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 > 2006 NY Rulings > NY L83390 - NY L86493 > NY L84728

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
NY L84728




October 16, 2006

CLA-2-54:RR:NC:TA:352 L84728

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: 5407.10.0090

Mr. Harry Keuler
OLBO Industrietextilien GMBH
Aachener Strasse 5 (Verwaltung)
Heiligenstock/Durener Str. (Warenannahme/Versand) 42697 Solingen-Ohligs, Germany

RE: The tariff classification of five RFL dipped polyester/nylon blend woven fabrics from Germany.

Dear Mr. Keuler:

In your letter dated April 25, 2005 and updated on October 10, 2006 you requested a tariff classification ruling.

Five samples of woven fabric accompanied your request for a ruling. Laboratory analysis of the first, designated as type PIW 80 (EP 100), indicates that it is a plain fabric composed of 70.6% filament polyester and 29.4% filament nylon. This product is produced wholly of non-textured multifilament single yarns and contains 20 ends per centimeter and 6 picks per centimeter. Weighing 353.8 g/m2, this fabric will be imported in a variety of widths ranging between 98 centimeters and 225 centimeters. Although the laboratory was unable to verify the tenacity of the yarns that form this fabric, you have stated that all of the yarns meet the definition for high tenacity yarns as defined in Note 6 to Section XI of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States (HTSUS). The fabric has been dipped in RFL (Resorcinol Formaldehyde Latex) which is an emulsion containing typically formalin, resorcinol, styrene-butadiene and other minor components combined with water. The RFL changes the color of the fabric to a brownish orange color however the RFL is not visible to the naked eye other than as a change in color. Your correspondence indicates that the RFL application promotes the adhesion of the fabric to rubber. After importation you also state that this product will be laminated with rubber as a step in manufacturing it into a conveyor belt.

Laboratory analysis of the sample designated as type PIW 110 (EP 160) indicates that it is a plain fabric composed of 78.3% filament polyester and 21.7% filament nylon. This product is produced wholly of non-textured multifilament single yarns and contains 15 ends per centimeter and 5.7 picks per centimeter. Weighing 556.7 g/m2, this fabric will be imported in a variety of widths ranging between 98 centimeters and 225 centimeters. Although the laboratory was unable to verify the tenacity of the yarns that form this fabric, you have stated that all of the yarns meet the definition for high tenacity yarns as defined in Note 6 to Section XI of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States (HTSUS). The fabric has been dipped in RFL (Resorcinol Formaldehyde Latex) which is an emulsion containing typically formalin, resorcinol, styrene-butadiene and other minor components combined with water. The RFL changes the color of the fabric to a brownish orange color however the RFL is not visible to the naked eye other than as a change in color. Your correspondence indicates that the RFL application promotes the adhesion of the fabric to rubber. After importation you also state that this product will be laminated with rubber as a step in manufacturing it into a conveyor belt.

Laboratory analysis of the sample designated as type PIW 200 (EP 315) indicates that it is woven as a plain weave except that each group of two warp yarns are woven as one. This fabric is composed of 85.1% filament polyester and 14.9% filament nylon. This product is produced wholly of non-textured multifilament single yarns and contains 13 ends per centimeter and 4.2 picks per centimeter. Weighing 1223.7 g/m2, this fabric will be imported in a variety of widths ranging between 98 centimeters and 225 centimeters. Although the laboratory was unable to verify the tenacity of the yarns that form this fabric, you have stated that all of the yarns meet the definition for high tenacity yarns as defined in Note 6 to Section XI of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States (HTSUS). The fabric has been dipped in RFL (Resorcinol Formaldehyde Latex) which is an emulsion containing typically formalin, resorcinol, styrene-butadiene and other minor components combined with water. The RFL changes the color of the fabric to a brownish orange color however the RFL is not visible to the naked eye other than as a change in color. Your correspondence indicates that the RFL application promotes the adhesion of the fabric to rubber. After importation you also state that this product will be laminated with rubber as a step in manufacturing it into a conveyor belt.

Laboratory analysis of the sample designated as type PIW 400 (EP 630) indicates that it is woven as a plain weave except that each group of three warp yarns are woven as one. This fabric is composed of 87.3% filament polyester and 12.7% filament nylon. This product is produced wholly of non-textured multifilament single yarns and contains 14 ends per centimeter and 3.2 picks per centimeter. Weighing 1902.3 g/m2, this fabric will be imported in a variety of widths ranging between 98 centimeters and 225 centimeters. Although the laboratory was unable to verify the tenacity of the yarns that form this fabric, you have stated that all of the yarns meet the definition for high tenacity yarns as defined in Note 6 to Section XI of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States (HTSUS). The fabric has been dipped in RFL (Resorcinol Formaldehyde Latex) which is an emulsion containing typically formalin, resorcinol, styrene-butadiene and other minor components combined with water. The RFL changes the color of the fabric to a brownish orange color however the RFL is not visible to the naked eye other than as a change in color. Your correspondence indicates that the RFL application promotes the adhesion of the fabric to rubber. After importation you also state that this product will be laminated with rubber as a step in manufacturing it into a conveyor belt.

Laboratory analysis of the sample designated as type PIW 330 Straight Warp (EPP SW 630) indicates that it is woven fabric with a complex interlacing pattern. This fabric is composed of 73.1% filament polyester and 26.9% filament nylon. This product is produced wholly of non-textured multifilament single yarns and contains 16 ends per centimeter and 3.9 picks per centimeter. Weighing 1984.3 g/m2, this fabric will be imported in a variety of widths ranging between 98 centimeters and 225 centimeters. Although the laboratory was unable to verify the tenacity of the yarns that form this fabric, you have stated that all of the yarns meet the definition for high tenacity yarns as defined in Note 6 to Section XI of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States (HTSUS). The fabric has been dipped in RFL (Resorcinol Formaldehyde Latex) which is an emulsion containing typically formalin, resorcinol, styrene-butadiene and other minor components combined with water. The RFL changes the color of the fabric to a brownish orange color however the RFL is not visible to the naked eye other than as a change in color. Your correspondence indicates that the RFL application promotes the adhesion of the fabric to rubber. After importation you also state that this product will be laminated with rubber as a step in manufacturing it into a conveyor belt.

Your letter indicates that you believe that these fabrics should be classified under the provision for rubberized textile fabrics in subheading 5906.99.2500, HTS. This is not possible. Your correspondence indicates that the RFL formulation does not conform with the requirements delineated in Note 4(a) to chapter 40 which defines synthetic rubber. In addition, in a series of ruling our Headquarters office addressed whether RFL dipped fabrics are classifiable under the provision for rubberized textile fabrics in heading 5906, HTS. In rejecting classification under heading 5906, HTSUS, ruling HQ 966519 observed that:

Thus, to consider a substance to be a rubber, Note 4(a) sets forth a two-pronged test. First, the substance must be vulcanized (not merely cross-linked). Second, the vulcanized material must satisfy an extension-recovery test as described in Note 4(a). CBP has consistently applied this test to determine whether a substance is a “rubber” for tariff classification purposes. Thus this ruling makes clear that for a formulation to be considered a “rubber” it must meet the two-pronged test in Note 4(a) to chapter 40. Further the ruling goes on to analyze the typical RFL formulation and finds that the RFL fails the extension- recovery prong of the test and concludes RFL is not a “rubber” and therefore fabrics coated with RFL are not rubberized fabrics in heading 5906, HTSUS. See also Headquarters letters HQ 966534, HQ 966535 and HQ 966518.

Note 2 to Chapter 59, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, (HTS), defines the scope of heading 5903, under which textile fabrics which are coated, covered, impregnated, or laminated with plastics are classifiable. In addition, it provides guidance on the classification of combinations of textile and plastics. Note 2 states in part that heading 5903, HTS, applies to:

(a) Textile fabrics, impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics, whatever the weight per square meter and whatever the nature of the plastic material (compact or cellular), other than:

(1) Fabrics in which the impregnation, coating or covering cannot be seen with the naked eye (usually chapters 50 to 55, 58 or 60): for the purposes of this provision, no account should be taken of any resulting change in color;

(2) Products which cannot, without fracturing, be bent manually around a cylinder of a diameter of 7 mm, at a temperature between 15 C and 30 C (usually chapter 39)

(3) Products in which the textile fabric is either completely embedded in plastics or entirely coated or covered on both sides with such material, provided that such coating or covering can be seen with the naked eye with no account being taken of any resulting change of color (chapter 39);

(4) Fabrics partially coated or partially covered with plastic and bearing designs resulting from these treatments (usually chapters 50 to 55, 58 or 60);

Therefore, even if we were to consider RFL a plastic material, these five fabrics could not fall within the scope of the provision for textile fabrics coated with plastics in heading 5903, HTSUS, since the coating on the fabrics is not visible to the naked eye except for a change of color. These fabrics are not considered coated fabrics either for the purposes of classification in heading 5903, HTS, as coated fabrics of textile nor as plastic products of chapter 39.

The applicable subheading for the five woven fabric will be 5407.10.0090, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), which provides for woven fabrics of synthetic filament yarn, including woven fabrics obtained from materials of heading 5404, woven fabrics obtained from high tenacity yarn of nylon or other polyamides or of polyester, other. The rate of duty will be 13.6 percent ad valorem.

Duty rates are provided for your convenience and are subject to change. The text of the most recent HTSUS and the accompanying duty rates are provided on World Wide Web at http://www.usitc.gov/tata/hts/.

This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs 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, contact National Import Specialist Alan Tytelman at 646-733-3045.

Sincerely,

Robert B. Swierupski
Director,

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: