HQ 0081458 - Decision on Application for Further Review of Protest No. 3701-7-000061 - 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 > 1991 HQ Rulings > HQ 0081095 - HQ 0084712 > HQ 0081458

HQ 081458

October 24, 1988

CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 081458 jlj

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: 256.90

District Director of Customs
517 East Wisconsin Avenue
Room 554
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202

RE: Decision on Application for Further Review of Protest No. 3701-7-000061

Dear Sir:

This protest was filed against your decision in the liquidation of certain Milwaukee entries covering shipments of two layers of creped paper laminated together by polyvinyl chloride plastic material.

This ruling concerns the tariff classification of the laminated paper product imported from Sweden.

FACTS:

The merchandise at issue, Dunicel Paper Water Repellant, is composed of two layers of creped paper laminated together by polyvinyl chloride plastic material. After importation, the Dunicel product is cut and folded; sometimes it is also printed and embossed. The final products made from Dunicel are table coverings, napkins, place mats and tray mats.

In Customs Laboratory Reports 9-82-42300 of June 8, 1982, and 9-28-42299 of June 8, 1982, covering white and colored Dunicel, the Chicago Customs laboratory said: "The sample is impregnated creped paper. In our opinion it is not creped as a secondary converting process."

In Customs Laboratory Report 2-86-12167-001 of September 19, 1986, covering "Dunicel paper-water repellant-2 ply," the New York Customs laboratory said: "The sample consists of 2 sheets of blue creped paper (45 percent by weight) which have been joined using a polyvinyl chloride plastics material (55 percent by weight). They are not coated, impregnated or surface colored and contain small amount of cotton fibers having lengths greater than 4 millimeters."

After Customs Laboratory Report 2-86-12167-001 was received, the instant entries were liquidated under the provision for articles of paper, not specially provided for, other, of papers, coated, or of any of the papers provided for in items 253.25, 253.30, 253.35, 253.40, or 253.45, other, in item 256.87, Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS).

Counsel for the protestant claims that the Dunicel paper should be classified under the provision for crepe paper, including paper creped or partly creped in any manner, other, in item 253.20, TSUS.

ISSUE:

Is the instant merchandise classified as a crepe paper in item 253.20, TSUS, or as an article of paper in item 256.90, TSUS?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

The Dictionary of Paper, Fourth Edition (1980), published by the American Paper Institute, defines "crepe paper" as "a general term descriptive of paper made with an effect simulating crepe." The Dictionary defines "laminated paper" as "a laminated product made of paper only." It defines "laminated" as "made by superposing two or more layers of the same or dissimilar materials, with or without adhesive." It further defines "laminating" as "the operation of combining two or more layers of paper or paperboard with an adhesive in such a way as to form a multi-ply paper product, the purpose generally being to increase thickness and rigidity or to impart special properties, for example, moisture- and grease- resistance." (Emphasis added.) The last three definitions clearly indicate that the instant merchandise is a laminated paper product.

Counsel for the protestant admits that the Dunicel product is a two-ply crepe material. He does not dispute Customs finding that Dunicel is composed of two layers of crepe paper laminated together by polyvinyl chloride plastics material. He argues, however, that the correct classification for the product is crepe paper in item 253.20, TSUS, pursuant to the 1982 laboratory report. He contends that the Dunicel is neither a finished nor an unfinished article. He cites a number of Customs rulings, none of which are on point because they do not deal with two layer products. He argues that the provision for crepe paper is more specific than that for articles of paper.

Previous Customs rulings have classified laminated paper products as articles. Customs Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 065398 of November 10, 1980, held that laminated paper was outside the scope of the superior heading for items 254.20 and 254.70, TSUS, which describes eight specific processes, and was therefore classified under the provision for articles of paper, not specially provided for, other, other, in item 256.90, TSUS. In HRL 070024 of October 12, 1982, a product of a layer of plastic film laminated to a layer of paper was held to be classified as an article of paper in item 256.90, TSUS. Finally, in HRL 071475 of September 20, 1983, a product composed of plastic film laminated to several thicknesses of embossed cellulose paper was held to be a product of cellulose wadding classified under the provision for articles of paper, not specially provided for, of cellulose wadding, in item 256.80, TSUS. These rulings indicate that Customs regards paper laminations as articles of paper rather than as paper.

The instant Dunicel product is not crepe paper because it is more than crepe paper. It is two layers of crepe paper laminated together. The Dictionary of Paper, supra, defines "laminating" as combining two or more layers of paper or paperboard in such as way as to form a multi-ply paper product. Customs has classified other paper laminations as articles of paper. For all of these reasons, the Dunicel product is classified as an article of paper in item 256.90, TSUS.

We note that the liquidation of the entries in item 256.87, TSUS, was incorrect inasmuch as the instant product is not made from coated paper nor from any of the papers provided for in items 253.25, 253.30, 253.35, 253.40, or 253.45, TSUS.

HOLDING:

The protest should be denied with regard to protestant's claimed classification in item 253.20, TSUS. The instant entries should be reliquidated under the provision for articles of paper in item 256.90, TSUS, unless such reliquidation results in duties in excess of those which were due under item 256.87, TSUS.

A copy of this ruling should be sent to the protestant along with the CF 19 Notice of Action.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling