HQ 222151: Application of Customs Regulations 141.67 and 141.68to entries submitted through Automated BrokerInterface (ABI); Cargo Selectivity; ACS; C.D. 3550-28

Native CBP ruling rendition. Applicability is fact-specific; modification/revocation relationships and original publisher date are retained. Publisher sentinel year0001 means unknown date, not a historical legal adoption.

                            HQ 222151

                         August 13, 1990

ENT-1-07 CO:R:C:E 222151 C

CATEGORY:  Entry/Liquidation

Regional Commissioner of Customs
Southeast Region
909 S.E. 1st Avenue
Miami, FL 33131

RE:  Application of Customs Regulations 141.67 and 141.68
to entries submitted through Automated Broker
Interface (ABI); Cargo Selectivity; ACS; C.D. 3550-28

Dear Sir:

     This responds to your February 9, 1990, memorandum regarding
the referenced subject (ADM-9-O:C CM).

     Your memorandum concerned the following scenario: A broker
files an entry through ABI, which is then passed through the
cargo selectivity mode of ACS (Automated Commercial System).  The
system instructs Customs to examine the merchandise.  Customs
orders the merchandise delivered to the CES (Container
Examination Station).  The broker instructs that delivery not be
made and submits a letter to Customs withdrawing the entry under
{141.67.  The merchandise is never delivered to the CES, nor is
it examined.

     Your memorandum suggested that this scenario is inconsistent
with Customs enforcement concerns and evidences a means of escape
from detection for those who would attempt to circumvent entry
procedures for certain merchandise.

     Customs Directive 3550-28 (copy attached), dated October 10,
1987, addresses this matter.  It instructs that after the broker
receives a conditional release message, "which indicates that
Customs expects to perform a 'general' or an 'intensive'
examination," the broker "must" submit the entry to Customs, even
if the broker intends not to use it.  Deletion of the entry data
depends on the explanation offered by the broker for not using
the entry submitted.  Although the directive does not address
withdrawal under {141.67, it is clear that Customs consideration
of the explanation would precede any decision to permit
withdrawal of the entry under the regulation.  Where cargo
selectivity has instructed an examination, any explanation would
be reasonably suspect.

     As applied to the scenario you presented, the merchandise
could be examined before permitting the withdrawal of the entry. 
Generally, Customs can examine merchandise in Customs custody
anytime prior to release.  19 U.S.C. 1499.

                               Sincerely,




                               Michael H. Lane