HQ 087188: Application for Further Review of Protest No. 0901-9-701128, on the classification of lubricating oil

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.

                                                          ~
(

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
                     U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE

                          WASHINGTON. D.C.

                            HQ 087188

                             SEP 25 1990

CLA-2 CO:R:C:G   087188 JGH

CATEGORY: Class i f icat ion

TARIFF NO.:  2710.00.30

District Director of Customs
111 West Huron Street
Buffalo, New York 14202

RE: Application for Further Review of Protest
       No. 0901-9-701128, on the classification of lubricating oil

Dear Sir:

       This decision involves the classification of a lubricating oil
from Canada under the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States 
(HTSUS).

FACTS:

       The merchandise,referred to as Britol Lubricating oil, was the
subject of several entries in March 1989, with liquidation in March
and April 1989.   It was entered under the provision for petroleum
lubricating oils in subheading 2710.00.30, HTSUS.   It is claimed by
the producer that the classification should be changed to that for
white mineral oil in subheading 2710.00.4530, HTSUS, since the product
meets the USP specifications for mineral oil.

       A Customs laboratory report on an analysis of a sample of a
1987 entry of "Britol 50 P" described it as a water-white, viscous
liquid, a mixture of hydrocarbons derived from petroleum. It further
stated that the sample did not meet the requirements for U.S.P. XIX
for medicinal grade mineral oil, but that it did have the viscosity
characteristics of a gas compressor crankcase lubricant.

ISSUE:

     Whether the imported oil is classifiable in subheading 2710.00.30
or 2710.00.45, HTSUS.

 T

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

                  iS claimed that the imports should be reclassified as
white mineral oil as they meet the USP 19 specifications.   A 1986 letter
from a technical director, states that "typical laboratory reports of
material received from Petro Canada" were attached; however, none is of
record.  A letter dated May 16,1989, from the business manager of the
purchaser, Petroleum Specialties International, Inc.,  is to the effect
that the entries should have been filed under the provision for white
mineral oil; however, once again, no evidence supporting this claim was
provided. Since a copy of a Customs laboratory on a similar import shows
that the product is not a mineral oil, the entries in issue can not be
classified as mineral oil in the absence of convincing evidence on the
composition.

HOLDING:

                The product is a lubricating oil classifiable in subheading
2710.00.30, HTSUS.

You are directed to deny the protest in full.

A copy of this decision should be furnished the protestant with the Form
19 Notice of Action.

Sincerely,

Commerical Rulings Division