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

~ ( 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