9014 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 28, 2007 / Notices 

opportunity for public comment on 

proposed collections of information, the 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health 

Services Administration (SAMHSA) 

will publish periodic summaries of 

proposed projects. To request more 

information on the proposed projects or 

to obtain a copy of the information 

collection plans, call the SAMHSA 

Reports Clearance Officer on (240) 276–

1243. 

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 

the proposed collections of information 

are necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of the burden of the proposed collection 

of information; (c) ways to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (d) 

ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Proposed Project: Underage Drinking 

Prevention: Town Hall Meeting 

Feedback Form—New 

The Substance Abuse and Mental 

Health Services Administration’s 

(SAMHSA), Center for Substance Abuse 

Prevention (CSAP) is proposing the 

project the 2008 Underage Drinking 

Prevention: Town Hall Meetings (THM) 

Initiative. In 2006, approximately 1,510 

THMs were held in 1,262 communitybased organizations (CBO) throughout 

the Nation. Each of the THMs strived to 

increase the understanding and 

awareness of underage alcohol use and 

its consequences by encouraging 

individuals, families, and communities 

to address the problem. The local THMs 

gave communities the opportunity to 

come together to learn more about the 

new research on underage alcohol use 

and its impact on both the individuals 

and the community. They also 

discussed how their communities can 

best prevent underage alcohol use. 

To help guide decision making and 

planning for future THMs, SAMHSA/ 

CSAP plans to conduct a process 

assessment of the THMs to be held in 

2008. CBOs who agree to participate in 

this initiative will be asked to provide 

feedback about the implementation and 

results of the THMs in their community. 

This information collection is being 

implemented under the authority of 

Section 501(d) (4) of the Public Health 

Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290aa). 

The contractor conducting this 

information collection will distribute a 

brief feedback form to all participating 

organizations. The form includes 14 

items about the THM, including where, 

when, and who conducted the meeting, 

number of attendees, format of meeting, 

participants in the presentations, 

actions planned, media coverage of the 

meeting, composition of the audience, 

responses of the attendees, materials 

provided in the town hall meetings, and 

indications of increased awareness and 

increased involvement. In addition to 

distributing the feedback form, the 

contractor will be responsible for 

collecting, compiling, analyzing, and 

reporting on information requested 

through this feedback form. 

The feedback form will be completed 

by an estimated 1,200 employees from 

CBOs. The paper form will take an 

average of 10 minutes (.167 hours) to 

review instructions, complete the form, 

and mail it in a self-addressed, stamped 

envelope. This burden estimate is based 

on comments from several potential 

respondents who reviewed the form and 

provided comments on how long it 

would take them to complete it. 

Form name Number of 

respondents 

Responses 

per 

respondent 

Hours per 

response 

Total hour 

burden 

Feedback Form ................................................................................................ 1,200 1 .167 120 

Send comments to Summer King, 

SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer, 

Room 7–1044, One Choke Cherry Road, 

Rockville, MD 20857. Written comments 

should be received within 60 days of 

this notice. 

Dated: February 22, 2007. 

Elaine Parry, 

Acting Director, Office of Program Services. 

[FR Doc. E7–3468 Filed 2–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4162–20–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Bureau of Customs and Border 

Protection 

Notice of Issuance of Final 

Determination Concerning Digital 

Color Multifunctional Systems 

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection, Department of Homeland 

Security. 

ACTION: Notice of final determination. 

SUMMARY: This document provides 

notice that the Bureau of Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) has issued a 

final determination concerning the 

country of origin of certain digital color 

multifunctional systems to be offered to 

the United States Government under an 

undesignated government procurement 

contract. Based on the facts presented, 

the final determination found that Japan 

is the country of origin of the subject 

digital color multifunctional systems for 

purposes of U.S. government 

procurement. 

DATES: The final determination was 

issued on February 8, 2007. 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 30 days 

of February 28, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Daniel Cornette, Valuation and Special 

Programs Branch, Office of International 

Trade; telephone (202) 572–8731. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is 

hereby given that on February 8, 2007, 

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 digital color 

multifunctional systems to be offered to 

the United States Government under an 

undesignated government procurement 

contract. The CBP ruling number is HQ 

563491. This final determination 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). 

The final determination concluded 

that, based upon the facts presented, the 

assembly in Japan of Japanese and 

foreign components to create the subject 

digital color multifunctional systems 

substantially transformed the foreign 

components into a product of Japan. 

Section 177.29, CBP 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 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 28, 2007 / Notices 9015 

issued. Section 177.30, CBP Regulations 

(19 CFR 177.30), states that any partyat-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: February 21, 2007. 

Sandra L. Bell, 

Executive Director, Office of Regulations and 

Rulings, Office of International Trade. 

HQ 563491 

February 8, 2007. 

MAR–2–05 RR:CTF:VS 563491 DCC 

Category: Marking. 

Ms. Fusae Nara, Pillsbury Winthrop 

Shaw Pittman, 1540 Broadway, 

New York, NY 10036–4039. 

Reference: U.S. Government 

Procurement; Final Determination; 

country of origin of digital color 

multifunctional systems; substantial 

transformation; 19 CFR Part 177. 

Dear Ms. Nara: This is in response to 

your letter dated April 24, 2006, 

requesting a final determination on 

behalf of Sharp Electronics Corporation 

(‘‘Sharp’’) pursuant to subpart B of Part 

177, Customs and Border Protection 

(‘‘CBP’’) Regulations (19 CFR 177.21 et 

seq.). Under these regulations, which 

implement Title III of the Trade 

Agreements Act of 1979, as amended 

(codified at 19 U.S.C. 2411 et seq.), CBP 

issues country of origin advisory rulings 

and final determinations on whether an 

article is or would be a product of a 

designated foreign country or 

instrumentality for the purpose 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 digital color 

multifunctional systems 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. 

Facts: 

The products subject to this ruling are 

digital color multifunctional systems 

manufactured by Sharp, Model Nos. 

MX–2300NJ and MX–2700NJ 

(hereinafter the ‘‘J–Models’’), imported 

from Japan for the purpose of sales to 

U.S. government agencies. The J-Models 

have photocopying, printing, faxing, 

and scanning functions. The primary 

difference between the two models is 

the speed at which they are able to 

process images. The MX–2300NJ prints 

23 pages per minute compared to 27 

pages per minute for the MX–2700NJ. 

Sharp’s parent company (‘‘Sharp 

Japan’’) developed the J-Model in Japan, 

and performs the entire engineering, 

development, design, and art work 

processes for both models in Japan. 

According to your submission, the 

production process may be broken 

down into four stages. In the first stage, 

the following key subassemblies are 

assembled: laser scanner unit (‘‘LSU’’) 

(assembled in China); first transfer unit 

subassembly (assembly begins in China 

and is finished in Japan); process unit 

subassembly (assembled in China); and 

controller unit subassembly (assembled 

in Japan). In addition, four minor 

subassemblies are assembled in China: 

first transfer cleaner unit; cabinet 

subassembly; auto document feeder 

subassembly, and fuser unit. The 

finished systems have one unit each of 

five different kinds of applicationspecific integrated circuits (‘‘ASIC’’), all 

of which are made in Japan. 

The second stage is the final physical 

assembly of the J-Models. In the third 

stage, Sharp Japan makes adjustments 

and conducts testing of the J-Models. In 

the fourth stage, the J-Models undergo 

final inspection and packaging for 

shipment to the United States. 

1. Subassembly Preparation 

(a) Laser Scanner Unit Subassembly 

The LSU writes the image data of the 

documents or graphics onto the drum 

unit. While the components comprising 

the LSU are assembled in China, the 

charge coupled device (‘‘CCD’’) and the 

ASIC, which are mounted on the cabinet 

as well as the laser diodes (‘‘LDs’’), are 

made in Japan. Color images are created 

by exposing the laser lights of the LDs 

to four color-specific drums (black, 

cyan, magenta, and yellow). The ASIC is 

designed to control the exposure of the 

laser lights following the scanned data 

with speed and precision. 

(b) First Transfer Unit Subassembly 

The first transfer unit is where the 

four color images, which are created by 

the four color drums, are transformed 

into an integrated color image that is 

then transferred onto paper. The image 

is transferred to the paper by a wide belt 

known as a transfer belt. The transfer 

belt rotates around the first transfer unit 

generating print images, while a cleaner 

cartridge continuously cleans the 

surface of the belt. The unfinished first 

transfer unit is manufactured in China 

and completed in Japan where the 

transfer belt is manufactured and 

installed. 

