending an email to the MIP Manager at
mip@iata.org.
3. Appoint a MIP contact person and share his contact details (name, position,
address, phone, fax and email) for publication in the MIP contact list.
4. Airlines: On a monthly basis, provide the MIP data files (on the 15th of
each month at the latest, covering the previous month activity).
5. Forwarders: Provide the list of all IATA agent numbers / names it operates
under for all its locations (for MIP report consolidation).
6. On a monthly basis, review the personalised MIP reports (distributed from
the 20th of each month) to investigate frequent issues with counterparts
(airlines, forwarders, CCS, GHAs, systems or service providers, internal IT
services...)
Participants are granted access to the MIP Extranet where they can find
monthly industry statistics and other MIP related information. From time to time,
MIP might be organising workshops and conference calls between participants
to discuss common issues and how best to resolve them.

MIP EDI Handbook
7.3 MIP Objectives
The primary objective of IATA e-freight is to eliminate the need to transport
paper documents for air cargo. To achieve this goal, numerous business,
technical, legal and regulatory requirements must be met. Two such
requirements are that the documents that accompany an e-freight shipment will,
wherever possible, be replaced by electronic messages and that the data in
these electronic messages must be complete and accurate for all shipments.
IATA e-freight stakeholders will not replace paper documents with electronic
messages unless they have confidence in the quality (completeness and
accuracy) of the data in those messages.
To provide a coordinated approach to improving message quality and

penetration, the IATA e-freight project has, together with industry stakeholders,
established an e-freight message penetration, measurement and improvement
program. This program has started with a limited number of stakeholders and
documents, but continues to expand to become industry wide. The program
enables participants to share learnings to resolve common problems and
provides standard, simple measures to track progress.
The IATA e-freight Message Improvement Program (MIP) is an integral part of

the e-freight project. All stakeholders involved with local e-freight
implementations are required to participate, but the program is also open to non
e-freight stakeholders that will be able to derive direct benefit from improved
message performance before they start implementing e-freight.
7.4 MIP and Cargo 2000

IATA e-freight and Cargo 2000 (C2K) are complementary. C2K and IATA e-
freight work together, where appropriate and feasible, to ensure alignment.
However, they remain separate programs.
To achieve the mutual objective, it is envisaged that MIP will become part of the
C2K quality measurement and all C2K members will join the IATA e-freight MIP
program. The C2K methodology carries additional quality checks in that certain
FWB data elements are measured as part of its existing operating process,
checking for receipt, sequence, timeliness and accuracy (the latter defined as
the information in the FWB matching that in the route-map). This benefits e-
freight by also improving message quality.
As part of this program, C2K Freight Forwarder and Airline Members will work
with IATA to improve the FWB and FHL message penetration and quality.
7.5 Scope of MIP

The scope of MIP is to cover the messages and documents as defined by the
IATA e-freight strategy, by
1. Collecting monthly data from the appropriate stakeholders

2. Producing and distributing monthly reports to the appropriate stakeholders
3. Establishing a formalized root cause analysis process for investigating
abnormal measurements
4. Collecting root cause analysis results that are of interest to all industry
stakeholders for publication into an EDI Handbook
5. Setting quality and penetration targets with the industry stakeholders
The MIP will continue as long as there is a need to increase data quality and
penetration to the point where e-freight stakeholders have sufficient confidence
MIP EDI Handbook
in the quality of data contained in EDI messages to discontinue the use of
paper documents as the primary source of shipment information. At this point,
subject to other (e.g. legal) constraints, e-freight stakeholders must be in a
position to implement paper-free operating processes. Once the paper is
removed from the process, quality might still need to be continually monitored.

