CLA-2 CO:R:C:G: 084941 DPS
Robin D. Iverson, Esq.
Geo. S. Bush & Co., Inc.
1400 Exchange Building
821 Second Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98104
RE: Monocular and Golf Scope
Dear Ms. Iverson:
Your letter of June 2, 1989, on behalf of Tasco Sales Inc.,
to our Seattle office, has been referred to this office for reply
concerning the tariff classification under the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA), of monoculars
and golf scopes imported from Japan. Samples of each were
provided with your ruling request and are being returned
herewith.
FACTS:
The merchandise requiring classification consists of two
distinct items. They are: (1) a Tasco, model S516, 8 x 20
monocular; and (2) a Tasco, model S514, 5 x 20 golf scope.
The monocular is a device that is designed to render distant
objects more distinct, and is used with one eye. The golf scope
is an optical instrument designed to allow the user to measure
the distance between the user and the flagpole on a golf course.
The golf scope has a range finding reticle showing distance in
yards.
Heading 9005, HTSUSA, covers binoculars, monoculars, other
optical telescopes, and mountings therefor, as well as other
astronomical instruments and mountings. Subheading 9005.10,
HTSUSA, covers binoculars, and subheading 9005.80, HTSUSA, covers
other instruments, and has breakouts for optical telescopes
(9005.80.4040, HTSUSA). Although the term "monoculars" is
included in the language of Heading 9005, no breakout for
monoculars exists under Heading 9005.
ISSUES:
(1) Where, within Heading 9005, HTSUSA, are monoculars
classified; under the subheading covering binoculars, other,
9005.10.0080, HTSUSA, the subheading covering optical
telescopes, other, 9005.80.4040, HTSUSA, or the subheading which
covers "other," 9005.80.6000, HTSUSA?
(2) Whether the golf scope at issue is considered a rangefinder
for tariff purposes; and whether it is classifiable under
subheading 9015.10.8000, HTSUSA, the provision for rangefinders,
other.
LAW & ANALYSIS:
The General Rules for the Interpretation of the Harmonized
System (GRI's) govern classification under the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule. According to GRI 1, the primary consideration in
determining whether merchandise should be classified in a
heading should be given to the language of the heading and to
any relevant chapter or section notes. We first consider
classification of the monocular.
The term, "monocular," is used in the language of the
heading, but no six or even eight digit breakout covering
monoculars is included within the heading. The Explanatory Notes
to the HTSUSA, which constitute the official interpretation of
the tariff at the international level, are silent with regard to
classification of monoculars. The description which most closely
resembles that of monoculars, is the Explanatory Notes'
description of telescopes. They provide, at page 1463, in
pertinent part:
This heading [9505] includes: (2) Telescopes for
hunting, touring, for use at sea, for firing
ranges, for health resorts (for observing scenery
or the sky), etc. They may be in one piece
(pocket or other telescopes) or with sliding
drawers for focussing; they may also be designed
to be fitted on a stand....
Because the relevant Explanatory Notes provide little guidance in
determining where monoculars fit within Heading 9005, HTSUSA, an
examination of various lexicographic authorities is instructive.
Reference to lexicographic authorities to determine the common
meaning of tariff terms is an accepted practice amongst the
courts. See, inter alia, Hasbro Industries, Inc. v. United
States, 703 F. Supp. 941 (CIT 1988), aff'd, Appeal No. 89-1202
(Fed. Cir. 1989), Customs Bulletin, Vol.23, No. 31 at p.26; and
C.J. Tower & Sons of Buffalo, Inc. v. United States, 673 F.2d
1268, 1271 (CCPA 1982).
The first task in classifying monoculars is to determine
whether binoculars are distinguishable from monoculars. The term
"monocular" is defined in the Photonics Dictionary, Vol.4 (35th
Ed. 1989), at p. d-84, as "viewed with one eye." In The Optical
Industry and Systems Directory, monocular is defined as
"pertaining to one eye." In the same reference book, the word
"binocular" is defined as, "any instrument in which both eyes can
be used to view the image to achieve a stereoscopic effect, or
merely facilitate observation." The McGraw-Hill Dictionary of
Scientific & Technical Terms (3rd Ed. 1984), at p.181, defines
binocular as "of, pertaining to, or used by both eyes." The
McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, Vol.2 (6th Ed.
1987), p. 504, defines binocular as: "any optical instrument
designed for use with both eyes to give enhanced views of distant
objects, whose distinguishing performance feature is the depth
perception obtainable." The Chambers Science and Technology
Dictionary (1988 Ed.), at p. 91, defines binoculars as, "a pair
of telescopes for use with both eyes simultaneously." The
Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 3 (Int'l. Ed. 1989), at p.756,
defines binocular as an "optical device consisting of two
parallel telescopic systems that enable the user to see an
enlarged image of a distant object with both eyes."
Consistent with the definitions discussed above, the Tasco
S516 monocular cannot be called a type of binocular because it is
not, by definition, a binocular. A monocular only pertains to
one eye, whereas, a binocular pertains to two. Accordingly,
monoculars are not classifiable under the provision for
binoculars under subheading 9005.10, HTSUSA.
The term "telescope" is defined in the Chambers Science and
Technology Dictionary (1988 Ed.), at p.889, as an optical
instrument for producing a magnified image of a distant object.
It consists of a system of mirrors, lenses or both. The McGraw-
Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms (3rd Ed. 1984),
at p.1617, states that a telescope is any assemblage of lenses,
mirrors, or both, that enhances the ability of the eye to see
objects with greater resolution or to see fainter objects.
The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, Vol. 18
(6th Ed. 1987), at p. 175, states that small refracting
telescopes are used in binoculars, cameras, gun sights, etc.
The sources indicate that all optical telescopes have two
elements: (1) the objective, which intercepts and focuses
incoming radiation (light); and (2) a mounting, by which the
objective is supported and aimed. The objective is a lens or
series of lenses or a mirror or a combination of both. An
eyepiece is used for viewing the image formed by the objective.
Here, the monocular at issue contains lenses, an eyepiece
and a housing or mounting which supports them. In accordance
with the technical and lexicographic authorities discussed above,
a monocular is considered to be an optical telescope. Therefore,
the subject Tasco S516 monocular is classifiable as an optical
telescope under subheading 9005.80.4040, HTSUSA.
The golf scope at issue is an optical instrument designed to
give the distance between it and a golf flagpole. It has a
reticle showing distance in yards. The Explanatory Notes to
Heading 9015, at VII, p. 1484, describe instruments which are
classifiable as rangefinders under subheading 9015.10, HTSUSA.
The Explanatory Notes provide:
This group covers all types of optical or opto-
electronic rangefinders for determining the
distance between the instrument and a given
object. They are used in surveying, photography
and cinematography, by the armed forces, etc.
The golf scope at issue squarely falls with the category
described by the Explanatory Note above. Accordingly, it is
classified under the provision for rangefinders, other, in
subheading 9015.10.8000, HTSUSA.
HOLDING:
The subject monocular is considered to be, for
classification purposes under the HTSUSA, an optical telescope.
Therefore, it is classifiable in the provision for optical
telescopes, other, under subheading 9005.80.4040, HTSUSA. Items
classified under this subheading are subject to a duty rate of 8
percent ad valorem.
The subject golf scope is properly classifiable as a
rangefinder, other, under subheading 9015.10.8000, HTSUSA. Items
classified under this subheading are subject to a duty rate of
5.6 percent ad valorem.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division