CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 954366 LTO
District Director
U.S. Customs Service
Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. Federal Building
10 Causeway Street, Room 603
Boston, Massachusetts
RE: Protest No. 0401-92-100433; Doctor Blade Material; parts of
machinery for making paper or paperboard; subheadings
8419.90.20, 8439.99.10; HQ 951001; "condition as imported"
Dear District Director:
The following is our decision regarding the request for
further review of Protest No. 0401-92-100433, which concerns the
classification of doctor blade material under the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). The subject
merchandise was entered on April 26, 1991, March 2, 1992 and
March 13, 1992. The entries were liquidated on April 10, 1992,
April 17, 1992 and May 29, 1992. The protest was timely filed on
July 9, 1992.
FACTS:
The importations in question consist of coils of vetronite
doctor blade material, 100 meters in length. The coil is 76.2
millimeters wide, and 1.4 millimeters thick, with a lengthwise
edge bevelled to an angle of 30 degrees. The material is
constructed of laminated glass and epoxy, and is cured using heat
and pressure. After importation, the material is uncoiled, cut
to the desired length and then assembled with a doctor blade
holder and other components to form a complete doctor blade
assembly. The imported coils are neither pre-scored nor
otherwise marked to indicate where a cut may be made.
A doctor blade is a thin, flexible blade or scraper which is
pressed against a rotating cylinder to lift the paper sheet off
the surface of the cylinder and keep the cylinder free of dirt, - 2 -
pulp or other contaminating materials. Doctor blades are used in
all sections of papermaking and paperboard-making machines, as
well as in off-machine applications such as coaters and
supercalendars. They are designed and fabricated so as to be
compatible with a specific machine or machine section and the
operating requirements of the intended application.
The doctor blade material was entered under subheading
8439.99.10, HTSUS, which provides for parts of machinery for
making paper or paperboard, other than the machinery of heading
8419, HTSUS. The entries were classified upon liquidation under
subheading 8419.90.20, HTSUS, which provides for parts of
machinery and plant for making paper pulp, paper or paperboard,
by the treatment of materials by a process involving a change of
temperature.
The subheadings at issue are as follows:
3926 Other articles of plastics and articles
of other materials of headings 3901 to
3914:
3926.90 Other:
3926.90.95 Other (5.3%)
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
8419 Machinery, plant or laboratory equipment, whether or not electrically heated, for
the treatment of materials by a process
involving a change of temperature such
as heating, cooking, roasting, distilling,
rectifying, sterilizing, pasteurizing,
steaming, drying, evaporating, vaporizing,
condensing or cooling, other than
machinery or plant of a kind used for
domestic purposes; . . . parts thereof:
8419.90 Parts:
8419.90.20 Of machinery and plant for making
paper pulp, paper or paperboard
(2.4%)
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
8439 Machinery for making pulp of fibrous
cellulosic material or for making or
finishing paper or paperboard (other than
the machinery of heading 8419); parts
thereof:
Parts:
- 3 -
8439.99 Other:
8439.99.10 Of machinery for making paper or
paperboard (Free)
ISSUE:
Whether the doctor blade material is classifiable as parts
of machinery for making paper or paperboard under subheading
8439.99.10, HTSUS.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
The General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's) to the HTSUS
govern the classification of goods in the tariff schedule. GRI 1
states in pertinent part that "for legal purposes, classification
shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and
any relative section or chapter notes . . . ."
Recently, the U.S. Court of International Trade reiterated
that "[i]t is well established that an imported article is to be
classified according to its condition as imported . . . ." XTC
Products, Inc. v. United States, 771 F.Supp. 401, 405 (1991).
See also, United States v. Citroen, 223 U.S. 407 (1911). In its
imported condition, the merchandise at issue consists of coils of
vetronite doctor blade material, 100 meters in length. The coils
are 76.2 millimeters wide, and 1.4 millimeters thick, with a
lengthwise edge bevelled to an angle of 30 degrees. The imported
coils are neither pre-scored nor otherwise marked to indicate
where a cut may be made.
After importation, the material is uncoiled, cut to the
desired length and then assembled with a doctor blade holder and
other components to form a complete doctor blade assembly. The
literature submitted by the protestant indicates that the
finished doctor blade may be used as a part of the Fourdrinier or
press sections of a papermaking or paperboard making machine, as
a part of a dryer section or calendar section of such machines,
as a part of an off-machine coater, or as a part of other process
machinery.
In HQ 951001, dated March 12, 1992, we held that rubber seal
strip imported in rolls which, after importation, was cut to
length and then assembled with other components to form a doctor
blade holder, was not classifiable as a part of machinery for
making paper or paperboard under heading 8439, HTSUS. Similarly,
the material in question, as imported, is not readily
identifiable, nor dedicated for use, as a part of any particular
section of a papermaking or paperboard-making machine, or any
other machine. Therefore, the material cannot be classified as a
- 4 -
part under either heading 8419 or 8439, HTSUS.
The imported doctor blade material is constructed of
laminated glass and epoxy, and is cured using heat and pressure
to form a plastics material of chapter 39, HTSUS. Because no
specific provision of chapter 39 covers the material in question,
it is classifiable as other articles of plastics under subheading
3926.90.95, HTSUS, dutiable at 5.3 percent ad valorem.
HOLDING:
The vetronite doctor blade material is classifiable under
subheading 3926.90.95, HTSUS.
Because this classification would result in a higher rate of
duty than that given at liquidation, the protest should be
denied. A copy of this decision should be attached to the
Customs Form 19 and provided to the protestant as part of the
notice of action on the protest.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division