[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 160 (Thursday, August 20, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42087-42089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19953]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection


Notice of Issuance of Final Determination Concerning 
Multifunctional Machines

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

ACTION: Notice of final determination.

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

SUMMARY: This document provides notice that U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (``CBP'') has issued a final determination concerning the 
country of origin of certain multifunctional machines which may be 
offered to the United States Government under a government procurement 
contract. Based upon the facts presented, in the final determination 
CBP concluded that Japan is the country of origin of the 
multifunctional machines for purposes of U.S. Government procurement.

DATES: The final determination was issued on August 12, 2009. A copy of 
the final determination is attached. Any party-at-interest, as defined 
in 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial review of this final 
determination within September 21, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen S. Greene, Valuation and Special 
Programs Branch, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade 
(202-325-0041).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that on----------, 
pursuant to subpart B of part 177, Customs Regulations (19 CFR part 
177, subpart B), CBP issued a final determination concerning the 
country of origin of certain multifunctional machines which may be 
offered to the United States Government under a government procurement 
contract. This final determination, in HQ H039856, was issued at the 
request of Sharp Electronics Corporation under procedures set forth at 
19 CFR part 177, subpart B, which implements Title III of the Trade 
Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511-18). In the final 
determination, CBP concluded that, based upon the facts presented,

[[Page 42088]]

certain articles will be substantially transformed in Japan. Therefore, 
CBP found that Japan is the country of origin of the finished articles 
for purposes of U.S. Government procurement.
    Section 177.29, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.29), provides that 
notice of final determinations shall be published in the Federal 
Register within 60 days of the date the final determination is issued. 
Section 177.30, CBP Regulations (19 CFR 177.30), provides that any 
party-at-interest, as defined in 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial 
review of a final determination within 30 days of publication of such 
determination in the Federal Register.

    Dated: August 12, 2009.
Sandra L. Bell,
Executive Director, Office of Regulations and Rulings, Office of 
International Trade.
Attachment

HQ H039856

August 12, 2009.
OT:RR:CTF:VS H039856 KSG.

Mr. Edmund Baumgartner, Esq.,
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, 1540 Broadway, New York, NY 
10036.

Re: U.S. Government Procurement; country of origin of 
multifunctional printer machines; substantial transformation

    Dear Mr. Baumgartner: This is in response to your letters, dated 
November 26, 2007, July 2, 2008, and November 10, 2008, requesting a 
final determination on behalf of Sharp Electronics Corporation 
(``Sharp'') pursuant to subpart B of 19 CFR Part 177.
    Under these regulations, which implement Title III of the Trade 
Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511 et seq.), CBP 
issues country of origin advisory rulings and final determinations 
as to whether an article is or would be a product of a designated 
country or instrumentality for the purposes of granting waivers of 
certain ``Buy American'' restrictions in U.S. law or practice for 
products offered for sale to the U.S. Government.
    This final determination concerns the country of origin of 
certain multifunctional machines that Sharp may sell to the U.S. 
Government. We note that Sharp is a party-at-interest within the 
meaning of 19 CFR 177.22(d)(1) and is entitled to request this final 
determination. A conference was held on this matter at Headquarters 
on August 25, 2008.

FACTS

    This case involves the Sharp Jupiter II J-models that are sent 
to the U.S. for final assembly (Sharp model <greek-i> MX-M350NJ, MX-
M350UJ, MX-M450NJ, and MX-450OUJ)/ (``J-models''). These models have 
digital multifunctional systems (monochrome copying, printing, 
faxing and duplex scanning functions). The Jupiter II J-models 
designated with an ``N'' feature a hard disc drive and network 
interface card which allows them to function as networked printers 
and send scanned documents in the form of e-mail attachments in 
various formats. The Jupiter II J-models designated with a ``U'' are 
not equipped with a hard disk or network interface card and function 
with stand-alone capacity.
    Sharp Corporation, Sharp's parent company (``Sharp Japan'') 
developed the Jupiter II J-models in Japan; all the engineering, 
development, design and artwork processes were developed in Japan. 
Each J-model is produced from a scanner unit and printer engine 
unit, which are assembled in Japan.
    The scanner units and printer engine units are imported into the 
U.S. where each is combined with a scanner rack and stand which can 
contain optional paper feed drawers.
    There are 16 main subassemblies that compose the Jupiter II J-
models.

