The country of origin of magnesium aluminate spinels

N348376
July 22, 2025
OT:RR:NC:N3:139
CATEGORY: Origin Autumn Firich Almatis Incorporated 501 West Park Road Leetsdale, PA 15056 RE: The country of origin of magnesium aluminate spinels Dear Ms. Firich: In your letter dated April 29, 2025, and earlier filings, you requested a German country of origin ruling on two different types of magnesium aluminate spinels. They have the item code designations of AR78, and AR90. Subsequent to their importation into the United States, you state that the spinels would be used for their general refractory attributes for such items as steel ladle shapes, monolithics, bricks for steel applications, concretes, and in functional ceramics (e.g. sliding gate plates or purging plugs) used in the steel industry at operating temperatures up to ~ 1.750°C. In China, magnesium oxide and aluminum oxide feedstocks are mixed in a ball mill. Once they are ball formed, they are placed in a shaft kiln and sintered at temperatures up to ~ 1.900°C. You state that as a result of these operations a chemical reaction occurs that produces a non stoichiometric magnesium aluminate spinel (Mg1-3xAl2+2xO4) with particle dimensions of approximately 2 centimeters. In Germany the spinel is crushed in various forms of crushing machines, with iron by products from earlier processing removed by magnets. The spinel then goes through a milling operation and then undergoes an “air classifying” operation in which spinel material that needs to go through the milling operation again are separated out and then reworked. After the spinels meet quality control standards, they are packed in shipping bags. You state that as a result of these operations the spinel does not undergo any chemical reactions and that the particle dimensions are reduced to a range of 2 micrometers to 6 millimeters. You also state that the spinels apparent porosity is reduced while its bulk specific gravity is increased. When determining the country of origin for purposes of applying current trade remedies under Section 301 and additional duties, the substantial transformation analysis is applicable. See, e.g., Headquarters Ruling Letter H301619, dated November 6, 2018. The test for determining whether a substantial transformation will occur is whether an article emerges from a process with a new name, character, or use different from that possessed by the article prior to processing. See Texas Instruments Inc. v. United States, 681 F.2d 778 (C.C.P.A. 1982). This determination is based on the totality of the evidence. See National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 C.I.T. 308 (1992), aff’d, 989 F.2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993).

In Germany, the Chinese spinel particles are reduced in size, and the residual iron is removed, which changes the particle’s physical state but not their chemical composition. You state that as a result of the German operations, the spinel particle’s apparent porosity and bulk specific gravity are changed. You provided additional evidence showing that in the case of the spinels added to alumina castables for the manufacture of such items as a steel ladle monothlic wear lining, and a corresponding gas purging plug, the thermomechanical strength of the castable is increased. This increase in strength capacity is apparently brought about because of the spinels ability to bond with the materials already present in the alumina castable and this bonding process can only occur if the spinel particles are a certain size and consistency, which the Chinese materials in the state they are in do not have. It has been shown that as a result of the German operation, changes made to the spinels make it suitable for a more specific use as a raw material for a specific type of end use product. Based on this, it is our opinion that there is a substantial transformation of the spinels as a result of the processes undertaken in Germany. Therefore, the magnesium aluminate spinels AR78, and AR90 will have a country of origin identity of Germany. The holding set forth above applies only to the specific factual situation and merchandise description as identified in the ruling request. This position is clearly set forth in Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 177.9(b)(1). This section states that a ruling letter is issued on the assumption that all of the information furnished in the ruling letter, whether directly, by reference, or by implication, is accurate and complete in every material respect. In the event that the facts are modified in any way, or if the goods do not conform to these facts at time of importation, you should bring this to the attention of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and submit a request for a new ruling in accordance with 19 CFR 177.2. Additionally, we note that the material facts described in the foregoing ruling may be subject to periodic verification by CBP. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs and Border Protection Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177). A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should be provided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, please contact National Import Specialist John Bobel at [email protected].
Sincerely,
(for) James Forkan Acting Director National Commodity Specialist Division