Court No. 99-09-00590 Page 6
5
Section 1516 provides that an interested party may inquire into, among other things, the
classification of imported merchandise and file a petition setting forth the rate of duty it believes
proper. See 19 U.S.C. § 1516(a). If the Secretary of the Treasury determines the classification is
incorrect, the statute directs him to determine the correct classification. See id. at § 1516(b). If
the Secretary determines the classification is correct he is directed to notify the petitioner who
then has thirty days to contest the decision. See id. at § 1516(c). Upon receipt of such notice, the
Secretary must publish his determination and the petitioner’s desire to contest it, and furnish the
petitioner with sufficient information to enable a challenge to the liquidation of one entry. See
id. No time limits are imposed on the Secretary to make his initial decision.
Section 1625 provides at least a thirty day comment period for modification or revocation
of a prior interpretive ruling or decision in effect for at least sixty days. See 19 U.S.C. §
1625(c)(1). Once the comment period closes, the Secretary is directed to publish a final ruling
within thirty days. See id. Sixty days following publication of the final ruling or decision it
becomes effective. See id.
from the syrup. Finally the crystals are subjected to a number of steps making them suitable to sell
as liquid sucrose for use in the production of cereal, ice cream, candy and other food applications.
The sucrose content of the liquid sucrose is several percentage points higher than the syrup in its
condition as imported. Some of the residue, which is molasses, is sold for use in animal feed, some
is lost in the process and some is returned to Canada.
On January 14, 1998, Defendant-Intervenor, United States Beet Sugar Association, filed a
petition with Customs under 19 U.S.C. § 1516, suggesting alternatively that Customs had the option
to proceed under 19 U.S.C. § 1625, seeking reclassification of the sugar syrup.
5
AR I(1). Customs
chose the latter option, and on June 9, 1999, issued notice of its intent to revoke NYRL 810328 and
invited comments pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(1) on proposed Headquarter Ruling (“HQ”)
961273. See Proposed Revocation of Ruling Letter and Treatment Relating to Tariff Classification
of Certain Sugar Syrups, 33 Cust. Bull. No. 22/23 at 52 (“Preliminary Notice”). Because of this
procedural mechanism, Plaintiff was forced to obtain Defendant-Intervenor’s submission through
a Freedom of Information Act request. Following an extension of the comment period to August 9,
1999, on September 8, 1999, Customs published a notice of revocation, which pursuant to 19