HQ 957724: Internal Advice 62/94; Aluminized Steel Sheet in Coils; Flat-Rolled Products of Iron or Nonalloy Steel Plated or Coated With Aluminum; Flat-Rolled Products of Other Alloy Steel, Heading 7225; Chapter 72, Note 1(f) Dear District Director: Your memorandum, dated September 29, 1994 (CLA-2-DD:CO:JF),initiated this request for internal advice, as requested by theimporter in his letter to you, dated August 8, 1994. At issue is the classification of certain aluminized steel sheet in coils, from Japan. FACTS: The merchandise is steel sheet in coils coated or platedwith aluminum to render it corrosion resistant. This merchandisewas entered under the provision for other flat-rolled products ofiron or nonalloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, plated orco

Native CBP ruling rendition. Applicability is fact-specific; modification/revocation relationships and original publisher date are retained. Publisher sentinel year0001 means unknown date, not a historical legal adoption.

                                 
                           HQ 957724
                                
                                       AUGUST 1, 1995
                                
                    CLA-2 R:C:M  957724 JAS
                                
                  CATEGORY:    Classification
                                
                    TARIFF NO.:  7210.60.00
                                
                  District Director of Customs
                 2nd. & Chestnut Sts., Rm. 102
                    Philadelphia, PA 19106 
                                
RE:  Internal Advice 62/94; Aluminized Steel Sheet in Coils;      
     Flat-Rolled Products of Iron or Nonalloy Steel Plated or     
      Coated With Aluminum; Flat-Rolled Products of Other Alloy
             Steel, Heading 7225; Chapter 72, Note 1(f)
                                 
                    Dear District Director:
                                
     Your memorandum, dated September 29, 1994 (CLA-2-DD:CO:JF),
initiated this request for internal advice, as requested by the
importer in his letter to you, dated August 8, 1994.  At issue is
 the classification of certain aluminized steel sheet in coils,
                          from Japan.
                                
                             FACTS:
                                
     The merchandise is steel sheet in coils coated or plated
with aluminum to render it corrosion resistant.  This merchandise
was entered under the provision for other flat-rolled products of
iron or nonalloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, plated or
coated with aluminum, in subheading 7210.60.00, Harmonized Tariff
 Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).  Your office noted that
 the goods were invoiced as aluminized steel sheet in coils, a
  product that is customarily nonalloyed, and that the invoice
   contained a reference to American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) specification A463/83, a standard specification
 for steel sheet, cold-rolled, aluminum coated, types 1 and 2. 
   The chemical requirements under this specification are not
 sufficient to make the steel alloyed for tariff purposes.  In
addition, a mill certificate submitted with this entry indicated
                the merchandise was nonalloyed.
                                
     The internal advice applicant maintains the merchandise is
alloyed for tariff purposes and is classifiable under subheading
7225.90.00, a provision for flat-rolled products of other alloy
steel.  A computer error is given as the reason the proper alloy
content was not noted on the mill certificate.  The manufacturer
submitted a Commodity Description Sheet as an alternative method
  of verifying alloy content.  However, there is no indication                              - 2 -

whether this document was submitted with the entry summary or
subsequently.  After release of the steel from Customs custody,
samples from the shipment covered by this entry were subsequently
recovered from the customer.  Chemical analysis by an independent
laboratory purports to confirm that the sample contains the
requisite percent, by weight, of titanium, to qualify the steel
as alloyed for tariff purposes.  The laboratory report is not a
part of this file.  Revised inspection/mill certificates were
obtained from the Japanese supplier that purport to establish
that the steel sheet is alloyed.
     
     The provisions under consideration are as follows:

     7210           Flat-rolled products of iron or nonalloy
                    steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, clad,
                    plated or coated:


     7210.60.00          Plated or coated with aluminum
                         ...5.8 percent      

                        *               *              *              *

     7225           Flat-rolled products of other alloy steel, of
                    a width of 600 mm or more:

     7225.90.00          Other...5.2 percent

ISSUE:

     Whether the aluminized steel sheet in coils is considered
alloyed for tariff purposes.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:
     
     Merchandise is classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) in accordance with the
General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs).  GRI 1 states in part
that for legal purposes, classification shall be determined
according to the terms of the headings and any relative section
or chapter notes, and provided the headings or notes do not
require otherwise, according to GRIs 2 through 6.  

     The term Other alloy steel includes, among others, steels
not complying with the definition of stainless steel and
containing by weight 0.05 percent or more of titanium.  Chapter
72, Note 1(f), HTSUS.

     While aluminized steel sheet in coils is customarily
nonalloyed, it is not uncommon for an importer to add an alloying
element or elements in sufficient amounts as to require
classification under a provision with a lower rate of duty, or                              - 3 -

for other legitimate duty avoidance purposes.  The courts have
sanctioned an importer's right to fashion his merchandise in this
way provided it is in fact described by the claimed provision. 
This is a corollary to the established rule of construction that
merchandise is classified and assessed with duty in its condition
as imported, that is, when it is brought within the Customs
territory with intent to unlade.  Ordinarily, therefore, it is
the evidence of record at the time merchandise enters the Customs
territory that determines its tariff status.  

     This should not be interpreted as stating that no evidence
submitted after the merchandise is released from Customs custody
may be considered to establish its condition as imported.  In
administrative proceedings Customs has considerable latitude in
evaluating in a light most favorable to the importer or other
party seeking relief all credible evidence as to the condition of
the merchandise as imported.  

     With respect to the entry in question, the only objective
evidence of the condition of the merchandise as imported is
reflected by the invoices, mill certificates, and other documents
available to Customs officers which showed the steel to be
nonalloyed.  Revised mill certificates and post-importation
statements from the importer and others that contradict, rather
than corroborate, evidence already in the record, should be
accorded little or no probative value.  However, notwithstanding
the samples were produced after the merchandise was released from
Customs custody, the fact they were found to be alloyed should be
considered an important factor in establishing the condition of
the merchandise as imported, but only if the concerned import
specialist determines there is sufficient evidence that the
samples came from the shipment covered by the entry. 

HOLDING:

     The aluminized steel sheet in issue is to be classified in
subheading 7210.60.00, HTSUS, or in subheading 7225.90.00, HTSUS,
as appropriate, in accordance with these guidelines.

     You should mail this decision to the internal advice
applicant no later than 60 days from the date of this letter.  On
that date the Office of Regulations and Rulings will take steps
to make the decision available to Customs personnel via the
Customs Rulings Module in ACS and to the public via the Diskette
Subscription Service, the Freedom of Information Act, and other
public access channels.
                              
                              Sincerely,


                              John Durant, Director
                              Commercial Rulings Division