Sprinkler heads for sprinkler systems
Issued March 13, 1990 by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Tariff classification
HTS codes: 8424.90.90
Headings: 8424
GRI rules applied: GRI 1
Product description
The article at issue is described as a sprinkler head to be used in ceiling-installed fire extinguishing sprinkler systems. The sprinkler head is comprised of cast metal, a minimum of which is 75% copper. It is to be assembled in the United States with other castings or small machined parts and then installed with the sprinkler system. While the sprinkler system is mechanical, the sprinkler head itself is non-mechanical.
CBP rationale
The General Rules of Interpretation (GRI) govern classification of articles under HTSUSA. GRI 1 requires that classification be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes. Heading 7419 covers articles of copper other than those expressly covered elsewhere under the HTS. The sprinkler head is not mentioned in any of the other provisions covering copper articles in chapter 74. In fact, it is not specifically referred to anywhere else in the Harmonized System. As noted above, the sprinkler head is comprised of at least 75% copper. Thus, it could be classifiable under heading 7419 as an article of copper not covered elsewhere in chapter 74. We must now determine if the sprinkler head is covered more specifically under another heading. Heading 8424 covers, among other things, mechanical appliances (whether or not hand operated) for projecting, dispersing or spraying liquids or powders, and parts thereof. Once assembled, the sprinkler head is to be installed with a ceiling sprinkler system as a part of that system. The head operates within the system to spray water over the interior of a room to extinguish fires. The system is mechanically operated while the sprinkler head by itself is not. We have classified non-mechanical parts of mechanical articles before. In HQ 031521, we classified a similar part, a screw-on nozzle for an automatic sprinkler system, as a part of that system even though the nozzle was non-mechanical while the system was mechanically operated. There is no reason why we should not follow that reasoning in this case. Whether or not the sprinkler head is mechanical, the fact it is a part of the sprinkler system is most controlling for the purpose of classification. Therefore, we find the sprinkler head to be properly classifiable under heading 8424 as a part of mechanical appliance for spraying liquid. Classification under heading 7419 is precluded as a result.
Full text
HQ 085842 March 13, 1990 CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 085842 TLS CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 8424.90.90 Ms. Ann Newton Fabrique De Fer De Charleroi (USA), Inc. 88 Danbury Road Wilton, Connecticut 06897 RE: Sprinkler heads for sprinkler systems Dear Ms. Newton: Your letter of October 10, 1989 requested a ruling on the proper tariff classification of a sprinkler head under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA). Our ruling follows. FACTS: The article at issue is described as a sprinkler head to be used in ceiling-installed fire extinguishing sprinkler systems. The sprinkler head is comprised of cast metal, a minimum of which is 75% copper. It is to be assembled in the United States with other castings or small machined parts and then installed with the sprinkler system. While the sprinkler system is mechanical, the sprinkler head itself is non-mechanical. ISSUE: Under which of the following HTSUSA headings is the sprinkler head properly classifiable: 7419, HTSUSA, covering other articles of copper; 8424, HTSUSA, covering mechanical appliances (whether or not hand operated) for projecting, dispersing or spraying liquids or powders; fire extinguishers, whether or not charged; ... parts thereof. LAW AND ANALYSIS: The General Rules of Interpretation (GRI) govern classification of articles under HTSUSA. GRI 1 requires that classification be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes. Heading 7419 covers articles of copper other than those expressly covered elsewhere under the HTS. The sprinkler head is not mentioned in any of the other provisions covering copper articles in chapter 74. In fact, it is not specifically referred to anywhere else in the Harmonized System. As noted above, the sprinkler head is comprised of at least 75% copper. Thus, it could be classifiable under heading 7419 as an article of copper not covered elsewhere in chapter 74. We must now determine if the sprinkler head is covered more specifically under another heading. Heading 8424 covers, among other things, mechanical appliances (whether or not hand operated) for projecting, dispersing or spraying liquids or powders, and parts thereof. Once assembled, the sprinkler head is to be installed with a ceiling sprinkler system as a part of that system. The head operates within the system to spray water over the interior of a room to extinguish fires. The system is mechanically operated while the sprinkler head by itself is not. We have classified non-mechanical parts of mechanical articles before. In HQ 031521, we classified a similar part, a screw-on nozzle for an automatic sprinkler system, as a part of that system even though the nozzle was non-mechanical while the system was mechanically operated. There is no reason why we should not follow that reasoning in this case. Whether or not the sprinkler head is mechanical, the fact it is a part of the sprinkler system is most controlling for the purpose of classification. Therefore, we find the sprinkler head to be properly classifiable under heading 8424 as a part of mechanical appliance for spraying liquid. Classification under heading 7419 is precluded as a result. HOLDING: The sprinkler head is classified under subheading 8424.90.90, HTSUSA, as a part of a mechanical appliance for spraying liquid. Sincerely, John Durant, Director Commercial Rulings Division
More rulings on the same tariff codes
Application for Further Review of Protest No. 300123104920; Classification of a certain “puffer cabinet”
Revocation of two ruling letters concerning the tariff classification of certain nozzles for the dispersing or spraying of high-pressure liquids; New York Ruling Letter (“NY”) N162918, dated May 26, 2011; and NY C87376, dated May 14, 1998
Internal Advice Request (No. 11/025); Classification of incomplete power paint spray gun kits from China
Revocation of NY I89445; Canister of Le Bozec Rain Repellent
Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid Reservoir and Washer Nozzle Assembly
NY D86147, NY D86149 Revoked; Washer Fluid Tank Cap, Washer Fluid Nozzle
HQ 956900 Modified; Plastic Front Nozzle, Rear Tank, and Rear Nozzle Assemblies
Searching CBP rulings the smart way
TariffLens semantically searches all 200,000+ CBP rulings, surfaces the ones that actually match your product, and builds defensible classifications backed by ruling citations.
Book a demo →