CLA-2 CO:R:C:F 956220 JGH
District Director of Customs
P.O. Box 1490
St. Albans, Vermont 05478
RE: Decision on Application for Further Review of Protest
No. 0201-93-100295, on the Classification of Food Starch.
Dear Sir:
This protest concerns the classification under the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) of food
starch from Canada.
FACTS:
The entries in issue were made in January 1993, liquidated
on April 30, 1993, and protest filed on July 29, 1993. A Customs
laboratory report described a sample as a white powder identified
as corn starch. It was the opinion of the laboratory that the
starch had not been chemically modified.
A statement from a spokesman for the National Starch and
Chemical Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, was that the starch was
obtained from the wet milling of waxy corn, and modified by being
manufactured by a method consistent with the procedures outlined
in 21 CFR 172.892.
ISSUE:
Whether the food starch is classifiable as corn starch in
subheading 1108.12.00, HTSUS, or modified starches in subheading
3505.10.00, HTSUS.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
The starches of heading 1108 are described by the
Explanatory Notes as products of the milling of cereals; they are
said to be white odorless powders composed of fine grains which
crackle when rubbed between the fingers. The Explanatory Notes
to Heading 3505 state that the heading covers dextrins and other
modified starches; products obtained by the transformation of
starches through the action of heat, chemicals, or diastase, and
starch modified, e.g., by oxidation, esterification, or
etherification. - 2 -
A Customs laboratory reported that it had examined a sample
of the starch and described it as a white powder identified as
corn starch; the opinion was that it had not been chemically
modified. Subsequently a letter was received in behalf of the
importer in which it was claimed that food starch was modified by
a method outlined in 21 CFR 172.892 (Food and Drugs); these
regulations set out the permissible methods of starch
modification by the use of acids, bleaching, oxidation,
esterification and etherification. However, no detailed
information on the particular method of processing claimed to
have been used on the protested merchandise was provided.
On the basis of the evidence of record, it is concluded that
it has not been established that the imported food starch was
chemically modified.
HOLDING:
The food starch in issue is classifiable in subheading
1108.12.0010, HTSUS.
You are directed to deny the protest in full. A copy of
this decision should be furnished the protestant with the Form 19
Notice of Action.
In accordance with Section 3A (11)(b) of the Customs
Directive 099 3550-065, dated August 3, 1993, subject: Revised
Protest Directive, this decision should be mailed out by your
office to the protestant no later than 60 days from the date of
this letter. Any liquidation of the entry in accordance with the
decision must be accomplished prior to the mailing of the
decision. Sixty days from the date of the decision the Office of
Regulations and Rulings will take steps to make the decision
available to Customs personnel via the Customs Rulings Module in
ACS and the public via the Diskette Subscription Service, Lexis,
Freedom of Information Act and other public access channels.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division