[Federal Register: June 2, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 106)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 31921-31927]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02jn06-6]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
19 CFR Parts 141 and 142
[CBP Dec. 06-11]
RIN 1505-AB34
Single Entry for Unassembled or Disassembled Entities Imported on
Multiple Conveyances
AGENCY: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland
Security, Department of the Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document amends the regulations in title 19 of the Code
of Federal Regulations to allow an importer of record, under certain
conditions, to submit a single entry to cover multiple portions of a
single entity which, due to its size or nature, arrives in the United
States on separate conveyances. This document implements statutory
changes made to the merchandise entry laws by the Tariff Suspension and
Trade Act of 2000.
DATES: Effective Date: July 3, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For operational matters: Timothy Sushil, Office of Field
Operations, (202) 344-2567.
For legal matters: Emily Simon, Office of Regulations and Rulings,
(202) 572-8867.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 1460 of Public Law 106-476, popularly known as the Tariff
Suspension and Trade Act of 2000, amended section 484 of the Tariff Act
of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1484) by adding a new subsection (j) in order to
provide for the treatment of certain multiple shipments of merchandise
as a single entry.
The amended law, 19 U.S.C. 1484(j), is concerned with two issues.
First, section 1484(j)(1) addresses the problem long encountered by the
importing community in entering merchandise the size or nature of which
necessitates shipment in an unassembled or disassembled condition on
more than one conveyance. Second, section 1484(j)(2) offers relief to
importers whose shipments, which they intended to be carried on a
single conveyance, are divided at the initiative of the carrier. As to
both these matters, the legislation is silent as to the affected modes
of transportation, thus indicating that the new law is to apply to
merchandise shipped by air, land or sea.
The Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) determined to
proceed first with proposed regulations only to shipments which are
divided by carriers (19 U.S.C. 1484(j)(2)); these are referred to as
``split shipments.'' Separate proposals were undertaken because CBP had
already begun a project to amend the regulations to provide for one
entry for such split shipments prior to the present statutory
amendments.
The proposed rule regarding split shipments (RIN 1515-AC91) was
published in the Federal Register (66 FR 57688) for public comment on
November 16, 2001. The comment period ended on February 14, 2002, and
the final rule was published in the Federal Register (68 FR 8713) on
February 25, 2003. The final rule regarding split shipments went into
effect on March 27, 2003.
On April 8, 2002, CBP published a proposed rule in the Federal
Register (67 FR 16664) proposing regulations and requesting comments
concerning a single entry for merchandise the size or nature of which
necessitates shipment in an unassembled or disassembled condition on
more than one conveyance (19 U.S.C. 1484(j)(1)). The comment period
ended on June 7, 2002. These final regulations concern single entries
for unassembled or disassembled shipments as addressed in 19 U.S.C.
1484(j)(1).
Unassembled or Disassembled Entity Defined
For the purposes of this final rule, an unassembled or disassembled
entity consists of merchandise which is not capable of being
transported on a single conveyance, but which is purchased and invoiced
as a single classifiable entity. By necessity, due to its size or
nature, the entity is placed on multiple conveyances which arrive at
different times at the same port of entry in the United States. The
subject arriving portions are consigned to the same person in the
United States.
The current regulations in title 19 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) ordinarily require, with certain exceptions, that all
merchandise
[[Page 31922]]
arriving on one conveyance and consigned to one consignee be included
on one entry (see 19 CFR 141.51). With the exception of split shipments
regulations in 19 CFR 141.57, there is no provision currently in the
regulations authorizing the filing of a single entry to cover multiple
portions of a single entity arriving at the same port of entry in the
United States at different times on separate conveyances. While today's
final regulations permit the acceptance of a single entry in the case
of a qualifying unassembled or disassembled shipment, importers may, of
course, continue to file a separate entry for each portion of an
unassembled or disassembled shipment as it arrives, if they so choose.
Filing of Single Entry for an Unassembled or Disassembled Entity Under
the Proposed Rule
In principal part, the April 8, 2002, Federal Register document
proposed to permit the filing of a single entry to cover unassembled or
disassembled shipment provided that: (1) The subject shipment is not
capable of being transported on a single conveyance, but is purchased,
invoiced and classified under a single provision of the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) as a single entity; (2)
the arriving portions of the shipment are consigned to the same person
in the United States; and (3) the portions covered under the entry
arrive directly from abroad at the same port of importation in the
United States within 10 calendar days of the date of the portion that
arrives first.
Specifically, to implement 19 U.S.C. 1484(j)(1) under which an
importer could make a single entry for an unassembled or disassembled
shipment, it was proposed to add a new 19 CFR 141.58, in addition to
making certain amendments to 19 CFR 141.51. Also, minor conforming
changes were to be made to 19 CFR 142.21 and 142.22.
In addition, appearing in this edition of the Federal Register is a
notice explaining and extending application of the National Customs
Automation Program (NCAP) test concerning the periodic monthly deposit
of duties and fees for those duties and fees attributable to entries
utilizing this regulation.
Renaming of U.S. Customs as CBP
Sections 403(1) and 411 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Pub.
L. 107-296) transferred the U.S. Customs Service and its functions from
the Department of the Treasury to the Department of Homeland Security.
Pursuant to section 1502 of the Act, the President renamed the
``Customs Service'' as the ``Bureau of Customs and Border Protection,''
also referred to as ``CBP''. Accordingly, for the sake of consistency
throughout the sections in the regulations affected by this final rule
(i.e., 19 CFR 141.51, 141.58, 142.21, 142.22 and 142.23), the term
``Customs'' is removed wherever it appears in those sections and the
term ``CBP'' is added in its place.
Discussion of Comments
CBP solicited written comments on its proposal regarding the
implementation of 19 U.S.C. 1484(j)(1). A total of 13 comments were
received in response to the April 8, 2002, notice of proposed
rulemaking. A review of CBP's response to the issues and questions that
were presented by the comments follows.
Comment: The proposed regulations subtly misstate the statutory
directive because they add conditions yet fail to take into account the
``nature'' of the articles. The statute refers to merchandise that is
``purchased and invoiced as a single entity but is shipped in an
unassembled or disassembled condition in separate shipments due to the
size or nature of the merchandise.'' In the proposed regulations CBP
limits coverage to merchandise that is both large and incapable of
being transported on a single conveyance. This would allow a large
machine or a knocked-down log home, all parts of which are ready for
shipment at the same time but requiring two or more shipments because
of size, to qualify for single entry treatment. However, a large
turbine generator that could be accommodated on one vessel but the
parts of which are made in different locations, necessitating shipment
by different conveyances, would not qualify under the proposed
regulations. Also precluded would be an entity, such as an industrial
equipment installation, which for construction reasons is sent over a
period of time. These last two examples would qualify for single entry
treatment under the statute but not under the proposed regulation. The
proposed regulations should be changed to reflect that the nature of
the article and not just size alone is also a criterion that must be
taken into account.
CBP Response: CBP agrees with the commenter that the nature of the
article not just size alone is a criterion that must be taken into
account. Accordingly, the regulatory text has been amended to include
the nature of the article as an equal and independent criterion.
However, the commenter's examples would not be afforded single entry
treatment under the regulations due to the nature of the entity alone.
A large turbine generator that could be accommodated on one vessel but
the parts of which are made in different locations would not qualify on
that basis. CBP believes that the legislation was intended to apply to
the components of articles with a single point of origin which are
shipped from the same port of export at approximately the same time.
Similarly, an entity, such as an industrial installation, would not
qualify for single entry treatment on the basis of construction
reasons. CBP believes that the legislation was not intended to act as a
means to control an importer's inventory or manufacturing processes. An
example of an article which may be entered under the regulations due to
its nature is an article which, because of safety concerns, must be
shipped in an unassembled or disassembled state. In addition, an
importer may enter an article which, because of the nature of the
article, must be shipped by more than one mode.
Comment: An expansive interpretation of the legislation would
benefit trade statistics, because the ensuing entries would reflect the
article that is actually being imported, instead of the parts and
components that comprise the whole.
CBP Response: CBP has endeavored to promulgate regulations that
accurately reflect the underlying statute. There are many laws with
differing effects on trade statistics, and the agency's responsibility
is to implement the law.
Comment: The proposed 10-calendar day arrival window is too short
and does not reflect congressional intent or commercial reality. Its
adoption would severely limit the application of the statute,
particularly where ocean shipments are involved. The legislative
history indicates that the provision was targeted towards single
entities shipped unassembled or disassembled ``over a period of time''.
That time should be sufficient to accommodate the many large machines
that are sold as one entity but manufactured in segments, often over a
period of time and at different factories. Requiring the importation of
machinery within a short time frame may not afford the purchaser
sufficient time to install each component before the next one arrives,
thereby significantly increasing the storage and project costs. Also,
given the size of ocean vessels today, most products can be shipped on
a single conveyance. However, often the steamship company does not want
an entire hold of a vessel to be filled with several big pieces of
machinery, and would impose a very high price to have them shipped
together. Suggested
[[Page 31923]]
alternative time frames include 30 days, one year, 15 months, or a
period to be set at the discretion of the port director depending on
the circumstances of the transaction.
CBP Response: CBP is sensitive to the interest expressed in
extending the time frames. However, CBP in drafting these regulations
was constrained by the longstanding rule, expressed both judicially and
administratively, that importation of merchandise shall precede its
entry. The regulations accomplish this by ensuring that all portions
will have arrived either before an entry is filed under the ``hold
all'' procedure of 19 CFR 141.58(d)(1), or before an entry summary--
which serves as the entry--is filed when an election has been made to
have the portions released incrementally under 19 CFR 141.58(d)(2).
Certain time limits necessarily apply to these two different entry
methods. General order rules allow merchandise to remain unentered for
15 calendar days after unlading or after arrival at the port of
destination if transported in bond. A 10-day arrival window was
selected to ensure that this requirement could be met. In deference to
the interests of the importing community, CBP will adjust the arrival
times to the outermost possible limits within the existing legal
framework. The final rule will reflect new arrival times as follows:
For entities entered under the ``hold all'' method, all of the portions
of the shipment must arrive within 15 calendar days after the unlading
of the first portion or arrival at the destination port if transported
in bond; and for those entities released incrementally, all of the
portions must arrive within 10 calendar days after the release of the
first portion under special permit procedures. This adjustment would
extend by five days the arrival window under the ``hold all'' method,
and would potentially give an importer using incremental release an
arrival window of 25 days, attained by filing the special permit on the
fifteenth calendar day after arrival of the first portion. Section
141.58(b)(4) is amended accordingly. Importers filing unassembled or
disassembled entities in a single entry may pay through the method set
forth in the National Customs Automation Program (NCAP) test concerning
the periodic monthly payment statement process, as announced in a
General Notice published in the Federal Register (69 FR 5362) on
February 4, 2004, and amended by a General Notice published in the
Federal Register (70 FR 5199) on February 1, 2005, and a General Notice
published in the Federal Register (70 FR 45736) on August 8, 2005.
Comment: The proposed regulations require, in the case of
incremental release, the entry/entry summary to be filed within 10
working days from the date of the first released portion. This may be
too restrictive, because it would not take into account delays incurred
by the carrier, due to weather, mechanical malfunction, etc. A better
alternative would be to require entry summary filing within 10 working
days after the arrival of the last portion of the entity. Adoption of
the longer filing period may raise interest issues, which could be
addressed by developing a unique entry type code and building a new
interest calculator into the CBP Automated Commercial System (ACS).
CBP Response: As discussed above, for entities released
incrementally, CBP is amending 19 CFR 141.58(b)(4) to allow subsequent
portions of an entity to arrive 10 calendar days after the release of
the first portion under special permit procedures. Therefore, an
importer using incremental release could potentially take advantage of
an arrival window of 25 days, attained by filing the special permit on
the fifteenth calendar day after arrival of the first portion. Also as
mentioned above, CBP believes that the legislation was intended to
apply to the components of articles which are shipped at approximately
the same time.
Comment: The restriction to arrival at a single port of importation
can be a potential problem where shipments are dispatched from
different geographic locations. In other cases, some carriers do not
offer specialized containers, such as open top units, which may be
required for a portion of a particular machine, or such specialized
units may not be available from the same underlying carrier when the
shipment is ready to move. Since not all carriers serve the same ports,
it is quite possible that the different machine components will arrive
at different ports. With respect to truck shipments, neither the
carrier nor the importer exerts much control over where a particular
shipment may cross the border. In some cases, long lines at one border
port may prompt the driver to divert to another port of entry. For
these reasons, the same arrival port requirement should either be
eliminated or a unique entry type developed to accommodate multiple
ports of entry.
CBP Response: CBP agrees. Accordingly, proposed 19 CFR 141.58(b)(4)
is revised in this final rule by eliminating the requirement that all
portions of a qualifying unassembled or disassembled shipment arrive at
the same port of importation in the United States. Instead, all
portions of the shipment must timely arrive at the same port of entry
in the United States. Any portion that arrives at a different port must
be transported in-bond to the destination port where entry will be
made.
Comment: The proposed rulemaking is somewhat ambiguous regarding
the term ``port of arrival'', i.e., is this to be the first port of
arrival, or the destination port when goods are being transported in-
bond?
CBP Response: The changes made in response to the previous comment
should serve to clarify that the focal point is the port of entry,
which is otherwise known as the destination port when goods are being
transported in-bond.
Comment: With respect to the provision granting the port director
discretion to deny incremental release, the decision to select one
portion (or all of the shipments) for examination should not in itself
cause the importer to lose the potential benefit of 19 U.S.C. 1484(j).
CBP Response: A decision to examine one portion or to deny
incremental release is not tantamount to a denial of the benefit of the
new legislation, because the importer may still file a single entry
under the ``hold all'' procedure, provided all of the requirements for
that procedure are met.
Comment: While the entire process is clearly subject to the
approval of CBP officers on a case by case basis, there should be an
expression that it is the policy of CBP to approve applications for
single entry treatment whenever possible.
CBP Response: It will be the policy of CBP to approve applications
made under these regulations, provided the shipments fall within the
parameters of these regulations.
Comment: Such requirements as advance notice and application for a
single entry will allow CBP to meet its regulatory tracking and
management obligations. However, this commitment can easily be met by
simply requiring advance notice [of an unassembled or disassembled
entity] at the first port of entry and then requiring reference to the
first entry number, port code, and purchase order or other contract
reference on all subsequent related entries.
CBP Response: This comment appears to be based on the mistaken
belief that advance notice will be required before the arrival of each
portion of an unassembled or disassembled entity. However, the proposed
regulation only requires that such notice be provided in
[[Page 31924]]
advance of the arrival of the first conveyance.
Comment: There is no reason why CBP should require both an
explanation as to why a shipment cannot be entered all at once and
approval by the port director.
CBP Response: The explanation to which the comment refers is an
integral part of the application the importer must make to secure
single entry treatment. The statute that gave rise to this provision
imposes the application requirement. CBP was thus obligated to include
an application process in the regulations. An application by its very
nature is either approved or denied, in this case by the port director.
Therefore, the need for both an explanation and port director approval
is well founded.
Comment: The regulations should expressly state that when a port
director denies an application, the denial will be deemed to be an
exclusion from entry and eligible for protest pursuant to 19 CFR
174.11(d).
CBP Response: CBP disagrees that a denial of an application amounts
to an exclusion from entry, because the merchandise may still be
entered, albeit on separate entries.
Comment: By granting port directors discretion to deny incremental
release, CBP is defeating the benefits of the legislation.
CBP Response: The legislation confers the benefit of being able to
file one entry under circumstances that previously would have required
the filing of multiple entries. The denial of incremental release does
not remove this benefit, because the importer still retains the option
of filing one entry under the ``hold all'' procedure.
Comment: CBP should have included an option in these proposed
regulations that would permit the importer to enter the complete entity
on the first shipment and to pay the appropriate duties, fees, and
taxes on the known value as witnessed by the purchase order or
contract. Where the importer knows that the price is not yet firm he
may utilize the reconciliation process to report the final value when
determined. CBP could allow subsequent importations on CBP Form 3461 or
CBP Form 3461 ALT, properly referenced to the original entry summary
for the complete entity. Generally, there are purchase order amendments
that follow for some time after the importation of a large piece of
equipment, and the value is reconciled with CBP.
CBP Response: The entry process as presented in these new
regulations was designed to implement the underlying legislation while
at the same time uphold the well-established legal requirement that
importation precede entry of goods. The procedure that is suggested in
the foregoing comment would not accomplish the latter goal. An election
to file one entry under these regulations will not prevent an importer
from filing reconciliation entries, should the unresolved issues be of
the kind which are entitled to be resolved under the reconciliation
program.
Comment: It is unclear whether the application to file a single
entry must be submitted by the importer five days prior to the first
arrival when such application is made by annotating CBP Form 3461 or
CBP Form 3461 ALT.
CBP Response: The 5-day advance application requirement applies
equally to applications made in letter format and to those made on a
CBP Form 3461 or CBP Form 3461 ALT.
