Remote Location Filing, 69015-69021 [E9-30736]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 30, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
PART 275—RULES AND
REGULATIONS, INVESTMENT
ADVISERS ACT OF 1940
1. The general authority citation for
Part 275 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 80b–2(a)(11)(G), 80b–
2(a)(17), 80b–3, 80b–4, 80b–4a, 80b–6(4),
80b–6a, and 80b–11, unless otherwise noted.
*
*
*
*
*
2. Section 275.206(3)–3T(d) is revised
to read as follows:
■
§ 275.206(3)–3T Temporary rule for
principal trades with certain advisory
clients.
(d) This section will expire and no
longer be effective on December 31,
2010.
Dated: December 23, 2009.
By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–30877 Filed 12–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
19 CFR Parts 111, 113, 141, 142 and
143
[CBP Dec. 09–47; USCBP–2006–0001]
RIN 1505–AB20
Remote Location Filing
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
AGENCIES: U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, Department of Homeland
Security; Department of the Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This document adopts as a
final rule, with changes, the proposed
amendments to title 19 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (19 CFR) regarding
Remote Location Filing (RLF). RLF is a
planned component of the National
Customs Automation Program (NCAP),
authorized by section 414 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as added by section 631
within the Customs Modernization
provisions of the North American Free
Trade Agreement Implementation Act.
RLF allows a participating NCAP filer to
electronically file with CBP those
consumption entries and related
information that CBP can process in a
completely electronic data interchange
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:16 Dec 29, 2009
Jkt 220001
system from a location other than where
the goods will arrive in the United
States.
DATES: Effective Date: January 29, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
systems or automation issues: Tony
Casucci, Office of Information
Technology, at (703) 650–3053. For
operational or policy issues: Cynthia
Whittenburg, Trade Policy and
Programs, Office of International Trade,
at (202) 863–6512 or via e-mail at
remote.filing@dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 23, 2007, CBP published in
the Federal Register (72 FR 13714) a
proposal to implement Remote Location
Filing (RLF) regulations in a new
subpart E to part 143 within title 19 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR
part 143, subpart E).
RLF, which currently operates as a
National Customs Automation Program
(NCAP) prototype test pursuant to
section 414 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
added by section 631 within the
Customs Modernization provisions of
the North American Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act, allows
an RLF filer to electronically file with
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) those consumption entries and
related information that CBP can
process in a completely electronic data
interchange system from a location
other than where the goods will arrive
in the United States.
As noted in 72 FR 13714, the RLF
prototype will terminate upon the
effective date of this final rule. RLF
prototype participants may continue to
participate in the NCAP test program
until this date.
CBP solicited comments on the
proposed rulemaking.
Discussion of Comments
Fourteen commenters responded to
the solicitation of public comment in
the proposed rule. A description of the
comments received, together with CBP’s
analyses, is set forth below.
Comment: Proposed § 143.44(c)
describes RLF automation requirements
as encompassing only those entries and
entry summaries that CBP processes
completely in an electronic data
interchange system. Three commenters
requested that, in the final rule, CBP
either specifically list the RLF-eligible
entry types or cite to a source for such
information.
CBP Response: Currently, only
electronically transmitted consumption
entries—entry types 01 and 11—may be
filed using RLF. CBP is presently
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
69015
working to expand the entry types that
may be processed via RLF. It is
anticipated that upon the total
integration of the major cargo and entry
summary functionalities into
Automated Commercial Environment
(ACE), the expansion of RLF will be
fully realized and will incorporate most
entry types.
As the entry types currently permitted
under RLF are expanded in the future,
CBP will not list them in the regulatory
text; rather, CBP will include a reference
in the regulatory text, at § 143.44(c), to
the Web site located at https://
www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/trade/
trade_programs/remote_location_filing/
that provides a current listing of
permissible RLF entry types.
Comment: Four commenters
requested that RLF permit the filing of
all entry types (including anti-dumping,
countervailing duty, and quota entries),
and not be limited to type 01 and 11
consumption entries. One of the
commenters also suggested that CBP
create a special class of National Permit
to allow a broker to file any type of
entry in RLF.
CBP Response: As noted in the
response to the previous comment, it is
anticipated that most entry types will be
permitted under RLF at such time as the
major cargo and entry summary
functionalities are totally integrated into
ACE. For this reason, the creation of a
special class of National Permit is
unnecessary.
Comment: One commenter requested
that all brokers meeting the criteria set
forth in proposed § 143.43 should have
their filer codes centrally ‘‘turned on’’
automatically in the Automated
Commercial System (ACS) for all
eligible RLF ports instead of having
their Automated Broker Interface (ABI)
Client Representatives enter them as
needed.
CBP Response: The current ACS
environment does not provide this
capability. Coordination with the ABI
Client Representative is required to
enable a broker to file remotely at a
specific port.
Comment: Two commenters requested
additional clarification regarding the
specific criteria used by CBP in
establishing RLF-operational locations.
CBP Response: CBP continually
reviews and makes determinations
concerning the addition of new ports to
the list of RLF-approved processing
locations. A prospective port must, at a
minimum, have appropriate electronic
entry processing capabilities. In
determining whether to make a port
RLF-operational, CBP may take into
consideration factors such as trade
interest and whether CBP personnel
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
69016
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 30, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
have been trained in RLF procedures at
a particular location. Filers are
encouraged to contact the CBP RLF
Program Manager at
remote.filing@dhs.gov to suggest
possible port additions.
Comment: Four commenters
advocated that RLF be permanently
adopted as a final rule.
CBP Response: CBP concurs.
Comment: Three commenters
requested that CBP adopt procedures
that would provide the trade with a 90day advance notice of new RLFoperational ports. The commenters
noted that Express Consignment Carrier
Facility (ECCF) operators require
advance notice to modify automated
systems to accept RLF entries and,
although the proposed rule notice stated
that new RLF locations will be listed in
the Automated Broker Interface (ABI)
administrative messaging system, the
document did not state that advance
notice will be provided. The
commenters also note that messages
sent via ABI will not reach parties such
as carriers and ECCF operators who are
not part of ABI messaging.
CBP Response: CBP will make every
effort to provide advance notice to the
trade of new RLF-operational ports and
will list new and pending RLFoperational ports on its Web page so
that parties who do not participate in
the ABI administrative messaging
system will be informed in this regard.
The agency, however, views adopting a
90-day advance notice regulatory
requirement as unnecessarily restrictive
as the time it takes to train CBP
personnel and ensure that the port is
fully RLF operational varies from port to
port. As noted above, filers are
encouraged to contact the CBP RLF
Program Manager at
remote.filing@dhs.gov for information
regarding possible port additions.
Comment: Three commenters
requested that CBP publish a list of
current RLF operational ports in a
manner that is clearly labeled on the
CBP Web site and includes the date of
last update.
CBP Response: A complete and
current list of existing RLF operational
ports is set forth at the CBP Web site
located at https://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/
trade/trade_programs/
remote_location_filing/. A link entitled
‘‘RLF Operational Locations’’ directs
viewers to the list, which also contains
the date of last update. A reference to
this Web site is set forth in § 143.42(b).
Comment: One commenter stated that
the need for adequate staffing at RLFoperational ports is essential and noted
a lack of uniform training at these sites.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:16 Dec 29, 2009
Jkt 220001
CBP Response: CBP is in the process
of updating internal RLF standard
operating procedures and training
materials which will help achieve a
higher level of proficiency and
uniformity in RLF processing skills at
RLF-operational ports.
Comment: One commenter noted that
under the terms of the RLF prototype,
CBP accepted electronic filings of
certain ‘‘other government agency’’
(OGA) information and certifications
such as Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) certificates. The commenter
urges CBP to expand RLF in this
capacity.
CBP Response: CBP continues to work
with OGAs to fulfill documentation
requirements electronically through the
International Trade Data System (ITDS).
Also, as noted above, when the major
cargo and entry summary functionalities
are totally integrated into ACE, it is
anticipated that the expansion of RLF
will be fully realized and most OGA
information and filings will be able to
be filed electronically.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that RLF should be expanded to include
the Line Release process, prescribed in
19 CFR part 142, subpart D, which
exists to facilitate the clearance of
repetitive, low-risk transactions.
CBP Response: Line Release provides
for advance cargo screening and
expedited release at land border ports.
The current ACS environment does not
provide the capability for RLF to
include Line Release. However, as entry
processing migrates to ACE and CBP’s
system capabilities evolve, CBP will
explore opportunities to achieve various
process objectives based on the
expanded automation capabilities.
Comment: One commenter stated that
RLF regulations are not necessary
because the RLF prototype has been
functioning for 13 years and ACE will
make RLF redundant. The commenter
suggests that RLF should continue as a
NCAP prototype until such time as the
functionalities of ACE are totally
integrated.
CBP Response: Promulgating RLF as a
regulatory program will clarify and
harmonize RLF requirements and
provide the operational groundwork for
ACE. ACE will not replace RLF; rather,
ACE will be the electronic means
necessary to expand RLF.
Comment: One commenter, citing the
proposed amendment to 19 CFR
141.61(a)(2) which would allow
electronic entry and entry summary
documentation to be filed ‘‘by the
importer of record or his duly
authorized agent, one of whom must be
a resident of the United States for the
purposes of receiving service of
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
process,’’ requested that CBP verify that
it is not amending part 141 to allow
customs brokers (or any other future
authorized agent for an importer) to
prepare and file customs entries, entry
summaries and/or other ‘‘customs
business’’ documents from outside the
United States on the importer’s behalf.
CBP Response: The amendments to 19
CFR 141.61(a)(2) are intended to
provide regulatory guidance for RLF
regarding the manner by which
electronic entry and entry summary
documentation are to be prepared. This
regulatory package does not address the
issue of whether entries can be filed
from outside the United States.
Comment: One commenter suggested
changes to proposed 19 CFR
141.61(a)(2) which concerns the
preparation of electronic entry and entry
summary documentation. The
commenter notes that the certification of
the entry filing is ‘‘customs business,’’
as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1641(a) and 19
CFR 111.1, and the person responsible
for preparing the electronic filing, not
simply the transmitter of the filing, must
be the importer self-filer or a licensed
U.S. customs broker. Accordingly, the
commenter suggests deleting the phrase
in proposed § 141.61(a)(2) which states,
‘‘* * * by the importer of record or his
duly authorized agent, one of whom
must be resident in the United States for
purposes of receiving service of process
* * *’’ and adding in its place the
language, ‘‘* * * by the importer of
record or the importer’s duly authorized
customs broker’’.
CBP Comment: CBP agrees with the
commenter’s suggested language and
proposed § 141.61(a)(2), as set forth in
72 FR 13714, is amended in this
document to state that the entry and
entry summary documentation must be
certified by the importer of record or the
importer’s duly authorized ‘‘customs
broker.’’ This provision is further
amended to retain the concept of the
importer’s ‘‘duly authorized agent’’ in a
service of process context.
Comment: One commenter noted that
RLF pertains only to customs brokers
and that importers who are self-filers
have no permit restrictions and may file
entries of all kinds at all ports in the
U.S. In order to maintain the current
level playing field, brokers must
continue to have the option of offering
their clients the same capabilities. To
that end, the commenter proposes that
a special class of national permit should
be created that would allow brokers to
file at all ports with no restrictions as to
entry types. The commenter posits that
creating a new class of permit would
provide brokers with the same filing
options as self-filing importers.
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 30, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
CBP Response: The legislative intent
of the Customs Modernization Act (Pub.
L. 103–182, 107 Stat. 2170 (December 8,
1993)), was to allow nationally
permitted brokerage firms to file
electronically at all ports of entry, and
CBP is working toward that objective.
Additionally, and as noted above,
when the major cargo and entry
summary functionalities are totally
integrated into ACE, the expansion of
RLF will be fully realized, and it is
anticipated that RLF will be able to
encompass most, if not all, entry types.
Comment: One commenter inquired
whether a broker would be allowed to
make entry via RLF even when the
broker has an office in the port of entry.
CBP Response: A broker may use
CBP’s electronic invoice capabilities to
facilitate an entry filing when the broker
has an office in the port of entry.
Comment: Several commenters noted
that express consignment carrier and
courier hub facilities (ECCFs) are
privately constructed and funded
facilities at which ECCF operators are
required to pay reimbursement fees to
CBP (see § 24.23(b)(4)) for services
provided by the agency at these
facilities. As ECCFs are increasingly
used by conventional brokers who do
not pay reimbursement fees, the
commenters suggested that CBP should
impose filer code restrictions and ECCF
operators should be able to choose
which of their port codes will be RLFeligible and which brokers will be
permitted to file RLF entries at the
ECCFs.
CBP Response: With regard to the
commenters’ request for filer code
restrictions at ECCFs, CBP notes that
RLF operational ports, including ECCFs,
are open to all filers and importers who
fulfill the RLF eligibility criteria.
Comment: Several commenters
requested that ECCF operators be
notified as part of the approval and setup process to prevent the filing of
duplicate entries resulting from
situations where an importer retains the
services of an outside customs broker to
file an entry instead of using the ECCF’s
designated ‘‘in-house’’ broker who
typically arranges customs clearance at
the facility.
CBP Response: As this issue is
substantively outside the scope of the
proposed amendments to the CBP
regulations set forth in 72 FR 13714, it
cannot be addressed in this final rule.
CBP notes, however, that as importers
are obligated to use reasonable care in
making an entry, the U.S. purchaser and
the foreign shipper are obligated to
coordinate with each other as to which
of them will be responsible for entering
the foreign merchandise covered by
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:16 Dec 29, 2009
Jkt 220001
their transaction. Brokers are obligated
to exercise reasonable supervision over
the customs business they perform and
are obligated to ask whether an entry is
being made on behalf of the foreign
shipper or the U.S. purchaser. If the
parties to the transaction meet their
above-described legal obligations, the
issue of duplicate entries being made on
the same merchandise should not occur.
However, where duplicate entries are
filed, filers may remedy this through
CBP’s established entry cancellation
procedures. For a further discussion of
this issue, the trade is advised to contact
the Trade Facilitation and
Administration Division, Office of
International Trade, Customs and
Border Protection, at (202) 863–6000.
Comment: Several commenters note
that as an ECCF operator engages in a
contractual agreement with a shipper
through the terms and conditions of the
air waybill, the ECCF operator is
contractually obligated to abide by the
instructions from the shipper. These
terms and conditions include the
authority to make clearance
arrangements at destination and offer an
option under which the shipper can
specify that the consignee will make
clearance arrangements. The
commenters expressed concern that the
proposed RLF regulations make no
mention of this contractual obligation
and thus create the possibility of forced
contractual breach by requiring the
ECCF operator to accept the entry under
arrangements by the consignee.
CBP Response: These comments
address a substantive issue that is
beyond the scope of the proposed RLF
rule and therefore will not be
considered in the context of this final
rule.
Comment: Several commenters
described the PAIRED program as
distinct from RLF and suggested that if
PAIRED were to be eliminated, as
proposed, valuable experience and
established relationships between the
trade, participating government agencies
and CBP will be lost. The commenters
noted that PAIRED port entries were
designed to facilitate legitimate low
risk/repetitive trade throughout the
United States and therefore play a
significant part in the economic wellbeing of our nation and the importing
companies that use the PAIRED
program. The commenters further noted
that although Congress stated that the
PAIRED program would be eliminated
upon implementation of RLF, this
presupposed that RLF would provide
the same benefits and unique aspects of
PAIRED. In this regard, it is noted that
AD/CVD entries, quota entries, single
bond entries, and paper entry filings
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
69017
required by certain other government
agencies are permitted under PAIRED,
but not under RLF at this time.
CBP Response: CBP agrees that the
PAIRED program is distinct from RLF.
RLF is processed in a completely
electronic environment while PAIRED,
in most cases, still relies on paper
filings. The PAIRED program was
implemented in 1987 as an alternative
process for importers to use the existing
‘‘telecommunications facilities’’ that
were available at that time to expedite
the submission, review, and final
disposition of entry documentation.
PAIRED was implemented as an
attempt to reduce the costs associated
with maintaining the transportation inbond system. In 1987, CBP did not
possess the technological resources for
electronic filing, nor did the agency
possess the statutory authority to permit
brokers to file entries to districts other
than those for which they held district
permits.
Congress directed the discontinuance
of PAIRED entries upon implementation
of RLF. See House Report No. 103–
361(I), page 127. CBP is of the view that
elimination of the PAIRED program
fulfills Congressional intent by
increasing electronic filing (a major
impetus of the Customs Modernization
provisions of the North American Free
Trade Agreement Implementation Act,
Pub. L. 103–182, 107 Stat. 2170
(December 8, 1993)). The argument that
RLF was intended to provide the same
benefits as PAIRED is unsubstantiated
and, in any event, will be rendered moot
in the foreseeable future as ACE
modernization development will deliver
major release and entry summary
processing capabilities in 2009.
Comment: Several commenters
request that elimination of the PAIRED
program should be phased in until RLF
is implemented for all entry types.
CBP Response: CBP does not view an
interim continuation of the PAIRED
program as conducive to either CBP’s
homeland security objectives or its
customs modernization initiatives.
As noted above, RLF was established
under the Customs Modernization Act
and provides for the electronic
submission of required entry and entry
summary data from any location
regardless of where the merchandise
arrives in the United States or where it
is examined. Under RLF, physical
examinations are not restricted to either
the port of filing or the port of arrival
(unlike PAIRED). Examination can also
take place at the port nearest the cargo’s
final destination. RLF supports
comprehensive account based
processing by allowing filers to
electronically manage and control filing
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
69018
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 30, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
of customs cargo data. RLF also
supports the accurate electronic tracking
of cargo arrival and required electronic
review. The PAIRED program does not
support these important security
objectives and runs counter to the
agency’s modernization efforts.
merchandise, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Conclusion
19 CFR Part 143
After analysis of the comments and
further review of the matter, CBP has
determined to adopt as final, with the
changes mentioned in the comment
discussion, the proposed rule published
in the Federal Register (72 FR 13714) on
March 23, 2007.
This final rule also affects an
additional non-substantive change to
§§ 143.43(a), 143.44(a) and 143.44(b) to
clarify that the importer of record, in
addition to a customs broker, may
participate in RLF.
Automated Broker Interface (ABI),
Computer technology (Electronic entry
filing), Customs duties and inspection,
Entry of merchandise, Invoice
requirements, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act and
Executive Order 12866
PART 141—ENTRY OF MERCHANDISE
Customs duties and inspection,
Forms, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Paperwork Reduction Act
As there are no new collections of
information proposed in this document,
the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507)
are inapplicable.
Signing Authority
This document is being issued in
accordance with 19 CFR 0.1(a)(1).
List of Subjects
19 CFR Part 111
1. The general authority citation for
part 111 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202 (General
Note 3(i), Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States), 1624, 1641.
*
*
*
*
*
2. Section 111.2(b)(2)(i)(C) is revised
to read as follows:
■
§ 111.2 License and district permit
required.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) Electronic filing. A broker may
electronically file entries for
merchandise from a remote location,
pursuant to the terms set forth in
subpart E to part 143 of this chapter,
and may electronically transact other
customs business even though the entry
is filed, or other customs business is
transacted, within a district for which
the broker does not have a district
permit; and
*
*
*
*
*
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
*
Customs duties and inspection,
Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Surety bonds.
§ 113.62
15:16 Dec 29, 2009
Jkt 220001
*
*
*
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, parts 111, 113, 141, 142 and
143 of title 19 of the CFR (19 CFR parts
111, 113, 141, 142 and 143) are
amended as set forth below.
19 CFR Part 113
VerDate Nov<24>2008
*
Section 141.68 also issued under 19 U.S.C.
1315;
Section 141.90 also issued under 19 U.S.C.
1487;
PART 113—CUSTOMS BONDS
3. The general authority citation for
part 113 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1623, 1624.
*
*
*
*
[Amended]
4. In § 113.62, paragraph (k)(1) is
amended by removing the reference
,‘‘ subpart D,’’ and by removing the
words ‘‘that subpart’’ and adding in
their place the words, ‘‘part 143’’.
■
Customs duties and inspection, Entry
of merchandise, Invoices, Release of
*
*
Administrative practice and
procedure, Brokers, Customs duties and
inspection, Imports, Licensing,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
19 CFR Part 141
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1414, 1448, 1484,
1624.
Subpart F also issued under 19 U.S.C.
1481;
Subpart G also issued under 19 U.S.C.
1505;
Amendments to the Regulations
PART 111—CUSTOMS BROKERS
Because these amendments
implement a voluntary program
provided for by statute, and have the
effect of streamlining the entry process
and reducing the overall regulatory
burden on the general public, it is
certified pursuant to the provisions of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.
601 et seq. that these amendments will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. Further, these amendments do
not meet the criteria for a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as specified in E.O.
12866.
5. The general authority citation for
part 141 is revised, and the specific
authority citations for subparts F and G
and §§ 141.68 and 141.90 continue to
read as follows:
■
19 CFR Part 142
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
6. In § 141.18:
a. The introductory sentence is
amended by removing the word
‘‘Customs’’ and adding in its place the
word ‘‘customs’’, and by removing the
word ‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the
word ‘‘may’’;
■ b. Paragraph (a) is revised; and
■ c. Paragraph (b) is amended by
removing the word ‘‘Customs’’ and
adding in its place the term ‘‘CBP’’.
The revision reads as follows:
■
■
§ 141.18
Entry by nonresident corporation.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) Has a resident agent in the State
where the port of entry is located who
is authorized to accept service of
process against that corporation or, in
the case of an entry filed from a remote
location pursuant to subpart E of part
143 of this chapter, has a resident agent
authorized to accept service of process
against that corporation either in the
State where the port of entry is located
or in the State from which the remote
location filing originates; and
*
*
*
*
*
■ 7. In § 141.61:
■ a. Paragraphs (a) and (b) are revised;
■ b. Paragraph (c) is amended, in the
first sentence, by removing the word
‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the word
‘‘must’’, and; in the second sentence, by
removing the word ‘‘shall’’ and adding
in its place the word ‘‘will’’;
■ c. Paragraph (d) is amended by
removing the word ‘‘shall’’ each place
that it appears and adding the word
‘‘must’’, and by removing the words
‘‘Customs Form’’ each place they appear
and adding the words ‘‘CBP Form’’;
■ d. Paragraph (e) is amended:
■ i. In paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(3),
by removing the word ‘‘shall’’ each
place that it appears and adding the
word ‘‘must’’, and by removing the
words ‘‘Customs Form’’ each place they
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 30, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
appear and adding the words ‘‘CBP
Form’’;
■ ii. In paragraph (e)(4), by removing the
word ‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the
word ‘‘will’’ and by removing the word
‘‘Customs’’ and adding in its place the
term ‘‘CBP’’; and
■ iii. In paragraph (e)(5), by removing
the word ‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place
the word ‘‘will’’; and
■ e. Paragraph (f) is amended:
■ i. In paragraph (f)(1), by removing the
word ‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the
word ‘‘must’’; in paragraph (f)(1)(iv), by
removing, in the second sentence, the
words ‘‘shall represent’’ and adding in
their place the words ‘‘must represent’’;
and, in the third sentence, by removing
the word ‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place
the word ‘‘must’’ and by removing the
word ‘‘Customs’’ each place that it
appears and adding the term ‘‘CBP’’;
■ ii. In paragraph (f)(2)(i), by removing
the word ‘‘shall’’ each place that it
appears and adding the word ‘‘must’’
and by removing the word ‘‘Customs’’
and adding in its place the term ‘‘CBP’’;
■ iii. In paragraph (f)(2)(ii), by
removing, in the first sentence, the word
‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the word
‘‘must’’, by removing in the second
sentence the words ‘‘shall represent’’
and adding in their place the words
‘‘must represent’’; and, in the third
sentence, by removing the word ‘‘shall’’
and adding in its place the word
‘‘must’’; and, in paragraphs (f)(2)(iii) and
(f)(2)(iv), by removing the word ‘‘shall’’
each place that it appears and adding
the word ‘‘must’’.
The revision reads as follows:
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
§ 141.61 Completion of entry and entry
summary documentation.
(a) Preparation—(1) Paper entry and
entry summary documentation. Except
when entry and entry summary
documentation is filed with CBP
electronically pursuant to the provisions
of part 143 of this chapter:
(i) Such documentation must be
prepared on a typewriter (keyboard), or
with ink, indelible pencil, or other
permanent medium, and all copies must
be legible;
(ii) The entry summary must be
signed by the importer (see § 101.1 of
this chapter); and
(iii) Entries, entry summaries, and
accompanying documentation must be
on the appropriate forms specified by
the regulations and must clearly set
forth all required information.
(2) Electronic entry and entry
summary documentation. Entry and
entry summary documentation that is
filed electronically pursuant to part 143
of this chapter must contain the
information required by this section and
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:16 Dec 29, 2009
Jkt 220001
must be certified (see §§ 143.35 and
143.44 of this chapter) by the importer
of record or his duly authorized customs
broker as being true and correct to the
best of his knowledge. The importer of
record, customs broker, or a duly
authorized agent must be resident in the
United States for purposes of receiving
service of process. A certified electronic
transmission is binding in the same
manner and to the same extent as a
signed document.
(b) Marks and numbers previously
provided. An importer may omit from
entry summary (CBP Form 7501) the
marks and numbers previously provided
for packages released or withdrawn.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 141.63
[Amended]
8. In § 141.63:
a. Paragraphs (a)(2) and (b) are
amended by removing the word ‘‘shall’’
each place that it appears and adding
the word ‘‘will’’; and
b. Paragraph (c) is removed.
■
§ 141.68
[Amended]
9. In § 141.68:
a. Paragraphs (a) through (e), (g), and
(h) are amended by removing the word
‘‘shall’’ each place that it appears and
adding the word ‘‘will’’; and
■ b. Paragraphs (a), (d), and (f) through
(h) are amended by removing the word
‘‘Customs’’ each place that it appears
and adding the term ‘‘CBP’’.
■ 10. In § 141.86:
■ a. Paragraphs (a) through (e) are
amended by removing the word ‘‘shall’’
each place that it appears and adding
the word ‘‘must’’;
■ b. Paragraph (f) is amended by
removing the word ‘‘shall’’ and adding
in its place the word ‘‘must’’, and by
removing the word ‘‘Customs’’ and
adding in its place the term ‘‘CBP’’;
■ c. Paragraph (g) is amended by
removing the word ‘‘shall’’ and adding
in its place the word ‘‘must’’;
■ d. Paragraph (h) is revised; and
■ e. Paragraph (j) is amended by
removing the word ‘‘shall’’ and adding
in its place the word ‘‘must’’.
The revisions read as follows:
■
■
§ 141.86 Contents of invoices and general
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Numbering of invoices and pages.
(1) Invoices. Except when electronic
invoice data are transmitted to CBP
under the provisions of part 143 of this
chapter, when more than one invoice is
included in the same entry, each invoice
with its attachments must be numbered
consecutively by the importer on the
bottom of the face of each page,
beginning with No. 1.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
69019
(2) Pages. Except when electronic
invoice data are transmitted to CBP
under the provisions of part 143 of this
chapter, if the invoice or invoices filed
with one entry consist of more than two
pages, each page must be numbered
consecutively by the importer on the
bottom of the face of each page, with the
page numbering beginning with No. 1
for the first page of the first invoice and
continuing in a single series of numbers
through all the invoices and
attachments included in one entry.
(3) Both invoices and pages. Except
when electronic invoice data are
transmitted to CBP under the provisions
of part 143 of this chapter, both the
invoice number and the page number
must be shown at the bottom of each
page when applicable. For example, an
entry covering one invoice of one page
and a second invoice of two pages must
be paginated as follows:
Inv. 1, p. 1.
Inv. 2, p. 2.
Inv. 2, p. 3
*
*
*
*
*
■ 11. In § 141.90:
■ a. Paragraph (b) is revised;
■ b. Paragraph (c) is amended by
removing the word ‘‘shall’’ each place
that it appears and adding the word
‘‘must’’ in its place; and
■ c. Paragraph (d) is revised.
The revisions read as follows:
§ 141.90 Notation of tariff classification
and value on invoice.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Classification and rate of duty.
The importer or customs broker must
include on the invoice or with the
invoice data the appropriate subheading
under the provisions of the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (19
U.S.C. 1202) and the rate of duty for the
merchandise being entered. Except
when invoice line data are linked to an
entry summary line and transmitted to
CBP electronically under the provisions
of part 143, that information must be
noted by the importer or customs broker
in the left-hand portion of the invoice,
next to the articles to which they apply.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Importer’s notations in blue or
black ink. Except when invoice line data
are linked to an entry summary line and
transmitted to CBP electronically under
the provisions of part 143, all notations
made on the invoice by the importer or
customs broker must be in blue or black
ink.
