HQ 954229: Country of origin of fitted crib sheets

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 954229

                        September 2, 1993

CLA-2  CO:R:C:T 954229 CAB

CATEGORY:  Classification

Knox White, Esq.
Haynsworth, Marion, McKay & Guerard
P.O. Box 2048
Greenville, SC 29602

RE:  Country of origin of fitted crib sheets

Dear Mr. White:

     This is in response to your inquiry of May 5, 1993, on
behalf of your client, Gerber Childrenswear, requesting a country
of origin ruling on cotton crib sheets.  The merchandise in
question will be entered through the ports of Charleston and
Savannah.  A sample was submitted for examination.

FACTS:

     A greige fabric will be manufactured in China and exported
to the United States for further processing.  The processing in
the United States includes scouring, bleaching, adding optical
whiteners and softeners, dyeing, and drying.  The white bleached
fabric will then be cut at the top and bottom (width), sewn,
elastic will be fitted and attached on all four corners, folded,
and packaged.

ISSUE:

     What is the country of origin of the merchandise in
question?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     Country of origin determinations for textile products are
subject to Section 12.130, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 12.130). 
Section 12.130 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 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), Customs Regulations, sets forth criteria
for determining whether a substantial transformation of a textile
product has taken place.  This regulation states 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), Customs Regulations, 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 or (iii)  Commercial use.

     Section 12.130(d)(2), Customs Regulations, states that for
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

     (v)     The value added to the article or material  

     An article or material usually will be a product of a
particular foreign territory or country when it has undergone
prior to the importation into the U.S. in that foreign territory
or country 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.

                        *     *     *

     When fabric is cut to length and width (four sides) and
hemmed to construct a sheet, a new and different article of
commerce is created.  However, in order for a substantial
transformation to result within the purview of Section 12.130,
there must be additional processing that is sufficiently complex
so as to constitute a substantial manufacturing operation. 
Merely cutting fabric on two sides, hemming, and adding elastic
is a simple processing operation.  When making a determination as
to whether fabric used to make sheets has been substantially
transformed, the minimum processing required is cutting the
fabric to length and width.  After the fabric has been cut on
four sides, Customs assesses the additional processing and
determines whether the processing amounts to a substantial
manufacturing operation.    

     In prior cases, Customs has evaluated the degree of skill,
value, and amount of time expended to manufacture sheets and made
substantial transformation determinations accordingly.  In
Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 952909, dated April 12, 1993,
Customs concluded that fabric that had been cut to length and
width, coupled with the additional processing required to attach
piping to flat sheets amounted to a substantial manufacturing
operation.  In HRL 953477, dated May 18, 1993, Customs
distinguished fitted sheets that had been cut to length and width
and fitted sheets that had merely been cut on two sides.  Customs
applied the criteria stipulated in Section 12.130 and concluded
that merely cutting fabric to length, hemming, and adding elastic
to the corners did not amount to a substantial manufacturing
operation.  Customs evaluated the processing involved in
manufacturing the fitted sheets that had been cut to both length
and width and decided that the processing involved amounted to a
substantial manufacturing operation.  

     In this instance, the material used to make the fitted crib
sheet has only been cut to width.  In light of prior Customs
ruling, it is clear that the processing involved in constructing
the subject fitted sheets does not amount to a substantial
manufacturing operation within the purview of Section 12.130(d). 

     To comply with Section 12.130(e)(1)(i), a fabric must be
both dyed and printed, as well as being subject to the other
required processing.  See, HRL 089230, dated May 10, 1991, where
the subject merchandise was greige fabric that had been produced
in China, scoured, bleached, printed, and pre-shrunk in Hong
Kong, and finally cut, hemmed, and packaged in the Philippines. 
Customs stated that none of the processing which the fabric was
subjected to after it was formed in China resulted in a
substantial transformation.  In this case, the greige fabric used
to make the fitted sheets is not dyed and printed in addition to
other processing in any single country.  Since this type of
processing is a requirement of Section 12.130(e)(1)(i), the
merchandise in question underwent its last substantial
transformation in China, the country in which the fabric was
manufactured.

     In your submission you refer to HRL 733787, dated March 14,
1991, where Customs concluded that greige fabric manufactured in
Pakistan, exported to Sri Lanka where it was cut on four sides
(length and width), hemmed, and converted into fitted sheets
underwent its last substantial transformation in Sri Lanka.  You
state that the processing of the subject fitted sheet in HRL
733787 is virtually identical to the processing done to the
fitted crib sheet in this instance.  There is an important
difference in the processing which you fail to acknowledge.  This
important distinction is that the fitted sheet of HRL 733787 had
been cut on four sides (length and width) and the fitted crib
sheet at issue has only been cut on two sides (width).  As stated
above, the minimum requirement for a sheet to be substantially
transformed in a second country is cutting to both length and
width coupled with additional processing.  Consequently, the
fitted crib sheet at issue does not undergo a substantial
transformation in the United States. 

HOLDING:

     The country of origin of the fitted crib sheet is China.  

     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 of 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