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 > 1993 HQ Rulings > HQ 0952379 - HQ 0952469 > HQ 0952460

Previous Ruling Next Ruling


HQ 952460


October 26, 1992

CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 952460 EJD

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO: 9013.80.60

Stephanie Moody
Traffic Administrator
Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation
P.O. Box 2206
Savannah, Georgia 31402-2206

RE: Flexible Fibrescope; Pre-Entry Classification Ruling 871850, modified; Subheading 8205.59.80

Dear Ms. Moody:

This is in response to your letter of August 10, 1992 to the District Rulings Coordinator at Savannah, Georgia, requesting a modification of Pre-Entry Classification Ruling (PC) 871850, dated April 21, 1992, concerning the classification of various aircraft tools, including a flexible fibrescope, part number ERE2447.

We have reviewed PC 871850 and have determined that the flexible fibrescope was incorrectly classified. The flexible fibrescope was classified under the provision for other handtools in subheading 8205.59.80, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).

The correct classification is as other optical devices, appliances and instruments under subheading 9013.80.60, HTSUS, with a rate of duty of 9 percent ad valorem. The reason for this classification is because this item is used for internal inspection of an engine and is not in the nature of a tool of Chapter 82, HTSUS, but is an optical instrument of Chapter 90, HTSUS. See Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System Explanatory Notes to Chapter 82 at pages 1101-1102.

Subheading 9013.80.60, HTSUS, specifically provides for

Liquid crystal devices not constituting articles provided for more specifically in other headings; lasers, other than laser diodes; other optical appliances and instruments, not specified or included elsewhere in this chapter; parts and accessories thereof...[o]ther devices, appliances and instruments...[o]ther. (Emphasis added.)

This notice to you should be considered a modification of PC 871850, dated April 21, 1992, under 19 CFR 177.9 (d). It is not to be applied retroactively to PC 871850 (19 CFR 177.9(d)(2)) and will not, therefore, affect past transactions for the importation of the merchandise under that ruling. However, for the purposes of future transactions involving merchandise of this type, PC 871850 will not be valid precedent.

We recognize that pending transactions may be adversely affected by this modification, in that current contracts for importations arriving at a port subsequent to this decision will be classified pursuant to it. If such a situation arises, you may, at your discretion, notify this office and apply for relief from the binding effects of this decision as may be warranted by the circumstances.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: