CLA-2 RR:CR:GC 965940 BJB
Port Director Newark/New York
U.S. Customs Service
1210 Corbin Street
Elizabeth, NJ 07201
RE: Protest 1001-01-102302; Diamond cleaving knives; Blades
Dear Port Director:
This is our decision regarding Protest 1001-01-102302, filed on behalf of Harris International (“protestant”) concerning the classification, under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”), of “diamond cleaving knives.” Descriptive literature and pictures of the goods were submitted in support of this protest.
FACTS:
Protestant describes the subject merchandise as “diamond cleaving knives” made by brazing a gem-quality diamond cutting tip to a molybdenum or tungsten carbide shank. They have a cutting edge of less than 3.0 mm, and a shank of approximately 2.5 mm to 3.5 mm.
Protestant’s descriptive materials provide that they are to be inserted into a “light weight pen-type handle” to form an “inexpensive hand-held optic fibre cleaving knife.” The cleaving knife is used to cut optical fibers for connection to other optical fibers or optical devices.
At entry, protestant classified the goods under subheading 8208.10.00, HTSUS, which provides for, in pertinent part, “[k]nives and cutting blades, for machines or for mechanical appliances, and base metal parts thereof: For metal working, and parts thereof[.]”
The goods were liquidated under subheading 8211.93.00, HTSUS, as “[k]nives with cutting blades, . . . other than knives of heading 8208, and blades and other base metal parts thereof: Knives having other than fixed blades[.]”
Protestant now claims the goods are classifiable under subheading 8207.90.15, HTSUS, as “[i]nterchangeable tools for handtools, whether or not power-operated, . . .; base metal parts thereof[:] Other interchangeable tools, and parts thereof: Files and rasps, including rotary files and rasps, and parts thereof[.]”
The subject entry was filed on June 7, 2000, and liquidated on June 1, 2001. A Protest and Application for Further Review were filed on June 13, 2001, and received in this office for reply on October 1, 2002.
ISSUE:
What is the classification under the HTSUS of the subject diamond cleaving blades?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
We note initially that the protest was timely filed under the statutory and regulatory provisions for protests, 19 U.S.C. 1514(c)(3)(A) and 19 CFR 174.12(e)(1).
Classification under the HTSUS is made in accordance with the General Rules of Interpretation (“GRI’s”). GRI 1 provides that the classification of goods shall be determined according to the terms of the headings of the tariff schedule and any relative Section or Chapter Notes. In the event that the goods cannot be classified solely on the basis of GRI 1, and if the headings and legal notes do not otherwise require, the remaining GRI’s may then be applied.
The Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System Explanatory Notes (“EN’s”) constitute the official interpretation of the Harmonized System at the international level. While neither legally binding nor dispositive, the EN’s provide a commentary on the scope of each heading of the HTSUS and are generally indicative of the proper interpretation of these headings. Customs believes that the ENs should always be consulted. See T.D. 89-80, 54 Fed. Reg. 35127, 35128 (Aug. 23, 1989).
The HTSUS (2001) provisions under consideration are as follows:
Interchangeable tools for handtools, whether or not power-operated, or for
machine-tools (for example, for pressing, stamping, punching, tapping, threading, drilling, boring, broaching, milling, turning or screwdriving), including dies for drawing or extruding metal, and rock drilling or earth boring tools; base metal parts thereof:
8207.90 Other interchangeable tools, and parts thereof:
8207.90.15 Files and rasps, including rotary files and rasps, and parts thereof:
* * * * * *
8208 Knives and cutting blades, for machines or for mechanical appliances, and base
metal parts thereof:
For metal working, and parts thereof:
* * * * * *
Knives with cutting blades, serrated or not (including pruning knives), other than knives of heading 8208, and blades and other base metal parts thereof:
Knives having other than fixed blades . . .
Other[.]
* * * * * *
Blades:
Other[.]
* * * * * *
Protestant claims that the subject goods are sharp, hand-held “fibre-optic diamond knives” that cut with a “scratch and pull” technique. Protestant claims that they are best described as “[i]nterchangeable tools for handtools . . .; base metal parts thereof[,]” under heading 8207, HTSUS, supra.
As noted above, protestant’s descriptive materials provide these blades are to be inserted into a “light weight pen-type handle” to form an “inexpensive hand-held optic fibre cleaving knife.” In fact, the subject goods are commonly known as knife blades.
There is no disagreement that the goods are classifiable under Chapter 82, HTSUS. The essential issue is whether these blades are more specifically and accurately classifiable as “interchangeable tools” or base metal parts thereof, under heading 8207, HTSUS, supra., or as “blades” described under heading 8211, HTSUS, supra.
As stated above, in accordance with the GRIs, we must classify articles according to the terms of the headings, and the more specific heading is preferred to the more general one.
EN 82.07 provides, that “[w]hereas (apart from a few exceptions such as machine saw blades) the preceding headings of this Chapter apply in the main to hand tools ready for use as they stand or after affixing handles, this heading covers an important group of tools, which are unsuitable for use independently, but are designed to be fitted, as the case may be, into:
hand tools, whether or not power-operated (e.g., breast drills, braces and die-stocks),
. . .
for pressing, stamping, punching, tapping, threading, drilling, boring, reaming, broaching, milling, gear-cutting, turning, cutting, morticing or drawing, etc., metals, metal carbides, wood, stone, ebonite, certain plastics or other materials, or for screwdriving.”
The subject goods are small blades, with a sharp, precision cutting-edge. Prima facie, they are unsuitable for use independently in the hand and are designed to be fitted into a knife handle.
The term “hand tools” describes a very broad class of goods. The courts have determined that in the tariff sense of the term “interchangeable tools,” the term “tool” has the same broad signification as the synonymous term “instruments” meaning any implement or tool by which work is done. United States v. Bliss & Co. et al., 6 Ct. Cust. Appls. 433, 440, T.D. 35980 (1915); Audel’s New Mechanical Dictionary (1960).
In HQ 952988, dated February 4, 1993, Customs addressed the term “interchangeable” in its classification of a plastic handle with a steel blade slider and a scored blade strip inside the handle. The article contained a dull blade snapper section that could be used to break off a dull blade at the scored line making a fresh blade available for use. Citing lexicons, including Webster’s II New Riverside University Dictionary (1988), and Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (Unabridged) (1966), Customs noted that “interchangeable” was defined as “[c]apable of mutual exchange”; and “[c]apable of being interchanged[;] Mutual, reciprocal[;] Permitting mutual substitution without loss of function or suitability[.]” Customs determined that the blades were “interchangeable,” and that the article was a “utility knife” with “interchangeable blades,” but found them more specifically classifiable in heading 8211, HTSUS, as a knife.
The subject goods include three different diamond cleaving blades. Each of these blades has a different cutting angle. They are not packaged together at entry, and there is no evidence that all three blades are sold together with the knife handle. Further, there is no evidence that the separate blades are “interchangeable,” i.e., that they may be exchanged one for another in the same knife handle.
Heading 8211, HTSUS, however, in pertinent part, specifically provides for
“. . . blades[.]” Although this term is not defined in the heading or in the ENs, Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary,10th Ed., (1999) (p.120), defines “blade” as, “3 a: the cutting part of an implement[.]” The subject blades are specifically designed to be used in a knife that cleanly cleaves the ends of optical fibers. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, defines “cleave” as “1: to divide by or as if by a cutting blow[.]” (Id., at 213). The subject goods are consistent with these definitions.
Moreover, for the purpose of the heading, EN 82.11, in pertinent part, provides that it “also covers blades for the manufacture of the knives listed above which may be in the form of crude or machined blanks, polished or completely finished blades.” Although the subject blades are entered without knife handles they are of a class or kind of blades that fit into a pen-type handle and form a knife.
In HQ 956076, dated October 21, 1994, Customs addressed the issue of whether a box cutter-utility knife, described as having a single-edged razor blade contained within a handle was classifiable as a “knife,” “cutter,” or other “hand tool.” Customs determined that the box cutter was principally used as a “knife,” and therefore, classifiable under heading 8211, HTSUS, as a “knife having other than fixed blades.” Thus, the box cutter-utility knife, and the blades used with it, were determined more specifically described under heading 8211, HTSUS, as a “knife” and “blades,” than by the more general term “tool,” provided elsewhere in Chapter 82, HTSUS.
The subject blades are readily distinguishable from those described under heading 8207, HTSUS, supra, by size, shape, and precise design. The subject goods are cleaving blades, with a “gem-quality” diamond cutting edge placed on a tungsten carbide or molybdenum shank. They are designed to precisely cut the ends of optical fibers.
The subject goods are explicitly described in heading 8211, HTSUS, as knife “blades.” As noted, they are sharp and used to cut optical fibers. They cannot be held by themselves to accurately cut an optical fiber but to do so must be inserted into the pen-type knife handle.
Although protestant claims that the subject goods are not “blades” or “knives,” in a “traditional sense,” blades that precisely cut an accurate “nick” in a very thin optical fiber to produce a cleanly cleaved fiber end fall within the tariff description of knife “blades” provided under heading 8211, HTSUS. Whether or not you claim the goods are “blades” or “knives,” the tariff heading description indicates that blades are a distinct commercial good describing these goods.
After considering the possible tariff classifications for these diamond cleaving blades, and the documentation provided, it is our determination that heading 8211, HTSUS, more accurately describes the subject goods as “blades” than does heading 8207, as “[i]nterchangeable tools for handtools . . .; base metal parts thereof[.]”
Accordingly, by application of GRI 1, we find that these diamond cleaving blades are described in subheading 8211.94.50, HTSUS, as: “[k]nives with cutting blades, serrated or not (including pruning knives), other than knives of heading 8208, and blades and other base metal parts thereof: Blades: Other[.]”
HOLDING:
At GRI 1, the subject diamond blades are classifiable in subheading 8211.94.50, HTSUS, which provides for, “[k]nives with cutting blades, serrated or not (including pruning knives), other than knives of heading 8208, and blades and other base metal parts thereof: Blades: Other[.]”
You are instructed to DENY the protest in FULL.
In accordance with Section 3A(11)(b) of Customs Directive 099 3550-065, dated August 4, 1993, Subject: Revised Protest Directive, you are to mail this decision, together with the Customs Form 19, to the protestant no later than 60 days from the date of this letter. Any reliquidation of the entry in accordance with the decision must be accomplished prior to mailing of the decision.
Sixty days from the date of the decision the Office of Regulations and Rulings will make the decision available to Customs personnel, and to the public on the Customs Home Page on the World Wide Web at www.customs.treas.gov, by means of the Freedom of Information Act, and other methods of public distribution.
Sincerely,
Myles B. Harmon, Acting Director
Commercial Rulings Division