HQ 951015: Protest No. 2704-91-103185; children's athletic shoes; subheading 6402.99.70; foxing-like band; high point rule; T.D. 83-116; T.D. 92-108; HRLs 088501 and 950759

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 951015

                        December 9, 1992

CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 951015 NLP

CATEGORY: Classification

TARIFF NO.: 6402.99.15

District Director
U.S. Customs Service
300 South Ferry Street Terminal Island
Room 2071
San Pedro, CA 90731

RE:  Protest No. 2704-91-103185; children's athletic shoes;
     subheading 6402.99.70; foxing-like band; high point rule;
     T.D. 83-116; T.D. 92-108; HRLs 088501 and 950759 

Dear Sir:

     This is in response to the Application for Further Review of
Protest No. 2704-91-103185, dated July 10, 1991, which pertains
to the tariff classification of children's athletic footwear
under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS). 

FACTS:

     The articles under consideration are boy's athletic shoes,
VSC lot 9802, in sizes 2-1/2 to 6.  The uppers and soles are made
of polyvinyl chloride (PVC).  Upon importation, the entry was
liquidated under subheading 6402.99.70, HTSUS, which provides for
"[o]ther footwear with outer soles and uppers of rubber or
plastics: [o]ther footwear: [o]ther: [o]ther: [o]ther, valued
over $3 but not over $6.50/pair."  The rate of duty is 90 cents
per pair + 37.5% ad valorem.

     The protestant contends that the shoes are classified in
subheading 6402.99.15, HTSUS, which provides for "[o]ther
footwear with outer soles and uppers of rubber or plastics:
[o]ther footwear: [o]ther: [h]aving uppers of which over 90
percent of the external surface area (including any accessories
or reinforcements such as those mentioned in note 4(a) to this
chapter) is rubber or plastics (except footwear having a foxing
or foxing-like band applied or molded at the shoe and overlapping
the upper...): [o]ther."  The rate of duty is 6% ad valorem.  

ISSUE:

     Does the boy's athletic shoe possess a foxing-like band?


LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     The classification of merchandise under the HTSUS is
governed by the General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's).  GRI 1
provides that classification shall be determined first in
accordance with the terms of the headings of the tariff and any
relative section or chapter notes. 

     In deciding the classification of footwear of this type, we
must determine whether the footwear has as one of its constituent
parts a "foxing-like band."  Treasury Decision (T.D.) 83-116, 17
Cust. Bull. 229 (1983) set forth guidelines relating to the
characteristics of foxing or foxing-like bands.  The relevant
characteristics at issue in this case read as follows:

     4.   A foxing-like band must be applied or molded at the
          sole and must overlap the upper.

     5.   A foxing-like band must encircle or substantially
          encircle the entire shoe.

     7.   Unit molded footwear is considered to have a foxing-
          like band if a vertical overlap of 1/4 inch or more
          exists from where the upper and the outsole initially
          meet, measured on a vertical plane.  If this vertical
          overlap is less than 1/4 of an inch, such footwear is
          presumed not to have a foxing-like band.

     In Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 088510, dated April 29,
1991, Customs held that children's shoes having an overlap of
3/16 inch or more around 40% of their perimeters may possess
foxing-like bands. 

     The subject children's shoes were liquidated under the
premise that they possessed a foxing-like band because of varying
amounts of vertical overlap along the perimeter of the shoe.  It
should be noted that in those instances where there are
variations in overlap, the "high point" rule may come into
effect.  Briefly, this rule means that where the degree of
vertical overlap on a unit molded bottom varies, the amount of
vertical overlap is considered to be at the "highest point."  

     The "high point" rule is not used in cases where a separate
sole sample is submitted with a sample of the completed shoe. 
See, HRL 088510.  In this case, the protestant submitted an
entire shoe and an unattached sole.  However, the sole sample was
different from the sole on the shoe sample and, therefore, has no
bearing on the analysis of this case.  



     Moreover, the "high point" rule should not be applied where
it can be determined without much difficulty that a 3/16 inch
overlap by the sole encircles less than 40% of the perimeter of
the child's shoe.  It is our opinion that the "high point" rule
should be primarily relied on in those situations where there are
multiple variations in the amount of overlap and measurement that 
would require numerous cuts at various places along the perimeter
of the shoe.  However, based on HRL 950759, dated March 18, 1992,
which dealt with the classification of women's athletic shoes,
the high point rule should not be applied if there is only one
variation, called a wave, in the amount of overlap. 

     In this case, the "high point" rule should not be applied
because there is only one variation, a wave, in the amount of
overlap.  Therefore, in order for the band of the boy's athletic
shoe to be deemed a foxing-like band, it must encircle between 40
to 60% of the perimeter of the shoe and have the appearance or
function of a foxing-like band or it must encircle 60% or more of
the perimeter of the shoe.  Custom's position concerning the 40-
60% rule was recently reaffirmed in T.D. 92-108, dated November
25, 1992, 26 Cust. Bull. 48 (1992).

     In this instance, a foxing-like band does not exist because
the overlap of the upper by the sole is less than 3/16 inch over
at least 60.1% of the perimeter of the shoe.  With unit molded
footwear in children's sizes an overlap of less than 3/16 inch is
not sufficient to create a foxing-like band.  See, HRL 088510. 
Therefore, the boy's athletic shoes are classified in subheading
6402.99.15, HTSUS.
     
HOLDING:

     The protest should be granted.  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