[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 107 (Friday, June 4, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31803-31805]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-13497]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection


Notice of Issuance of Final Determination Concerning a Lift Unit 
for an Overhead Patient Lift System

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security.

ACTION: Notice of final determination.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document provides notice that U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (``CBP'') has issued a final determination concerning the 
country of origin of a lift unit for an overhead patient lift system. 
Based upon the facts presented, CBP has concluded in the final 
determination that Sweden is the country of origin of the lift unit for 
purposes of U.S. government procurement.

DATES: The final determination was issued on May 28, 2010. A copy of 
the final determination is attached. Any party-at-interest, as defined 
in 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial review of this final 
determination within July 6, 2010.

[[Page 31804]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather K. Pinnock, Valuation and 
Special Programs Branch: (202) 325-0034.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that on 2010, 
pursuant to subpart B of part 177, Customs Regulations (19 CFR part 
177, subpart B), CBP issued a final determination concerning the 
country of origin of the lift unit which may be offered to the U.S. 
Government under an undesignated government procurement contract. This 
final determination, in HQ H100055, was issued at the request of Hill-
Rom Company, Inc., under procedures set forth at 19 CFR part 177, 
subpart B, which implements Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 
1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511-18). In the final determination, CBP 
concluded that, based upon the facts presented, the lift unit, 
assembled in Sweden from parts made in a non-TAA country and in Sweden, 
is substantially transformed in Sweden, such that Sweden is the country 
of origin of the finished article for purposes of U.S. government 
procurement.
    Section 177.29, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.29), provides that 
notice of final determinations shall be published in the Federal 
Register within 60 days of the date the final determination is issued. 
Section 177.30, CBP Regulations (19 CFR 177.30), provides that any 
party-at-interest, as defined in 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial 
review of a final determination within 30 days of publication of such 
determination in the Federal Register.

    Dated: May 28, 2010.
Harold M. Singer,
Acting Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings, Office of 
International Trade.

Attachment

HQ H100055

May 28, 2010
OT:RR:CTF:VS H100055 HkP
CATEGORY: Marking

Karen A. McGee, Esq.
Linda M. Weinberg, Esq.
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
750 17th Street, N.W., Suite 900
Washington, DC 20006-4675

RE: Government Procurement; Country of Origin of a Lift Unit for an 
Overhead Patient Lift System; Substantial Transformation
    Dear Mses. McGee and Weinberg: This is in response to your 
letter dated April 1, 2010, requesting a final determination on 
behalf of Hill-Rom Company, Inc., pursuant to subpart B of part 177 
of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Regulations (19 C.F.R. 
Part 177).
    Under these regulations, which implement Title III of the Trade 
Agreements Act of 1979 (TAA), as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511 et seq.), 
CBP issues country of origin advisory rulings and final 
determinations as to whether an article is or would be a product of 
a designated country or instrumentality for the purposes of granting 
waivers of certain ``Buy American'' restrictions in U.S. law or 
practice for products offered for sale to the U.S. Government.
    This final determination concerns the country of origin of a 
lift unit for the Likorall Overhead Patient Lift System. We note 
that as a U.S. importer Hill-Rom is a party-at-interest within the 
meaning of 19 C.F.R. Sec.  177.22(d)(1) and is entitled to request 
this final determination.

FACTS:

    According to the information submitted, the Likorall Overhead 
Patient Lift System is a ceiling-mounted or free-standing patient 
lift system. The system is capable of lifting and transporting 
patients with limited mobility, weighing up to 550 pounds, from one 
part of a room to another or from one room to another. It can also 
be used for weighing and lifting in combination with a stretcher and 
for walking, standing, gait and balance training. The system is 
designed to lift and move patients safely while avoiding injuries to 
caregivers.
    The merchandise at issue, the Likorall lift unit, is the 
motorized component of the Overhead Patient Lift System that extends 
and retracts the lift belt to which the patient-supporting sling is 
attached. The unit is manufactured in 3 basic models: (1) 242, which 
has a lifting capacity up to 440 pounds; (2) 243, which has a 
lifting capacity up to 507 pounds; and (3) 250, which has a lifting 
capacity up to 550 pounds. Models 243 and 250 come in an ``ES'' 
version, which is equipped with an infrared (IR) receiver for 
optional use with a remote control. Model 242 comes in the ``S'' 
version, which operates only with an attached hand control, as well 
as in the ES version. In addition, the 242 model has ``R2R'' 
versions, which feature a contact for a transfer motor so that the 
patient can be moved between two independent overhead rail systems 
in separate rooms, without the need for openings above doorways. The 
lift unit was designed, developed and engineered in Sweden. It 
incorporates approximately 100 components imported from non-TAA 
countries, except for the motor, which is imported from a TAA 
country and the IR remote control, which is made in Sweden.
    At the manufacturing facility in Sweden, teams of employees 
assemble the lift unit in a four segment process and perform a 25-
step final functional test under specified conditions. The segments 
are: Manufacturing the electrical motor, drum and motor package in a 
17-step process; mounting batteries and installing the exterior 
covers of the drum/motor assembly in a 5-step process; connecting a 
printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) to the motor, housed drum and 
batteries in a 3-step process; and, assembling the emergency strap, 
cover and end caps in a 14-step process. The PCBA is assembled and 
programmed prior to importation into Sweden but is designed in 
Sweden and its software program is written in Sweden. During the 
final functional test the electronics of the lift unit are checked 
and the maximum load is attached to check performance. At the 
conclusion of the test, the employee performing the test must 
complete a test protocol form, with the original being provided to 
the customer and a copy retained by the manufacturer in a test log 
that tracks units by serial number. The full manufacturing process 
takes approximately 45 minutes and the testing process takes 
approximately 15 minutes.
    According to the information submitted, the employees 
manufacturing the lift unit have mechanical knowledge and skill 
related to their work gained from technical secondary education, 
product specific training, and certified final functional test 
training. The lift unit is also tested by an accredited testing 
institute and complies with the requirements of directives for 
medical-technical Class 1 products in the European Union (MDD 93/42/
EEC).
    Packaged for retail sale with the lift unit is a hand control, 
which is attached by cable to the overhead unit and is used to 
control power, lifting and lowering of the lift unit's belt, and the 
moving of the lift unit along the rails. The hand control plugs into 
a contact on one of the end plates and is physically and 
electrically connected to the overhead lift unit. It is made in a 
non-TAA country. An IR remote hand control (ES versions and 242 
ESR2R), which can be used as an alternative to the attached hand 
control is also imported with the unit. The remote control and the 
PCB it incorporates are made in Sweden. A battery charger, into 
which the wired hand control is inserted to charge the batteries 
inside the lift unit, is also imported with the lift unit. The 
charger is made in the same non-TAA country as the hand control.

ISSUE:

    What is the country of origin of the lift unit for purposes of 
U.S. government procurement?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

    Pursuant to Subpart B of Part 177, 19 CFR Sec.  177.21 et seq., 
which implements Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as 
amended (19 U.S.C. Sec.  2511 et seq.), CBP issues country of origin 
advisory rulings and final determinations as to whether an article 
is or would be a product of a designated country or instrumentality 
for the purposes of granting waivers of certain ``Buy American'' 
restrictions in U.S. law or practice for products offered for sale 
to the U.S. Government.
    Under the rule of origin set forth under 19 U.S.C. Sec.  
2518(4)(B):

    An article is a product of a country or instrumentality only if 
(i) it is wholly the growth, product, or manufacture of that country 
or instrumentality, or (ii) in the case of an article which consists 
in whole or in part of materials from another country or 
instrumentality, it has been substantially transformed into a new 
and different article of commerce with a name, character, or use 
distinct from that of the article or articles from which it was so 
transformed.

See also 19 CFR Sec.  177.22(a).

    In determining whether the combining of parts or materials 
constitutes a substantial transformation, the determinative issue is 
the

[[Page 31805]]

extent of operations performed and whether the parts lose their 
identity and become an integral part of the new article. Belcrest 
Linens v. United States, 573 F. Supp. 1149 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1983), 
aff'd, 741 F.2d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Assembly operations that are 
minimal or simple, as opposed to complex or meaningful, will 
generally not result in a substantial transformation. See C.S.D. 80-
111, C.S.D. 85-25, C.S.D. 89-110, C.S.D. 89-118, C.S.D. 90-51, and 
C.S.D. 90-97. In C.S.D. 85-25, 19 Cust. Bull. 844 (1985), CBP held 
that for purposes of the Generalized System of Preferences 
(``GSP''), the assembly of a large number of fabricated components 
onto a printed circuit board in a process involving a considerable 
amount of time and skill resulted in a substantial transformation. 
In that case, in excess of 50 discrete fabricated components (such 
as resistors, capacitors, diodes, integrated circuits, sockets, and 
connectors) were assembled. Whether an operation is complex and 
meaningful depends on the nature of the operation, including the 
number of components assembled, number of different operations, 
time, skill level required, attention to detail, quality control, 
the value added to the article, and the overall employment generated 
by the manufacturing process.
    In order to determine whether a substantial transformation 
occurs when components of various origins are assembled into 
completed products, CBP considers the totality of the circumstances 
and makes such determinations on a case-by-case basis. The country 
of origin of the item's components, extent of the processing that 
occurs within a country, and whether such processing renders a 
product with a new name, character, and use are primary 
considerations in such cases. Additionally, factors such as the 
resources expended on product design and development, the extent and 
nature of post-assembly inspection and testing procedures, and 
worker skill required during the actual manufacturing process will 
be considered when determining whether a substantial transformation 
has occurred. No one factor is determinative.
    CBP has held in a number of cases that complex and meaningful 
assembly operations involving a large number of components result in 
a substantial transformation. In Headquarters Ruling Letter (HQ) 
H047362, dated March 26, 2009, CBP found that 61 components 
manufactured in China and assembled into ground fault circuit 
interrupters (GFCIs) in Mexico in a two-phase process by skilled 
workers using sophisticated equipment were substantially transformed 
in Mexico. In particular, we took into consideration that the first 
phase involved the assembly of a PCB in a 42-step technically 
complex process that took 12 minutes and that the completed PCB had 
all the major components necessary for the GFCI to fulfill its 
function. We also took into consideration that in the second phase 
the PCB would be assembled with 29 other components to form the 
GFCIs in a 43-step process taking approximately 10 minutes, after 
which the components would have lost their individual identities and 
become an integral part of the interrupters with a new name, 
character and use.
    By contrast, assembly operations that are minimal or simple will 
generally not result in a substantial transformation. For example, 
in HQ 734050, dated June 17, 1991, CBP held that Japanese-origin 
components were not substantially transformed in China when 
assembled in that country to form finished printers. The printers 
consisted of five main components identified as the ``head'', 
``mechanism'', ``circuit'', ``power source'', and ``outer case.'' 
The circuit, power source and outer case units were entirely 
assembled or molded in Japan. The head and mechanical units were 
made in Japan but exported to China in an unassembled state. All 
five units were exported to China where the head and mechanical 
units were assembled with screws and screwdrivers. Thereafter, the 
head, mechanism, circuit, and power source units were mounted onto 
the outer case with screws and screwdrivers. In holding that the 
country of origin of the assembled printers was Japan, CBP 
recognized that the vast majority of the printer's parts were of 
Japanese origin and that the operations performed in China were 
relatively simple assembly operations.
    In this case, approximately 100 components manufactured in non-
TAA countries will be assembled in Sweden in four phases requiring 
specialized training. The manufacturing process has 39 steps and 
takes 45 minutes. After manufacturing, the unit is subjected to a 
25-step testing process, which takes approximately 15 minutes. We 
find these manufacturing and testing operations in Sweden to be 
sufficiently complex and meaningful, in that individual components' 
names, uses and identities are lost and are transformed in Sweden 
into the lift unit. Therefore, the country of origin of the lift 
unit is Sweden.
    You argue that of the lift unit, detachable hand control and 
battery charger being imported, the lift unit provides the essential 
character of the Likorall System. ``The term `character' is defined 
as `one of the essentials of structure, form, materials, or function 
that together make up and usually distinguish the individual.' '' 
Uniden America Corporation v. United States, 120 F. Supp. 2d. 1091, 
1096 (citations omitted) (Ct. Int'l Trade 2000), citing National 
Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 Ct. Int'l Trade 308, 311 
(1992). In Uniden (concerning whether the assembly of cordless 
telephones and the installation of their detachable A/C (alternating 
current) adapters constituted instances of substantial 
transformation), the Court of International Trade applied the 
``essence test'' and found that ``[t]he essence of the telephone is 
housed in the base and the handset. Consumers do not buy the article 
because of the specific function of the A/C adapter, but rather 
because of what the completed handset and base provide: 
communication over telephone wires.'' Id. at 1096.
    Further, you argue that the detachable hand control and battery 
charger are substantially transformed with the lift unit, in that 
they have a new character, use and name because they are attached to 
and form parts of the Likorall System. In support of this view, you 
cite Uniden, supra, in which the court also found that the 
detachable A/C adapters underwent a substantial transformation 
pursuant to the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) when 
installed into the cordless telephones. The court noted that the 
substantial transformation test is to be applied to the product as a 
whole and not to each of its detachable components. See id. 
Consequently, the court found that the A/C adapter, as part of the 
cordless phone, had a new character, use and name.
    Based on the findings of the court in Uniden, we agree with your 
view that the detachable hand control and battery charger are 
substantially transformed when attached to the lift unit. 
Consequently, if they are imported from Sweden packaged together 
with the lift unit, their country of origin for purposes of U.S. 
government procurement will be Sweden.

HOLDING

    Based on the facts of this case, we find that the manufacturing 
and testing operations performed in Sweden substantially transforms 
the non-TAA country components. Therefore, the country of origin of 
the lift unit is Sweden for purposes of U.S. government procurement. 
Moreover, because the lift unit conveys the essential character of 
the Likorall System and the detachable hand control and the battery 
charger are parts of that system, they are substantially transformed 
when attached to the lift unit. The country of origin of the hand 
control and battery charger for purposes of U.S. government 
procurement, when imported from Sweden packaged with the lift unit, 
is Sweden.
    Notice of this final determination will be given in the Federal 
Register, as required by 19 CFR Sec.  177.29. Any party-at-interest 
other than the party which requested this final determination may 
request, pursuant to 19 CFR Sec.  177.31, that CBP reexamine the 
matter anew and issue a new final determination. Pursuant to 19 CFR 
Sec.  177.30, any party-at-interest may, within 30 days after 
publication in the Federal Register Notice referenced above, seek 
judicial review of this final determination before the Court of 
International Trade.
    Sincerely,

Harold M. Singer
Acting Executive Director
Regulations and Rulings
Office of International Trade

[FR Doc. 2010-13497 Filed 6-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P