PRD 2002-94-100173; Aluminum Coated Steel Sheet in Coils; Flat-Rolled Products of Iron or Nonalloy Steel; Protest Denied For Failure to Produce Evidence in Support of Claim Dear Sir:

HQ 956515 SEPTEMBER 20, 1994 CLA-2:CO:R:C:M 956515 JAS CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 7210.60.00 District Director of Customs 423 Canal Street, Rm. 245 New Orleans, LA 70130 RE: PRD 2002-94-100173; Aluminum Coated Steel Sheet in Coils; Flat-Rolled Products of Iron or Nonalloy Steel; Protest Denied For Failure to Produce Evidence in Support of Claim Dear Sir: This is our decision on Application for Further Review of Protest 2002-94-100173, dated February 3, 1994. The issue is whether, at the time of importation, certain aluminum coated steel sheet in coils was of alloy or nonalloy steel Protests against decisions of the appropriate Customs officers must be in conformity with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. Under 19 U.S.C. 1514(c)(1), a protest of a decision under subsection (a) of section 1514 must set forth distinctly and specifically each decision as to which protest is made. United States v. E. H. Bailey & Co., 32 CCPA 89, C.A.D. 291 (1945); United States v. Parksmith Corp., 514 F. 2d 1052, 62 CCPA 76 (1975), and related cases. In addition, the Customs Regulations require that a protest set forth the nature of, and justification for the objection set forth distinctly and specifically with respect to each decision. 19 CFR 174.13(a)(6). The scope of review in a protest filed under 19 U.S.C. 1514 is limited to the administrative record. Customs will consider all relevant allegations that are supported by competent evidence. In acting on a protest, however, Customs lacks the legal authority to assume facts and arguments that are not presented and, therefore, not in the official record. In this case, protest is properly made against your decision in liquidating the relevant entry under subheading 7210.60.00, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), as flat- rolled products of iron or nonalloy steel. Your decision was based on the invoice and mill certificate which did not confirm the required alloy content of the steel. However, while - 2 - protestant's representative maintains that the steel is sufficiently alloyed to support classification in subheading 7225.90.00, HTSUS, as flat-rolled products of iron or other alloy steel, he has provided no evidence to support this claim, nor is there other evidence of record from which we can independently determine the validity of the claim. Based on protestant's failure to comply with the requirements of 19 CFR 174.13(a)(6), the protest should be DENIED. In accordance with Section 3A(11)(b) of Customs Directive 099 3550-065, dated August 4, 1993, Subject: Revised Protest Directive, you should mail this decision, together with the Customs Form 19, to the protestant no later than 60 days from the date of this letter. Any reliquidation of the entry or entries in accordance with the decision must be accomplished prior to mailing the decision. Sixty days from the date of the decision the Office of Regulations and Rulings will take steps to make the decision available to Customs personnel via the Customs Rulings Module in ACS and to the public via the Diskette Subscription Service, the Freedom of Information Act and other public access channels. Sincerely, John Durant, Director Commercial Rulings Division