HQ 956607

DECEMBER 1, 1994

CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 956607 JAS

CATEGORY: Classification

TARIFF NO.: 8704.10.50, 9903.87.00

District Director of Customs

1 East Bay Street

Savannah, GA. 31401

RE: PRD 1703-94-100065; Dumper Cab Chassis and Dumper Bodies

Imported Together; Heading 8704, Heading 8707; Complete

but Unassembled Dump Trucks, GRI 2(a), HQ 950221, HQ 950431,

HQ 952850

Dear Sir:

This is our decision on Protest 1703-94-100065, filed

against your action in classifying certain dumper cab chassis and

dumper bodies from Australia. The entries were liquidated on

March 11 and 25, 1994, and this protest timely filed on June 3,

1994\.

FACTS:

The merchandise is four motor chassis with enclosed cabs for

dump trucks or dumper cab chassis, and five dumper bodies.

Originally, five Euclid R50 off-highway dump trucks were

manufactured in Canada, shipped to Australia where they were used

for some time, then disassembled and the components sold to the

importer/protestant. Whether by coincidence, design or

inadvertence, the individual components were shipped aboard the

same vessel, so that they arrived and were offloaded at Savannah

at the same time.

The four cab chassis were entered separately under the

provision in heading 8704 for cab chassis, and the five dumper

bodies entered as other bodies of heading 8707. The import

specialist determined that the importation consisted of four

unassembled dump trucks and liquidated the entries under a

provision in heading 8704 for dumpers designed for off-highway

use. The fifth dumper body remained classified in the provision

for other bodies. This classification is not being protested.

\- 2 -

The provisions under consideration are as follows:

8704 Motor vehicles for the transport of goods:

8704.10 Dumpers designed for off-highway use:

8704.10.10 Cab Chassis\...4 percent

8704.10.50 Other\...25 percent under 9903.87.00

\* \* \* \*

8707 Bodies (including cabs), for the motor

vehicles of headings 8701 to 8705:

8707.90 Other:

8707.90.50 Other\...4 percent

ISSUE:

Whether cab chassis and dumper bodies imported together are

complete but unassembled dumpers of heading 8704.

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 Harmonized Commodity Description And Coding System

Explanatory Notes (ENs) constitute the Customs Cooperation

Council\'s official interpretation of the Harmonized System.

While not legally binding on the contracting parties, and

therefore not dispositive, the ENs provide a commentary on the

scope of each heading of the Harmonized System and are thus

useful in ascertaining the classification of merchandise under

the System. Customs believes the notes should always be

consulted. See T.D. 89-80. 54 Fed. Reg. 35127, 35128 (Aug. 23,

1989).

The General Explanatory Note to Rule 2(a) states in part

that complete or finished articles presented unassembled or

disassembled are to be classified in the same heading as the

assembled article. When goods are so presented, it is usually

for reasons such as requirements or convenience of packing,

handling or transport. Articles are to be considered unassembled

\- 3 -

for purposes of this rule provided only simple assembly

operations are involved. The EN continues by stating unassembled

components of an article that are in excess of the number

required for the article when complete are to be classified

separately.

Protestant\'s counsel maintains that because breakbulk

freight rates are higher than roll on-roll off (RORO) rates, it

was more expensive to ship the components separately rather than

assembled. For this reason, the manner of shipment has no

apparent relation to the requirements of packing, handling or

transport. Counsel also maintains that the dumper cab chassis

and dumper bodies are to be classified separately because they

are routinely imported this way for legitimate duty avoidance

purposes and because the components have separate commercial

identities. While dumper cab chassis are heavy-duty construction

vehicle components capable of continuous use over a long period

of time, dumper bodies wear out quickly and must be replaced on a

regular basis. New bodies are compatible with used cab chassis

and used bodies can be matched with other cab chassis for less

vigorous applications. For this reason, protestant and others in

the industry often buy and sell used cab chassis and dumper

bodies separately and customarily hold them in inventory until a

buyer can be found. Thus, individual components may be sold

separately or may be stripped down and sold as parts. However,

just as often a cab chassis may be combined with a dumper body if

a customer needs a complete dump truck.

A number of cases are cited for the proposition that the

instant components should be separately classified. In HQ

952850, dated April 14, 1993, ball point pen parts in one

shipment which at times were intermingled with parts from other

shipments to make complete pens of a desired color were held to

constitute bulk inventory and the components separately

classified. It appears that none of the components in one

shipment could be assembled into complete pens of a desired

color. HQ 952850 is clearly distinguishable because the

components in issue here are sufficient to assemble complete dump

trucks. In HQ 950221, dated November 22, 1991, bulk shipments of

numerous computer parts and components from consolidated

shipments arriving together were held to be separately

classifiable because the manner of importation was not for

convenience of packing, handling or transport. HQ 950431, dated

December 5, 1991, held that parts of hearing aids were to be

separately classified because of a lack of evidence that the

importation was anything other than bulk shipments of numerous

components or parts. HQ 950221 and HQ 950431 are likewise

\- 4 -

distinguishable because the evidence in those cases showed that

the importations were nothing more than bulk shipments of

numerous components and parts.

In this case protestant has not conclusively demonstrated

that at the time of importation the cab chassis and dumper bodies

were strictly bulk component parts destined for inventory. In

fact, the record here may reasonably be interpreted as supporting

the opposite conclusion. In two instances cab chassis and dumper

bodies were reassembled after importation and sold as off-highway

dumpers. Unlike the cited cases, there are only two components

involved here, with cab chassis being complete subassemblies

clearly dedicated to receiving dumper bodies. Moreover, the cab

chassis and dumper bodies at one time comprised complete and

fully functional dump trucks which were later disassembled into

their constituent component parts.

The facts of this case are consistent with the statement in

the Explanatory Note to GRI 2(a) that complete or finished

articles presented unassembled or disassembled are to be

classified in the same heading as the assembled article.

HOLDING:

Under the authority of GRI 2(a), the dumper cab chassis and

dumper bodies are unassembled dumpers of heading 8704. They are

classifiable in subheading 8704.10.50, HTSUS. The extra dumper

body is classifiable in subheading 8707.90.50, HTSUS.

The protest should be DENIED. In accordance with Section

3A(11)(b) of Customs Directive 099 3550-065, dated August 4,

1993, Subject: Revised Protest Directive, you should mail this

decision, together with the Customs Form 19, to the protestant no

later than 60 days from the date of this letter. Any

reliquidation of the entry or entries in accordance with the

decision must be accomplished prior to mailing the decision.

Sixty days from the date of the decision 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