PART 142—ENTRY PROCESS
12. The authority citation for part 142
continues to read as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
69020
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 30, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1448, 1484, 1624.
13. In § 142.3:
a. Paragraph (a) is amended by:
i. Removing in the introductory
sentence the word ‘‘shall’’ and adding in
its place the word ‘‘must’’;
■ ii. By removing in paragraph (a)(1) the
word ‘‘Customs’’ each place that it
appears and adding the term ‘‘CBP’’ and
by removing the word ‘‘shall’’ and
adding in its place the word ‘‘must’’;
■ iii. By removing in paragraph (a)(5)
the word ‘‘Customs’’ and adding in its
place the term ‘‘CBP’’;
■ iv. By removing in paragraph (a)(6) the
word ‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the
word ‘‘must’’ and by removing the term
‘‘CF’’ and adding in its place the words
‘‘CBP Form’’;
■ b. Paragraph (b) is revised; and
■ c. A new paragraph (d) is added.
The revision and addition read as
follows:
■
■
■
§ 142.3
Entry documentation required.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Entry summary filed at time of
entry. When the entry summary is filed
at time of entry in accordance with
§ 142.12(a)(1) or § 142.13:
(1) CBP Form 3461 or 7533 will not
be required; and
(2) CBP Form 7501 or CBP Form 3311
(as appropriate, see § 142.11) may serve
as both the entry and the entry summary
documentation if the additional
documentation set forth in paragraphs
(a)(2), (3), (4) and (5) of this section and
§ 142.16(b) is filed.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Electronic Format. The entry
documentation identified in this section
may be submitted to CBP in either a
paper or, where appropriate, an
electronic format.
PART 143—SPECIAL ENTRY
PROCEDURES
14. The authority citation for part 143
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1414, 1481, 1484,
1498, 1624, 1641.
15. Section 143.0 is revised to read as
follows:
■
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
§ 143.0
Scope.
This part sets forth the requirements
and procedures for participation in the
Automated Broker Interface (ABI), for
the clearance of imported merchandise
under appraisement and informal
entries, and under electronic entry filing
and under Remote Location Filing
(RLF). All requirements and procedures
set forth in this part are in addition to
the general requirements and
procedures for all entries set forth in
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:16 Dec 29, 2009
Jkt 220001
part 141 of this chapter. More specific
requirements and procedures are set
forth elsewhere in this chapter; for
example, part 145 concerns
importations by mail and part 10
concerns merchandise conditionally
free of duty or subject to a reduced rate.
■ 16. In § 143.32, the introductory text
and paragraphs (a), (b), (d) through (k),
and the first sentence of paragraph (o)
are revised to read as follows:
§ 143.32
Definitions.
The following are definitions for
purposes of subparts D and E of this
part:
(a) ABI. ‘‘ABI’’ means the Automated
Broker Interface and refers to a module
of ACS that allows entry filers to
transmit immediate delivery, entry and
entry summary data electronically to
CBP through ACS and to receive
transmissions from ACS.
(b) ACS. ‘‘ACS’’ means the Automated
Commercial System and refers to CBP’s
integrated comprehensive tracking
system for the acquisition, processing
and distribution of import data.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Broker. ‘‘Broker’’ means a customs
broker licensed under part 111 of this
chapter.
(e) Certification. ‘‘Certification’’
means the electronic equivalent of a
signature for data transmitted through
ABI. This electronic (facsimile)
signature must be transmitted as part of
the immediate delivery, entry or entry
summary data. Such data are referred to
as ‘‘certified’’.
(f) Data. ‘‘Data’’ when used in
conjunction with immediate delivery,
entry and/or entry summary means the
information required to be submitted
with the immediate delivery, entry and/
or entry summary, respectively, in
accordance with the CATAIR (CBP
Publication 552, Customs and Trade
Automated Interface Requirements)
and/or CBP Headquarters directives. It
does not mean the actual paper
documents, but includes all of the
information required to be in such
documents.
(g) Documentation. ‘‘Documentation’’
when used in conjunction with
immediate delivery, entry and/or entry
summary means the documents set forth
in § 142.3 of this chapter, required to be
submitted as part of an application for
immediate delivery, entry and/or entry
summary, but does not include the CBP
Forms 7501, 3461 (or alternative forms).
(h) EDIFACT. ‘‘EDIFACT’’ means the
Electronic Data Interchange for
Administration, Commerce and
Transport that provides an electronic
capability to transmit detailed CBP
Forms 7501 and 3461, and invoice data.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(i) Electronic entry. ‘‘Electronic entry’’
means the electronic transmission to
CBP of:
(1) Entry information required for the
entry of merchandise; and
(2) Entry summary information
required for the classification and
appraisement of the merchandise, the
verification of statistical information,
and the determination of compliance
with applicable law.
(j) Electronic immediate delivery.
‘‘Electronic immediate delivery’’ means
the electronic transmission of CBP
Forms 3461 or 3461 alternate (CBP Form
3461 ALT) data utilizing ACS in order
to obtain the release of goods under
immediate delivery.
(k) Electronic Invoice Program (EIP).
‘‘EIP’’ refers to modules of the
Automated Broker Interface (ABI) that
allow entry filers to transmit detailed
invoice data and includes Automated
Invoice Interface (AII) and any other
electronic invoice authorized by CBP.
*
*
*
*
*
(o) Selectivity criteria. ‘‘Selectivity
criteria’’ means the categories of
information that guide CBP’s judgment
in evaluating and assessing the risk of
an immediate delivery, entry, or entry
summary transaction. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
■ 17. Part 143 is amended by adding a
new subpart E, consisting of §§ 143.41
through 143.45, to read as follows:
Subpart E—Remote Location Filing
Sec.
143.41 Applicability.
143.42 Definitions.
143.43 RLF eligibility criteria.
143.44 RLF procedure.
143.45 Filing of additional entry
information.
Subpart E—Remote Location Filing
§ 143.41
Applicability.
This subpart sets forth the general
requirements and procedures for
Remote Location Filing (RLF). RLF
entries are subject to the documentation,
document retention and document
retrieval requirements of this chapter as
well as the general entry requirements
of parts 141, 142 and 143 of this
chapter. Participation in the RLF
program is voluntary and at the option
of the filer.
§ 143.42
Definitions.
The following definitions, in addition
to the definitions set forth in § 143.32 of
this part, apply for purposes of this
subpart E:
(a) Remote Location Filing (RLF)—
‘‘RLF’’ is an elective method of making
entry by which a customs broker with
a national permit electronically
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 30, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
transmits all data information associated
with an entry that CBP can process in
a completely electronic data interchange
system to a RLF-operational CBP
location from a remote location other
than where the goods are being entered.
(Importers filing on their own behalf
may file electronically in any port,
subject to ABI filing requirements.)
(b) RLF-operational CBP location—
‘‘RLF-operational CBP location’’ means
a CBP location within the customs
territory of the United States that is
staffed with CBP personnel who have
been trained in RLF procedures and
who have operational experience with
the Electronic Invoice Program (EIP).
EIP is defined in § 143.32 of this
chapter. A list of all RLF-operational
locations is available for viewing on the
CBP Internet Web site located at
https://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/trade/
trade_programs/remote_location_filing/.
§ 143.43
RLF eligibility criteria.
(a) Automation criteria. To be eligible
for RLF, a licensed customs broker or
importer of record must be:
(1) Operational on the ABI (see 19
CFR part 143, subpart A);
(2) Operational on the EIP prior to
applying for RLF; and
(3) Operational on the ACH (or any
other CBP-approved method of
electronic payment), for purposes of
directing the electronic payment of
duties, taxes and fees (see 19 CFR
24.25), 30 days before transmitting a
RLF entry.
(b) Broker must have national permit.
To be eligible for RLF, a licensed
customs broker must hold a valid
national permit (see 19 CFR 111.19(f)).
(c) Continuous bond. A RLF entry
must be secured with a continuous
bond.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
§ 143.44
RLF procedure.
(a) Electronic transmission of invoice
data. For RLF transactions, a customs
broker or importer of record must
transmit electronically, using EIP, any
invoice data required by CBP.
(b) Electronic transmission of
payment. For RLF transactions, a
customs broker or importer of record
must direct the electronic payment of
duties, taxes and fees through the ACH
(see 19 CFR 24.25) or any other method
of electronic payment authorized by
CBP.
(c) Automation requirements. Only
those entries and entry summaries that
CBP processes completely in an
electronic data interchange system will
be accepted for RLF. For a listing of
entry types that may be filed via RLF,
go to https://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:16 Dec 29, 2009
Jkt 220001
trade/trade_programs/
remote_location_filing/.
(d) Combined electronic entry and
entry summary. For RLF transactions
using a combined electronic entry and
entry summary, a customs broker must
submit to CBP, through ABI or any other
electronic interface authorized by CBP,
a complete and error-free electronic data
transmission constituting the entry
summary that serves as both the entry
and entry summary.
(e) No line release or immediate
delivery entries permitted under RLF.
Line release (see 19 CFR, Part 142,
Subpart D) or immediate delivery
procedures may not be combined with
RLF transactions.
(f) Data acceptance and release of
merchandise. Data that are complete
and error free will be accepted by CBP.
If electronic invoice or additional
electronic documentation is required,
CBP will so notify the RLF filer. If no
documentation is required to be filed,
CBP will so notify the RLF filer. If CBP
accepts the RLF entry (including invoice
data) under §§ 143.34 through 143.36 of
this part, the RLF entry will be deemed
to satisfy all filing requirements under
this part and the merchandise may be
released.