(c) Process Unit Subassembly 

The process unit is a combination of 

the drum, developer, and toner 

cartridges. Because the J-Models are 

color multifunctional systems, they 

require four sets of the process units, 

which includes a drum, developer and 

toner for each of the four colors, i.e., 

black, yellow, cyan, and magenta. The 

developer and toner materials, as well 

as the drums, are produced in Japan. 

The process unit subassembly is 

assembled by attaching each of the four 

drums to the four drum cartridges. The 

toner and developer cartridges are filled 

with toner and developer and installed 

on the subassembly for testing purposes. 

(d) Control Box Unit Subassembly 

The control box unit is the ‘‘brain’’ of 

the J-Model machines. The control 

printed wiring board (‘‘PWB’’) and the 

mother PWB are populated in China 

with diodes, resisters, and condensers. 

In Japan, Sharp forms a harness for the 

hard disk (either from Malaysia or 

China) that is then fastened to the 

harness board of the control box unit 

with screws. The hard disk is affixed to 

the harness and then to the PWB. 

Cushioning is installed around the hard 

disk and flash memory chips (i.e., the 

boot flash ROM, and the program flash 

ROM) are inserted into designated slots 

on the control box. 

2. Final Assembly 

The final Japanese assembly process 

begins with the cabinet that houses the 

middle section of the finished product. 

The cabinet is fabricated in China and 

contains certain components, such as 

Japanese ASICs, that are installed in 

China. The major subassemblies 

described above are assembled into the 

cabinet as follows: 

a. The side panel of the cabinet is 

opened and the LSU subassembly is 

inserted and fastened to the cabinet 

with screws. 

b. The front panel of the cabinet is 

opened and the first transfer unit 

assembly is inserted into a slot and 

fastened to the cabinet with screws. 

c. Four drum cartridges, four 

developer cartridges, and four toner 

cartridges—one for each of the four 

colors (i.e., black, yellow, cyan, and 

magenta)—are installed. 

d. A small panel on the back of the 

cabinet is removed and the control box 

unit is inserted into a slot in the cabinet 

assembly and secured with screws. 

e. The automatic document feeder is 

fastened to the hinge on top of the 

cabinet assembly with screws. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
9016 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 28, 2007 / Notices 

3. Testing 

In Japan, extensive tests are 

conducted and adjustments are made to 

all functions, including scanning, image 

placement, color and darkness. 

a. Adjustments. The following 

adjustments are made to each unit: 

• Confirm data input circuitry by 

connecting the printer/scanner unit to a 

computer based on the destination of 

the finished unit. 

• Inspect the card reader by running 

a test card with a simulation program. 

• Apply high voltage to the printer 

unit and adjust it to be within the 

permitted range for each color. 

• Measure the bias voltage to confirm 

that the voltage used to remove excess 

toner is proper. 

• Confirm the rotation of the toner 

motor. 

• Confirm the functioning of the hard 

disk and the hard disk output on the 

LCD display panel of the operation unit. 

• Measure the distance between the 

drum ‘‘sleep’’ position and the toner 

cartridge magnet roller to ensure even 

print quality. 

• Adjust the amount of developer by 

connecting the developer unit for each 

color. 

• Attach the toner cartridge and 

adjust the darkness sensor. 

b. Test Copying. After the assembly 

adjustments are complete, the unit 

undergoes alignments by running test 

copies to confirm the following 

functions: Paper placement; print 

darkness; optical images; print 

placement; color balance for printer 

engine and print output; color pattern 

chart; manual copy; print and image 

output; two-sided copying; feeder 

functions; intermediate tone process 

control for various printing modes (i.e., 

letter, photograph, and combination); 

print output from an attached computer; 

USB cable connection; and memory. 

After testing is complete, each unit is 

reset to the default position to prepare 

for final inspection and packaging for 

shipment. 

4. Final Inspection and Packaging 

The finished assembly is prepared for 

shipment by removing the drum 

cartridges, toner cartridges, and 

developer cartridges used for testing 

purposes and by cleaning the color 

toner pipes, printing mechanism, 

scanner surface, and exterior. New drum 

and developer cartridges are inserted 

and secured to the unit. An operator 

conducts a final inspection that 

includes testing the power supply, the 

LCD display panel, sensors, and proper 

operation of the unit. After final 

inspection, the finished unit is packaged 

for shipping. 

Issue: 

Whether the multifunctional systems 

manufactured by Sharp (Model Nos. 

MX–2300NJ and MX–2700NJ) are 

products of Japan for purposes 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 on whether an article is 

or would be a product of a designated 

country or instrumentality for the 

purposes of granting waivers of certain 

‘‘Buy American’’ restrictions in U.S. law 

or practice for products offered for sale 

to the U.S. Government. 

Under the rule of origin set forth 

under 19 U.S.C. 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). A 

substantial transformation ‘‘results in an 

article having a name, character, or use 

differing from that of the imported 

article.’’ Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States, 

542 F. Supp. 1026, 1029 (Ct. Int’l Trade 

1982), aff’d, 702 F.2d 1022 (Fed. Cir. 

1983). 

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. See 

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. 

CBP has held in a number of cases 

involving similar merchandise that 

complex and meaningful assembly 

operations involving a large number of 

components will generally result in a 

substantial transformation. In 

Headquarters Ruling Letter (‘‘HRL’’) 

562936, 69 FR 13577 (March 23, 2004), 

we addressed the country of origin of 

certain multifunction printers 

assembled in Japan of various Japaneseand Chinese-origin parts. In that ruling, 

we determined that the multifunction 

printer was a product of Japan based on 

the fact that a ‘‘substantial portion of the 

printer’s individual components and 

subassemblies [were] of Japanese 

origin.’’ Furthermore, we noted that 

some of the Japanese components and 

subassemblies were essential parts of 

the finished article, and other Japanese 

parts, including the reader scanner unit 

and the control panel unit, were critical 

to the production of the printer. Finally, 

HRL 562936 noted that the Japanese 

processing operations were complex 

and meaningful, that required ‘‘the 

assembly of a large number of 

components, and render[ed] a new and 

distinct article of commerce that 

possesse[d] a new name, character, and 

use.’’

In HRL 562495, dated November 13, 

2002, color ink jet printers were 

assembled in Singapore of components 

imported from a number of other 

countries. In that ruling, we determined 

that the imported components were 

substantially transformed during 

assembly such that the country of origin 

of the assembled ink jet printers was 

Singapore. In support of this 

determination, we considered the 

processing occurring within Singapore 

to be complex and extensive, requiring 

the integration of 13 major 

subassemblies to the chassis, and that 

the resulting product was a new and 

distinct article of commerce that 

possessed a new name, character, and 

use. 

In HRL 561734, dated March 22, 2001, 

published in the Federal Register on 

March 29, 2001 (66 FR 17222), we held 

that certain multifunctional machines 

(consisting of printer, copier, and fax 

machines) assembled in Japan were a 

product of that country for 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. One 

of the subassemblies produced in Japan, 

referred to as the scanner unit, was 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 28, 2007 / Notices 9017 

described as the ‘‘heart of the machine.’’

In finding that the imported parts were 

substantially transformed in Japan, we 

stated that the individual parts and 

components lost their separate identities 

when they became part of the 

multifunctional machine. See also HRL 

561568, dated March 22, 2001, 

published in the Federal Register on 

March 29, 2001 (66 FR 17222). 

By contrast, assembly operations that 

are minimal or simple will generally not 

result in a substantial transformation. 

For example, in HRL 734050, dated June 

17, 1991, we determined that Japaneseorigin components were not 

substantially transformed in China 

when assembled in that country to form 

finished printers. The printers consisted 

of five main components identified as 

the ‘‘head,’’ ‘‘mechanism,’’ ‘‘circuit,’’

‘‘power source,’’ and ‘‘outer case.’’ The 

circuit, power source and outer case 

units were entirely assembled or 

molded in Japan. The head and 

mechanical units were made in Japan 

but exported to China in an 

unassembled state. All five units were 

exported to China where the head and 

mechanical units were assembled with 

screws and screwdrivers. Thereafter, the 

head, mechanism, circuit, and power 

source units were mounted onto the 

outer case with screws. In holding that 

the country of origin for marking 

purposes was Japan, CBP recognized 

that the vast majority of the printer’s 

parts were of Japanese origin and that 

the operations performed in China were 

relatively simple assembly operations. 

