HQ 086250: Reconsideration of HRL 084941 concerning monoculars

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 086250

                         April 18, 1990

CLA-2  CO:R:C:G:  086250 DPS

CATEGORY:  Classification

TARIFF NO.:  9005.80.4040


Mr. Roger Vallecorse
Tasco Sales, Inc.
P.O. Box 520080
Miami, Florida  33152-0080

RE:  Reconsideration of HRL 084941 concerning monoculars

Dear Mr. Vallecorse:

     Your letter dated December 28, 1989, requested
reconsideration of Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 086250,
which classified the monoculars your company imports as
optical telescopes, other, under subheading 9005.80.4040 of
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated
(HTSUSA).  You assert that the subject monoculars should be
classified as binoculars rather than as optical telescopes.

     Your assertion that the monoculars were improperly
classified is predicated on the three points quoted from your
letter below, and your argument that "the `spirit' of the
classification should be taken into greater consideration
than the simple literal translation."  The three points
raised in your letter are:

     (1)  With regards to physical appearance,
          monoculars are smaller, more compact than
          binoculars.

     (2)  Monoculars tend to be constructed in such a
          fashion that they are optically identical to
          binoculars, with the exception of having one
          optical path versus two.  Also, the use and
          array of prism to "fold" to [sic] optical path
          are collimated in an identical fashion to
          binoculars.  This method of manufacturing
          differs greatly from telescopes and other
          single view optical instruments.

     (3)  Again with regards to construction, most
          monoculars are simply individual focusing
          binoculars without the bridge assembly that
          joins the two halves of the binocular
          together.

     With regard to the points you make, we agree that
monoculars are similar to binoculars in their physical
appearance, and construction, except that binoculars have two
optical paths rather than one.  We also acknowledge that
monoculars are smaller, more compact than binoculars.
However, what you choose not to discuss in your letter, the
distinct differences between the views that each instrument
provides (the difference between one and two optical paths)
is what the technical authorities on optical instruments
recognize.

     In preparing HRL 084941, Customs relied on the tariff
itself, the Explanatory Notes to the HTSUSA, which are the
official interpretation of the tariff at the international
level, and technical and lexicographic authorities on the
subject to reach a rational decision.  Such reliance on
technical authorities provides an objective approach to
being informed about particular industries and the products
they manufacture.  It also allows for a fair and consistent
interpretation of the nomenclature as it applies to all
imported merchandise.

     With regard to your statement that "the `spirit' of the
classification should be taken into greater consideration,"
we understand your concern about the treatment of monoculars
under the HTSUSA, which, under the prior tariff law, the
Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS), were
considered a type of field glass or opera glass and entered
duty free.  Under the HTSUSA, monoculars are classified under
the provision for other optical telescopes, with a
corresponding duty rate of 8 percent ad valorem.  Binoculars
are classified within the HTSUSA as "binoculars," and can be
imported duty free, as they were under the TSUS.

     The reason for the difference in tariff treatment of
these items is the language of the tariffs.  Under the TSUS,
binoculars, field glasses and opera glasses were accorded
duty-free treatment.  Monoculars, which are considered a type
of field glass or opera glass with only one scope, were
classified there.  Monoculars have never been considered
binoculars from a technical or scientific standpoint.  Under
the HTSUSA, the only items accorded duty free treatment under
the chapter covering such optical instruments are binoculars.
No other duty-free provision for field glasses or opera
glasses is included.  Rather the provision most accurately
describing monoculars in the HTSUSA is the provision for
other optical telescopes, which are dutiable at the rate of 8
percent ad valorem.  HRL 084941 recognizes and explains the
difference between monoculars and binoculars, and their
classification under the HTSUSA.

     Unfortunately, it is not within the power or authority
of the U.S. Customs Service to change the language of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule.  However, an international review
of the Chapter 90 nomenclature is expected to occur in
Brussels in 1990, at which time the binocular/monocular
issue is expected to be discussed among the members of the
Customs Cooperation Council.  Whether or not a change in the
international nomenclature is effected at the international
level, a U.S. change in the tariff must run its course
through the legislative process.

HOLDING:

     Upon review of the relevant HTSUSA provisions and the
technical authorities concerning monoculars and binoculars,
we affirm HRL 084941 in all respects.  The subject monoculars
remain classifiable under the provision for other optical
telescopes, subheading 9005.80.4040, HTSUSA.


                              Sincerely,



                              John Durant, Director
                              Commercial Rulings Division