(g) Liquidation. The entry summary
will be scheduled for liquidation once
payment is made under statement
processing (see 19 CFR 24.25).
§ 143.45 Filing of additional entry
information.
When filing from a remote location, a
RLF filer must electronically file all
additional information required by CBP
to be presented with the entry and entry
summary information (including
facsimile transmissions) that CBP can
accept electronically. If CBP cannot
accept additional information
electronically, the RLF filer must file the
additional information in a paper format
at the CBP port of entry where the goods
arrived.
Approved: December 22, 2009.
Jayson P. Ahern,
Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. E9–30736 Filed 12–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
69021
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[TD 9477]
RIN 1545–BI14
Use of Controlled Corporations To
Avoid the Application of Section 304
AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Final and temporary
regulations.
SUMMARY: This document contains final
and temporary regulations under section
304 of the Internal Revenue Code
(Code). The regulations apply to certain
transactions that are subject to section
304 but that are entered into with a
principal purpose of avoiding the
application of section 304 to a
corporation that is controlled by the
issuing corporation in the transaction,
or with a principal purpose of avoiding
the application of section 304 to a
corporation that controls the acquiring
corporation in the transaction. The
regulations affect persons treated as
receiving distributions in redemption of
stock by reason of section 304. The text
of the temporary regulations serves as
the text of the proposed regulations in
the notice of proposed rulemaking on
this subject published in the Proposed
Rules section of this issue of the Federal
Register.
DATES: Effective Date: These regulations
are effective on December 30, 2009.
Applicability Date: These regulations
apply to acquisitions of stock occurring
on or after December 29, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sean W. Mullaney, (202) 622–3860 (not
a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This document contains amendments
to 26 CFR part 1 under section 304 of
the Code. Section 304(a)(1) provides
generally that, for purposes of sections
302 and 303, if one or more persons are
in control of each of two corporations
and one such corporation (acquiring
corporation) acquires in exchange for
property stock of the other corporation
(issuing corporation) from the person (or
persons) so in control, then, unless
section 304(a)(2) applies, the property
shall be treated as received in
redemption of the stock of the acquiring
corporation. Section 304(a)(2) provides
generally that, for purposes of sections
302 and 303, if in exchange for property
the acquiring corporation acquires stock
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 30, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69015-69021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-30736]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
19 CFR Parts 111, 113, 141, 142 and 143
[CBP Dec. 09-47; USCBP-2006-0001]
RIN 1505-AB20
Remote Location Filing
AGENCIES: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland
Security; Department of the Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document adopts as a final rule, with changes, the
proposed amendments to title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19
CFR) regarding Remote Location Filing (RLF). RLF is a planned component
of the National Customs Automation Program (NCAP), authorized by
section 414 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as added by section 631 within
the Customs Modernization provisions of the North American Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act. RLF allows a participating NCAP filer to
electronically file with CBP those consumption entries and related
information that CBP can process in a completely electronic data
interchange system from a location other than where the goods will
arrive in the United States.
DATES: Effective Date: January 29, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For systems or automation issues: Tony
Casucci, Office of Information Technology, at (703) 650-3053. For
operational or policy issues: Cynthia Whittenburg, Trade Policy and
Programs, Office of International Trade, at (202) 863-6512 or via e-
mail at remote.filing@dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 23, 2007, CBP published in the Federal Register (72 FR
13714) a proposal to implement Remote Location Filing (RLF) regulations
in a new subpart E to part 143 within title 19 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (19 CFR part 143, subpart E).
RLF, which currently operates as a National Customs Automation
Program (NCAP) prototype test pursuant to section 414 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as added by section 631 within the Customs Modernization
provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation
Act, allows an RLF filer to electronically file with U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) those consumption entries and related
information that CBP can process in a completely electronic data
interchange system from a location other than where the goods will
arrive in the United States.
As noted in 72 FR 13714, the RLF prototype will terminate upon the
effective date of this final rule. RLF prototype participants may
continue to participate in the NCAP test program until this date.
CBP solicited comments on the proposed rulemaking.
Discussion of Comments
Fourteen commenters responded to the solicitation of public comment
in the proposed rule. A description of the comments received, together
with CBP's analyses, is set forth below.
Comment: Proposed Sec. 143.44(c) describes RLF automation
requirements as encompassing only those entries and entry summaries
that CBP processes completely in an electronic data interchange system.
Three commenters requested that, in the final rule, CBP either
specifically list the RLF-eligible entry types or cite to a source for
such information.
CBP Response: Currently, only electronically transmitted
consumption entries--entry types 01 and 11--may be filed using RLF. CBP
is presently working to expand the entry types that may be processed
via RLF. It is anticipated that upon the total integration of the major
cargo and entry summary functionalities into Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE), the expansion of RLF will be fully realized and will
incorporate most entry types.
As the entry types currently permitted under RLF are expanded in
the future, CBP will not list them in the regulatory text; rather, CBP
will include a reference in the regulatory text, at Sec. 143.44(c), to
the Web site located at https://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/trade/trade_programs/remote_location_filing/ that provides a current listing of
permissible RLF entry types.
Comment: Four commenters requested that RLF permit the filing of
all entry types (including anti-dumping, countervailing duty, and quota
entries), and not be limited to type 01 and 11 consumption entries. One
of the commenters also suggested that CBP create a special class of
National Permit to allow a broker to file any type of entry in RLF.
CBP Response: As noted in the response to the previous comment, it
is anticipated that most entry types will be permitted under RLF at
such time as the major cargo and entry summary functionalities are
totally integrated into ACE. For this reason, the creation of a special
class of National Permit is unnecessary.
Comment: One commenter requested that all brokers meeting the
criteria set forth in proposed Sec. 143.43 should have their filer
codes centrally ``turned on'' automatically in the Automated Commercial
System (ACS) for all eligible RLF ports instead of having their
Automated Broker Interface (ABI) Client Representatives enter them as
needed.
CBP Response: The current ACS environment does not provide this
capability. Coordination with the ABI Client Representative is required
to enable a broker to file remotely at a specific port.
Comment: Two commenters requested additional clarification
regarding the specific criteria used by CBP in establishing RLF-
operational locations.
CBP Response: CBP continually reviews and makes determinations
concerning the addition of new ports to the list of RLF-approved
processing locations. A prospective port must, at a minimum, have
appropriate electronic entry processing capabilities. In determining
whether to make a port RLF-operational, CBP may take into consideration
factors such as trade interest and whether CBP personnel
[[Page 69016]]
have been trained in RLF procedures at a particular location. Filers
are encouraged to contact the CBP RLF Program Manager at
remote.filing@dhs.gov to suggest possible port additions.
Comment: Four commenters advocated that RLF be permanently adopted
as a final rule.
CBP Response: CBP concurs.
Comment: Three commenters requested that CBP adopt procedures that
would provide the trade with a 90-day advance notice of new RLF-
operational ports. The commenters noted that Express Consignment
Carrier Facility (ECCF) operators require advance notice to modify
automated systems to accept RLF entries and, although the proposed rule
notice stated that new RLF locations will be listed in the Automated
Broker Interface (ABI) administrative messaging system, the document
did not state that advance notice will be provided. The commenters also
note that messages sent via ABI will not reach parties such as carriers
and ECCF operators who are not part of ABI messaging.
CBP Response: CBP will make every effort to provide advance notice
to the trade of new RLF-operational ports and will list new and pending
RLF-operational ports on its Web page so that parties who do not
participate in the ABI administrative messaging system will be informed
in this regard. The agency, however, views adopting a 90-day advance
notice regulatory requirement as unnecessarily restrictive as the time
it takes to train CBP personnel and ensure that the port is fully RLF
operational varies from port to port. As noted above, filers are
encouraged to contact the CBP RLF Program Manager at
remote.filing@dhs.gov for information regarding possible port
additions.
Comment: Three commenters requested that CBP publish a list of
current RLF operational ports in a manner that is clearly labeled on
the CBP Web site and includes the date of last update.
CBP Response: A complete and current list of existing RLF
operational ports is set forth at the CBP Web site located at https://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/trade/trade_programs/remote_location_filing/. A
link entitled ``RLF Operational Locations'' directs viewers to the
list, which also contains the date of last update. A reference to this
Web site is set forth in Sec. 143.42(b).
Comment: One commenter stated that the need for adequate staffing
at RLF-operational ports is essential and noted a lack of uniform
training at these sites.
CBP Response: CBP is in the process of updating internal RLF
standard operating procedures and training materials which will help
achieve a higher level of proficiency and uniformity in RLF processing
skills at RLF-operational ports.
Comment: One commenter noted that under the terms of the RLF
prototype, CBP accepted electronic filings of certain ``other
government agency'' (OGA) information and certifications such as Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) certificates. The commenter urges CBP to
expand RLF in this capacity.
CBP Response: CBP continues to work with OGAs to fulfill
documentation requirements electronically through the International
Trade Data System (ITDS). Also, as noted above, when the major cargo
and entry summary functionalities are totally integrated into ACE, it
is anticipated that the expansion of RLF will be fully realized and
most OGA information and filings will be able to be filed
electronically.
Comment: One commenter suggested that RLF should be expanded to
include the Line Release process, prescribed in 19 CFR part 142,
subpart D, which exists to facilitate the clearance of repetitive, low-
risk transactions.
CBP Response: Line Release provides for advance cargo screening and
expedited release at land border ports. The current ACS environment
does not provide the capability for RLF to include Line Release.
However, as entry processing migrates to ACE and CBP's system
capabilities evolve, CBP will explore opportunities to achieve various
process objectives based on the expanded automation capabilities.
