HQ 955380: Classification and country of origin of diapers and burppads.

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 955380

                          June 13, 1994

CLA-2 CO:R:C:T  955380 HP

CATEGORY:  Classification

Mr. Allan Gordon
President
Performance Trading, Inc.
520 South Lafayette Park Place
Suite 200
Los Angeles, CA 90057

RE:  Classification and country of origin of diapers and burp
pads.

Dear Mr. Gordon:

     This is in reference to your letter of November 15, 1993. 
In our response dated November 17, 1993, you were advised that
your questions concerning the classification and country of
origin determination of burp pads, produced in China and Namibia,
would be subject to a separate reply.  Please reference your
letter AP12393.

FACTS:

     The merchandise at issue consists of baby's woven cotton
diapers, or the fabric used to make such diapers, embroidered or
appliqued to change that product into a burp pad.  You have given
us two potential manufacturing scenarios.  In the first,
completed woven cotton diapers currently in Namibia (and
considered products of China) have applied to their center panel
an embroidery or applique.  In the second, diaper fabric, both
with and without "lines of demarcation," would be exported from
China and assembled in Namibia directly into the burp pads.

ISSUE:

     How are the burp pads classified under the HTSUSA?  Whether
the burp pads are considered products of Namibia or China?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Classification and Future Importation

     From your description repeated above, it is not possible for
Customs to provide a binding classification decision for the
instant merchandise.  Without a more complete description and, if
possible, a completed sample, we cannot ascertain whether the
item is an embroidered diaper or a burp pad.  Should you obtain
additional details, kindly reference this ruling letter in any
new request you submit.  Please be aware, however, that burp pads
are currently classified as other made up articles under
subheading 6307.90, HTSUSA.  See HRL 089070 of July 2, 1991.

Country of Origin

     On June 5, 1990, the U.S. Customs Service issued to you HRL
087138,  informing you that woven cotton diapers assembled in
Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Lesotho or Namibia from Chinese fabric were
considered products of "Country 2" for quota/visa purposes.    On
May 17, 1993, we issued to you HRL 953677, revoking HRLs 086665
and 087138.  You have questioned whether the above-described
embroidery or applique work would transform the 27,210 dozen
diapers remaining with your supplier into products of Namibia.

     Textile commodities produced in more than one foreign
country are subject to the country of origin requirements
delineated in section 12.130 of the Customs Regulations (19
C.F.R.  12.130).  These regulations provide that:

          . . . a textile product . . . which consists
          of materials produced or derived from, or
          processed in, more than one foreign . . .
          country shall be a product of that foreign .
          . . country where it last underwent a
          substantial transformation.

 12.130(b).  A textile product undergoes a substantial
transformation when it is ". . . transformed by means of
substantial manufacturing or processing  operations into a new
and different article of commerce."

     Section 12.130 of the regulations outlines the criteria used
to determine the country of origin for textiles and textile
products.  Specifically, this provision of the regulations is
considered in determining whether a textile product has undergone
substantial manufacturing or processing operations, and what
constitutes a new and different article of commerce.  The factors
considered are not exhaustive.  In fact,  "one or any combination
of criteria may be determinative, and additional factors may be
considered."  In determining whether merchandise has undergone
substantial manufacturing or processing operations, we consider
the (1) physical change in the material or the article; (2) time
involved; (3) complexity of the operations; (4) level or degree
of skill and/or technology required; and (5) value added to the
article in each country.

     As we stated in HRL 953677, supra, the weave structure of
the Chinese fabric confirmed the fact that the material was
intended for use as diapers.  The changing of the weaves was
performed at additional cost and for the specific purpose of
creating markers for folding.  As a result, no substantial
transformation took place.  The description you provided for the
embroidery or applique work does not allow us to determine
whether these Chinese diapers underwent substantial manufacturing
or processing operations.  Accordingly, our position remains that
the items in Namibia are still considered products of China.

HOLDING:

     As a result of the foregoing, the instant merchandise is
considered a product of China.  The holding in this ruling
applies only to the specific factual situation and merchandise
identified in the ruling request. This position is clearly set
forth in  177.9(b)(1), Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R.
 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 C.F.R.  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. In such a
case, it is recommended that a new ruling request be submitted in
accordance with  177.2, Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R.  177.2).

     A copy of this ruling letter should be attached to the entry
documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported.  If the
documents have been filed without a copy, this ruling should be
brought to the attention of the Customs officer handling the
transaction.

                           Sincerely,



                      John Durant, Director
                   Commercial Rulings Division