OT:RR:NC:N3:140
Paul Fong
Kenso Inc
9330 Lyndon B Johnson Fwy, Suite 900 Dallas, TX 75243
RE: The country of origin of Bentazone + Imazamox Herbicide formulated in Malaysia
Dear Mr. Fong:
In your letter dated October 3, 2023, you requested a country of origin ruling determination on Bentazone + Imazamox Herbicide.
The merchandise under consideration is Bentazone + Imazamox Herbicide formulated in your facility in Malaysia. You provided documentation regarding the manufacturing process in Malaysia to illustrate that in a product batch capacity, Bentazone (CAS # 25057-89-0) and Imazamox (CAS # 114311-32-9), which are stable dormant solid form molecules insoluble in water and imported from China, will chemically react with Sodium Hydroxide Solution (CAS # 1310-73-2) in the presence of water to form Bentazone Sodium Salt (CAS # 50723-80-3) + Imazamox Sodium Salt (CAS # 1226788-26-6). The process is run in batches until 50% Bentazone Sodium Salt Manufacturing Concentrate (CAS # 50723-80-3) + 2.3% Imazamox Sodium Salt (CAS # 1226788-26-6) is produced in liquid form. The 50% Bentazone Sodium Salt (CAS # 50723-80-3) + 2.3% Imazamox Sodium Salt (CAS # 1226788-26-6) is then mixed proportionately with other ingredients and further diluted with water to obtain the end use finished product for shipment to the USA in 1000L IBC Totes.
The "country of origin" is defined in 19 CFR 134.1(b) as "the country of manufacture, production, or growth of any article of foreign origin entering the United States. Further work or material added to an article in another country must effect a substantial transformation in order to render such other country the 'country of origin' within the meaning of this part."
The test for determining whether a substantial transformation will occur is whether an article emerges from a process with a new name, character or use, different from that possessed by the article prior to processing. See Texas Instruments Inc. v. United States, 69 C.C.P.A. 151 (1982).
The courts have held that a substantial transformation occurs when an article emerges from a process with a new name, character or use different from that possessed by the article prior to processing. United States v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., Inc., 27 CCPA 267, C.A.D. 98 (1940); National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 CIT 308 (1992), aff’d, 989 F. 2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993); Anheuser Busch Brewing Association v. The United States, 207 U.S. 556 (1908) and Uniroyal Inc. v. United States, 542 F. Supp. 1026 (1982). However, if the manufacturing or combining process is merely a minor one that leaves the identity of the article intact, a substantial transformation has not occurred. Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States, 3 CIT 220, 542 F. Supp. 1026, 1029 (1982), aff’d, 702 F.2d 1022 (Fed. Cir. 1983). Substantial transformation determinations are based on the totality of the evidence. See Headquarters Ruling (HQ) W968434, dated January 17, 2007, citing Ferrostaal Metals Corp. v. United States, 11 CIT 470, 478, 664 F. Supp. 535, 541 (1987).
It is our opinion that the country of origin of the Bentazone + Imazamox Herbicide, having undergone a chemical reaction, mixing, and formulating, will be Malaysia.
This merchandise may be subject to the requirements of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), which is administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Pesticide Programs. Information on the FIFRA can be obtained by calling the EPA at (202) 566-1245, or by visiting their website at www.epa.gov.
The holding set forth above applies only to the specific factual situation and merchandise description as identified in the ruling request. This position is clearly set forth in Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 177.9(b)(1). This section states that a ruling letter is issued on the assumption that all of the information furnished in the ruling letter, whether directly, by reference, or by implication, is accurate and complete in every material respect. In the event that the facts are modified in any way, or if the goods do not conform to these facts at time of importation, you should bring this to the attention of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and submit a request for a new ruling in accordance with 19 CFR 177.2. Additionally, we note that the material facts described in the foregoing ruling may be subject to periodic verification by CBP.
This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs and Border Protection Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177).
A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should be provided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, please contact National Import Specialist Merari Ortiz at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Steven A. Mack
Director
National Commodity Specialist Division