United States International Trade Commision Rulings And Harmonized Tariff Schedule
faqs.org  Rulings By Number  Rulings By Category  Tariff Numbers
faqs.org > Rulings and Tariffs Home > Rulings By Number > 1991 HQ Rulings > HQ 0222493 - HQ 0544452 > HQ 0222780

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

HQ 222780

January 8, 1991

DRA-4-CO:R:C:E 222780 CB


Philip Yale Simons, Esq.
Freeman, Wasserman & Schneider
90 John Street
New York, New York 10038

RE: Request for reconsideration of HQ 222507 issued August 20, 1990 under 19 U.S.C. 1313(a)

Dear Mr. Simons:

This is in reply to your letter of October 17, 1990, on behalf of Dole Packaged Foods Company, a division of Castle and Cook Inc. In our ruling HQ 222507, dated August 20, 1990, issued to your client's broker RADIX International, Inc., we were of the opinion that the mere addition of an anti-foaming agent to a batch of imported concentrated pineapple juice precluded the application of same condition drawback. You submitted additional facts and requested a ruling whether they constitute a manufacture for drawback (19 U.S.C. 1313(a)).


The merchandise in issue is imported concentrated pineapple juice processed by a blending process to obtain a concentrate with a specific degree Brix and acid content. In addition, dimethylpolysiloxane is added as an anti-foaming agent to control foaming when the concentrate is further processed into single strength juice.


Whether blending different batches of imported concentrated pineapple juice to make a concentrate with specific Brix and acid values and adding an anti-foaming agent to the blended pineapple juice concentrate results in a product which is eligible for drawback under 19 U.S.C. 1313(a)?


Section 313(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1313(a)), provides that upon the exportation of articles manufactured or produced in the United States with the use of imported merchandise, ninety-nine percent of the duties paid upon the merchandise so used shall be refunded as drawback.

In C.S.D. 83-90, Customs Headquarters found that the blending of oils to a batch of designated concentrated orange juice for manufacturing (COJM) was a manufacture or production for drawback purposes. The oils were blended solely to mask the "cardboard off flavor" of the concentrate. Similarly, in the instant case, the blending of the concentrates to obtain specific Brix and acid values appears to change the character of the blendstocks from the imported pineapple juice. Further, the addition of the anti-foaming agent is required in order to produce a commercially accepted product. You have stated that the presence of foam prevents the proper sealing of the chilled cartons into which the juice is packaged which results in leakage and accelerated product degradation. Thus, since the pineapple juice concentrate exported is a commercially accepted product whereas the imported juice is not, there is a new and different article. Therefore, the pineapple juice concentrate exported is eligible for manufacturing drawback.


The blending of concentrates to change Brix and acid values, together with the blending of an anti-foaming agent to pineaple juice concentrate, in order to produce a commercially accepted product, constitutes a manufacture for purposes of the drawback law under 19 U.S.C. 1313(a). You should submit, for approval, a drawback contract which describes the manufacturing process in detail.


Previous Ruling Next Ruling