Inside PLACI: The system that keeps air cargo safe

In October 2010, UK and UAE authorities intercepted two parcel bombs hidden inside printer cartridges on cargo aircraft after receiving a tip from Saudi intelligence. The packages, shipped from Yemen and to addresses in Chicago, were discovered separately in Dubai and at East Midlands Airport in the UK, each containing explosives fitted with a detonator and timer, revealing a major gap in air cargo security. This episode directly led to the creation of risk-assessment systems like Pre-Loading Advance Cargo Information (PLACI), designed to ensure that potentially dangerous cargo is identified and assessed long before it ever reaches an aircraft.

The aviation industry has faced a significant operational shift with the introduction of the PLACI programme. As Christian Piaget, Head of Cargo Border Management & Claims at International Air Transport Association (IATA), explains, "PLACI is quite an intensive programme from an airline perspective. It requires a lot of adaptation because it's changing the way risk assessment is done."

Four major PLACI regimes are now live worldwide: the US Air Cargo Advance Screening (ACAS) programme, the EU Import Control System 2 (ICS2), Canada’s Pre-Load Air Cargo Targeting (PACT) programme, and the UAE’s National Advance Information Centre (NAIC), collectively establishing a global framework for pre-loading risk assessment.

For decades, risk assessment traditionally took place upon arrival at the destination. PLACI, however, moves this crucial step to before the goods are even loaded onto the aircraft. Piaget underscores the reasoning behind this shift: "The purpose is to identify a 'bomb in the box'. This only makes sense before loading; nobody wants to discover a bomb on board just before arrival."

While IATA strongly supports PLACI, Piaget cautions that close collaboration between governments and industry is essential. The programme presents three major operational challenges: "Getting data early, accurate, complete, and in the correct format. Transmitting the data on time. Being ready to react to customs risk assessments: additional screening, requests for information, or a 'Do Not Load' (DNL)."

“PLACI is quite an intensive programme from an airline perspective. It requires a lot of adaptation because it's changing the way risk assessment is done."
Christian Piaget, IATA

Successfully implementing PLACI requires airlines to rethink workflows, establish standard operating procedures, maintain 24/7 contact points, align with forwarders and interline partners, and invest in IT upgrades. According to Piaget, it also demands "strong internal organisation," reflecting the complexity and scale of this transformative initiative.

Despite the operational challenges PLACI introduced, its track record so far suggests the system is doing exactly what it was designed to do: prevent catastrophic threats without paralysing global air cargo flows. As Piaget puts it: “In security, when nothing happens, it's good. Since PLACI started, we’ve had no bombs, so in that sense it’s efficient.”

Piaget also addresses a major industry fear when PLACI began: that risk-based interventions might overwhelm operations. “Our main concern was the possibility of too many DNLs; if every tenth shipment gets stopped, it's a disaster for the industry.” But real-world experience has been far more balanced. “Authorities have been reasonable. They alert us only when there’s a strong concern.”

If PLACI’s success is evident today, its rollout hasn’t been smooth everywhere, most notably in Europe. Piaget contrasts the EU’s experience sharply with the U.S. “The US case was positive because we piloted ACAS for nine years.” That long runway allowed industry and regulators to stress-test the system before full enforcement.

Europe was a different story. When the EU launched its ICS2 pre-loading requirements in 2023, Piaget says the scale and uneven readiness across member states created serious disruption. “The EU is 27 countries with 27 customs systems, with uneven preparation. When airlines started sending data, many systems collapsed. Member states were overwhelmed.”

The consequences were immediate. “They postponed the implementation twice. For us, that hurts credibility. We tell customers to prepare for a date, and then it gets delayed.” More critically, operational failures had a real-world impact inside cargo terminals. “When systems collapsed, shipments got stuck in warehouses; our worst nightmare.”

Despite the frustration, Piaget acknowledges that regulators responded. “We didn’t make a public scandal out of it, but we were really unhappy. To their credit, the European Commission worked very hard to fix it. Now it works, but it took time.”

His takeaway for governments considering PLACI is unambiguous: this is not a plug-and-play programme. “PLACI is not easy. Countries can underestimate the effort. We don’t push PLACI globally; only countries that genuinely feel threatened by terrorism should implement it.”

“More controls have to be employed at the first origin well before the goods are scheduled to fly to avoid bottlenecks at major hubs.”
Martin Meacock, Descartes

PLACI hasn’t just shifted when risk assessment happens; it has reshaped how airlines, forwarders, and handlers organise their upstream workflows. Martin Meacock, VP of Product Management at Descartes, points out that the biggest pressure point is no longer technology alone but the quality and completeness of the data moving through the system. According to him, challenges emerge “around Harmonized System (HS) Codes, goods descriptions, and accurate address details of the relative parties,” all of which are critical for pre-loading risk assessment but often incomplete at the time carriers must file PLACI data.

He notes that U.S. ACAS in particular has tightened expectations: “ACAS in recent years has focused on much more detailed information that is not always immediately available to the carrier.” This shift forces airlines and forwarders to push controls further upstream, long before cargo arrives at a major hub. As Meacock explains, “More controls have to be employed at first origin well before the goods are scheduled to fly to avoid bottlenecks at major hubs and transit points.”

This becomes even more complicated for transit cargo, where the final routing may not be clear from the start: “It can be a challenge for transit goods where it is not obvious at origin whether a PLACI filing will be required or not.”

PLACI doesn’t just introduce new data requirements; it redistributes responsibility across the entire logistics chain, forcing players who were never part of the security workflow to step into compliance roles. As Samir J Shah, Director at JBS Jeena Logistics, explains, “PLACI extends the responsibility for safety and security checks beyond custodians and carriers to a wider set of stakeholders.”

Traditionally, security obligations sat mostly with airlines and regulated entities at the origin. PLACI flips that model by requiring advanced information to multiple authorities along the route. Shah highlights the shift clearly: “Advance information is now required not only by origin stakeholders and customs but also by destination stakeholders and customs authorities. This broadens the compliance scope significantly.”

But the operational challenge isn’t just procedural, it’s cultural. Entire segments of the cargo chain must now develop competencies they never had. Shah notes that “stakeholders must build capacity in areas not traditionally part of their operational role,” which means new training regimes, new systems, and new processes. This step-up doesn’t come cheap: “It demands a mindset shift, investment in training, and higher costs for advanced compliance. These factors have been major deterrents for many service providers.”

"PLACI extends the responsibility for safety and security checks beyond custodians and carriers to a wider set of stakeholders.”
Samir J Shah, JBS Jeena Logistics

The push for global harmonisation in PLACI is underway, but far from complete. Regulators may be aligning at the policy level, yet operational reality on the ground remains fragmented. Piaget of IATA draws a clear distinction between the standards that exist and the technical divergences that still frustrate the industry. “Yes. World Customs Organization (WCO)’s Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (SAFE Framework) and International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 17 already harmonise global PLACI standards, data elements, actions on DNL, and screening requests. Airline message standards like Cargo XML also support harmonisation.”

But he also points out where the complexity hides: “Most remaining complexity lies in technical specifications, which differ because customs systems differ. As long as countries follow international standards, we’re fine. The only exception is that the US recently added new data elements, and we’re still discussing that.”

From the industry side, Martin Meacock of Descartes is more sceptical. For him, true harmonisation still feels aspirational. “This is probably a dream,” he says bluntly. Even where frameworks look aligned on paper, like the 7+1 dataset, implementation details diverge. Meacock notes that “the U.S., in particular, in the ACAS programme has certain data requirements that do not naturally fit within the IATA standards,” while Europe’s ICS2 and the UK’s PACT are even more complex because they are multimodal systems. As he explains, “Whilst technically ICS2 PLACI follows the 7+1 concept, the technical details and communication methods can be challenging.”

On the forwarder side, Shah offers a more optimistic but equally practical view: global standards would make compliance simpler and strengthen security. “HSN is a great example of synergy and simplicity across cultures, languages, and continents. A similar global standard for PLACI would greatly streamline supply chains and enable more honest and effective compliance, ultimately improving safety and security.”

Together, these perspectives paint the picture: the world agrees on what PLACI should look like, but not yet on how to implement it. The policy scaffolding exists, the intent is clear, and the benefits are evident. But until technical specifications, data models, and system designs converge, global harmonisation will remain a work in progress, part aspiration, part negotiation, and part engineering challenge.

Despite PLACI’s growing maturity, global expansion is moving slowly, and for good reason. Christian Piaget notes that several governments are quietly exploring the idea, but none are rushing. “Some countries have shown interest informally, at WTO meetings, for example, but none are moving fast. The EU’s difficult experience probably scared some of them.”

The interest spans both major markets and smaller states, evaluating security risks. “Countries like India, China, Japan, and Singapore may eventually consider it. Mauritius and Madagascar have also been mentioned, but nothing official.” But Piaget’s message is that curiosity does not equal commitment; governments are watching others’ experiences closely before stepping in.

The article was originally published in the Dec 2025 issue of The STAT Trade Times.