MIP EDI Handbook
8 Common Quality Problems and Solutions
Specific regulations for the transmission of data for Master Air Waybill and
House Manifest data to / or via the USA have been in place since 2004. Today
this has been extended to many other countries that have introduced similar
regulations requiring the carrier to report data electronically, often in advance of
landing. Unfortunately some carriers continue to experience difficulties with the
data provided from their customers. In many cases the data provided to the
carrier does not match the required standards set by the government agencies
in their regulations. The key areas of concern are the shipper , the consignee
and goods description. These frequently contain significant errors, some of
which result in delays to the import of the goods as well as placing the carrier at
risk of penalty.
By making some changes to the way in which data is entered by forwarders, it

is possible to make a difference to the quality of the message.
The only valid characters that should be used in an FWB are:

Ê The letters A to Z (must be upper case)
Ê The numerals 0 to 9
Ê The special characters / -. Space and <= (also known as carriage
return line feed)
CSC (Cargo Services Conference) Resolution 600a for the completion of Air
Waybills must be strictly adhered to. Also, IATA’s Cargo Interchange Message
Procedures Manual (CIMP) must be strictly followed for messaging. FWB
messages must contain all the required information as described in resolution
600a. Many messaging issues originate from the lack of compliance to the
standards and validations described in this manual or the mismatch of message
versions between senders and receivers. IATA e-freight recommends only the
latest published versions to be used. The latest version available today is
version 29 published in 2009 and can be obtained through
http://www.iata.org/ps/publications / cimp.htm
Note: This document is a guideline and should not be used to determine

the reporting requirements for Customs authorities. It is up to each
individual company to ensure that they are reporting correctly to
Customs.
8.1 Consignee / Shipper information

Airlines spend a lot of time correcting consignee and shipper information in both
the FWB and FHL messages. By following a few simple business rules , the
quality of data exchanged between forwarders and the airlines can improve.
The full shipper name and address must be provided in all cases. Only in cases
where the shipment is a consolidation can the forwarder, agent or consolidator
be shown as the shipper. In all other cases it must be the name and address of
the place from where the goods are shipped.
The address should always be complete and include all the data elements. In
some countries including the USA and Canada the use of Post Office Box
numbers is not acceptable.

MIP EDI Handbook
8.2 Pieces and weight
Weight and pieces of the shipment have to be correct. The use of SLAC
(Shipper Load And Count) is required where appropriate.
8.3 Airport Codes

Only valid IATA Airport Codes are accepted by customs in the fields that refer
to airports (e.g. airport of departure / arrival). City codes can be used however
for the routing (see TACT).
8.4 Agent Information
Airlines also spend a lot of time correcting agent information in the FWB
messages. Once again by following a few simple business rules the quality of
data exchanged between forwarders and the airlines can improve.
8.5 Other Charges Codes

Another common problem concerns the incorrect use of other charges codes. A
full description of the codes can be found in later in this document.
8.6 Country codes

One of the common areas for errors is the ISOC country code. To get started
and assist with the identification of country codes, IATA has included the list, as
published by ISO later in this document.
8.7 Description of Goods

Any shipment having one or more House Waybills attached is considered a
consolidation. For consolidations, the Nature and Quantity of Goods (box 22I on
the AWB completion guide) must be described as “Consolidation as per
attached list”.
Where the consignment is not a consolidation the full descriptive text should be
provided which also conforms to the requirements of any national regulations.
The Goods Description has to be complete and correct. It cannot contain any
unclear descriptions; in most cases those lead to an immediate customs hold of
the shipment.
Special characters, e. g.: > # , & = / - as well as umlauts (äöü) are not allowed
in the Goods Description:
Many customs authorities are now demanding more accurate descriptions

relating to the goods. In many cases, the required details can be found on the
Customs web sites.
8.8 Timeliness
FWB and FHL messages must be sent to airlines before the shipment is
received. Most Airlines’ systems cannot process FWBs or FHLs after the
shipment has been received and will reject such messages, causing additional
time and cost to be spent to re-enter all necessary data when the shipment is
received. . Also, this can be a cause of message duplications (=additional
communications costs) as the Ground Handler will be creating a message and
send it to the airline who will as well receive the late message from the
forwarder for the same shipment.

MIP EDI Handbook
Additional time restrictions might apply based on the station of origin. For
example, in Hongkong freight is delivered to the airlines before the air waybill is
prepared. To support this unique situation, IATA has created FSU-FOH, which
means the freight is on-hand pending “Ready for Carriage” determination.
Additional details can be found in the Cargo Interchange Message (CIMP)
procedure.
8.9 Message Versions

It is important that the message originator and the message recipient agree on
the message version to be exchanged. This requires liaison between the
message originator, the recipient and the CCS.IATA e-freight recommends only
the latest available versions of messages to be used as they will include all
needed information as required by customs or for security purposes. A frequent
cause of missing data is the use of older message versions by senders that do
not include the latest required information or do not conform to the latest
standards for customs or security.
8.10 Removal of Unnecessary Spaces or Unsupported Characters

No unnecessary spaces or un-supported characters should appear in the
messages exchanged. This can cause problems in the recipient’s systems as
CIMP messages have strict field length limitations.
8.11 How to Ensure FWB Shipper / Consignee Data Compliance

One area where mistakes can be made is during the completion of the shipper /
consignee details. The validation rules for entering the shipper details on the air
waybill match exactly those for the same field on the FWB.
8.11.1 Shipper / Consignee FWB Layout Template

MIP EDI Handbook
8.11.2 Data Element Completion
Ê The line identifier in the AWB / FWB identifies whether the data is
that of the Shipper (SHP) or the Consignee (CNE).
Ê Optional: the account number, which follows the message identifier,

consists of 14 characters free format text.
Ê Where the address is in the US the address it should contain the

State code and zip code (as per TACT rules); Country and Zip
Codes have to be entered correctly. Example:
Ê Name ABC Company
Ê Address 123 Front Road
Ê City Atlanta
Ê State GA
Ê Zip code 12345
Ê Country code US
Ê Where the address is in Canada the address must contain the

province Code (as per TACT rules) and the postal code must be to
the correct format. Example:
Ê Name ABC Company
Ê Address 123 Front Road
Ê City Toronto
Ê State ON
Ê Zip code A7A 9V9
(alpha,numeric,alpha,space,numeric,alpha,numeric)
Ê Country code CA
Ê Mandatory: the shippers / consignees name can be up 35

characters in free format text.
Ê Mandatory: the shippers / consignees street address can be up 35

Ê Mandatory: the shippers / consignees place can be up 17

Ê Optional: the shippers / consignees state / province can be up 9

Note: The state and province code are mandatory for customs
requirements in both USA and Canada and must be included in
both the AWB and FWB for shipments destined for these countries.
Ê Mandatory: the shippers / consignees ISO country code (2 alpha)

and should be as listed later in this document.
Ê Optional: the shippers / consignees country postcode can be up 9

Note: The post-code is mandatory for both US (zip code) and CA
Customs requirements and must be included and populated in
accordance with the country requirements on both the AWB and
FWB for shipments destined for these countries.
Ê Optional: one or more contacts comprising, for each contact, the

contact type (2 alpha), followed by the contact number (up to 25
characters free format text).

MIP EDI Handbook
8.11.3 System Enhancements Required for Consignee / Shipper
Compliance
Ê Ensure that only valid characters are sent in the FWB message:
Ê The letters A to Z (Must be upper case)
Ê The special characters -. Space
Ê Ensure that the field length boundaries are not exceeded, e.g., the
name can only be 35 characters.
Ê Ensure that additional lines of text in the shipper / consignee fields
are not printed on the air waybill or included in the FWB message.
Ê Ensure country code is a valid ISO country code.
Ê Include checks to ensure mandatory consignee / shipper fields are
completed.
8.12 How to Ensure FWB Agent Data Compliance

Another area in which mistakes can be made is during the completion of the
agent details. The validation rules for entering the agent details on the air
waybill are exactly the same as those for the same field on the FWB. The agent
details in the FWB are conditional on the agent being entitled to commission.
8.12.1 FWB – Agent Layout template

Ê Account Number (Optional), IATA Agent Numeric Code
(Mandatory), IATA agent CASS Address (Optional), Participant
Identifier.
Ê Optional: the account number can be up to 14 characters of free

format text.
Ê Mandatory: the IATA Agent Numeric Code in non-CASS areas is a

7 numeric identifier. In CASS areas it is an 11 numeric identifier
(Agent Numeric Code plus Agent CASS Address), the eleventh digit
being an un-weighted, modulus 7 check-digit. If no IATA code exist
for the agent

MIP EDI Handbook
Ê The participant identifier is a code identifying the participant
involved in the movement of the shipment, e.g.
Ê AGT = AGENT
Ê CAG = COMMISSIONABLE AGENT
Ê FFW = FREIGHT FORWARDER
Ê SHP = SHIPPER
Ê Mandatory: the name can be up to 35 characters free format text.
Ê Mandatory: the place can be up to 17 characters free format text.
8.12.3 System Enhancements Required for Agent Compliance

Ê Ensure that only valid characters are sent in the FWB message:
Ê The letters A to Z (Must be upper case)
Ê The special characters -. Space
Ê Ensure that the field length boundaries are not exceeded, e.g. the
Ê Ensure that additional lines of text included in the agent data are
not included on the printed air waybill or in the FWB message.
Ê Implement a modulus 7-digit check on the 11th digit where 7
numeric identifier IATA agent numeric code includes the IATA
Agent CASS address.
Ê Include checks to ensure mandatory agent fields are completed.
Ê Ensure that participant identifier is static or can be populated from a
drop down list.
8.13
8.14 How to Ensure FWB Other Charges Codes Data Compliance
Although this entire section is optional for e-freight, there are a significant
number of other charges codes, which can appear on both the FWB and the
AWB. Because there are so many, there is a tendency to group the charges
under the heading of miscellaneous charges if there is doubt when creating the
data. This practice causes data inaccuracies and is strongly discouraged.
8.14.1 FWB – Other Charges Layout Template

MIP EDI Handbook
Ê Prepaid Collect indicator P or C.
Ê Other Charge Code – 2 alpha charge code (see table below).
Ê Entitlement code – 1 alpha entitlement code C for carrier or A for
agent.
Ê Charge amount - Up to 12 numeric characters, including a decimal
point if applicable.
The correct other charges codes should be strictly adhered to and are shown
below for your convenience. In any case, you must make sure to adhere to the
exact list specified in Resolution 600a that can be obtained here:
http://www.iata.org/ps/publications/cargo-conference-manual.htm
8.14.3 System Enhancements Required for Other Charge Code

Compliance
Ê Ensure that the field length boundaries are not exceeded.
Ê Ensure that other charges codes are valid. These could be
populated from a drop down list that includes a full explanation of
what the charge is.
Ê Ensure that specific mandatory other charges for airlines are
present before allowing the user to complete the transaction.
8.15 How to Ensure FHL Shipper / Consignee Data Compliance

There are three main problems currently being experienced with the FHL
message. These are:
1. Invalid or missing shipper details

2. Invalid or missing consignee details
3. Description of goods not acceptable to regulatory authorities
8.15.1 FHL – Shipper / Consignee Layout Template

MIP EDI Handbook
Ê When required for customs reporting purposes, the shipper and
consignee details must consist of 4 lines.
Ê The line identifier in the FHL identifies whether the data is that of
the Shipper (SHP) or the Consignee (CNE).
Ê Mandatory for Customs reporting: the shippers / consignees name

can be up to 35 characters of free format text.
Ê Mandatory for Customs reporting: the shippers / consignees street

address can be up to 35 characters of free format text.
Ê Mandatory for Customs reporting: the shippers / consignees place

can be up 17 characters in free format text.
Ê Mandatory for Customs reporting: the shippers / consignees state /

province can be up 9 characters in free format text.
Ê Note: the state and province code are mandatory for customs
requirements in both USA and Canada and must be included in
both the AWB and FWB for shipments destined for these
countries.
Ê Mandatory for Customs reporting: the shippers / consignees

country code (2 alpha) as listed in section 5 below.
Ê Mandatory for Customs reporting: the shippers / consignees

country postcode can be up 9 characters in free format text.
Ê Note: The post-code is mandatory for both US and CA
Customs requirements and must be included and populated in
accordance with the country requirements on both the AWB
and FWB for shipments destined for these countries.
Ê Optional: one or more contacts comprising, for each contact, the

contact type (2 alpha), followed by the contact number (up to 25
characters free format text.
8.15.3 System Enhancements Required for Consignee / Shipper

Compliance:
Ê Ensure that if the shipment is travelling to a destination or transit
point, which requires the Shipper / Consignee data in the FHL
message, the transaction which causes the FHL to be generated
cannot be completed until the shipper / consignee data has been
populated correctly.
Ê Ensure only valid characters are sent in the FHL message:
Ê The letters A to Z ((Must be upper case)
Ê The special characters - . Space
Ê Ensure that the field length boundaries are not exceeded, e.g. the
Ê Ensure that additional lines of text included in the shipper /
consignee fields of the forwarders system are not included in the
FHL message.
Ê Ensure the country code is a valid ISO country code. This could be
populated from a drop down list.

MIP EDI Handbook
Ê Include checks to ensure mandatory consignee / shipper fields are
completed.
8.16 How to ensure FHL Manifest Description of Goods Data Compliance
8.16.1 FHL – House Waybill Summary Details Layout Template

Ê The Manifest Description of Goods can be up to 15 characters of
free format text.
8.17 How to ensure FHL Free Text Description of Goods Data Compliance
8.17.1 FHL – Free text description of goods layout template

Ê The Free Text Description of Goods must be used for transmitting
acceptable descriptions to customs and can be up to 65 characters
of free format text.
Ê Note: Due to the size limitations in the Manifest Description of
Goods it is necessary to provide the full descriptive text in the free
text line in some cases. However, it is not allowed to start the
description in the Manifest Description of Goods and continue the
description in the Free Text Description of Goods. The Manifest
Description of Goods and Free Text Description of Goods are
separate and different data fields and should not be mixed.

MIP EDI Handbook
Good example
a) FHL / 2
MBI / 125-32317460MNLJFK / T21K3586.8
HBS / 5363409271 / MNLPVD / 6 / L222.6 / TOOLS
TXT / INDUSTRIAL TOOLS
Bad examples
a) MBI / 125-37472816KULBOS / T1K36.0
HBS / KUL00091533 / KULBOS / 1 / K36.0 / EPOXY MOLDING C
TXT / OMPOUND INV.NO M85303
b) FHL / 2
MBI / 125-33873254MAAATL / T2K811.0
HBS / MAA0096761 / MAAATL / 2 / K811.0 / ALUMINIUM PISTO
SHP / SUPER AUTO FORGE LTD
8.18 Description of Goods Compliance

Many Customs authorities are now demanding better and more accurate
descriptions of goods when this information is sent to them in either electronic
or other means.
Examples of what is acceptable and not acceptable can generally be found on

Custom’s Web sites. For instance the Canadian Custom’s Web site contains
the following information.
Not Acceptable Acceptable

Apparel Clothing
Wearing Apparel Shoes
Ladies' Apparel Footwear
Mens’ Apparel Jewellery (may include watches)
Appliances Kitchen Appliances
Industrial Appliances
Heat Pump
Auto parts New Auto parts
Parts Used Auto parts
Caps Baseball Caps
Blasting Caps
Bottle Caps
Hub Caps
Chemicals, hazardous Actual Chemical Name (not brand name)
Chemicals, non- Or U.N. HAZMAT Code Identifier #
hazardous
Electronic Goods Computers
Electronics Consumer Electronics, Telephones
Electronic Toys (can include Game boys, Game Cubes, Dancing Elmo Doll
etc.)
Personal / Household Electronics (i.e. PDAs, VCRs, TVs)
Equipment Industrial Equipment, Oil Well Equipment,
Automotive Equipment, Poultry Equipment, etc.
Flooring Wood Flooring, Plastic Flooring, Carpet, Ceramic Tile, Marble Flooring
Foodstuffs Oranges
Fish
Packaged Rice, Packaged Grain, Bulk Grain
Iron Iron Pipes, Steel Pipes
Steel Iron Building Material, Steel Building Material

MIP EDI Handbook
Not Acceptable Acceptable
Leather Articles Saddles
Leather Handbags
Leather Jackets, Shoes
Machinery Metal Working Machinery
Cigarette Making Machinery
Machines Sewing Machines
Printing Machines
Pipes Plastic Pipes
PVC Pipes
Steel Pipes
Copper Pipes
Plastic Goods Plastic Kitchenware, Plastic Houseware,
Industrial Plastics
Toys, New / Used Auto Parts
Polyurethane Polyurethane Threads
Polyurethane Medical Gloves
Personal Effects
Household Goods
Rubber Articles Rubber Hoses
Tires
Toys
Rubber Conveyor Belts
Rods Welding Rods
Rebar
Aluminium Rods
Reactor Rods
Scrap Plastic Scrap
Aluminium Scrap
Iron Scrap
STC (Said to Contain)
General Cargo
FAK (Freight of All Kinds)
"No Description"
Tiles Ceramic Tiles
Marble Tiles
Tools Hand Tools
Power Tools
Industrial Tools
Wires Electric Wires
Auto Harness
Coiled Wire (Industrial)
8.18.1 System Enhancements Required for Description of Goods

Compliance:
Ê Do not allow abbreviated description of goods. If necessary,
populate from a drop down list.
Ê Do not start the goods description in the manifest description of
goods and continue in the free text description of goods. Repeat the
details in the text description of goods.

MIP EDI Handbook
9 Appendix A - ISO Country codes
This list states the country names (official short names in English) in alphabetical order as given in ISO
3166-1 and the corresponding ISO 3166-1-alpha-2 code elements.
Country Name Country Country Name Country Country Name Country

Code Code Code
Afghanistan AF Chad TD Gambia, The GM
Albania AL Chile CL Georgia GE
Algeria DZ China CN Germany DE
American Samoa AS Chinese Taipei TW Ghana GH
Andorra AD Christmas Island CX Gibraltar GI
Angola AO Cocos (Keeling) CC Greece GR
Anguilla AI Islands Greenland GL
Antarctica AQ Colombia CO Grenada GD
Antigua & Barbuda AG Comoros KM Guadeloupe GP
Argentina AR Congo (Brazzaville) CG Guam GU
Armenia AM Congo, Democratic CD Guatemala GT
Aruba AW Republic of the Guinea GN
Australia AU Cook Islands CK Guinea-Bissau GW
Austria AT Costa Rica CR Guyana GY
Azerbaijan AZ Côte d'Ivoire CI Haiti HT
Bahamas BS Croatia HR Heard Island and HM
Bahrain BH Cuba CU McDonald Islands
Bangladesh BD Cyprus CY Holy See (Vatican VA
Barbados BB Czech Republic CZ City)
Belarus BY Denmark DK Honduras HN
Belgium BE Djibouti DJ Hong Kong (SAR), HK
Belize BZ Dominican Republic DO China
Benin BJ Dominicana DM Hungary HU
Bermuda BM East Timor TL IATA defined code XU
Bhutan BT Ecuador EC Iceland IS
Bolivia BO Egypt EG India IN
Bosnia and BA El Salvador SV Indonesia ID
Herzegovina Equatorial Guinea GQ Iran IR
Botswana BW Eritrea ER Iraq IQ
Bouvet Island BV Estonia EE Ireland IE
Brazil BR Ethiopia ET Israel IL
British Indian Ocean IO Falkland Islands (Islas FK Italy IT
Territory Malvinas) Jamaica JM
British Virgin Islands VG Faroe Islands FO Japan JP
Brunei BN Fiji FJ Jordan JO
Bulgaria BG Finland FI Kazakhstan KZ
Burkina Faso BF France FR Kenya KE
Burma MM France, Metropolitan FX Kiribati KI
Burundi BI French Guiana GF Korea (South) KR
Cambodia KH French Polynesia PF Korea, North KP
Cameroon CM French Southern and TF Kuwait KW
Canada CA Antarctic Lands Kyrgyzstan KG
Cape Verde CV FYROM - Former MK Laos LA
Cayman Islands KY Yugoslav Republic Of Latvia LV
Central African CF Macedonia Lebanon LB
Republic Gabon GA Lesotho LS
MIP EDI Handbook
Country Name Country Country Name Country Country Name Country
Code Code Code
Liberia LR Palau PW Suriname SR
Libya LY Palestine PS Svalbard SJ
Liechtenstein LI Panama PA Swaziland SZ
Lithuania LT Papua New Guinea PG Sweden SE
Luxembourg LU Paraguay PY Switzerland CH
Macao (SAR), China MO Peru PE Syria SY
Madagascar MG Philippines PH Tajikistan TJ
Malawi MW Pitcairn Islands PN Tanzania TZ
Malaysia MY Poland PL Thailand TH
Maldives MV Portugal PT Togo TG
Mali ML Puerto Rico PR Tokelau TK
Malta MT Qatar QA Tonga TO
Marshall Islands MH Reunion RE Trinidad and Tobago TT
Martinique MQ Romania RO Tunisia TN
Mauritania MR Russian Federation RU Turkey TR
Mauritius MU Rwanda RW Turkmenistan TM
Mayotte YT Saint Helena SH Turks and Caicos TC
Mexico MX Saint Kitts and Nevis KN Islands
Micronesia FM Saint Lucia LC Tuvalu TV
Moldova MD Saint Pierre and PM Uganda UG
Monaco MC Miquelon Ukraine UA
Mongolia MN Saint Vincent and the VC UNDEFINED XX
Montenegro ME Grenadines United Arab Emirates AE
Montserrat MS Samoa WS United Kingdom GB
Morocco MA San Marino SM United States Minor UM
Mozambique MZ Sao Tome and ST Outlying Islands
Namibia NA Principe United States of US
Nauru NR Saudi Arabia SA America
Nepal NP Senegal SN Uruguay UY
Netherlands NL Serbia RS Uzbekistan UZ
Netherlands Antilles AN Serbia & Montenegro CS Vanuatu VU
New Caledonia NC Seychelles SC Venezuela VE
New Zealand NZ Sierra Leone SL Vietnam VN
Nicaragua NI Singapore SG Virgin Islands VI
Niger NE Slovakia SK Wallis & Futuna WF
Nigeria NG Slovenia SI Islands
Niue NU Solomon Islands SB Western Sahara EH
Norfolk Island NF Somalia SO Yemen YE
Northern Mariana MP South Africa ZA Zambia ZM
Islands South Georgia and the GS Zimbabwe ZW
Norway NO Islands
Oman OM Spain ES
Pakistan PK Sri Lanka LK
Sudan SD

MIP EDI Handbook

IATA E-Freight: Message Improvement Programme (MIP) EDI Handbook V2.0

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IATA E-Freight: Message Improvement Programme (MIP) EDI Handbook V2.0

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IATA e-freight

Message Improvement Programme

www.iata.org/e-freight IATA CARGO

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 2/34 IATA CARGO

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 3/34 IATA CARGO

The information contained in the publication is subject to constant review in the

No part of this guide may be reproduced, recast, reformatted or transmitted in

Director Cargo Supply Chain Management, IDFS

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 4/34 IATA CARGO

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 5/34 IATA CARGO

Revised by Changes Version Date

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 6/34 IATA CARGO

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 7/34 IATA CARGO

The IATA e-freight Message Improvement Program is an industry project,

For the industry to move forward, it is important that stakeholders understand

This goal of this handbook are:

1. An easy-to-understand guide to EDI (Part 1)

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 8/34 IATA CARGO

6.1 What is EDI?

In short, with EDI:

Ê Electronic data replace paper documents (where legally feasible)

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 10/34 IATA CARGO

6.1.1 Increase speed

Ê Sending an electronic message to any location on the globe

6.1.2 Improved accuracy

Ê The data used in EDI documents is typically derived from a

6.1.3 Increased business efficiency

6.2 EDI Business Functions in Air Cargo

Ê Schedule and Availability information request and answer (FVR /

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 11/34 IATA CARGO

6.2.1 Schedule and Availability Information Request and Answer (FVR /

Schedule queries can be made in respect of:

Ê Direct flights for a specific routing

The availability of information provided can include:

6.2.2 Space Allocation Request and Answer (FFR / FFA)

Where manual intervention is required the system may respond with an

Situations requiring manual intervention could include:

Ê Freight requiring special handling, e.g. live animals, dangerous

6.2.3 Air Waybill Data (FWB)

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 12/34 IATA CARGO

6.2.4 Consolidation List (FHL)

6.2.5 Airline Flight Manifest (FFM)

6.2.6 Status Information (FSA / FSU)

Ê Freight Status Request (FSR)

Ê Freight Status Update (FSU)

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 13/34 IATA CARGO

6.3 How You Can Exchange Data Electronically?

Cargo Community Systems

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 14/34 IATA CARGO

The advantages of using a Cargo Community System include:

Cargo Community Systems also maintain a check on the completeness of the

6.4 What You Need to Make EDI Work

Ê EDI Software to generate and receive messages

These are further outlined below.

6.4.1 EDI Software

It may be important, depending on your business, to ensure that the EDI

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 15/34 IATA CARGO

6.5 Future Developments in EDI

6.5.1 Legacy Standards

Such developments could make the replacement of paper documents with

Currently, IATA is actively engaged in the development of new XML messages

Additional information can be found at

www.iata.org/e-freight Page 16/34 IATA CARGO