CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 954366 LTO

District Director
U.S. Customs Service
Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. Federal Building
10 Causeway Street, Room 603
Boston, Massachusetts

RE: Protest No. 0401-92-100433; Doctor Blade Material; parts of machinery for making paper or paperboard; subheadings 8419.90.20, 8439.99.10; HQ 951001; "condition as imported"

Dear District Director:

The following is our decision regarding the request for further review of Protest No. 0401-92-100433, which concerns the classification of doctor blade material under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). The subject merchandise was entered on April 26, 1991, March 2, 1992 and March 13, 1992. The entries were liquidated on April 10, 1992, April 17, 1992 and May 29, 1992. The protest was timely filed on July 9, 1992.

FACTS:

The importations in question consist of coils of vetronite doctor blade material, 100 meters in length. The coil is 76.2 millimeters wide, and 1.4 millimeters thick, with a lengthwise edge bevelled to an angle of 30 degrees. The material is constructed of laminated glass and epoxy, and is cured using heat and pressure. After importation, the material is uncoiled, cut to the desired length and then assembled with a doctor blade holder and other components to form a complete doctor blade assembly. The imported coils are neither pre-scored nor otherwise marked to indicate where a cut may be made.

A doctor blade is a thin, flexible blade or scraper which is pressed against a rotating cylinder to lift the paper sheet off the surface of the cylinder and keep the cylinder free of dirt, - 2 -

pulp or other contaminating materials. Doctor blades are used in all sections of papermaking and paperboard-making machines, as well as in off-machine applications such as coaters and supercalendars. They are designed and fabricated so as to be compatible with a specific machine or machine section and the operating requirements of the intended application. The doctor blade material was entered under subheading 8439.99.10, HTSUS, which provides for parts of machinery for making paper or paperboard, other than the machinery of heading 8419, HTSUS. The entries were classified upon liquidation under subheading 8419.90.20, HTSUS, which provides for parts of machinery and plant for making paper pulp, paper or paperboard, by the treatment of materials by a process involving a change of temperature.

The subheadings at issue are as follows:

3926 Other articles of plastics and articles of other materials of headings 3901 to 3914: 3926.90 Other: 3926.90.95 Other (5.3%)

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

8419 Machinery, plant or laboratory equipment, whether or not electrically heated, for the treatment of materials by a process involving a change of temperature such as heating, cooking, roasting, distilling, rectifying, sterilizing, pasteurizing, steaming, drying, evaporating, vaporizing, condensing or cooling, other than machinery or plant of a kind used for domestic purposes; . . . parts thereof: 8419.90 Parts: 8419.90.20 Of machinery and plant for making paper pulp, paper or paperboard (2.4%)

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

8439 Machinery for making pulp of fibrous cellulosic material or for making or finishing paper or paperboard (other than the machinery of heading 8419); parts thereof: Parts: - 3 -

8439.99 Other: 8439.99.10 Of machinery for making paper or paperboard (Free)

ISSUE:

Whether the doctor blade material is classifiable as parts of machinery for making paper or paperboard under subheading 8439.99.10, HTSUS.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

The General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's) to the HTSUS govern the classification of goods in the tariff schedule. GRI 1 states in pertinent part that "for legal purposes, classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes . . . ." Recently, the U.S. Court of International Trade reiterated that "[i]t is well established that an imported article is to be classified according to its condition as imported . . . ." XTC Products, Inc. v. United States, 771 F.Supp. 401, 405 (1991). See also, United States v. Citroen, 223 U.S. 407 (1911). In its imported condition, the merchandise at issue consists of coils of vetronite doctor blade material, 100 meters in length. The coils are 76.2 millimeters wide, and 1.4 millimeters thick, with a lengthwise edge bevelled to an angle of 30 degrees. The imported coils are neither pre-scored nor otherwise marked to indicate where a cut may be made.

After importation, the material is uncoiled, cut to the desired length and then assembled with a doctor blade holder and other components to form a complete doctor blade assembly. The literature submitted by the protestant indicates that the finished doctor blade may be used as a part of the Fourdrinier or press sections of a papermaking or paperboard making machine, as a part of a dryer section or calendar section of such machines, as a part of an off-machine coater, or as a part of other process machinery.

In HQ 951001, dated March 12, 1992, we held that rubber seal strip imported in rolls which, after importation, was cut to length and then assembled with other components to form a doctor blade holder, was not classifiable as a part of machinery for making paper or paperboard under heading 8439, HTSUS. Similarly, the material in question, as imported, is not readily identifiable, nor dedicated for use, as a part of any particular section of a papermaking or paperboard-making machine, or any other machine. Therefore, the material cannot be classified as a - 4 -

part under either heading 8419 or 8439, HTSUS.

The imported doctor blade material is constructed of laminated glass and epoxy, and is cured using heat and pressure to form a plastics material of chapter 39, HTSUS. Because no specific provision of chapter 39 covers the material in question, it is classifiable as other articles of plastics under subheading 3926.90.95, HTSUS, dutiable at 5.3 percent ad valorem.

HOLDING:

The vetronite doctor blade material is classifiable under subheading 3926.90.95, HTSUS.

Because this classification would result in a higher rate of duty than that given at liquidation, the protest should be denied. A copy of this decision should be attached to the Customs Form 19 and provided to the protestant as part of the notice of action on the protest.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division