CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 953295 SK
Lawrence A. Doyle
Franco Mfg. Co., Inc.
555 Prospect Street
Metuchen, N.J. 08840-2293
RE: Reconsideration of NYRL 880263 (12/2/92); affirmed; country
of origin determination for a flat sheet; Section 12.130 of
the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 12.130); finishing
operations, printing, cutting, sewing and packaging do not
constitute a substantial manufacturing operation; no
substantial transformation in Mauritius.
Dear Mr. Doyle:
On December 2, 1992, our New York office issued you New York
Ruling Letter (NYRL) 880263, dated December 2, 1992, in which a
country of origin determination was issued for a bed linen set
manufactured in China, Indonesia and Mauritius. You have asked
Customs to review the portion of NYRL 880263 which determined the
country of origin status of the flat sheet. Upon review, this
office concurs with the holding in that ruling. Our analysis
follows.
FACTS:
The flat sheet at issue measures 66 x 96 inches. It is made
from a 55 percent cotton/ 45 percent polyester woven fabric. The
greige fabric for the flat sheet is sourced in China and sent to
Mauritius for further processing. The flat sheet is scoured,
bleached, printed, cut, sewn and packaged in Mauritius. No
information was provided as to whether the sheet was cut to
length in Mauritius, or to length and width. In NYRL 880263,
Customs determined that the country of origin of the flat sheet
was China.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Country of origin determinations are made pursuant to
Section 12.130 of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 12.130).
Section 12.130(b) of the Customs Regulations provides that a
textile product that is processed in more than one country or
territory shall be a product of that country or territory where
- 2
it last underwent a substantial transformation. A textile
product will be considered to have undergone a substantial
transformation if it has been transformed by means of substantial
manufacturing or processing operations into a new and different
article of commerce.
Section 12.130(d) of the Customs Regulations sets forth
criteria in determining whether a substantial transformation of a
textile product has taken place. This regulation states that
these criteria are not exhaustive; one or any combination of
criteria may be determinative, and additional factors may be
considered.
Section 12.130(d)(1) states that a new and different article
of commerce will usually result from a manufacturing or
processing operation if there is a change in:
(i) Commercial designation or identity;
(ii) Fundamental character;
(iii) Commercial use.
Section 12.130(d)(2) of the Customs Regulations states that
in determining whether merchandise has been subjected to
substantial manufacturing or processing operations, the following
will be considered:
(i) The physical change in the material or article;
(ii) The time involved in the manufacturing or processing;
(iii) The complexity of the manufacturing or processing;
(iv) The level or degree of skill and/or technology
required in the manufacturing or processing
operations;
(v) The value added to the article or material;
[emphasis added]
Section 12.130(e)(1) provides that an article or material
usually will be a product of a particular foreign territory or
country, or insular possession of the United States, when, prior
to importation into the United States, it has undergone in that
foreign territory or country or insular possession, any of the
following:
(i) Dyeing of fabric and printing when accompanied by two
or more of the following finishing operations:
bleaching, shrinking, fulling, napping, decating,
permanent stiffening, weighting, permanent embossing,
or moireing;
(ii) Spinning fibers into yarn;
- 3 -
(iii) Weaving, knitting or otherwise forming fabric;
(iv) Cutting of fabric into parts and the assembly of those
parts into the completed article; or
(v) substantial assembly by sewing and/or tailoring of
all cut pieces ...
[emphasis added]
Conversely, Section 12.130(e)(2) provides that, "[A]n
article or material usually will not be considered to be a
product of a particular foreign territory or country, or insular
possession of the U.S. by virtue of merely having undergone any
of the following:
(i) Simple combining operations, labeling, pressing,
cleaning or dry cleaning, or packaging operations, or
any combination thereof;
(ii) Cutting to length or width and hemming or overlocking
fabrics which are readily identifiable as being
intended for a particular commercial use;
(iii) Trimming and/or joining together by sewing, looping,
linking, or other means of attaching otherwise
completed knit-to-shape component parts even when
accompanied by other processes (washing, drying,
mending, etc.) normally incident to the assembly
process.
(iv) One or more finishing operations on yarns, fabrics, or
other textile articles, such as showerproofing,
superwashing, bleaching, decating, fulling, shrinking,
mercerizing, or similar operations; or
(v) Dyeing and/or printing of fabrics or yarns.
[emphasis added]
In the instant case, the fabric undergoes finishing
operations in Mauritius which consist of scouring and bleaching.
The fabric is also printed in Mauritius and cut, hemmed and
packaged there. Customs has consistently held that the type of
operations performed on the flat sheet in Mauritius do not
constitute a substantial manufacturing operation or process for
purposes of conferring country of origin status. See
Headquarters Ruling Letters (HRL's) 950780, dated August 14,
1992; 952450, dated December 15, 1992 (affirming HRL 950780);
734664, dated November 23, 1992. HRL 733787, dated March 14,
1991, held that flat sheets made from greige fabric from Pakistan
that was desized, scoured, shrunk, bleached, singed, sized,
finished, stentor dried, shrunk, calendered, cut and hemmed in
Sri Lanka was a product of Sri Lanka. This ruling was
retroactively revoked by HRL 734379 on April 27, 1992, and is no
longer precedential.
The finishing operations performed on the flat sheet in
Mauritius do not constitute a substantial manufacturing process
- 4 -
by mandate of Section 12.130(e)(2)(iv). Nor is the mere cutting
of fabric a substantial manufacturing process as set forth in
Section 12.130(e)(2)(ii). Similarly, printing of fabric does not
constitute a substantial manufacturing process. See Section
12.130(e)(2)(v). These operations are not significant enough in
terms of the amount of time they require, the skill and/or
technology necessitated, or the value they impart to the
merchandise to be deemed substantial manufacturing processes for
purposes of conferring country of origin.
These operations, taken in their entirety, also fail to
constitute a substantial manufacturing process. As the
performance of finishing operations is not a substantial
manufacturing process, the additional steps of merely printing
the fabric, performing simple cutting and hemming, and packaging
the sheet, do not impart the requisite amount of complexity.
Accordingly, as per Section 12.130(1)(iii), the country of origin
of the article at issue is where the fabric was woven: China.
HOLDING:
NYRL 880263 is affirmed.
The flat sheet is a product of Mauritius.
The holding set forth above applies only to the specific
factual situation and merchandise identified in the ruling
request. This position is clearly set forth in section
177.9(b)(1), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.9(b)(1). This
section states that a ruling letter is issued on the assumption
that all the information furnished in connection with the ruling
request and incorporated in the ruling letter, either directly,
by reference, or by implication, is accurate and complete in
every material respect. Should it subsequently be determined
that the information furnished is not complete and does not
comply with 19 CFR 177.9(b)(1), the ruling will be subject to
modification or revocation. In the event there is a change in
the facts previously furnished, this may affect the determination
of country of origin. Accordingly, it is recommended that a new
ruling request be submitted in accordance with section 177.2,
Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.2).
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division