Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Notices 34603 

information technology, e.g., permitting 

electronic submission of responses. The 

comments that are submitted will be 

summarized and included in the request 

for approval. All comments will become 

a matter of public record. 

Overview of This Information 

Collection 

Title: Customs Declaration. 

OMB Number: 1651–0009. 

Form Number: CBP Form 6059B. 

Abstract: CBP Form 6059B, Customs 

Declaration, is used as a standard report 

of the identity and residence of each 

person arriving in the United States. 

This form is also used to declare 

imported articles to U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) in accordance 

with 19 CFR 122.27, 148.12, 148.13, 

148.110, 148.111; 31 U.S.C. 5316 and 

section 498 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (19 U.S.C. 1498). 

Section 148.13 of the CBP regulations 

prescribes the use of the CBP Form 

6059B when a written declaration is 

required of a traveler entering the 

United States. Generally, written 

declarations are required from travelers 

arriving by air or sea. Section 148.12 

requires verbal declarations from 

travelers entering the United States. 

Generally, verbal declarations are 

required from travelers arriving by land. 

CBP continues to find ways to improve 

the entry process through the use of 

mobile technology to ensure it is safe 

and efficient. To that end, CBP is testing 

the operational effectiveness of a 

process which allows travelers to use a 

mobile app to submit information to 

CBP prior to arrival. This process, called 

Mobile Passport Control (MPC) which is 

a mobile app that allows travelers to 

self-segment upon arrival into the 

United States—a process also known as 

intelligent queuing. Another electronic 

process that CBP is testing in lieu of the 

paper 6059B is the Automated Passport 

Control (APC). This is a CBP program 

that facilitates the entry process for 

travelers by providing self-service 

kiosks in CBP’s Primary Inspection area 

that travelers can use to make their 

declaration. 

A sample of CBP Form 6059B can be 

found at: http://www.cbp.gov/travel/uscitizens/sample-declaration-form. 

Current Actions: This submission is 

being made to extend the expiration 

date of this information collection with 

no change to the burden hours or to the 

information collected. 

Type of Review: Extension (without 

change). 

Affected Public: Individuals. 

CBP Form 6059B: 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

34,006,000. 

Estimated Number of Total Annual 

Responses: 34,006,000. 

Estimated Time per Response: 4 

minutes. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 2,278,402. 

Verbal Declarations: 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

233,000,000. 

Estimated Number of Total Annual 

Responses: 233,000,000. 

Estimated Time per Response: 10 

seconds. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 669,000. 

APC Terminals: 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

70,000,000. 

Estimated Number of Total Annual 

Responses: 70,000,000. 

Estimated Time per Response: 2 

minutes. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 2,310,000. 

MPC App: 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

500,000. 

Estimated Number of Total Annual 

Responses: 500,000. 

Estimated Time per Response: 2 

minutes. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 16,500. 

Dated: July 17, 2018. 

Seth D. Renkema, 

Branch Chief, Economic Impact Analysis 

Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15561 Filed 7–19–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–14–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

Notice of Issuance of Final 

Determination Concerning Certain 

Insufflation Tubing 

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 insufflation tubing. 

Based upon the facts presented, CBP has 

concluded that the country of origin of 

the insufflation tubing in question is 

China, for purposes of U.S. Government 

procurement. 

DATES: The final determination was 

issued on July 13, 2018. 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 August 

20, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Yuliya A. Gulis, Valuation and Special 

Programs Branch, Regulations and 

Rulings, Office of Trade, at (202) 325– 

0042. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is 

hereby given that on July 13, 2018, 

pursuant to subpart B of Part 177, U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection 

Regulations (19 CFR part 177, subpart 

B), CBP issued a final determination 

concerning the country of origin of 

certain insufflation tubing imported by 

Global Resources International, Inc. 

from the Dominican Republic, which 

may be offered to the U.S. Government 

under an undesignated government 

procurement contract. This final 

determination, HQ H298148, was issued 

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 the country of origin of 

the insufflation tubing is China for 

purposes of U.S. Government 

procurement. 

Section 177.29, CBP Regulations (19 

CFR 177.29), provides that a notice of 

final determination 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: July 13, 2018. 

Alice A. Kipel, 

Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings, 

Office of Trade. 

HQ H298148 

July 13, 2018 

OT:RR:CTF:VS H298148 YAG 

CATEGORY: Origin 

Ms. Christi Roos, LCB 

M–PACT Solutions 

P.O. Box 30209 

4294 Swinnea Road 

Memphis, TN 38118 

RE: U.S. Government Procurement; Country 

of Origin of Insufflation Tubing; Title III, 

Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 

§ 2511 et seq.); Subpart B, Part 177, CBP 

Regulations 

Dear Ms. Roos: 

This is in response to your correspondence 

dated March 26, 2018, requesting a final 

determination, on behalf of Global Resources 

International, Inc. (‘‘Global Resources’’), 

concerning the country of origin of certain 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
34604 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Notices 

insufflation tubing, pursuant to subpart B of 

Part 177 of the U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (‘‘CBP’’) Regulations (19 C.F.R. 

§ 177.21 et seq.). 

We note that Global Resources is a partyat-interest within the meaning of 19 C.F.R. 

§ 177.22(d)(1) and is entitled to request this 

final determination. 

FACTS: 

Global Resources is the importer of 

insufflation tubing. Insufflation tubing is 

used to interconnect and deliver carbon 

dioxide gas (‘‘CO2’’) from the insufflator 

machine (CO2 ‘‘gas pump’’ or insufflator) to 

the patient during laparoscopic surgery. 

Insufflation tubing is typically 3 meters 

(around 10 feet) in length, composed of a 

long clear plastic tubing and a short blue 

plastic tubing, with a filter attached about 30 

centimeters (12 inches) from one end. The 

purpose of the filter is to prevent fluid 

backflow into the insufflator and to help 

prevent contaminants from entering the 

patient’s abdominal cavity. One end of the 

tubing is comprised of a male Luer lock 

fitting, which always connects to an 

instrument that is inserted into the patient’s 

abdomen. The other end connects to the 

insufflator, which may contain any number 

of types of fittings. 

The country of origin of the clear tubing, 

blue tubing, filter assembly, and fittings is 

China. The insufflation tubing is assembled, 

sterilized, packed, and labeled in the 

Dominican Republic. 

ISSUE: 

What is the country of origin of the 

insufflation tubing for purposes of U.S. 

Government procurement? 

LAW AND ANALYSIS: 

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, pursuant to subpart B of 

Part 177, 19 C.F.R. § 177.21 et seq., which 

implements Title III of the Trade Agreements 

Act of 1979 (‘‘TAA’’), as amended (19 U.S.C. 

§ 2511 et seq.). 

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 C.F.R. § 177.22(a). 

In rendering advisory rulings and final 

determinations for purposes of U.S. 

Government procurement, CBP applies the 

provisions of subpart B of Part 177 consistent 

with the Federal Procurement Regulations. 

See 19 C.F.R. § 177.21. In this regard, CBP 

recognizes that the Federal Acquisition 

Regulations restrict the U.S. Government’s 

purchase of products to U.S.-made or 

designated country end products for 

acquisitions subject to the TAA. The 

regulations define a ‘‘designated country end 

product’’ as: 

WTO GPA [World Trade Organization 

Government Procurement Agreement] 

country end product, an FTA [Free Trade 

Agreement] country end product, a least 

developed country end product, or a 

Caribbean Basin country end product. 

A ‘‘WTO GPA country end product’’ is 

defined as an article that: 

(1) Is wholly the growth, product, or 

manufacture of a WTO GPA country; or 

(2) In the case of an article that consists in 

whole or in part of materials from another 

country, has been substantially transformed 

in a WTO GPA country 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 

transformed. The term refers to a product 

offered for purchase under a supply contract, 

but for purposes of calculating the value of 

the end product includes services (except 

transportation services) incidental to the 

article, provided that the value of those 

incidental services does not exceed that of 

the article itself. 

See 48 C.F.R. § 25.003. 

The Dominican Republic is a WTO GPA 

country. China is not. You assert that the 

insufflation tubing at issue is a product of the 

Dominican Republic for U.S. Government 

procurement purposes because all of the 

components of insufflation tubing, sourced 

from China, meet the requisite tariff shift 

rules under the Dominican Republic-Central 

America-United States Free Trade Agreement 

(‘‘DR–CAFTA’’). Please note that this is an 

incorrect analysis to apply to determine the 

country of origin for U.S. Government 

procurement purposes. Rather, as set forth 

below, the relevant test is ‘‘substantial 

transformation.’’ 

In the Court of International Trade’s 

decision in Energizer Battery, Inc. v. United 

States, 190 F. Supp. 3d 1308 (2016), the court 

interpreted the meaning of substantial 

transformation as used in the Trade 

Agreements Act of 1979 for purposes of 

government procurement. Energizer involved 

the determination of the country of origin of 

a flashlight, referred to as the Generation II 

flashlight, under the TAA. Other than a white 

LED and a hydrogen getter, all of the 

components of the Generation II flashlight 

were of Chinese origin. The components 

were imported into the United States where 

they were assembled into the finished 

Generation II flashlight. 

The court reviewed the ‘‘name, character 

and use’’ test in determining whether a 

substantial transformation had occurred, and 

reviewed various court decisions involving 

substantial transformation determinations. 

The court noted, citing Uniroyal, Inc. v. 

United States, 3 CIT 220, 226, 542 F. Supp. 

1026, 1031, aff’d, 702 F.2d 1022 (Fed. Cir. 

1983), that when ‘‘the post-importation 

processing consists of assembly, courts have 

been reluctant to find a change in character, 

particularly when the imported articles do 

not undergo a physical change.’’ Energizer at 

1318. In addition, the court noted that ‘‘when 

the end-use was pre-determined at the time 

of importation, courts have generally not 

found a change in use.’’ Energizer at 1319, 

citing as an example, National Hand Tool 

Corp. v. United States, 16 CIT 308, 310, aff’d 

989 F.2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Furthermore, 

courts have considered the nature of the 

assembly, i.e., whether it is a simple 

assembly or more complex, such that 

individual parts lose their separate identities 

and become integral parts of a new article. 

In reaching its decision in Energizer, the 

court examined whether the imported 

components retained their names after they 

were assembled into the finished Generation 

II flashlights. The court found ‘‘[t]he 

constitutive components of the Generation II 

flashlight do not lose their individual names 

as a result [of] the post-importation 

assembly.’’ The court also found that the 

components had a pre-determined end-use as 

parts and components of a Generation II 

flashlight at the time of importation and did 

not undergo a change in use due to the postimportation assembly process. Finally, the 

court did not find the assembly process to be 

sufficiently complex as to constitute a 

substantial transformation. Thus, the court 

found that Energizer’s imported components 

did not undergo a change in name, character, 

or use as a result of the post-importation 

assembly of the components into a finished 

Generation II flashlight. The court 

determined that China, the source of all but 

two components, was the correct country of 

origin of the finished Generation II flashlights 

under the government procurement 

provisions of the TAA. 

The assembly process of insufflation tubing 

is similar to that of the Generation II 

flashlight in Energizer. All of the components 

are sourced from China, and there is no 

evidence of a change in the shape or material 

composition of the components. See also 

Headquarters Ruling Letter (‘‘HQ’’) H035441, 

dated September 11, 2008; and HQ 734214, 

dated November 18, 1991. In other words, the 

individual components do not lose their 

separate identities as a result of the assembly 

process in the Dominican Republic and do 

not undergo a change in their pre-determined 

uses. Considering the totality of the 

information provided to CBP, and relying 

upon the court’s application of substantial 

transformation in Energizer, we find that the 

country of origin of the assembled 

insufflation tubing, produced as described 

herein, is China. 

HOLDING: 

Based on the facts provided, insufflation 

tubing will be considered a product of China 

for purposes of U.S. Government 

procurement. 

Notice of this final determination will be 

given in the Federal Register, as required by 

19 C.F.R. § 177.29. Any party-at-interest other 

than the party which requested this final 

determination may request, pursuant to 19 

C.F.R. § 177.31, that CBP reexamine the 

matter anew and issue a new final 

determination. Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. 

§ 177.30, any party-at-interest may, within 30 

days of publication of the Federal Register 

Notice referenced above, seek judicial review 

of this final determination before the Court 

of International Trade. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2018 / Notices 34605 

Sincerely, 

Alice A. Kipel, 

Executive Director Regulations and Rulings 

Office of Trade. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15536 Filed 7–19–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA–4371– 

DR; Docket ID FEMA–2018–0001] 

New Hampshire; Major Disaster and 

Related Determinations 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the 

Presidential declaration of a major 

disaster for the State of New Hampshire 

(FEMA–4371–DR), dated June 8, 2018, 

and related determinations. 

DATES: The declaration was issued June 

8, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dean Webster, Office of Response and 

Recovery, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2833. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is 

hereby given that, in a letter dated June 

8, 2018, the President issued a major 

disaster declaration under the authority 

of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 

U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ‘‘Stafford Act’’), 

as follows: 

I have determined that the damage in 

certain areas of the State of New Hampshire 

resulting from a severe winter storm and 

snowstorm during the period of March 13– 

14, 2018, is of sufficient severity and 

magnitude to warrant a major disaster 

declaration under the Robert T. Stafford 

Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 

Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ‘‘Stafford 

Act’’). Therefore, I declare that such a major 

disaster exists in the State of New 

Hampshire. 

In order to provide Federal assistance, you 

are hereby authorized to allocate from funds 

available for these purposes such amounts as 

you find necessary for Federal disaster 

assistance and administrative expenses. 

You are authorized to provide Public 

Assistance in the designated areas and 

Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. You 

are further authorized to provide snow 

assistance under the Public Assistance 

program for a limited period of time during 

or proximate to the incident period. 

Consistent with the requirement that Federal 

assistance be supplemental, any Federal 

funds provided under the Stafford Act for 

Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 

percent of the total eligible costs. Federal 

funds provided under the Stafford Act for 

Public Assistance also will be limited to 75 

percent of the total eligible costs, with the 

exception of projects that meet the eligibility 

criteria for a higher Federal cost-sharing 

percentage under the Public Assistance 

Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for 

Debris Removal implemented pursuant to 

section 428 of the Stafford Act. 

Further, you are authorized to make 

changes to this declaration for the approved 

assistance to the extent allowable under the 

Stafford Act. 

The Federal Emergency Management 

Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that 

pursuant to the authority vested in the 

Administrator, under Executive Order 

12148, as amended, James N. Russo, of 

FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal 

Coordinating Officer for this major 

disaster. 

The following areas of the State of 

New Hampshire have been designated 

as adversely affected by this major 

disaster: 

Carroll, Rockingham, and Stafford Counties 

for Public Assistance. 

Carroll, Rockingham, and Stafford Counties 

for snow assistance under the Public 

Assistance program for any continuous 48- 

hour period during or proximate to the 

incident period. 

All areas within the State of New 

Hampshire are eligible for assistance under 

the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. 

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used 

for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 

Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora 

Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 

97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, 

Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 

97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 

97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to 

Individuals and Households In Presidentially 

Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 

Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance— 

Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals 

and Households; 97.050, Presidentially 

Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals 

and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, 

Disaster Grants—Public Assistance 

(Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, 

Hazard Mitigation Grant. 

Brock Long, 

Administrator, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15599 Filed 7–19–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–23–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA–4370– 

DR; Docket ID FEMA–2018–0001] 

New Hampshire; Major Disaster and 

Related Determinations 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the 

Presidential declaration of a major 

disaster for the State of New Hampshire 

(FEMA–4370–DR), dated June 8, 2018, 

and related determinations. 

DATES: The declaration was issued June 

8, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dean Webster, Office of Response and 

Recovery, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2833. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is 

hereby given that, in a letter dated June 

8, 2018, the President issued a major 

disaster declaration under the authority 

of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 

U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ‘‘Stafford Act’’), 

as follows: 

I have determined that the damage in 

certain areas of the State of New Hampshire 

resulting from a severe storm and flooding 

during the period of March 2–8, 2018, is of 

sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant 

a major disaster declaration under the Robert 

T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 

Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the 

‘‘Stafford Act’’). Therefore, I declare that such 

a major disaster exists in the State of New 

Hampshire. 

In order to provide Federal assistance, you 

are hereby authorized to allocate from funds 

available for these purposes such amounts as 

you find necessary for Federal disaster 

assistance and administrative expenses. 

You are authorized to provide Public 

Assistance in the designated area and Hazard 

Mitigation throughout the State. Consistent 

with the requirement that Federal assistance 

be supplemental, any Federal funds provided 

under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation 

will be limited to 75 percent of the total 

eligible costs. Federal funds provided under 

the Stafford Act for Public Assistance also 

will be limited to 75 percent of the total 

eligible costs, with the exception of projects 

that meet the eligibility criteria for a higher 

Federal cost-sharing percentage under the 

Public Assistance Alternative Procedures 

Pilot Program for Debris Removal 

implemented pursuant to section 428 of the 

Stafford Act. 

Further, you are authorized to make 

changes to this declaration for the approved 

assistance to the extent allowable under the 

Stafford Act. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES