[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 22, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-6496]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: March 22, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

19 CFR Part 175

[T.D. 94-22]

 

Decision on Domestic Interested Party Petition Concerning 
Classification of Load Roller Products for Fork Lift Trucks

AGENCY: U.S. Customs Service, Department of the Treasury.

ACTION: Final interpretive rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document advises the public of Customs decision granting 
a domestic interested party petition concerning the classification of 
certain load roller products for fork lift trucks. Customs has 
previously ruled that the products were classified as parts of fork 
lift trucks in heading 8431, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States (HTSUS). The petition requests a determination by Customs that 
the products be classified as radial ball bearings in heading 8482, 
HTSUS. After careful analysis of the petition and the comments 
received, Customs is of the opinion that the products are classified as 
ball bearings in subheading 8482.10.50, HTSUS.

DATES: This decision will be effective as to merchandise entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption after April 29, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James A. Seal, Metals and Machinery 
Classification Branch, U.S. Customs Service, (202-482-7030).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 28, 1992, a notice was published in the Federal Register 
(57 FR part 39158), stating that Customs had received a petition on 
behalf of a domestic interested party, filed under section 516, Tariff 
Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1516), and Part 175, Customs 
Regulations (19 CFR 175). The petition requested a determination by 
Customs that certain load roller products for fork lift trucks were 
classifiable as radial ball bearings in subheading 8482.10.50, HTSUS, 
subject to a Column 1 General rate of duty of 11 per cent, ad valorem.
    In HQ 087775, dated January 17, 1991, Customs held that the load 
roller products were classified as parts of fork lift trucks in 
subheading 8431.20.00, HTSUS, subject to a Column 1 free rate of duty. 
HQ 087775 was affirmed by HQ 088888, dated March 24, 1992. The products 
were described in HQ 088888 as steel tires into which assemblies 
containing rolling elements are incorporated. The tires are designed to 
turn in the channels of fork lift mast uprights. The products are 
manufactured in two configurations. The first configuration is 
comprised of a separate, reinforced tire into which inner and outer 
rings containing rolling elements are installed. The steel tire of the 
second configuration is manufactured integrally with the outer ring 
section it incorporates.
    In HQ 088888, Customs noted that the products are referred to by 
many names including ``load rollers'', ``wheels'', ``bearings'', 
``guide wheels'', ``mast guide bearings'' and ``rollers''. Customs 
stated the belief that the products are similar in form and function to 
certain lifting and handling equipment components which are not 
described as ball bearings. It was also noted that the products may 
incorporate bearing components but, as a whole, Customs believed the 
products were not mere ball bearings.
    The petitioner contends that the products should be classified as 
ball bearings in subheading 8482.10.50, HTSUS. The petitioner argues 
that the products are ball bearings of special configuration described 
by heading 8482, that Customs placed undue emphasis on the outer tire 
component of the products, and that the products are excluded from 
heading 8431 by Section XVI, Note 2, HTSUS.

Comments

    Pursuant to section 175.21(a), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 
175.21(a)), before making a determination on this matter, Customs 
invited written comments from interested parties on this issue.
    Only one commenter submitted arguments in response to the Federal 
Register notice dated August 28, 1992. The commenter supported the 
correctness of the current classification of the products in heading 
8431, HTSUS. The commenter argued that the outer tires of the products 
are not designed like an outer bearing race, that the reducing of 
friction is a secondary function of the products, and that trade 
literature describes the products as a type of ``roller'', and not a 
type of bearing.

Decision on Petition

    After careful analysis of the petition and the comments received in 
response to the notice of August 28, 1992, Customs is of the opinion 
that the products should be classified as radial ball bearings in 
subheading 8482.10.50, HTSUS, subject to a Column 1 General rate of 
duty of 11 per cent ad valorem.
    Customs is presented with a unique article of commerce which is 
entered in two configurations. In the first configuration, the steel 
tire section is machined to function as the outer bearing race. This 
integral tire configuration is quite similar to heavy duty cam 
followers, such as those which roll in channels in aircraft wings. It 
has been Customs position for some time that cam followers function as 
ball or roller bearings, are commonly known as bearings and are 
properly classified as bearings.
    The second configuration contains a thick outer steel tire 
enclosing a thinner steel ring. This second ring is the part that has 
been machined to function as the bearing outer race. This separate tire 
configuration has some similarities in construction to products such as 
trolley wheels, roller skate wheels and furniture drawer glides, which 
are considered to be articles containing bearings and are not 
themselves classified as ball bearings. The second configuration of 
load roller product, however, performs the same function as the 
integral tire configuration. Both configurations of the product are of 
the same class or kind of merchandise, and should be classified in the 
same provision under the HTSUS.
    Through the course of this proceeding, including a continuing 
analysis of the petitioner's submissions, the commenter's submissions 
and our own research, we have reached a number of conclusions which 
have progressed from our conclusions in prior rulings on the 
merchandise.
    Central to our previous position was the fact that mast guide 
bearings came in two separate configurations, as previously described. 
The first version, presented to us in a ruling request, and deemed the 
``integral tire'' configuration, had the design characteristics most 
commonly associated with ball bearings, namely, an outer and inner ring 
separated by a row of spaced balls or rolling elements. While the 
thickness of the outer ring was significantly greater than that 
normally found on most bearings, it did conform to the design structure 
of a cam follower. In the past, Customs has uniformly held to the 
position that cam followers were classifiable as antifriction bearings.
    The second version, deemed the ``external tire'' configuration of 
the mast guide bearing, was originally referred to by the importer as a 
load roller. It was viewed as a component of a fork lift which 
contained a bearing. Articles containing bearings are normally 
classifiable as parts of whatever finished article they are 
incorporated into.
    Our emphasis on what functions as the outer race is based on our 
understanding of the construction and operation of antifriction ball 
bearings. The critical elements of such bearings are the uniformity and 
smoothness of the balls, as well as the degree of precision grinding, 
honing and polishing of the races. The term ``races'' refers to the 
machined grooves, or tracks, that are cut into the metal surfaces of 
the inner and outer rings. A bearing is assembled by loading the balls 
between the two rings and normally separating the balls from each other 
by using either metal or nylon retainers called cages. The balls ride 
in the groove created by the upper and lower races.
    Normally, a bearing is installed into some type of housing in which 
the outer ring is held stationary. A rotatable shaft or axle is then 
press fit into the inner ring. The result is that all of the rotational 
movement of the shaft is transferred to the balls. The balls also 
support the shaft load. It is much less common to have an application 
in which the inner ring remains stationary and the outer ring rotates. 
A standard ball bearing cannot be used as a load-supporting wheel. The 
outer ring, not being reinforced, would tend to distort itself trying 
to carry weight. When bearings are used in this manner, they are 
inevitably pressed inside other devices, such as gears, pulleys or 
wheels. As such, the bearing tends to lose its own identity and take on 
the identity of the completed assembly. Devices such as cam followers 
are the exception to this rule. In that case, the outer ring is 
significantly reinforced in thickness to provide the necessary support. 
The ring is still machined internally to create the smooth precisioned 
raceway needed to reduce friction.
    It was the original position of the Customs Service that the 
primary function of the mast guide bearing was to act as a guide wheel, 
not as a friction-reducing bearing. While we acknowledged the 
structural similarity of the ``integral tire'' bearing configuration to 
that of a cam follower, Customs believed that the two did not share a 
common use and function. Customs grouped mast guides into the same 
category as other articles regarded as being non-bearing types, such as 
trolley wheels, furniture drawer guides, and roller skate wheels. These 
articles shared a structural identity with the ``external tire'' 
bearing configuration and also, in our opinion, a functional 
similarity.
    Additional information supplied by the petitioner indicates that 
cam followers are used in applications of which we were previously 
unaware. It is now clear that cam followers are capable of being used 
as track guides on heavy machinery. We now view construction and 
engineering principles relating to the ``external tire'' bearing 
configuration as supporting petitioner's claim. Previously, Customs 
placed far too much significance on differences in the design of the 
two versions of the mast guide bearing. We likened the ``external'' 
tire configuration to other articles that were held to contain ball 
bearings, rather than being ball bearings themselves. We looked at the 
construction of this ``external'' tire version and saw two separate 
components: a complete ball bearing composed of an inner ring, balls, 
and a thin-section outer ring; and a separate tire into which the 
bearing was pressed. Upon closer examination, what we have, in reality, 
is a two-part outer ring. In order to load additional balls into this 
assembly, which is done to maximize the load handling capacity of the 
mast guide, the designers had to split the outer ring. By cracking the 
outer ring and spreading it apart, additional balls could be added. 
This would be impossible to do with the first, integral tire version. 
The outer ring of that bearing was more than \1/2\ inch thick. 
Splitting it would ruin the unit. Instead, a much thinner steel liner, 
which we originally referred to as the outer ring of the external tire 
version, was used. This liner was machined to create the bearing race, 
but was thin enough to split. Thus, additional balls could be added and 
this assembly inserted into the tire. This was not an assembly of two 
different components, unlike other devices such as pulleys and gears. 
Instead, it was an engineering solution that resulted in a maximum 
complement ball bearing, and not a component containing a ball bearing.
    In a recent decision, THK America, Inc. v. United States, Slip Op. 
93-207, decided November 1, 1993, the Court of International Trade held 
that certain linear motion guide systems were ball bearings of heading 
8482. The Court noted that the term ``ball bearing'' was not defined 
either in the statute or its legislative history, and that it was 
therefore proper for the Court to aid its own understanding of the term 
by reference to dictionaries, lexicons and scientific authorities. One 
of the sources consulted was The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & 
Technology, in which antifriction bearings, of which ball bearings are 
a subgroup, were defined as ``A machine element that permits free 
motion between moving and fixed parts. Antifriction bearings are 
essential to mechanized equipment: they hold or guide moving machine 
parts and minimize friction and wear.'' (Emphasis original). By 
function and design, the load roller products under consideration both 
guide the lifting forks as they move along the lift mast uprights which 
are fixed in place, and minimize the friction caused by this movement.
    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. In accordance with the above analysis, we find that the load roller 
products are provided for, by name, as ball bearings, in heading 8482. 
Tariff provisions designating an article or a class of articles eo 
nomine, by name, will include all forms of the named article in the 
absence of a contrary legislative intent, judicial decision, or 
administrative practice. Nootka Packing Co. v. United States, 22 CCPA 
464, T.D. 47464 (1935).
    Under the authority of GRI 1, the fork lift load roller products 
are provided for as ball bearings in heading 8482. They are 
classifiable as other ball bearings, in subheading 8482.10.50, HTSUS.
    Because they are parts which are goods included in a heading in 
Chapter 84, these products are precluded from classification in heading 
8431 by virtue of Section XVI, Note 2(a), HTSUS. This note states, in 
relevant part, that parts which are goods included in any of the 
headings of chapters 84 and 85, are in all cases to be classified in 
their respective headings. HQ 087775, dated January 17, 1991, and HQ 
088888, dated March 24, 1992, which held that the products are 
classified in heading 8431 as parts of fork lift trucks, are revoked by 
this document.
    In summary, a thorough review of the evidence of record leads to 
the following factual and legal conclusions: both the first and second 
configuration of load roller products are in all material respects 
indistinguishable from cam followers, which Customs uniformly regards 
as ball bearings; both configurations are within the common meaning of 
the term ``ball bearing''; for this reason, both configurations are 
provided for, eo nomine, by name, in heading 8482, noting that eo 
nomine designations in most cases will include all forms of the named 
article.
    For these reasons, the fork lift load roller products under 
consideration are classified as ``[B]all * * * bearings * * *: Ball 
bearings: * * * Other'', in subheading 8482.10.50, HTSUS. This decision 
will stand in the absence of a contrary judgment rendered by the United 
States Court of International Trade, the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Federal Circuit or the United States Supreme Court.

Authority

    This notice is published under the authority of section 516(c), 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1516(c)), and section 175.24, 
Customs Regulations (19 CFR 175.24).

Drafting Information

    The principal author of this document was James A. Seal, Metals and 
Machinery Classification Branch, Office of Regulations and Rulings, 
U.S. Customs Service. Personnel from other Customs offices participated 
in its development.

Samuel H. Banks,
Acting Commissioner of Customs.
    Approved: February 28, 1994
John P. Simpson,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. 94-6496 Filed 3-21-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-P