Comment: The requirement to file the application in advance of
first arrival is onerous, at least insofar as land border and air modes
of transportation are concerned. The air split shipment regulations did
not require such notice.
CBP Response: As explained in a response to a previous comment, the
advance application is required by statute, and thus must be included
in these regulations. As to the requirement being burdensome, an
importer seeking to utilize this single entry provision should know
well in advance the transportation arrangements that will necessitate
shipping on separate conveyances. This is in contrast to the split
shipment situation to which you refer whereby the carrier, at its own
initiative, decides to divide a shipment and convey its various
portions on different conveyances. Quite frequently in the latter
scenario the importer only learns of the split after the goods have
arrived. In recognition of this fact, CBP in the split shipment
regulations (19 CFR 141.57(c)) indicated that ``advance notice'' of the
intent to file a single entry for the various portions may be made as
soon as the importer learns of the split but in all cases prior to
entry summary filing. The same need for practical accommodation does
not apply here.
Comment: Granting the port director discretion to approve or deny
an importer's application for single entry treatment and requiring that
justification for such treatment be submitted are superfluous, as the
importer would know in advance that the particular entity would
qualify. The use by importers of experts such as brokers would be the
first line of defense against misuse of this provision.
CBP Response: As noted in earlier responses, applications are
required by the implementing legislation. When making a determination
as to whether to approve or deny a particular application, the port
director must rely on the information that is supplied on the
application.
Comment: The proposed rulemaking does not address the issue of
whether a blanket application would be acceptable. Use of a blanket
permit would reduce CBP's workload. While specific invoice or purchase
order information would not be available, the entity's specifications
should suffice.
CBP Response: Blanket applications are not acceptable because a
decision to grant or deny treatment as a single entity will depend on
the facts pertaining to each particular shipment.
Comment: The proposed regulations will benefit importers of fiber
production equipment which frequently incorporate units of substantial
size that must be transported unassembled or disassembled on multiple
conveyances.
CBP Response: CBP agrees in principle with the general nature of
this comment, which reflects the purpose behind the regulatory
proposal.
Comment: The proposed requirement that importers file adjusted CBP
Form 3461s for each arriving portion that is released incrementally is
burdensome and unnecessary. Instead, CBP should allow incremental
release of split shipments without the filing of a CBP Form 3461 as
long as the entry summary and carrier manifest data are consistent.
CBP Response: CBP finds that requiring an adjusted copy of the CBP
Form 3461 to be submitted for each portion of the shipment is necessary
in order to afford a mechanism by which the importer and CBP may easily
and effectively keep track of the specific merchandise contained in any
given portion of the shipment. However, CBP agrees that multiple CBP
Form 3461 copies are unnecessary when both the carrier and the importer
are automated. In the case of such automation, adjustments may be made
electronically to show the quantity of merchandise contained in each
portion of the shipment as it arrives. Proposed 19 CFR 141.58(e) is
thus amended in this final rule to reflect that if both the carrier and
the importer are automated, such adjustments may be made electronically
through the ACS.
Comment: The proposed regulations should provide for the amendment
of certificates of origin that are used in preferential trade programs
so as to eliminate the need to obtain revised certificates from the
importer or producer covering each portion of an unassembled or
disassembled shipment that arrives separately.
CBP Response: CBP does not believe that this is necessary. Most
certificates
[[Page 31925]]
of origin are blanket certificates, designed to cover merchandise
appearing on many entries. When a certificate of origin covering a
single entry pertains to a single entity that is shipped unassembled or
disassembled on different conveyances, and separate entries covering
different portions of the shipment are filed (either by choice or
because a portion of the shipment arrives too late to be covered under
the split-shipment entry), copies of the certificate may be made to
apply to the additional entries.
Comment: The proposed regulations wrongly preclude quota
merchandise from incremental release.
CBP Response: CBP finds that quota and/or visa merchandise is of
such a sensitive nature as to warrant its exclusion from incremental
release.
Comment: The proposal will compromise the quality of statistics
received and recorded by the U.S. government, particularly with respect
to freight charges and shipping weight information obtained from the
CBP Form 7501 entry summary. It will result in the government losing
valuable carrier information. The commenter requests that CBP develop a
means of collecting multiple carrier, charges, and shipping weight
information on a single entry summary that covers shipments of
unassembled or disassembled merchandise that arrives on separate
conveyances. It is also suggested that CBP require the importer of
record to submit separate carrier, charges, and shipping weight
information for each portion of a single entity that arrives in the
United States on separate conveyances. Finally, the commenter asks CBP
to implement these changes in the Automated Commercial Environment
(ACE).
CBP Response: CPB will take these concerns into consideration and
attempt to address them in the design and implementation of ACE.
Comment: The commenter periodically imports machines for the
production of industrial textile yarns, which by nature of their size
and multiple parts cannot be shipped on a single conveyance. This
importer firmly favors the proposed rule as this type of equipment is
not produced in the United States and must therefore be imported.
CBP Response: CBP agrees that the regulations will facilitate the
entry of machines in circumstances such as are described.
Comment: In the Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order
12866 analyses, CBP noted that the implementation of the proposed
regulations will engender cost savings by reducing paperwork for
importers and by reducing the number of entries required for separate
shipments of unassembled and disassembled entities. If CBP issues these
regulations as proposed, there will be little, if any, possible usage
of this provision because of CBP constraints. The savings that CBP
purports will be made simply will not materialize under the burdensome
proposed regulations and in the end will force importers to return to
Congress for further legislation on this issue.
CBP Response: The commenter did not provide any empirical evidence
for this statement, and other commenters including the previous
commenter (importer of industrial yarn machines) provided comments
contrary to this claim.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866
This rule is intended to implement the amendment of 19 U.S.C. 1484
by the Tariff Suspension and Trade Act of 2000. The rule will engender
cost savings by reducing the number of entries required for separate
shipments of unassembled or disassembled entities. Therefore, pursuant
to the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), it is certified that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly,
it is not subject to the regulatory analysis or other requirements of 5
U.S.C. 603 and 604. Nor does the rule result in a ``significant
regulatory action'' under E.O 12866.
Signing Authority
The signing authority for this document falls under 19 CFR
0.1(a)(1). The Secretary of the Treasury retained the sole authority to
approve any regulations concerning, among other things, the completion
of entry. Accordingly, this document must be signed by the Secretary of
Homeland Security (or his or her delegate) and the Secretary of the
Treasury (or his or her delegate).
List of Subjects
19 CFR Part 141
Customs duties and inspection, Entry of merchandise, Release of
merchandise, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
19 CFR Part 142
Computer technology, Customs duties and inspection, Entry of
merchandise, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Amendments to the Regulations
0
For the reasons stated above, 19 CFR parts 141 and 142 are amended as
follows.
PART 141--ENTRY OF MERCHANDISE
0
1. The general authority citation for part 141 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1448, 1484, 1624.
* * * * *
0
2. Section 141.51 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 141.51 Quantity usually required to be in one entry.
All merchandise arriving on one conveyance and consigned to one
consignee must be included on one entry, except as provided in Sec.
141.52. In addition, a shipment of merchandise that arrives by separate
conveyances at the same port of entry in multiple portions, either as a
shipment split by the carrier or as components of a large unassembled
or disassembled entity, may be processed under a single entry, as
prescribed, respectively, in Sec. Sec. 141.57 and 141.58.
0
3. Subpart D of part 141 is amended by adding a new Sec. 141.58, to
read as follows:
Sec. 141.58 Single entry for separately arriving portions of
unassembled or disassembled entities.
(a) At election of importer of record. At the election of the
importer of record, an unassembled or disassembled entity arriving on
multiple conveyances as contemplated under section 484(j)(1), Tariff
Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1484(j)(1)), may be processed as a single entry,
as prescribed under the procedures set forth in this section.
(b) Unassembled or disassembled entities covered. An unassembled or
disassembled entity for purposes of this section is an entity which:
(1) Cannot, due to its size or nature, be shipped on a single
conveyance, and is thus imported in an unassembled or disassembled
condition;
(2) Is ordered, invoiced and is classifiable under the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), as a single entity and is
consigned to one person in the United States;
(3) Is imported on more than one conveyance to the same port of
entry in the United States; and
(4) Involves the first portion and all succeeding portions arriving
at the same United States port of entry within either:
(i) 15 calendar days after the unlading of the first portion or
arrival at the destination port if transported in bond
[[Page 31926]]
for entities entered under the ``hold all'' method permitted in
paragraph (d)(1) of this section; or
(ii) 10 calendar days after the release of the first portion under
special permit procedures for entities released incrementally as
permitted in paragraph (d)(2) of this section.
(c) Application by importer. The importer of record must apply to
file a single entry covering an entity described in paragraph (b) of
this section. Applications may be made either by appropriately
annotating a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Form 3461, CBP Form
3461 ALT, or electronic equivalent, or by submitting a letter to CBP.
The required application must be made no later than 5 working days in
advance of the arrival of the first conveyance. Justification for the
need for more than one conveyance must be provided in the application,
which must include an affirmative statement that the entity cannot, due
to its size or nature, be shipped on one conveyance. A copy of the
relevant invoice or purchase order, or electronic equivalent, must
accompany the application, along with the proposed appropriate single
tariff number under the HTSUS. The port director will notify the
applicant of the approval or denial of the application within 3 working
days of the receipt of the application.
(d) Entry or special permit for immediate delivery. In order to
make a single entry for portions of an entity covered under this
section that arrive at different times, an importer of record must
follow the procedure prescribed in paragraphs (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this
section, as applicable.
(1) Entry or special permit after arrival of all portions (Hold
All). An importer may file an entry at such time as all portions of the
entity have arrived at the same port of entry in the United States. Any
portion that arrives at a different port must be transported in-bond to
the destination port where entry will be made. In the alternative, the
importer may file a special permit for immediate delivery after arrival
of all portions of the entity provided that it is eligible for such a
permit under Sec. 142.21(a)-(d), (f) and (i) of this chapter.
(2) Special permit for immediate delivery after arrival of first
portion (Incremental Release). As provided in Sec. 142.21(h) of this
chapter, an importer of record may file an application for a special
permit for immediate delivery after the arrival of the first portion of
the entity covered by paragraph (b) of this section, and its remaining
portions may be released incrementally pursuant to the requirements set
forth in paragraph (e) of this section. All portions of the shipment
must timely arrive at the same port of entry in the United States. Any
portion that arrives at a different port must be transported in-bond to
the destination port where entry will be made.
(e) Release. If an importer wishes to secure release of an entity
under paragraph (d)(1) of this section after the entity's arrival, the
importer must file with CBP a CBP Form 3461 or CBP Form 3461 ALT, as
appropriate, or electronic equivalent. To secure the separate release
upon arrival of each portion of a shipment under paragraph (d)(2) of
this section, the importer must file with CBP a CBP Form 3461 or CBP
Form 3461 ALT, as appropriate, or electronic equivalent after arrival
of the first portion. As each successive portion arrives, the importer
must submit a copy of the originally submitted CBP Form 3461/CBP Form
3461 ALT, annotated to specifically identify that particular portion.
The CBP Form 3461/CBP Form 3461 ALT must indicate the order of the
arriving portion in relation to the entire shipment as reflected on the
invoice (for example, third of six portions). If both the carrier and
the importer are automated, such adjustments may be made electronically
through the CBP Automated Commercial System (ACS). The release of each
portion upon arrival as permitted under this paragraph may be
restricted due to CBP's need to examine the merchandise in accordance
with paragraph (f) of this section. In addition, the importer of record
must present to CBP either on paper or through an authorized electronic
equivalent, specific and detailed information supplementing the CBP
Form 3461 or 3461 ALT, relating to the merchandise on each conveyance
which reflects exact information for that portion of the ordered entity
(for example, detailed packing lists).
(f) Examination. CBP may require examination of any or all portions
of the entity. CBP reserves the right to deny the release of each
portion of such shipments as they arrive (i.e., incremental release)
should such an examination of the merchandise be necessary. The denial
of incremental release does not preclude the use of the procedures
specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(g) Entry summary. (1) For merchandise entered under paragraph
(d)(1) of this section, an entry summary must be filed within 10
working days from the time of entry. For merchandise released under a
special permit for immediate delivery, the entry summary, which serves
as both the entry and entry summary, must be filed within 10 working
days after the first portion of the entity is authorized for release
under the special permit.
(2) For merchandise released under a special permit for immediate
delivery pursuant to paragraph (d)(2) of this section, the entry
summary, which serves as both the entry and the entry summary, must be
filed within 10 working days from the date of the first release of a
portion of the unassembled or disassembled entity. However, the entry/
entry summary for the entity cannot be filed before the last portion of
the entity which is to be included on the entry has arrived.
(3) Duty payment. At the time the entry summary is filed under
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this section, estimated duties, taxes
and fees must be attached. If the entry summary is filed
electronically, the estimated duties, taxes and fees must be scheduled
for payment at such time pursuant to the Automated Clearinghouse
procedures (see 19 CFR 24.25).
(h) Classification. Except as provided in paragraph (j) of this
section, for purposes of section 484(j)(1), Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1484(j)(1)), the merchandise comprising the separate portions of
an entity covered by paragraph (b) of this section included on one
entry will be classified as though imported together. Any spare parts
accompanying a portion of an entity must be classified and entered
separately.
(i) When separate entry and entry summary required. When all
portions of an entity do not arrive at the port of entry within the
time constraints of paragraphs (b)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section, as
applicable, a separate entry and entry summary must be filed for each
portion that has already arrived, and for each portion that
subsequently will arrive on separate conveyances. The merchandise
included on each separate entry shall be classified in its condition as
imported. Each entry would reflect the quantities, values,
classifications and rates of duty, as appropriate, of the various
components conveyed in each shipment, and not the value or
classification of the ordered single entity.
(j) Exclusions. Merchandise subject to quota and/or visa
requirements is entirely excluded from the procedures set forth in this
section. Also, CBP reserves the right for the port director to deny use
of the incremental release procedure and only release the shipment in
its entirety as circumstances warrant, such as in the case where a
particular shipment has been selected for examination.
[[Page 31927]]
PART 142--ENTRY PROCESS
0
4. The authority citation for part 142 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1448, 1484, 1624.
0
5. Section 142.21 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the term ``Customs'' wherever it appears and in its place
adding the term ``CBP'';
0
b. Revising the heading of paragraph (e)(1);
0
c. Removing the second sentence in paragraph (e)(1) and adding in its
place two new sentences;
0
d. Revising the heading of paragraph (e)(2);
0
e. Removing the second sentence in paragraph (e)(2) and adding in its
place two new sentences;
0
f. Revising paragraph (g);
0
g. Redesignating paragraph (h) as paragraph (i);
0
h. Adding a new paragraph (h), and
0
i. Revising newly designated paragraph (i).
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 142.21 Merchandise eligible for special permit for immediate
delivery.
* * * * *
(e) Quota-class merchandise--(1) Tariff rate quotas. * * * However,
merchandise subject to a tariff-rate quota may not be incrementally
released under a special permit for immediate delivery as provided in
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this section. Nor is such merchandise
eligible for release under a special permit pursuant to 19 CFR
141.58(d)(1). * * *
(2) Absolute quotas. * * * However, merchandise subject to an
absolute quota under this paragraph may not be incrementally released
under a special permit for immediate delivery as provided in paragraphs
(g) and (h) of this section. Nor is such merchandise eligible for
release under a special permit pursuant to Sec. 141.58(d)(1) of this
chapter. * * *
* * * * *
(g) Split shipments. Merchandise subject to Sec. 141.57(d)(2) of
this chapter, which is invoiced and delivered to the carrier as a
single shipment, but which, due to the carrier's inability to
accommodate the merchandise on a single conveyance, is shipped by the
carrier in separate portions to the same port of entry in the United
States as listed on the original bill of lading, may be released
incrementally under a special permit. Incremental release means
releasing each portion of such shipments separately as they arrive.
(h) Entities shipped unassembled or disassembled on multiple
conveyances. Merchandise subject to Sec. 141.58(d)(2) of this chapter,
which is purchased, invoiced, and classified as a single entity under
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), and which
is shipped in separate portions because its size or nature prevents
shipping the entity on a single conveyance, may be released
incrementally under a special permit.
(i) When authorized by Headquarters. Headquarters may authorize the
release of merchandise under the immediate delivery procedure in
circumstances other than those described in Sec. 142.21(a) through (h)
provided a bond on CBP Form 301 containing the bond conditions set
forth in Sec. 113.62 of this chapter is on file.
0
6. Section 142.22 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the term ``Customs'' wherever it appears and in its place
adding the term ``CBP''; and
0
b. Revising the first sentence in paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 142.22 Application for special permit for immediate delivery.
(a) Form. An application for a special permit for immediate
delivery will be made on CBP Form 3461, supported by the documentation
provided for in Sec. 142.3. * * *
* * * * *
Deborah J. Spero,
Acting Commissioner, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection.
Dated: May 26, 2006.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. E6-8498 Filed 6-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P