In order to determine whether a 

substantial transformation occurs when 

components of various origins are 

assembled to form multifunctional 

machines, CBP considers the totality of 

the circumstances and makes such 

decisions on a case-by-case basis. The 

primary considerations in such cases are 

the country of origin of the machine’s 

components and subassemblies, extent 

of processing that occurs within a given 

country, and whether such processing 

renders a product with a new name, 

character, and use. In addition, facts 

such as resources expended on product 

design and development, extent and 

nature of post-assembly inspection 

procedures, and worker skills required 

during the actual manufacturing process 

will be considered when analyzing 

whether a substantial transformation 

has occurred; however, no single factor 

is determinative. 

Based on the facts and law of this 

case, we find that the assembled JModel multifunctional systems are 

products of Japan for purposes of U.S. 

Government procurement. Although 

several of the subassemblies are 

assembled in China, we find that 

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. The process unit 

subassembly is also crucial in the 

performance of the multifunctional 

systems. While it is assembled in China, 

its key components, the developer and 

toner materials, and drums are 

produced in Japan. 

Furthermore, it is significant that 

although the PWB is of Chinese origin, 

the firmware for the control box unit 

subassembly is developed in Japan. This 

firmware programming controls the 

print engine, readout mechanism, 

processes images for the copier, printer, 

fax, and scanner, and controls the 

operation panel display. We further note 

that the testing and adjustments 

performed in Japan are technical and 

complex. Finally, the assembly 

operations that occur in Japan are 

sufficiently complex and meaningful. 

Through the product assembly and 

testing and adjustment operations, the 

individual components and 

subassemblies of Japanese and foreignorigin are subsumed into a new and 

distinct article of commerce that has a 

new name, character, and use. 

Therefore, we find that the country of 

origin of the J-Models digital color 

multifunctional systems for purposes of 

U.S. Government procurement is Japan. 

Holding: 

Based on the facts of this case, we 

find that the processing in Japan 

substantially transforms the nonJapanese components. Therefore, the 

country of origin of the Sharp digital 

color multifunctional systems (Model 

Nos. MX–2300NJ and MX–2700NJ) 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 partyat-interest other than the party that 

requested this final determination may 

request, pursuant to 19 CFR 177.31, that 

CBP reexamine the matter anew and 

issue a new final determination. Any 

party-at-interest may, within 30 days 

after publication of the Federal Register 

notice reference above, seek judicial 

review of this final determination before 

the U.S. Court of International Trade. 

Sincerely, 

Sandra L. Bell, 

Executive Director, Office of Regulations and 

Rulings, Office of International Trade. 

[FR Doc. E7–3482 Filed 2–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–14–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 

Services 

[CIS No. 2394–06; DHS Docket No. USCIS–

2006–0051] 

RIN 1615–ZA40 

Special FOIA Processing Track for 

Individuals Appearing Before an 

Immigration Judge 

AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services (USCIS) is 

improving its processing of Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA) requests from 

the general public by establishing a 

third processing track for individuals 

appearing before an immigration court. 

Currently, a large portion of FOIA 

requests are submitted by individuals 

who have received a Notice To Appear 

for a hearing before an immigration 

judge or by such individuals’ attorneys 

or representatives. By creating an 

additional processing track, USCIS will 

be able to provide the public with more 

expeditious service and to thereby 

improve customer satisfaction. 

DATES: This notice is effective March 30, 

2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian J. Welsh, Chief, Freedom of 

Information Act and Privacy Act, U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services, 

Department of Homeland Security, P.O. 

Box 648010, Lee’s Summit, Missouri 

64064, Phone: 816–350–5785, E-Mail: 

uscis.foia@dhs.gov . 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background: 

Under the Freedom of Information 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 552 (‘‘FOIA’’), the Privacy 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, and the Department 

of Homeland Security’s implementing 

regulations located at 6 CFR 5.5(b), the 

Secretary of Homeland Security may use 

two or more processing tracks for 

responding to FOIA requests. Currently, 

USCIS has two tracks: Track 1 is for less 

complex requests that can be processed 

in 20 working days or less. Track 2 is 

for complex requests that may require 

more than 20 working days to process 

and that include searching and line-byline review of numerous pages of 

information. With this notice, USCIS 

will establish a third processing track, 

the ‘‘Notice To Appear’’ track, which 

will allow for accelerated access to the 

Alien-File (A–File) for those individuals 

who have been served with a charging 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES