BON-1-04 CO:R:C:E 223474 TLS
District Director
U.S. Customs Service
1 East Bay Street
Savannah, Georgia 31401
RE: Request for extension of temporary importation bond (TIB)
#110-1712335-4; 19 CFR 10.37.
Dear Sir:
The above-referenced request has been forwarded to this
office for consideration. We have considered the points raised
by the importer and your office. Our decision follows.
FACTS:
The subject bond had already been extended for one year when
it expired on June 6, 1991. The importer filed a request for
extension by letter dated September 4, 1991. The letter, of
course, came after the expiration date but before a demand for
liquidated damages was issued. Such demand remains unissued
pending the outcome of this decision.
The September 4 letter explained the basis for requesting a
second extension. About six weeks after the original entry
involving two separate products was made, the entire bulk of one
particular product was exported. At this point, all of the
second product remains in the U.S. The importer requested the
first extension and is requesting this extension because the
remaining product is exported to countries where the political
climate is volatile. For this reason, it is explained, no orders
have been received for this product to date. The merchandise is
currently warehoused where it has been since entered; it has not
been tampered with in any sense. If the extension is granted,
the merchandise will be reformulated for any orders received. No
details were provided on the reformulation, however.
ISSUE:
Whether an extension may be granted on a temporary
importation bond when the merchandise has not been exported
within the bond term because no orders have been received for it.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
The Customs regulations cover extensions of temporary
importation bonds (TIBs). Under 19 CFR 10.37, the following is
provided for:
Extension of time for exportation.
The period of time during which merchandise under [a
TIB entry] may remain in [the Customs territory] may be
extended for not more than two further periods of 1
year each... Any untimely request for an extension of
time for exportation shall be referred to [the Entry
Rulings Branch at Customs Headquarters] for
disposition. (Emphasis added.)
This issue of whether Customs may grant an extension of a TIB
pursuant to an untimely request for such has been addressed
previously. In a 1989 Customs ruling, it was held that a one
year extension request on a TIB may be granted retroactively.
The decision found that if the bond holder meets all the
requirements for an extension, it may be granted even if the
request for such was untimely. Customs ruling HQ 221486 (August
21, 1989).
We see no reason not to follow the reasoning of that
decision in this case. Except for not timely filing the request
for a second extension, the bond holder has met all the
requirements for such; the circumstances that existed when the
first extension was granted still exist at this point.
Furthermore, the fact that an untimely request for extension may
be submitted to this office for further consideration suggests
that Part 10.37 permits the granting of an untimely request.
Given the unforeseen hardship the bond holder has endured,
further extension is justified. Therefore, we find sufficient
reason to grant a second one year extension of the TIB in this
case. (As an alternative, the importer could satisfy its
obligation to export by placing the article in an FTZ under zone
restricted status. The use of the FTZ in this situation would
appear to preclude any further manipulation, however.)
HOLDING:
The holder of the temporary importation bond in this case is
granted an extension on that bond. The extension is applicable
retroactive from June 7, 1991 to June 6, 1992. Liquidated
damages should not be collected.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director