Comment: One commenter stated that RLF regulations are not
necessary because the RLF prototype has been functioning for 13 years
and ACE will make RLF redundant. The commenter suggests that RLF should
continue as a NCAP prototype until such time as the functionalities of
ACE are totally integrated.
CBP Response: Promulgating RLF as a regulatory program will clarify
and harmonize RLF requirements and provide the operational groundwork
for ACE. ACE will not replace RLF; rather, ACE will be the electronic
means necessary to expand RLF.
Comment: One commenter, citing the proposed amendment to 19 CFR
141.61(a)(2) which would allow electronic entry and entry summary
documentation to be filed ``by the importer of record or his duly
authorized agent, one of whom must be a resident of the United States
for the purposes of receiving service of process,'' requested that CBP
verify that it is not amending part 141 to allow customs brokers (or
any other future authorized agent for an importer) to prepare and file
customs entries, entry summaries and/or other ``customs business''
documents from outside the United States on the importer's behalf.
CBP Response: The amendments to 19 CFR 141.61(a)(2) are intended to
provide regulatory guidance for RLF regarding the manner by which
electronic entry and entry summary documentation are to be prepared.
This regulatory package does not address the issue of whether entries
can be filed from outside the United States.
Comment: One commenter suggested changes to proposed 19 CFR
141.61(a)(2) which concerns the preparation of electronic entry and
entry summary documentation. The commenter notes that the certification
of the entry filing is ``customs business,'' as defined in 19 U.S.C.
1641(a) and 19 CFR 111.1, and the person responsible for preparing the
electronic filing, not simply the transmitter of the filing, must be
the importer self-filer or a licensed U.S. customs broker. Accordingly,
the commenter suggests deleting the phrase in proposed Sec.
141.61(a)(2) which states, ``* * * by the importer of record or his
duly authorized agent, one of whom must be resident in the United
States for purposes of receiving service of process * * *'' and adding
in its place the language, ``* * * by the importer of record or the
importer's duly authorized customs broker''.
CBP Comment: CBP agrees with the commenter's suggested language and
proposed Sec. 141.61(a)(2), as set forth in 72 FR 13714, is amended in
this document to state that the entry and entry summary documentation
must be certified by the importer of record or the importer's duly
authorized ``customs broker.'' This provision is further amended to
retain the concept of the importer's ``duly authorized agent'' in a
service of process context.
Comment: One commenter noted that RLF pertains only to customs
brokers and that importers who are self-filers have no permit
restrictions and may file entries of all kinds at all ports in the U.S.
In order to maintain the current level playing field, brokers must
continue to have the option of offering their clients the same
capabilities. To that end, the commenter proposes that a special class
of national permit should be created that would allow brokers to file
at all ports with no restrictions as to entry types. The commenter
posits that creating a new class of permit would provide brokers with
the same filing options as self-filing importers.
[[Page 69017]]
CBP Response: The legislative intent of the Customs Modernization
Act (Pub. L. 103-182, 107 Stat. 2170 (December 8, 1993)), was to allow
nationally permitted brokerage firms to file electronically at all
ports of entry, and CBP is working toward that objective.
Additionally, and as noted above, when the major cargo and entry
summary functionalities are totally integrated into ACE, the expansion
of RLF will be fully realized, and it is anticipated that RLF will be
able to encompass most, if not all, entry types.
Comment: One commenter inquired whether a broker would be allowed
to make entry via RLF even when the broker has an office in the port of
entry.
CBP Response: A broker may use CBP's electronic invoice
capabilities to facilitate an entry filing when the broker has an
office in the port of entry.
Comment: Several commenters noted that express consignment carrier
and courier hub facilities (ECCFs) are privately constructed and funded
facilities at which ECCF operators are required to pay reimbursement
fees to CBP (see Sec. 24.23(b)(4)) for services provided by the agency
at these facilities. As ECCFs are increasingly used by conventional
brokers who do not pay reimbursement fees, the commenters suggested
that CBP should impose filer code restrictions and ECCF operators
should be able to choose which of their port codes will be RLF-eligible
and which brokers will be permitted to file RLF entries at the ECCFs.
CBP Response: With regard to the commenters' request for filer code
restrictions at ECCFs, CBP notes that RLF operational ports, including
ECCFs, are open to all filers and importers who fulfill the RLF
eligibility criteria.
Comment: Several commenters requested that ECCF operators be
notified as part of the approval and set-up process to prevent the
filing of duplicate entries resulting from situations where an importer
retains the services of an outside customs broker to file an entry
instead of using the ECCF's designated ``in-house'' broker who
typically arranges customs clearance at the facility.
CBP Response: As this issue is substantively outside the scope of
the proposed amendments to the CBP regulations set forth in 72 FR
13714, it cannot be addressed in this final rule.
CBP notes, however, that as importers are obligated to use
reasonable care in making an entry, the U.S. purchaser and the foreign
shipper are obligated to coordinate with each other as to which of them
will be responsible for entering the foreign merchandise covered by
their transaction. Brokers are obligated to exercise reasonable
supervision over the customs business they perform and are obligated to
ask whether an entry is being made on behalf of the foreign shipper or
the U.S. purchaser. If the parties to the transaction meet their above-
described legal obligations, the issue of duplicate entries being made
on the same merchandise should not occur. However, where duplicate
entries are filed, filers may remedy this through CBP's established
entry cancellation procedures. For a further discussion of this issue,
the trade is advised to contact the Trade Facilitation and
Administration Division, Office of International Trade, Customs and
Border Protection, at (202) 863-6000.
Comment: Several commenters note that as an ECCF operator engages
in a contractual agreement with a shipper through the terms and
conditions of the air waybill, the ECCF operator is contractually
obligated to abide by the instructions from the shipper. These terms
and conditions include the authority to make clearance arrangements at
destination and offer an option under which the shipper can specify
that the consignee will make clearance arrangements. The commenters
expressed concern that the proposed RLF regulations make no mention of
this contractual obligation and thus create the possibility of forced
contractual breach by requiring the ECCF operator to accept the entry
under arrangements by the consignee.
CBP Response: These comments address a substantive issue that is
beyond the scope of the proposed RLF rule and therefore will not be
considered in the context of this final rule.
Comment: Several commenters described the PAIRED program as
distinct from RLF and suggested that if PAIRED were to be eliminated,
as proposed, valuable experience and established relationships between
the trade, participating government agencies and CBP will be lost. The
commenters noted that PAIRED port entries were designed to facilitate
legitimate low risk/repetitive trade throughout the United States and
therefore play a significant part in the economic well-being of our
nation and the importing companies that use the PAIRED program. The
commenters further noted that although Congress stated that the PAIRED
program would be eliminated upon implementation of RLF, this
presupposed that RLF would provide the same benefits and unique aspects
of PAIRED. In this regard, it is noted that AD/CVD entries, quota
entries, single bond entries, and paper entry filings required by
certain other government agencies are permitted under PAIRED, but not
under RLF at this time.
CBP Response: CBP agrees that the PAIRED program is distinct from
RLF. RLF is processed in a completely electronic environment while
PAIRED, in most cases, still relies on paper filings. The PAIRED
program was implemented in 1987 as an alternative process for importers
to use the existing ``telecommunications facilities'' that were
available at that time to expedite the submission, review, and final
disposition of entry documentation.
PAIRED was implemented as an attempt to reduce the costs associated
with maintaining the transportation in-bond system. In 1987, CBP did
not possess the technological resources for electronic filing, nor did
the agency possess the statutory authority to permit brokers to file
entries to districts other than those for which they held district
permits.
Congress directed the discontinuance of PAIRED entries upon
implementation of RLF. See House Report No. 103-361(I), page 127. CBP
is of the view that elimination of the PAIRED program fulfills
Congressional intent by increasing electronic filing (a major impetus
of the Customs Modernization provisions of the North American Free
Trade Agreement Implementation Act, Pub. L. 103-182, 107 Stat. 2170
(December 8, 1993)). The argument that RLF was intended to provide the
same benefits as PAIRED is unsubstantiated and, in any event, will be
rendered moot in the foreseeable future as ACE modernization
development will deliver major release and entry summary processing
capabilities in 2009.
Comment: Several commenters request that elimination of the PAIRED
program should be phased in until RLF is implemented for all entry
types.
CBP Response: CBP does not view an interim continuation of the
PAIRED program as conducive to either CBP's homeland security
objectives or its customs modernization initiatives.
As noted above, RLF was established under the Customs Modernization
Act and provides for the electronic submission of required entry and
entry summary data from any location regardless of where the
merchandise arrives in the United States or where it is examined. Under
RLF, physical examinations are not restricted to either the port of
filing or the port of arrival (unlike PAIRED). Examination can also
take place at the port nearest the cargo's final destination. RLF
supports comprehensive account based processing by allowing filers to
electronically manage and control filing
[[Page 69018]]
of customs cargo data. RLF also supports the accurate electronic
tracking of cargo arrival and required electronic review. The PAIRED
program does not support these important security objectives and runs
counter to the agency's modernization efforts.
Conclusion
After analysis of the comments and further review of the matter,
CBP has determined to adopt as final, with the changes mentioned in the
comment discussion, the proposed rule published in the Federal Register
(72 FR 13714) on March 23, 2007.
This final rule also affects an additional non-substantive change
to Sec. Sec. 143.43(a), 143.44(a) and 143.44(b) to clarify that the
importer of record, in addition to a customs broker, may participate in
RLF.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866
Because these amendments implement a voluntary program provided for
by statute, and have the effect of streamlining the entry process and
reducing the overall regulatory burden on the general public, it is
certified pursuant to the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. that these amendments will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Further,
these amendments do not meet the criteria for a ``significant
regulatory action'' as specified in E.O. 12866.
