us-cbp-cross-rulings-hq-083935•HQ 083935: Reconsideration of New York Letter 836411 of February 22, 1989, concerning the tariff classification of a bouffant cap
HQ 083935: Reconsideration of New York Letter 836411 of February 22, 1989, concerning the tariff classification of a bouffant cap
us-cbp-cross-rulings-hq-083935HQ 083935: Reconsideration of New York Letter 836411 of February 22, 1989, concerning the tariff classification of a bouffant capGuidance
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 083935
July 7, 1989
CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 083935 JLJ; 836411
CATEGORY: Classification
TARIFF NO.: 6505.90.8075; 6505.90.8015
Mr. Malcolm George
Keystone Adjustable Cap Company, Inc.
1591 Hylton Road
Pennsauken, New Jersey 08110
RE: Reconsideration of New York Letter 836411 of February 22,
1989, concerning the tariff classification of a bouffant cap
Dear Mr. George:
You requested a reconsideration of New York Letter 836411 of
February 22, 1989, concerning certain bouffant caps from Taiwan.
You submitted samples of the caps.
FACTS:
The samples are bouffant caps made of disposable nonwoven
man-made polypropylene fibers. We note that polypropylene fibers
are considered to be man-made textile fibers for tariff purposes.
See Chapter Note 1(a) of Chapter 54, HTSUSA, covering man-made
filaments. They have elastic bands sewn in the edge to hold them
in place and give them shape. Neither of the caps has a peak nor
a visor. They are similar in shape and style to shower caps.
New York Letter 836411 held that the caps were classified
under the provision for hats and other headgear, knitted or
crocheted, or made up from lace, felt or other textile fabric, in
the piece (but not in strips), whether or not lined or trimmed;
hair-nets of any material, whether or not lined or trimmed:
other: of man-made fibers: other: not in part of braid: other:
other, in subheading 6505.90.8075, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States Annotated (HTSUSA), dutiable at the general
rate of 8 percent ad valorem plus 22 cents per kilogram. Textile
category 659 applies to merchandise classified in this
subheading.
-2-
You argue that the caps are used in clinics, laboratories
and hospitals and that they should therefore be classified under
the specific statistical provision for nonwoven disposable
headgear designed for use in hospitals, clinics, laboratories or
contaminated areas, in subheading 6505.90.8030, HTSUSA. We note
that the general duty rate for this subheading is 8 percent ad
valorem, but that no textile category applies to this subheading.
ISSUE:
What is the proper tariff classification of the instant
bouffant caps?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
You argue that this style cap is frequently worn in the
operating room of hospitals. You state that this cap is worn in
all laboratories, clinics and medical research facilities. You
attach copies of invoices to indicate that hospitals, clinics and
laboratories do buy these caps. In short, you argue that the
instant bouffant caps are designed for use in hospitals, clinics
or laboratories and should be classified accordingly in
subheading 6505.90.8030, HTSUSA.
Classification of products under the HTSUSA is governed by
the General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's). GRI 1 provides that
classification is determined first in accordance with the terms
of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes.
The subject headwear is clearly classifiable in subheading
6505.90.80, HTSUSA, because it is of man-made fiber, not knitted
or crocheted or made up from knitted or crocheted fabric, and not
in part of braid. We must decide which statistical breakout
under subheading 6505.90.80, HTSUSA, applies in order to
determine whether this headwear is subject to quota. Subheading
6505.90.8030, HTSUSA, provides for "nonwoven disposable headgear
designed for use in hospitals, clinics, laboratories, or
contaminated areas," and is not subject to quota. Subheading
6505.90.8075, HTSUSA, provides for all other headwear which is
classifiable in subheading 6505.90.80, HTSUSA, and is not "for
babies" (subheading 6505.90.8045, HTSUSA). Subheading
6505.90.8075, HTSUSA, is subject to quota under textile category
659.
The language "designed for use in hospitals, clinics,
laboratories, or contaminated areas" is identical to the language
found in the equivalent provision under the TSUSA, item 703.14.
-3-
Another provision under the TSUSA which uses the same language in
connection with nonwoven disposable apparel is item 384.9305,
TSUSA. Item 384.9305 is the subject of Headquarters Ruling
Letter (HRL) 080056, dated August 27, 1987, which is instructive
in its discussion of the "designed for use" language. The
merchandise at issue in that ruling was a nonwoven disposable
coverall which the manufacturer claimed was principally used in
hospitals, clinics, and other health care facilities. Customs
determined that the coverall was not eligible for classification
in item 384.9305, which provides for nonwoven disposable apparel
"designed for use in hospitals, clinics, laboratories, or
contaminated areas," because it had no particular features making
it suitable for those uses. Instead, it was found that the
coverall was a multi-purpose garment which could be used in many
different environments, such as homes, yards and garages. This
interpretation of a "designed for" tariff provision was set forth
in HRL 069099, dated April 7, 1982, which stated that such
provisions generally include only articles designed for a single
purpose.
In HRL 080056, Customs relied on several court decisions
which interpret the "designed for use" language in prior tariff
schedules. We look to those court decisions as instructive in
interpreting the HTSUSA because (1) the language of subheading
6505.90.8030, HTSUSA, is identical to the language in the
equivalent provision under the TSUSA, item 703.14, and (2) there
are no provisions in the legal notes of the HTSUSA which require
an interpretation of the "designed for use" language which is
inconsistent to that used by the courts. See H. Conf. Rep. No.
100-576, 100th Cong., 2nd Sess., 549-50, reprinted in 1988 U.S.
Code Cong. & Ad. News 1547, 1582-83.
In United States v. Faber, 7 Ct. Cust. Appls. 406, T.D.
36980 (1917), the phrase "designed to be worn on apparel or
carried on or about or attached to the person," found in
paragraph 356 of the Tariff Act of 1913, was interpreted to
include only articles that were "peculiarly and specially fitted
for being carried on or about the person and devoted to such
use." In Plus Computing Machines, Inc. v. United States, 44 CCPA
160, C.A.D. 655 (1957), the court held that the phrase found in
paragraph 372 of the Tariff Act of 1930, i.e., "specially
constructed for" a particular purpose, when used in reference to
an article, means that the article includes particular features
which adapt it for that purpose. The court noted that the
purpose need not be the sole or principal one served by the
article. The court held that a machine with structural features
which served the specific purpose of enabling it to multiply and
-4-
divide and which incorporated those features solely for that
purpose was "specially constructed for multiplying and dividing."
This machine was clearly distinct from one designed for no
purpose other than addition or subtraction. Further, in
Stonewall Trading Co. v. United States, 64 Cust. Ct. 482, C.D.
4023 (1970), the Customs Court held that gloves, which were
specially designed for use in skiing, were classified in item
734.97, TSUSA, the tariff provision for ski equipment. The court
found that the gloves possessed special features which
distinguished them from ordinary gloves.
With regard to the instant bouffant caps, we find that they
are not classifiable in subheading 6505.90.8030 because they do
not have special design features which distinguish them from the
same style hats used in beauty salons to enclose the hair and
used by employees in restaurants and bakeries to prevent hair and
dandruff from falling into food. Hats used for the latter
purposes are also constructed to be large so as to enclose all of
the wearer's hair. They are designed to be worn for long periods
of time and are made of similarly strong nonwoven material which
does not allow the passage of hair particles or dandruff.
We note New York letters 825518, dated November 18, 1987,
and 829439, dated June 20, 1988, which classified similarly
described bouffant style disposable hats in subheading
6505.90.8075, HTSUSA. In New York Letter 829439, the nurse's cap
was found not to be designed specifically for use in hospitals.
Instead, it was determined that the style of hat was used in
hospitals, beauty parlors, and bakeries. Similarly, Customs
Headquarters Ruling Letter 081415 of May 2, 1989, classified
similar bouffant caps in subheading 6505.90.8075, HTSUSA, because
it found no special design features adapting them for use in
hospitals, clinics, laboratories or contaminated areas.
The controlling factor for the instant cap is whether the
article has design features which peculiarly adapt it for use in
hospitals, clinics, laboratories or contamination areas. Inas-
much as we find no such special design features in the instant
caps, they are not classified in subheading 6505.90.8030, HTSUSA.
We note that on July 1, 1989, new tariff language became
effective. Effective July 1, 1989, your bouffant caps will be
classified under the provision for hats and other headgear...:
other: of man-made fibers: other: not in part of braid: nonwoven
disposable headgear without peaks or visors, in subheading
6505.90.8015, HTSUSA. The general rate of duty is 8 percent ad
valorem plus 22 cents per kilogram, but no textile category
applies to this subheading.
-5-
HOLDING:
For the foregoing reasons, the instant bouffant caps were
classified through June 30, 1989, in subheading 6505.90.8075,
HTSUSA. Textile category 659 applies to this subheading. New
York Letter 836411 is affirmed through June 30, 1989.
On and after July 1, 1989, the instant caps are classified
in subheading 6505.90.8015, HTSUSA. New York Letter 836411 is
modified accordingly as of July 1, 1989.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division
JLJohnson:tj:typed 07/03/89
6cc: N.Y. Seaport (NIS-349)
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.