Assembly in China

    Assembly in China includes assembly of the duplex single pass 
feeder (``DSPF'') subassembly; the laser scanning unit (``LSU'') 
subassembly; the transfer unit subassembly; the developer (``DV'') 
unit subassembly; the printer control unit (``PCU''); the fusing 
unit subassembly; the multifunctional printer (``MFP'') control unit 
and various other subassemblies.
    (1) The DSPF subassembly transports original documents to the 
scanning bed.
    (2) The LSU subassembly takes the image data of the documents or 
graphics and converts the data into laser beams which are exposed to 
the drum surface and create the electrostatic images necessary for 
printing.
    (3) The transfer belt unit transfers the image created on the 
drum onto the surface of the paper for printing. This unit is 
assembled in China.
    (4) The developer unit (``DV'') is used to transfer toner evenly 
over the latent image created on the drum unit.
    (5) The PCU controls the printing function of the J-models. It 
is comprised of a control printed wire board (``PWB'') and mother 
PWB that are stuffed in China.
    (6) The fusing unit is used to fix the transferred image onto 
paper.

Processing and Assembly in Japan of the Scanner Unit and the 
Printer Engine Unit

    The following parts which are stated to be critical components 
are produced in Japan: the charge-coupled device (``CCD''), the 
contact image sensor (``CIS''), the laser scanning unit (``LSU'') 
housing, the LSU fixing base, the LSU synchronous lens, the LSU two 
cylinder lenses, the transfer roller, the drum, the DSD flange, the 
DSD flange spacer, the rollers, the lamps, the thermistors, the 
thermostat, the cleaning roller, two sets of pawls, and the flash 
memory chips.
    Eight of the 16 subassemblies involve processing in Japan; the 
upper cabinet rear unit; scanner base plate unit; the scanner 
control mounting unit; the process unit subassembly; the drum unit 
subassembly; the two rear frame units; the control box; and the high 
voltage holder unit.
    (1) The upper cabinet rear unit contains the detector 
luminescence arm and ORS emission printer wire board, which detect 
the size and placement of original documents on the scanning bed.
    (2) The scanner base plate unit contains a charge-coupled device 
(``CCD'') made in Japan, which is stated to be a critical component 
for scanning and copying documents. The scanning base plate unit 
contains lamps and mirror motors which illuminate and reflect the 
image for scanning by the CCD.
    (3) The scanner control mounting unit contains PWBs for 
operating the original document detector and guides and harnesses to 
hold the scanner's optical components in place.
    (4) The process unit subassembly stores the drum used for 
creating images.
    (5) The drum unit contains the drum. The drum unit is assembled 
in Japan with parts made in China and Japan.
    (6) Rear frame 2 unit is assembled from the rear fixing plate 
unit, solenoid fixing plate unit, dust support plate unit and other 
frames, mounts, holder and plates. Rear frame 1 unit is assembled 
from the main duct, fusing drawer, fixing plate, paper powder 
remover case unit, box cooling duct unit and other parts.
    (7) The control box unit is assembled with the control box upper 
unit and other parts.
    (8) The high voltage holder unit is assembled from a Chinese 
holder and other parts.
    Additional units are installed in the printer engine in Japan 
including the developer guide unit, left door unit, cassette unit, 
PS roller (resist roller) unit, main drive unit, paper feed unit, 
lift-up unit, paper exit reverse unit, power supply unit, PCU PWB 
fixing sub unit and inlet fixing unit.
    Final assembly of the scanner unit and printer engine unit are 
then performed in Japan. All functions of the printer engine and 
scanner unit undergo adjustment and testing prior to being exported 
to the U.S. You state that the testing and adjustment process takes 
as much or more time than the physical assembly of the product and 
require skilled personnel.

Final Assembly in the U.S.

    The scanner unit and the printer engine unit are imported into 
the U.S. where they are assembled onto a scanner rack and a scanner 
stand to create the finished multi-functional machine. Final testing 
of the machine is then performed.
    The basic scanner stand is made in the U.S.
    The scanner rack and stand with paper feed drawers (either 1,500 
sheet or 2,500 sheet) are made in China.

ISSUE

    What is the country of origin of the subject multifunctional 
printer machines for the purpose of U.S. Government procurement?

LAW AND ANALYSIS

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

[[Page 42089]]

    Under the rule of origin set forth under 19 U.S.C. 2518(4)(B):
    An article is a product of a country or instrumentality only if 
(i) it is wholly the growth, product, or manufacture of that country 
or instrumentality, or (ii) in the case of an article which consists 
in whole or in part of materials from another country or 
instrumentality, it has been substantially transformed into a new 
and different article of commerce with a name, character, or use 
distinct from that of the article or articles from which it was so 
transformed.
    See also 19 CFR 177.22(a).
    In determining whether the combining of parts or materials 
constitutes a substantial transformation, the determinative issue is 
the extent of operations performed and whether the parts lose their 
identity and become an integral part of the new article. Belcrest 
Linens v. United States, 573 F. Supp. 1149 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1983), 
aff'd, 741 F.2d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Assembly operations that are 
minimal or simple, as opposed to complex or meaningful, will 
generally not result in a substantial transformation. See C.S.D. 80-
111, C.S.D. 85-25, C.S.D. 89-110, C.S.D. 89-118, C.S.D. 90-51, and 
C.S.D. 90-97. In C.S.D. 85-25, 19 Cust. Bull. 844 (1985), CBP held 
that for purposes of the Generalized System of Preferences 
(``GSP''), the assembly of a large number of fabricated components 
onto a printed circuit board in a process involving a considerable 
amount of time and skill resulted in a substantial transformation. 
In that case, in excess of 50 discrete fabricated components (such 
as resistors, capacitors, diodes, integrated circuits, sockets, and 
connectors) were assembled. Whether an operation is complex and 
meaningful depends on the nature of the operation, including the 
number of components assembled, number of different operations, 
time, skill level required, attention to detail, quality control, 
the value added to the article, and the overall employment generated 
by the manufacturing process.
    The courts and CBP have also considered the essential character 
of the imported article in making these determinations. See 
Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States, 542 F. Supp. 1026, 3 CIT 220, 224-
225 (1982) (where it was determined that imported uppers were the 
essence of a completed shoe) and National Juice Products 
Association, et al v. United States, 628 F. Supp. 978, 10 CIT 48, 61 
(1986) (where the court addressed each of the factors (name, 
character, and use) in finding that no substantial transformation 
occurred in the production of retail juice products from 
manufacturing concentrate).
    In order to determine whether a substantial transformation 
occurs when components of various origins are assembled into 
completed products, CBP considers the totality of the circumstances 
and makes such determinations on a case-by-case basis. The country 
of origin of the item's components, extent of the processing that 
occurs within a country, and whether such processing renders a 
product with a new name, character, and use are primary 
considerations in such cases. Additionally, factors such as the 
resources expended on product design and development, extent and 
nature of post-assembly inspection and testing procedures, and 
worker skill required during the actual manufacturing process will 
be considered when determining whether a substantial transformation 
has occurred. No one factor is determinative.
    In a number of cases, CBP has considered similar merchandise. In 
Headquarters Ruling Letter (``HRL'') 563491 (February 8, 2007), CBP 
addressed the country of origin of certain digital color 
multifunctional systems manufactured by Sharp and assembled in Japan 
of various Japanese--and Chinese--origin parts. In that ruling, CBP 
determined that color multifunctional systems were a product of 
Japan based on the fact that ``although several subassemblies are 
assembled in China, enough of the Japanese subassemblies and 
individual components serve major functions and are high in value, 
in particular, the transfer belt, control box unit, application-
specific integrated circuits, charged couple device, and laser 
diodes.'' Further CBP found that the testing and adjustments 
performed in Japan were technical and complex, and the assembly 
operations that occurred in Japan were sufficiently complex and 
meaningful. Thus, through the product assembly and testing and 
adjustment operations, the individual components and subassemblies 
of Japanese and foreign-origin were subsumed into a new and distinct 
article of commerce that had a new name, character, and use. See 
also HRL 562936, dated March 17, 2004.
    In HRL 561734, dated March 22, 2001, CBP held that certain 
multifunctional machines (consisting of printer, copier, and fax 
machines) assembled in Japan were a product of that country for the 
purposes of U.S. government procurement. The multifunctional 
machines were assembled from 227 parts (108 parts obtained from 
Japan, 92 from Thailand, 3 from China, and 24 from other countries) 
and eight subassemblies, each of which was assembled in Japan. See 
also HRL 561568, dated March 22, 2001.
    Finally, in HRL H020516, dated November 7, 2008, CBP considered 
Sharp Andromeda II J models composed of eight main subassemblies, 
two of which involved processing in Japan. Similar to this case, all 
the engineering, development, design, and artwork were developed in 
Japan. The multifunctional printer control unit was described as the 
brain of the model. While some of the components were installed on 
the control printer board in China, the flash read-only memory which 
included firmware developed in Japan, was manufactured in Japan. The 
other unit that involved production in Japan was the process unit, 
that housed a drum produced in Japan. The process unit was assembled 
in China. The other subassemblies were assembled in China but 
certain key components of the subassemblies originated in Japan. The 
final assembly was performed in Japan.
    Based on the totality of the circumstances discussed in this 
ruling, we agree that the Jupiter II J-models described in this 
ruling are considered a product of Japan. As was determined in HRL 
563491 and HRL H020516, substantial portions of the components that 
are of key importance are of Japanese origin and all the 
engineering, design and development of the multifunctional machines 
occurs in Japan. As in H020516, we find the final assembly of the 
subassemblies into a finished product in Japan to be sufficiently 
complex and meaningful to result in a new and distinct article of 
commerce that possesses a new name, character and use. In this case, 
we also note that 8 of the 16 subassemblies involve processing in 
Japan. In addition, the testing and adjustment of the 
multifunctional machines in Japan is significant.
    The processing that occurs in the U.S., which involves the 
assembly of the finished printer engines and scanners to the stand 
and rack, is a simple assembly operation that is not demonstrated to 
be complex or meaningful and does not involve a large number of 
components. Based on these factors, we find that there is no 
substantial transformation in the U.S.
    Accordingly, the country of origin of the Jupiter II J-model 
multifunctional printer machines is Japan for purposes of U.S. 
Government procurement.

HOLDING

    Based on the facts of this case, the country of origin of the 
Jupiter II J-model multifunctional printer machines is Japan for 
purposes of U.S. Government procurement.
    Notice of this final determination will be given in the Federal 
Register, as required by 19 CFR 177.29. Any party-at-interest other 
than the party which requested this final determination may request, 
pursuant to 19 CFR 177.31 that CBP reexamine the matter anew and 
issue a new final determination. Pursuant to 19 CFR 177.30, any 
party-at-interest may, within 30 days after publication of the 
Federal Register Notice referenced above, seek judicial review of 
this final determination before the Court of International Trade.

    Sincerely,

Sandra L. Bell,
Executive Director, Office of Regulations and Rulings, Office of 
International Trade.


[FR Doc. E9-19953 Filed 8-19-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P