Paperwork Reduction Act
As there are no new collections of information proposed in this
document, the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3507) are inapplicable.
Signing Authority
This document is being issued in accordance with 19 CFR 0.1(a)(1).
List of Subjects
19 CFR Part 111
Administrative practice and procedure, Brokers, Customs duties and
inspection, Imports, Licensing, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
19 CFR Part 113
Customs duties and inspection, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Surety bonds.
19 CFR Part 141
Customs duties and inspection, Entry of merchandise, Invoices,
Release of merchandise, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
19 CFR Part 142
Customs duties and inspection, Forms, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
19 CFR Part 143
Automated Broker Interface (ABI), Computer technology (Electronic
entry filing), Customs duties and inspection, Entry of merchandise,
Invoice requirements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Amendments to the Regulations
For the reasons stated in the preamble, parts 111, 113, 141, 142
and 143 of title 19 of the CFR (19 CFR parts 111, 113, 141, 142 and
143) are amended as set forth below.
PART 111--CUSTOMS BROKERS
0
1. The general authority citation for part 111 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202 (General Note 3(i), Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States), 1624, 1641.
* * * * *
0
2. Section 111.2(b)(2)(i)(C) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 111.2 License and district permit required.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) Electronic filing. A broker may electronically file entries for
merchandise from a remote location, pursuant to the terms set forth in
subpart E to part 143 of this chapter, and may electronically transact
other customs business even though the entry is filed, or other customs
business is transacted, within a district for which the broker does not
have a district permit; and
* * * * *
PART 113--CUSTOMS BONDS
0
3. The general authority citation for part 113 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1623, 1624.
* * * * *
Sec. 113.62 [Amended]
0
4. In Sec. 113.62, paragraph (k)(1) is amended by removing the
reference ,`` subpart D,'' and by removing the words ``that subpart''
and adding in their place the words, ``part 143''.
PART 141--ENTRY OF MERCHANDISE
0
5. The general authority citation for part 141 is revised, and the
specific authority citations for subparts F and G and Sec. Sec. 141.68
and 141.90 continue to read as follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1414, 1448, 1484, 1624.
Subpart F also issued under 19 U.S.C. 1481;
Subpart G also issued under 19 U.S.C. 1505;
* * * * *
Section 141.68 also issued under 19 U.S.C. 1315;
* * * * *
Section 141.90 also issued under 19 U.S.C. 1487;
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 141.18:
0
a. The introductory sentence is amended by removing the word
``Customs'' and adding in its place the word ``customs'', and by
removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its place the word ``may'';
0
b. Paragraph (a) is revised; and
0
c. Paragraph (b) is amended by removing the word ``Customs'' and adding
in its place the term ``CBP''.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 141.18 Entry by nonresident corporation.
* * * * *
(a) Has a resident agent in the State where the port of entry is
located who is authorized to accept service of process against that
corporation or, in the case of an entry filed from a remote location
pursuant to subpart E of part 143 of this chapter, has a resident agent
authorized to accept service of process against that corporation either
in the State where the port of entry is located or in the State from
which the remote location filing originates; and
* * * * *
0
7. In Sec. 141.61:
0
a. Paragraphs (a) and (b) are revised;
0
b. Paragraph (c) is amended, in the first sentence, by removing the
word ``shall'' and adding in its place the word ``must'', and; in the
second sentence, by removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its place
the word ``will'';
0
c. Paragraph (d) is amended by removing the word ``shall'' each place
that it appears and adding the word ``must'', and by removing the words
``Customs Form'' each place they appear and adding the words ``CBP
Form'';
0
d. Paragraph (e) is amended:
0
i. In paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(3), by removing the word ``shall''
each place that it appears and adding the word ``must'', and by
removing the words ``Customs Form'' each place they
[[Page 69019]]
appear and adding the words ``CBP Form'';
0
ii. In paragraph (e)(4), by removing the word ``shall'' and adding in
its place the word ``will'' and by removing the word ``Customs'' and
adding in its place the term ``CBP''; and
0
iii. In paragraph (e)(5), by removing the word ``shall'' and adding in
its place the word ``will''; and
0
e. Paragraph (f) is amended:
0
i. In paragraph (f)(1), by removing the word ``shall'' and adding in
its place the word ``must''; in paragraph (f)(1)(iv), by removing, in
the second sentence, the words ``shall represent'' and adding in their
place the words ``must represent''; and, in the third sentence, by
removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its place the word ``must''
and by removing the word ``Customs'' each place that it appears and
adding the term ``CBP'';
0
ii. In paragraph (f)(2)(i), by removing the word ``shall'' each place
that it appears and adding the word ``must'' and by removing the word
``Customs'' and adding in its place the term ``CBP'';
0
iii. In paragraph (f)(2)(ii), by removing, in the first sentence, the
word ``shall'' and adding in its place the word ``must'', by removing
in the second sentence the words ``shall represent'' and adding in
their place the words ``must represent''; and, in the third sentence,
by removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its place the word
``must''; and, in paragraphs (f)(2)(iii) and (f)(2)(iv), by removing
the word ``shall'' each place that it appears and adding the word
``must''.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 141.61 Completion of entry and entry summary documentation.
(a) Preparation--(1) Paper entry and entry summary documentation.
Except when entry and entry summary documentation is filed with CBP
electronically pursuant to the provisions of part 143 of this chapter:
(i) Such documentation must be prepared on a typewriter (keyboard),
or with ink, indelible pencil, or other permanent medium, and all
copies must be legible;
(ii) The entry summary must be signed by the importer (see Sec.
101.1 of this chapter); and
(iii) Entries, entry summaries, and accompanying documentation must
be on the appropriate forms specified by the regulations and must
clearly set forth all required information.
(2) Electronic entry and entry summary documentation. Entry and
entry summary documentation that is filed electronically pursuant to
part 143 of this chapter must contain the information required by this
section and must be certified (see Sec. Sec. 143.35 and 143.44 of this
chapter) by the importer of record or his duly authorized customs
broker as being true and correct to the best of his knowledge. The
importer of record, customs broker, or a duly authorized agent must be
resident in the United States for purposes of receiving service of
process. A certified electronic transmission is binding in the same
manner and to the same extent as a signed document.
(b) Marks and numbers previously provided. An importer may omit
from entry summary (CBP Form 7501) the marks and numbers previously
provided for packages released or withdrawn.
* * * * *
Sec. 141.63 [Amended]
0
8. In Sec. 141.63:
a. Paragraphs (a)(2) and (b) are amended by removing the word
``shall'' each place that it appears and adding the word ``will''; and
b. Paragraph (c) is removed.
Sec. 141.68 [Amended]
0
9. In Sec. 141.68:
0
a. Paragraphs (a) through (e), (g), and (h) are amended by removing the
word ``shall'' each place that it appears and adding the word ``will'';
and
0
b. Paragraphs (a), (d), and (f) through (h) are amended by removing the
word ``Customs'' each place that it appears and adding the term
``CBP''.
0
10. In Sec. 141.86:
0
a. Paragraphs (a) through (e) are amended by removing the word
``shall'' each place that it appears and adding the word ``must'';
0
b. Paragraph (f) is amended by removing the word ``shall'' and adding
in its place the word ``must'', and by removing the word ``Customs''
and adding in its place the term ``CBP'';
0
c. Paragraph (g) is amended by removing the word ``shall'' and adding
in its place the word ``must'';
0
d. Paragraph (h) is revised; and
0
e. Paragraph (j) is amended by removing the word ``shall'' and adding
in its place the word ``must''.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 141.86 Contents of invoices and general requirements.
* * * * *
(h) Numbering of invoices and pages. (1) Invoices. Except when
electronic invoice data are transmitted to CBP under the provisions of
part 143 of this chapter, when more than one invoice is included in the
same entry, each invoice with its attachments must be numbered
consecutively by the importer on the bottom of the face of each page,
beginning with No. 1.
(2) Pages. Except when electronic invoice data are transmitted to
CBP under the provisions of part 143 of this chapter, if the invoice or
invoices filed with one entry consist of more than two pages, each page
must be numbered consecutively by the importer on the bottom of the
face of each page, with the page numbering beginning with No. 1 for the
first page of the first invoice and continuing in a single series of
numbers through all the invoices and attachments included in one entry.
(3) Both invoices and pages. Except when electronic invoice data
are transmitted to CBP under the provisions of part 143 of this
chapter, both the invoice number and the page number must be shown at
the bottom of each page when applicable. For example, an entry covering
one invoice of one page and a second invoice of two pages must be
paginated as follows:
Inv. 1, p. 1.
Inv. 2, p. 2.
Inv. 2, p. 3
* * * * *
0
11. In Sec. 141.90:
0
a. Paragraph (b) is revised;
0
b. Paragraph (c) is amended by removing the word ``shall'' each place
that it appears and adding the word ``must'' in its place; and
0
c. Paragraph (d) is revised.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 141.90 Notation of tariff classification and value on invoice.
* * * * *
(b) Classification and rate of duty. The importer or customs broker
must include on the invoice or with the invoice data the appropriate
subheading under the provisions of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States (19 U.S.C. 1202) and the rate of duty for the
merchandise being entered. Except when invoice line data are linked to
an entry summary line and transmitted to CBP electronically under the
provisions of part 143, that information must be noted by the importer
or customs broker in the left-hand portion of the invoice, next to the
articles to which they apply.
* * * * *
(d) Importer's notations in blue or black ink. Except when invoice
line data are linked to an entry summary line and transmitted to CBP
electronically under the provisions of part 143, all notations made on
the invoice by the importer or customs broker must be in blue or black
ink.
