HQ 0732227 - Country of origin marking requirements for imported carbon steel tubing - United States International Trade Commision Rulings

United States International Trade Commision Rulings And Harmonized Tariff Schedule

faqs.org Rulings By Number Rulings By Category Tariff Numbers

faqs.org > Rulings and Tariffs Home > Rulings By Number > 1990 HQ Rulings > HQ 0731902 - HQ 0732330 > HQ 0732227

HQ 732227

July 26, 1989

MAR 2-05 CO:R:C:V 732227 pmh

CATEGORY: MARKING

Mr. James E. Townsend, Jr.
Mannesmann Pipe & Steel Corp.
11911 North Freeway Building, Suite 600
Houston, TX 77060-1701

RE: Country of origin marking requirements for imported carbon steel tubing

Dear Mr. Townsend:

This is in response to your letter of March 10, 1989, on behalf of Mannesmann Pipe & Steel Corp. (the importer), requesting a ruling on country of origin marking requirements for imported carbon steel pipe sections.

FACTS:

You indicate that the importer plans to import steel tubing, in several shipments covered by separate entries over several months. You state that the importer requests a waiver of the statutory methods (die stamping, cast-in-mold lettering, etching and engraving) based on the fact that Combustion Engineering, Inc., the manufacturing company to whom the importer is selling the imported steel pipes, is the ultimate purchaser and knows the country of origin of the steel pipes. You have enclosed a letter from the Combustion Engineering, Inc., asserting that they are aware the country of origin of the steel tubing is West Germany, that they will process the steel tubing in the manufacture of boilers and that the statutory methods of marking would have long-term detrimental effects on the steel tubing. It was further indicated that the imported tubing consists of seamless carbon steel with an outer diameter measuring 6.000 inches and a wall thickness of .460 inches. Paint stencilling was requested as an alternative method of marking the imported tubing.

ISSUE:

Whether imported carbon steel tubing, with an outer diameter of 6.000 inches and a wall thickness of .460 inches, can be marked for country of origin purposes by means other than die stamping, cast-in-mold lettering, etching or engraving.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304), requires that every article of foreign origin (or its container) imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly and permanently as the nature of the article (or container) will permit in such a manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser the English name of the country of origin of the article. Part 134, Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 134), implements the country of origin marking requirements and exceptions of 19 U.S.C. 1304.

Section 304(a)(3)(H) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304(a)(3)(H)), provides for an exception from the marking requirements in those cases where the ultimate purchaser, by reason of the character of an imported article or by reason of the circumstances of its importation, must necessarily know the country of origin of such article even though it is not marked. However, that exception, nor any of the other exceptions set forth in 19 U.S.C. 1304(a)(3) apply to imported steel or iron pipes and pipe fittings because section 207 of the Trade and Tariff Act of 1984, amended 19 U.S.C. 1304 by adding a new paragraph (c) which requires that all imported pipe and pipe fittings of iron or steel be permanently marked to indicate their country of origin by means of die stamping, cast-in-mold lettering, etching or engraving. Customs subsequently determined that certain pipe and pipe fittings of iron or steel cannot be marked by any of the prescribed methods. These specific exceptions were enumerated in T.D. 86-15, published in the Federal Register of February 5, 1986 (51 FR 4559), wherein Customs listed various categories of pipes and pipe fittings that cannot be marked by any of the methods prescribed by section 207 without impairing the article with respect to their intended use, or without violating applicable industry standards. Therefore, the document provided that the categories of pipes and pipe fittings listed therein could be marked by alternate means such as stencilling or tagging of bundles or containers.

In addition, 19 U.S.C. 1304(c)(2) provides that if, because of the nature of an article, it is technically or commercially infeasible to mark it by one of the four methods specified in paragraph (1), the article may be marked by an equally permanent method of marking such as paint stencilling or tagging.

As you will note from the attached copy of T.D. 86-15, carbon steel tubing described in this case, i.e. with an outer diameter of 6.000 inches and a wall thickness of .460, is not listed in T.D. 86-15. Furthermore, although it has been asserted that any one of the four statutory methods of marking would have detrimental effects on the steel tubing, no evidence has been provided to support this assertion. Therefore, notwithstanding the fact that the ultimate purchaser knows the country of origin of the imported steel tubing in this case, it cannot be excepted from one of the statutory methods of marking, unless it can be shown, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1304(c)(2), that it is technically or commercially infeasible to mark it by such methods.

HOLDING:

The described imported carbon steel tubing having an outer diameter of 6.000 inches and a wall thickness of .460, does not qualify for one of the exceptions listed in T.D. 86-15, nor has it been shown that it would be technically or commercially infeasible to mark the subject tubing by die-stamping, cast-in- mold lettering, etching or engraving, as set forth in 19 U.S.C. 1304(c). Therefore, it must be marked by one of those four methods.

Sincerely,

Marvin M. Amernick

Previous Ruling Next Ruling