HQ 084318: Tariff Status of Certain Woven Glass Fabric

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 084318

                         APRIL 20, 1990



CLA-2 CO:R:C:G  084318  PR

CATEGORY:  Classification

TARIFF NO.:  7019.20.5000; 338.27

Area Director of Customs
New York Seaport
6 World Trade Center
New York, New York  10048

RE:  Tariff Status of Certain Woven Glass Fabric

Dear Sir:

     This ruling is in response to Internal Advice Request
No. 6/89, which was initiated by Mohawk Customs and Shipping
Corp. on behalf of T.B.A. Industrial Products Ltd.,
Lancashire, England, and concerns the classification of
certain woven glass fiber fabrics.

FACTS:

     The submitted samples are woven fabrics made from glass
fiber yarns.  Their trade name is Fortaglas and they are used
in a variety of applications requiring heat resistance.  The
natural color of glass fibers is white; however, as imported,
the fabrics are varying shades of brown because they have
been impregnated with inorganic chemicals to increase their
thermal resistance.

ISSUE:

     The issue presented by the instant inquiry is whether
the subject fabrics are classifiable as colored glass fiber
fabrics, in Subheading 7019.20.50, Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), and item 338.27,
Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS), or as glass
fiber fabrics, not colored, in Subheading 7019.20.20,
HTSUSA, and item 338.25, TSUS.

                             -2-

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     It is asserted by the inquirer that the merchandise
should not be classified as "colored" because the change in
color is an unavoidable end result of the processes necessary
to the fabrics' intended functions and that the color confers
no benefit to the product.

Classification under the TSUS

     Glass fiber fabrics were classifiable under the TSUS,
which ceased being in effect January 1, 1989, as textiles and
subject to the definition of "colored" contained in Headnote
2(b), Schedule 3, TSUS.  That headnote defines "colored" as
follows.

     the term "colored, as used in connection with
     textile materials or textile articles means that
     they have been subjected to a process such as, but
     not limited to, dyeing, staining, painting,
     printing, or stenciling, in which color is imparted
     at any stage of manufacture to all or part of the
     fiber, yarn, fabric, or other textile article,
     except identification yarns and except marking in
     or on selvages.

     Since the subject fabrics have had color imparted by a
process performed during their manufacture, those fabrics are
"colored" within the purview of Headnote 2(b).

Classification under the HTSUS

     Under the HTSUS, which superceded the TSUS, glass fiber
fabrics are not classifiable as textiles.  Another
difference between the TSUS and the HTSUS is that the HTSUS
has no specific definition for the word "colored".  In
Section XI, HTSUS, where most of the provisions for textiles
and textile products are located, Subheading Note 1 contains
definitions for "Dyed woven fabrics" and "Woven fabrics of
yarns of different colors".  However, the subject fabric
does not fall within either of those categories and neither
of those definitions is helpful in this circumstance.

     In T.D. 19423 (1898), it was determined that "colored"
includes the imparting of color by methods other than dyeing.
Therefore, the cotton fabrics which were the subject of that
decision and which, because of the process of mercerization,
were noticeably darker than unprocessed fabrics, were ruled
to be "colored" for tariff purposes.

                             -3-


     [C]otton cloth which may be "colored," or its color
     changed by any process of manufacture from the natural
     color, tint, or tinge of the gray cloth, becomes subject
     to the same rate of duty as though the change in color
     had been effected by the process of dyeing.  This is no
     less the case whether the purpose of the processes [sic]
     is to change the color or such change is merely an
     incident or accident of that process.

     In T.D. 32419 (1912), unbleached mercerized cotton cloth
was determined to be not colored because the existing tariff
distinguished between colored and mercerized fabrics.  In
Davison v. United States, 2 Ct. Cust. Appls. 78, T.D. 31631
(1911), the court held that the word colored is a
"participial adjective" and that the origin of the color or
the method of its production does not enter into the
essential meaning of the term.  See also T.D. 35747.

HOLDING:

     In view of the above, the subject merchandise is
presently classifiable under the provision for colored woven
fabrics of glass fibers, in Subheading 7019.20.50, HTSUS.
Prior to January 1, 1989, the fabric was classifiable under
the provision for colored woven glass fiber fabrics, in item
338.27, TSUS.

     A copy of this ruling should be furnished to the
initiator of this Internal Advice Request.


                              Sincerely,




                              Jerry Laderberg
                              Acting Director
                              Commercial Rulings Division