[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 106 (Friday, June 2, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31921-31927]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8498]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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