PART 142--ENTRY PROCESS
0
12. The authority citation for part 142 continues to read as follows:
[[Page 69020]]
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1448, 1484, 1624.
0
13. In Sec. 142.3:
0
a. Paragraph (a) is amended by:
0
i. Removing in the introductory sentence the word ``shall'' and adding
in its place the word ``must'';
0
ii. By removing in paragraph (a)(1) the word ``Customs'' each place
that it appears and adding the term ``CBP'' and by removing the word
``shall'' and adding in its place the word ``must'';
0
iii. By removing in paragraph (a)(5) the word ``Customs'' and adding in
its place the term ``CBP'';
0
iv. By removing in paragraph (a)(6) the word ``shall'' and adding in
its place the word ``must'' and by removing the term ``CF'' and adding
in its place the words ``CBP Form'';
0
b. Paragraph (b) is revised; and
0
c. A new paragraph (d) is added.
The revision and addition read as follows:
Sec. 142.3 Entry documentation required.
* * * * *
(b) Entry summary filed at time of entry. When the entry summary is
filed at time of entry in accordance with Sec. 142.12(a)(1) or Sec.
142.13:
(1) CBP Form 3461 or 7533 will not be required; and
(2) CBP Form 7501 or CBP Form 3311 (as appropriate, see Sec.
142.11) may serve as both the entry and the entry summary documentation
if the additional documentation set forth in paragraphs (a)(2), (3),
(4) and (5) of this section and Sec. 142.16(b) is filed.
* * * * *
(d) Electronic Format. The entry documentation identified in this
section may be submitted to CBP in either a paper or, where
appropriate, an electronic format.
PART 143--SPECIAL ENTRY PROCEDURES
0
14. The authority citation for part 143 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1414, 1481, 1484, 1498, 1624, 1641.
0
15. Section 143.0 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 143.0 Scope.
This part sets forth the requirements and procedures for
participation in the Automated Broker Interface (ABI), for the
clearance of imported merchandise under appraisement and informal
entries, and under electronic entry filing and under Remote Location
Filing (RLF). All requirements and procedures set forth in this part
are in addition to the general requirements and procedures for all
entries set forth in part 141 of this chapter. More specific
requirements and procedures are set forth elsewhere in this chapter;
for example, part 145 concerns importations by mail and part 10
concerns merchandise conditionally free of duty or subject to a reduced
rate.
0
16. In Sec. 143.32, the introductory text and paragraphs (a), (b), (d)
through (k), and the first sentence of paragraph (o) are revised to
read as follows:
Sec. 143.32 Definitions.
The following are definitions for purposes of subparts D and E of
this part:
(a) ABI. ``ABI'' means the Automated Broker Interface and refers to
a module of ACS that allows entry filers to transmit immediate
delivery, entry and entry summary data electronically to CBP through
ACS and to receive transmissions from ACS.
(b) ACS. ``ACS'' means the Automated Commercial System and refers
to CBP's integrated comprehensive tracking system for the acquisition,
processing and distribution of import data.
* * * * *
(d) Broker. ``Broker'' means a customs broker licensed under part
111 of this chapter.
(e) Certification. ``Certification'' means the electronic
equivalent of a signature for data transmitted through ABI. This
electronic (facsimile) signature must be transmitted as part of the
immediate delivery, entry or entry summary data. Such data are referred
to as ``certified''.
(f) Data. ``Data'' when used in conjunction with immediate
delivery, entry and/or entry summary means the information required to
be submitted with the immediate delivery, entry and/or entry summary,
respectively, in accordance with the CATAIR (CBP Publication 552,
Customs and Trade Automated Interface Requirements) and/or CBP
Headquarters directives. It does not mean the actual paper documents,
but includes all of the information required to be in such documents.
(g) Documentation. ``Documentation'' when used in conjunction with
immediate delivery, entry and/or entry summary means the documents set
forth in Sec. 142.3 of this chapter, required to be submitted as part
of an application for immediate delivery, entry and/or entry summary,
but does not include the CBP Forms 7501, 3461 (or alternative forms).
(h) EDIFACT. ``EDIFACT'' means the Electronic Data Interchange for
Administration, Commerce and Transport that provides an electronic
capability to transmit detailed CBP Forms 7501 and 3461, and invoice
data.
(i) Electronic entry. ``Electronic entry'' means the electronic
transmission to CBP of:
(1) Entry information required for the entry of merchandise; and
(2) Entry summary information required for the classification and
appraisement of the merchandise, the verification of statistical
information, and the determination of compliance with applicable law.
(j) Electronic immediate delivery. ``Electronic immediate
delivery'' means the electronic transmission of CBP Forms 3461 or 3461
alternate (CBP Form 3461 ALT) data utilizing ACS in order to obtain the
release of goods under immediate delivery.
(k) Electronic Invoice Program (EIP). ``EIP'' refers to modules of
the Automated Broker Interface (ABI) that allow entry filers to
transmit detailed invoice data and includes Automated Invoice Interface
(AII) and any other electronic invoice authorized by CBP.
* * * * *
(o) Selectivity criteria. ``Selectivity criteria'' means the
categories of information that guide CBP's judgment in evaluating and
assessing the risk of an immediate delivery, entry, or entry summary
transaction. * * *
* * * * *
0
17. Part 143 is amended by adding a new subpart E, consisting of
Sec. Sec. 143.41 through 143.45, to read as follows:
Subpart E--Remote Location Filing
Sec.
143.41 Applicability.
143.42 Definitions.
143.43 RLF eligibility criteria.
143.44 RLF procedure.
143.45 Filing of additional entry information.
Subpart E--Remote Location Filing
Sec. 143.41 Applicability.
This subpart sets forth the general requirements and procedures for
Remote Location Filing (RLF). RLF entries are subject to the
documentation, document retention and document retrieval requirements
of this chapter as well as the general entry requirements of parts 141,
142 and 143 of this chapter. Participation in the RLF program is
voluntary and at the option of the filer.
Sec. 143.42 Definitions.
The following definitions, in addition to the definitions set forth
in Sec. 143.32 of this part, apply for purposes of this subpart E:
(a) Remote Location Filing (RLF)--``RLF'' is an elective method of
making entry by which a customs broker with a national permit
electronically
[[Page 69021]]
transmits all data information associated with an entry that CBP can
process in a completely electronic data interchange system to a RLF-
operational CBP location from a remote location other than where the
goods are being entered. (Importers filing on their own behalf may file
electronically in any port, subject to ABI filing requirements.)
(b) RLF-operational CBP location--``RLF-operational CBP location''
means a CBP location within the customs territory of the United States
that is staffed with CBP personnel who have been trained in RLF
procedures and who have operational experience with the Electronic
Invoice Program (EIP). EIP is defined in Sec. 143.32 of this chapter.
A list of all RLF-operational locations is available for viewing on the
CBP Internet Web site located at https://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/trade/trade_programs/remote_location_filing/.
Sec. 143.43 RLF eligibility criteria.
(a) Automation criteria. To be eligible for RLF, a licensed customs
broker or importer of record must be:
(1) Operational on the ABI (see 19 CFR part 143, subpart A);
(2) Operational on the EIP prior to applying for RLF; and
(3) Operational on the ACH (or any other CBP-approved method of
electronic payment), for purposes of directing the electronic payment
of duties, taxes and fees (see 19 CFR 24.25), 30 days before
transmitting a RLF entry.
(b) Broker must have national permit. To be eligible for RLF, a
licensed customs broker must hold a valid national permit (see 19 CFR
111.19(f)).
(c) Continuous bond. A RLF entry must be secured with a continuous
bond.
Sec. 143.44 RLF procedure.
(a) Electronic transmission of invoice data. For RLF transactions,
a customs broker or importer of record must transmit electronically,
using EIP, any invoice data required by CBP.
(b) Electronic transmission of payment. For RLF transactions, a
customs broker or importer of record must direct the electronic payment
of duties, taxes and fees through the ACH (see 19 CFR 24.25) or any
other method of electronic payment authorized by CBP.
(c) Automation requirements. Only those entries and entry summaries
that CBP processes completely in an electronic data interchange system
will be accepted for RLF. For a listing of entry types that may be
filed via RLF, go to https://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/trade/trade_programs/remote_location_filing/.
(d) Combined electronic entry and entry summary. For RLF
transactions using a combined electronic entry and entry summary, a
customs broker must submit to CBP, through ABI or any other electronic
interface authorized by CBP, a complete and error-free electronic data
transmission constituting the entry summary that serves as both the
entry and entry summary.
(e) No line release or immediate delivery entries permitted under
RLF. Line release (see 19 CFR, Part 142, Subpart D) or immediate
delivery procedures may not be combined with RLF transactions.
(f) Data acceptance and release of merchandise. Data that are
complete and error free will be accepted by CBP. If electronic invoice
or additional electronic documentation is required, CBP will so notify
the RLF filer. If no documentation is required to be filed, CBP will so
notify the RLF filer. If CBP accepts the RLF entry (including invoice
data) under Sec. Sec. 143.34 through 143.36 of this part, the RLF
entry will be deemed to satisfy all filing requirements under this part
and the merchandise may be released.
(g) Liquidation. The entry summary will be scheduled for
liquidation once payment is made under statement processing (see 19 CFR
24.25).
Sec. 143.45 Filing of additional entry information.
When filing from a remote location, a RLF filer must electronically
file all additional information required by CBP to be presented with
the entry and entry summary information (including facsimile
transmissions) that CBP can accept electronically. If CBP cannot accept
additional information electronically, the RLF filer must file the
additional information in a paper format at the CBP port of entry where
the goods arrived.
Approved: December 22, 2009.
Jayson P. Ahern,
Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. E9-30736 Filed 12-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P