CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 951990 DWS
Mr. David L. Clark
Director, Customs
Cummins Engine Company, Inc.
P.O. Box 3005
Columbus, IN 47202-3005
RE: Revocation of NY 859968; Diesel Engine Cylinder Heads;
8409.99.99
Dear Mr. Clark:
In NY 859968, dated February 6, 1991, you were advised that
the subject diesel engine cylinder head, imported from Brazil,
Canada, Germany, and the United Kingdom, would be classifiable
under subheading 8409.99.99, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS), which provides for: "[p]arts suitable for
use solely or principally with the engines of heading 8407 or
8408: [o]ther: [o]ther: [o]ther: [o]ther." In your letter to the
Area Director, New York Seaport, of January 22, 1991, you stated
that the merchandise has a variety of applications, including a
"range from construction, mining, marine, rail, on-highway, power
generation units, logging, agriculture, bus, and
government/defense."
However, it has come to our attention that the subject
cylinder heads are principally used with the vehicles of headings
8701.20 (road tractors), 8702 (public transport passenger
vehicles), 8703 (motor vehicles for transport of persons), or
8704 (motor vehicles for transport of goods), HTSUS.
This letter is to notify you that, based upon this new
information, it is now our position that the merchandise is
classifiable under subheading 8409.99.91, HTSUS, which provides
for: "[p]arts suitable for use solely or principally with the
engines of heading 8407 or 8408: [o]ther: [o]ther: [o]ther: [f]or
vehicles of subheading 8701.20, or heading 8702, 8703, 8704."
The general, column one rate of duty is 3.7 percent ad valorem.
The merchandise which is manufactured in Brazil and Canada,
upon the meeting of certain regulations, will be entitled to duty
free treatment under the Generalized System of Preferences, and a
duty of 2.2 percent ad valorem under the United States-Canada
Free-Trade Agreement, respectively.
Accordingly, we are revoking NY 859968 pursuant to 19 CFR
177.9(d)(1). This revocation will not be applied retroactively
to NY 859968 [19 CFR 177.9(d)(2)] and will not, therefore, affect
past transactions under that ruling. However, for the purposes
of future transactions in merchandise of this type, NY 859968
will not be valid precedent. We recognize that pending
transactions may be adversely affected by this revocation, in
that current contracts for importations arriving at a port
subsequent to this decision will be classified pursuant to it.
If such a situation arises, you may apply for relief from the
binding effects of this decision as may be warranted by the
circumstances.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division