ISO 17712 Seals Are No Longer Optional: What ONE’s Global Mandate and the CORCA Bill Mean for Shippers in 2026

A freight forwarder in Chicago loads a container of industrial electronics for Rotterdam. The booking confirmation from Ocean Network Express (ONE) arrives with a line the shipper hasn’t seen before: all containers must be secured with ISO 17712:2013 high-security seals. Not recommended. Mandatory. Effective immediately. Non-compliant seals mean the shipper absorbs full liability for cargo shortages, customs penalties, and damage claims.

That scenario is no longer hypothetical. On July 2, 2026, ONE — the seventh-largest container shipping line in the world — made ISO 17712 high-security seal compliance a condition of carriage across its entire global network. Two days later, the industry received another signal from a different direction: TAPA AMERICAS formally urged the U.S. Senate to advance the Combating Organized Retail Crime Act (CORCA), a bill that would create the first federal cargo theft tracking system and dedicated prosecution resources.

Together, these two developments mark a turning point. Seal compliance is shifting from a best practice to a hard requirement — driven simultaneously by carrier policy and federal legislation. For shippers, logistics managers, and seal program administrators, the question is no longer whether to upgrade. It’s how fast.

ONE’s Global Seal Mandate: What Changed on July 2

ONE’s new policy applies to every container tendered for international transport under its custody, regardless of trade lane or origin. The requirement is specific: high-security seals that meet or exceed the ISO 17712:2013 standard.

That standard defines three classification levels — Indicative (I), Security (S), and High Security (H). Only the H classification meets ONE’s threshold. H-classified seals have been independently tested for tensile strength, shear, bend, and impact by an accredited third-party laboratory. Bolt seals and cable seals that achieve the H rating qualify. Plastic seals, metal strap seals, and padlock seals do not — they fall into the I or S tiers and are not acceptable as primary container door seals under this mandate.

The policy also includes placement guidance. ONE recommends sealing in the “Securacam” position — the bottom of the left locking bar on the container’s right-hand door — rather than the traditional top hasp position. The Securacam location is harder to reach from the ground and more visible during automated gate scans, making tampering both more difficult and easier to detect.

Verification is equally explicit. ONE requires that seal numbers match the numbers recorded on the Bill of Lading and other shipping documents. Any discrepancy between the physical seal and the documentation triggers additional scrutiny at destination ports, potentially causing delays that the shipper — not the carrier — will bear.

ONE is not alone in this direction. Maersk’s fleet-wide RFID seal deployment at Rotterdam, Singapore, and Los Angeles terminals, and port modernization programs in Hamburg, Shanghai, and Singapore that are replacing legacy mechanical seals with automated scanning alternatives, all point to the same trajectory: ISO 17712 compliance is becoming the baseline, not the ceiling.

The Liability Shift: Why Non-Compliance Now Hits Your Bottom Line

ONE’s policy language is direct about who pays when seals fall short. The carrier states that it will not be liable for cargo shortage, damage, or related claims arising from the use of substandard or non-compliant seals. Any fines, penalties, or additional costs imposed by customs or government authorities due to missing or non-compliant seals remain the customer’s responsibility under the terms of the ONE Bill of Lading.

This is a meaningful liability shift. Under previous informal practice, carriers often processed containers with non-standard seals to avoid disrupting schedules, and disputes over responsibility for shortages were negotiated case-by-case. ONE’s policy removes that gray area. If your seal doesn’t meet ISO 17712:2013 H-class standards, and cargo goes missing or customs levies a penalty, the financial impact lands on your company — not on the shipping line.

The practical risk is not hypothetical. Customs authorities at major U.S. ports — Los Angeles, Long Beach, New York-New Jersey — already require ISO 17712-compliant seals on loaded containers under C-TPAT minimum security criteria. ONE’s mandate extends that requirement across all its trade lanes, including routes where local enforcement has historically been less rigorous. A shipper who has been using standard bolt seals without verified ISO 17712 certification, or who has been relying on cable seals that are not H-rated, is now exposed on every container moving under ONE’s custody.

CORCA Advances in Congress: The Federal Response to Cargo Theft

While ONE’s mandate addresses seal compliance from the carrier side, the legislative branch is moving on the theft side. On July 8, 2026, TAPA AMERICAS sent a formal letter to Senate leadership urging passage of H.R. 2853, the Combating Organized Retail Crime Act (CORCA). The bill passed the House on June 26 with a bipartisan vote of 348-60 and earned unanimous approval from the House Judiciary Committee.

TAPA AMERICAS Chairman Scott Cornell — who authored the bill’s cargo theft provisions — described the scope of the problem in stark terms. Cargo theft incidents rose 93% between 2021 and 2024. Strategic theft, the most sophisticated and costly form, surged 1,475% in the same period. Cornell noted that CargoNet’s data, which represents the industry’s most rigorous tracking effort, captures only an estimated fraction of actual incidents. Based on firsthand observation and membership reports, actual cargo theft incident rates are 10-15 times higher than what gets reported to CargoNet.

The absence of a uniform federal reporting category is part of the problem. A stolen load might be recorded as auto theft, property crime, or burglary depending on which officer takes the report, making it nearly impossible to quantify the true scope at the national level. CORCA would address this gap by establishing federal tracking mechanisms, creating a dedicated multi-agency task force, designating federal prosecutors focused exclusively on organized cargo crime, and building information-sharing pathways between the private sector and federal law enforcement.

For seal program managers, CORCA’s potential passage has two practical implications. First, better data will likely drive stricter enforcement of existing C-TPAT seal requirements — when regulators can finally measure the problem accurately, compliance checks tend to tighten. Second, a federal task force focused on cargo theft will increase the odds that seal tampering incidents get investigated rather than dismissed as routine losses, which means documentation standards for seal inspection records will need to meet a higher bar.

The Numbers Behind the Regulatory Momentum

The data driving both ONE’s policy and CORCA’s legislative progress is unambiguous.

Verisk CargoNet estimates that cargo theft losses exceeded $359 million in the first six months of 2026, with the average stolen shipment value climbing to approximately $341,518. Criminal groups are targeting high-value commodities — copper, molybdenum, antimony, tungsten, and zinc, along with enterprise computing components such as RAM modules, fiber optic transceivers, and server blades — where individual shipments can exceed $1 million.

Identity-based theft is accelerating alongside commodity targeting. Criminal groups are compromising cloud-based business phone systems to make and receive calls using legitimate carrier telephone numbers, and gaining access to motor carrier accounts on broker compliance platforms through credential theft, remote access tools, and social engineering. Verisk CargoNet’s data shows that 90% of strategic thefts use stolen motor carrier identities.

The financial math is clear. Industry estimates put the true cost of a cargo loss at four times the shipment value when accounting for operational disruption, replacement costs, and reputational damage. A single $340,000 theft can translate into $1.36 million in total impact. Against that backdrop, the cost of upgrading from a non-compliant seal to an ISO 17712-H bolt seal is negligible — and the cost of building a documented seal program with layered security is a fraction of even one prevented loss.

What This Means for Your Seal Program

ONE’s mandate and CORCA’s legislative momentum converge on the same operational requirement: shippers need a structured, documented seal program that goes beyond checking the “ISO 17712” box. A tiered approach, aligned with shipment risk and carrier requirements, provides the framework.

This tiered model satisfies C-TPAT’s layered security concept, ONE’s specific mandate for Tier 1 shipments, and the documentation standards that CORCA’s federal tracking mechanisms will demand. It also keeps costs proportional to risk — not every container needs a bolt seal, but every container needs a seal that matches its risk level and is properly recorded.

Practical Compliance Steps

Verify your current seal inventory. Pull procurement records and confirm that every bolt seal and cable seal purchased for international shipping carries a valid ISO 17712:2013 H-classification certificate from an accredited testing laboratory. If your supplier’s documentation is outdated or incomplete, order compliant replacements before your next ONE booking.

Update your loading procedures. Train warehouse and dock teams on ONE’s Securacam seal placement requirement. Seal numbers must match the Bill of Lading — build a verification step into your loading checklist that cross-references the physical seal against the documentation before the container leaves the facility.

Document everything. CORCA’s federal tracking provisions, if enacted, will increase the evidentiary standard for theft reporting. Start now: seal application logs, arrival condition photos, serial number reconciliation reports, and incident response procedures should be standardized, time-stamped, and accessible. RFID seals create this audit trail automatically — consider them for shipments where documentation volume is high.

Review your carrier agreements. ONE’s liability shift is explicit. Other carriers may follow. Check your booking terms for seal compliance clauses and liability provisions. If the carrier’s Bill of Lading places seal-related penalties on the shipper, your seal program needs to meet that carrier’s stated standard — not just the minimum.

Prepare for legislative change. CORCA is likely to pass the Senate before the end of 2026. When it does, the federal tracking system will create new reporting obligations and the multi-agency task force will increase investigation rates. Seal programs with strong documentation will be in a position to support law enforcement inquiries and insurance claims; programs without documentation will struggle to prove what happened.

FAQ

Q: Does ONE’s mandate require a bolt seal specifically, or can I use an ISO 17712-H cable seal? ONE’s requirement is for “high-security seals that meet or exceed the ISO 17712:2013 standard.” Both bolt seals and cable seals qualify as long as they carry the H classification. The choice depends on your application — bolt seals are standard for container door sealing; cable seals are common for secondary access points and specific customs-approved configurations.

Q: What happens if my container arrives at a ONE port with a non-compliant seal? ONE states that it will continue to process containers with non-compliant seals to avoid operational disruption, but the carrier will not be liable for any cargo shortage, damage, or claims arising from substandard seals. Customs fines or penalties due to non-compliant or missing seals are the customer’s responsibility. You may face delays, additional inspections, and full financial exposure for any cargo loss.

Q: Does CORCA create new seal requirements? CORCA does not directly mandate specific seal types. Its impact on seal programs is indirect but significant: the federal tracking system will produce better data on cargo theft, which will likely drive stricter enforcement of existing C-TPAT seal requirements and increase the evidentiary standard for theft claims. Seal programs with thorough documentation will be better positioned for both compliance audits and law enforcement cooperation.

Q: Are plastic seals, padlock seals, and metal strap seals still useful under these new requirements? Yes — but not as primary container door seals for international shipping. Plastic seals, padlock seals, and metal strap seals serve critical roles in a layered program: plastic seals for inner packaging and domestic transit, padlock seals for gated access and reusable accountability, metal strap seals for railcar and drum applications, and meter seals for utility and fixed-asset protection. The mandate applies to the primary container barrier, not to every seal in your operation.

Q: How does RFID fit into ONE’s mandate? ONE’s requirement is for ISO 17712:2013 compliance — which is a physical performance standard, not a technology standard. RFID-enabled bolt seals and container lock seals that carry the H classification meet both the physical requirement and add digital verification capability. RFID seals are not mandated, but they provide the documentation automation that will become increasingly valuable as CORCA’s tracking provisions take effect.

Q: What is the Securacam position, and why does ONE recommend it? The Securacam position is the bottom of the left locking bar on the container’s right-hand door. ONE recommends it because this location is harder to reach from the ground, more visible during automated gate scans at modern terminals, and increasingly recognized by port security infrastructure. Placing seals in the Securacam position can reduce the risk of tampering and improve scan readability at ports with automated clearance systems.

Q: Should I change my seal supplier if current products lack ISO 17712 certification? If your current bolt seals or cable seals for international shipping do not carry valid ISO 17712:2013 H-classification certificates, you need to source compliant alternatives — whether from your existing supplier or a new one. The certification must come from an accredited third-party testing laboratory. Ask your supplier for the certificate before your next shipment under ONE’s custody.

Explore our full range of ISO 17712 compliant security seals for international shipping. Subscribe to our newsletter for monthly updates on logistics security regulations and carrier policy changes. Contact our team to learn more about building a compliant seal program for your operation.