Customs Bulletin

start of collection proceedings unless the Commissioner of Customs authorizes other action.

Because of the present limitations on a district director's authority to grant an extension of time for filing a petition, a request for such an extension usually must be referred to the Commissioner of Customs for decision, even though the district director is often in the best position to determine whether an extension of time is justified. Accordingly, section 162.32 (a) of the Customs Regulations is being amended to increase the authority of a district director with respect to extensions of the filing period for petitions for relief. This amendment, which specifies additional situations in which a district director may act on a request for an extension of the filing period, does not affect the present authority of the Commissioner to grant an extension or to take any other action on a case.

DRAFTING INFORMATION

The principal author of the document is William G. Rosoff, Regulations and Legal Publications Division of the Office of Regulations and Rulings, United States Customs Service. However, personnel from other offices of the Customs Service participated in developing the document, both on matters of substance and style.

AMENDMENT TO THE REGULATIONS

This amendment is considered to be exempt from the notice requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553 because it solely concerns agency procedure. Accordingly, section 162.32 (a) of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 162.32(a)) is amended to read as follows:

PART 162 INSPECTION, SEARCH, AND SEIZURE

§ 162.32 Where petition for relief not filed.

(a) Fines, penalties, and forfeitures. If the person who is liable for a fine or penalty, or who has an interest in property subject to forfeiture, for any violation of the Customs or navigation laws fails to petition for relief in accordance with Part 171 of this chapter, or to pay or to arrange to pay the fine or penalty within 60 days from the date of mailing of the notice of violation as provided in section 162.31, the district director shall immediately refer the case to the U.S. attorney for judicial action unless the Commissioner of Customs expressly authorizes other action with respect to the case. However, if there is at least one year before the statute of limitations may be asserted as a defense, a district director may extend the time for filing a petition, upon the request of the person who is liable for a fine or penalty, or who has an interest in property subject to forfeiture, in the following situations:

1. The person is seriously ill or is otherwise incapacitated and is unable to prepare or to assist in the preparation of a petition.

2. The person is absent from the United States or was absent from the United States for 30 days or more during the 60-day filing period. 3. Necessary evidence or a necessary witness is not available through no fault of the person.

4. The cases involves a complex legal or factual problem other than a classification, appraisement, or similar issue. Examples of the type of problem intended to be covered by this category are the need to examine voluminous records to learn the facts on which to base a petition or the need to determine legal responsibilities in a case involving numerous parties or numerous violations.

5. The existence of unusual circumstances, such as a fire or other disaster, affecting the business of the person which requires the full attention of that person in order to overcome the effects of the unusual circumstances.

6. Any other situation in which the district director determines that an extension of time for filing a petition is justified.

(R.S. 251, as amended; sec. 624, 46 Stat. 759 (19 U.S.C. 66, 1624))

(ADM-9-03)

Approved January 18, 1978:

BETTE B. ANDERSON,

Under Secretary of the Treasury.

G. R. DICKERSON, Acting Commissioner of Customs.

[Published in the FEDERAL REGISTER February 3, 1978 (43 FR 4595)]

(T.D. 78-37)

C.D. 4687 Limited

This notice limits the decision in C.D. 4687, decided January 31, 1977, holding that certain parts of shoes (uppers) were classifiable under the provision for articles not specially provided for, of rubber or plastics, in item 774.60, TSUS

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY,

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,

Washington, D.C., January 27, 1978.

In The Westminster Corp. v. United States, C.D. 4687, decided January 31, 1977, the United States Customs Court held that shoe uppers in chief value of plastics material were classifiable under the provision for articles not specially provided for, of rubber or plastics, in item 774.60, Tariff Schedules of the United States.

The United States Customs Service has decided to limit the application in C.D. 4687 to shoe uppers and other parts of shoes.

G. R. DICKERSON,

Acting Commissioner of Customs.

(T.D. 78-38)

Inspection, Search, and Seizure; Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures— Customs Regulations amended

Sections 162.31 and 171.1, Customs Regulations, pertaining to notices of fine, penalty, or forfeiture incurred, and to prepenalty notices, amended

PART 171

FINES, PENALTIES, AND FORFEITURES

AGENCY: United States Customs Service, Department of the Treasury.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule amends the Customs Regulations to provide that certain specified information shall be set forth in notices of fine, penalty, or forfeiture incurred and in prepenalty notices which are issued by the Customs Service. Notices occasionally have been unclear because of a lack of specific information as to the alleged violations on which liability is based. The purpose of this amendment is to enable the notified parties to make an informed response to the notices. EFFECTIVE DATE: March 3, 1978.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard M. Belanger, Attorney, Regulations and Legal Publications Division, United States Customs Service, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, D.C. 20229 (202-566-8237). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

BACKGROUND

Section 162.31 (a) of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 162.31(a)) provides that written notice of any fine or penalty incurred, as well as of any liability to forfeiture, shall be given to each party that the facts of record indicate has an interest in the claim or seized property. The notice shall also inform each interested party of his right to apply for relief under section 618, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1618), or any other applicable statute authorizing remission or mitigation of penalties, or remission of forefeitures, in accordance with Part 171 of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 171). One purpose of

the notice of fine, penalty, or forfeiture is to give interested parties the opportunity to petition for relief.

Section 171.1(b) of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 171.1(b)) provides that prior to the issuance of a claim for forfeiture value in excess of $25,000 for violation of section 592, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1592), with respect to the entry, or attempted entry, of merchandise, the district director shall give a written notice to the specified party of his intention to issue such a claim. The notice shall contain a description of the merchandise and shall set forth the circumstances of entry or attempted entry, specifying the provisions of law alleged to have been violated and describing the acts or omissions on which the liability is based. The purpose of the prepenalty notice procedure is to give parties against whom Customs intends to issue a claim for forfeiture value for violation of 19 U.S.C. 1592 an opportunity to respond to the allegations prior to the issuance of the claim.

In order that parties might properly present their reasons why a claim for forfeiture value should not be issued for an alleged violation of 19 U.S.C. 1592, or why relief should be granted from any fine, penalty, or forfeiture incurred, it is desirable to specify the contents of the prepenalty notice and of the notice of fine, penalty, or forfeiture. Accordingly, both notices will contain the provisions of law alleged to have been violated and a description of the specific acts or omissions forming the basis of the alleged violations. If the alleged violations involve the entry or attempted entry of merchandise, both notices will also contain a description of the merchandise, the circumstances of entry or attempted entry, and the identity of each entry. In addition, if the alleged violations involve a loss of revenue, both notices will contain the total loss of revenue and how it was computed. The notices will also contain the loss of revenue attributable to each entry, if it is readily susceptible to calculation.

Inasmuch as these amendments benefit the public by providing specific information necessary to enable a party to respond to actions taken by the Customs Service, notice and public procedure thereon is found to be unnecessary.

DRAFTING INFORMATION

The principal author of this document was Richard M. Belanger, Attorney, Regulations and Legal Publications Division of the Office of Regulations and Rulings, U.S. Customs Service. However, personnel from other offices of the Customs Service participated in developing the document, both on matters of substance and style.

AMENDMENTS TO THE REGULATIONS

Parts 162 and 171 of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR Parts 162, 171) are amended in the following manner:

PART 162 INSPECTION, search, and SEIZURE

Section 162.31 is amended by redesignating present paragraph (b)
as paragraph (c), and by adding a new paragraph (b) to read as
follows:

§ 162.31 Notice of fine, penalty, or forfeiture incurred.

(b) Contents of notice. The notice shall contain the following:

(1) The provisions of law alleged to have been violated;

(2) A description of the specific acts or omissions forming the

basis of the alleged violations;

(3) If the alleged violations involve the entry or attempted

entry of merchandise,

(i) A description of the merchandise and the circumstances
of its entry or attempted entry, and