Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. United States

10 Cust. Ct. 227, 1943 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 738
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedApril 17, 1943
DocketC. D. 759
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 10 Cust. Ct. 227 (Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Customs Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. United States, 10 Cust. Ct. 227, 1943 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 738 (cusc 1943).

Opinion

Cole, Judge:

Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. imported at the port of Cleveland, Ohio, from Eldorado Gold Mines Ltd. of Port Hope, Ontario, a shipment invoiced as “Radioactive Lead Oxide.” Duty was levied thereon at the rate of 30 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 46 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. 1940 ed., §1001, par. 46), as a lead compound, not specially provided for. Plaintiff protested the assessment, making various claims under provisions of different paragraphs of the said tariff act.

The record consists of the uncontradicted testimony of two well-qualified witnesses, employed in research departments of the plaintiff-corporation, whose duties include the development of new, as well as the improvement of old, products used by that concern in its manufacture of automotive accessories. One, Dr. John H. Dillon, is head of the research physics division. He developed commercial usage for the product obtained from the imported merchandise, and holds a number of United States patents covering- such usage. The other, Dr. John H. Street, is director of chemical and physical research. He is responsible for the importation in question, having located at the exporting company a source for the desired material.

The merchandise involved is a residue from Alaskan ore, processed at the refinery of the Canadian exporter where uranium, silver, and radium-barium, are recovered. The remaining material, consisting of approximately 96 per centum lead, .1 per centum radium D, and 3 per centum other impurities, none of which exceeds 1 per centum in quantity, constitutes the imported commodity. To facilitate its transportation, the solids were precipitated from the liquid and shipment was made in 50-pound cloth bags, packed in wooden boxes.

The merchandise arrived in this country in the form of an oxide although its use as a lead oxide is prohibitive because of the radioactive element contained in the radium D.

Eight years of study and research for radioactive material to be used in electrode wire employed in the manufacture of spark plugs by plaintiff terminated in the decision to use the imported product. Dr. Dillon discovered the value of radium D for obtaining desired results whereupon contact was made with the largest radium refinery, the [229]*229exporter of the instant merchandise, which heretofore was being discarded as apparently having no value.

Its imported condition represents the only known commercial form of radium D. It is never found alone but always associated with lead. It appears with its combined metal in minute quantity, but is extremely active and effective. Kadium D is a member of the so-called radium-disintegrating-series, of which radium is the ultimate parent. By reason of its radioactive properties, radium and all its elements possess the unusual characteristic of changing into lower members through a constant, natural, process of degradation. Hence, over a given interval of time, radium evolves or disintegrates into radon. The latter, an inert gas also possessing radioactive qualities, disintegrates over a definite unit of time into a substance known as radium A. Through the same process, the new substance becomes the parent of the following one, known as radium B. Plaintiff’s witness described the process as follows (r. 19):

That is just one of nature’s processes. We can’t do anything about it. If you start out with the first member of the series within a reasonable time you have got all the members of the series in that one group. In other words, the first one is making the second; the second is making the third, the fourth, the fifth, down the line. That goes on in such a way that you never use up the first one. It builds up the whole family of materials under it. If we buy Radium D within a certain length‘of time we also have mixed with it Radium É and F.

Radium D is the imported commodity, but it is the radioactive element emanating therefrom, the most important of its chemical or physical properties, known as Radium F or polonium, which is the desired product. Polonium, like radium, is strong in alpha radiation and comparatively weak in beta and gamma rays, the three types of radiation emitted by radioactive bodies. The use of radium, however, is not'feasible for plaintiff’s purpose, not only from an economical viewpoint but also because of its faculty to produce Radium C, that emits strong gamma rays having great therapeutic value, for which radium is chiefly used. The interest of plaintiff in alpha rays was explained as follows:

Now, the alpha radiation is what is known as an ionizing ray. It has strong ionizing power compared to either the beta or gamma, and it is the alpha ray that we wanted, because the efficiency of a spark gap depends on the ease of causing a spark to jump across. That is facilitated by what we call ionization of the gas. In other words, the resistance of the gas to the passage of the electric-current is much reduced if the gas is ionized. Consequently if we have alpha, rays in that spark gap, because of ionization at that point we therefore facilitate: the operation of that spark gap under any given electrical condition; and that-is the effect we desired and that is the effect we produce.

Polonium, for which plaintiff acquired practical use, is made-available by converting the imported material to solution by treatment with hydrochloric acid, thereby releasing the ions of polonium [230]*230which, are plated off on nickel foils. The latter are bundled in stick-like form and ultimately- plunged in a nickel melt used to manufacture electrode wire for. spark plugs. The polonium distributes itself uniformly, having the effect of dispersing its radioactive properties throughout the molten nickel melt. The alpha radiation imparted by the polonium is 4,500 times stronger than that possessed by pure radium.

Radium D, however, produces polonium only to the extent of 3 per centum of its quantity over a year’s time, so, after the polonium has been plated off, there still remains in solution approximately 97 per centum of the imported commodity. Since the product continues to retain the characteristic of working or disintegrating into radium F, it is precipitated by cooling the tanks and then stored in ceramic containers for a definite' period, at the conclusion of which it is subj ected to the treatment for recovery of the polonium.

The principal claim of plaintiff is that the merchandise is entitled to free entry under paragraph 1749 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. O. 1940 ed., § 1201, par. 1749), which provides for “Radium, and salts of, and radioactive substitutes.”

Prototype provisions were enacted in paragraphs 1650 of tb.e Tariff Act of 1922 and 585 of the Tariff Act of 1913, the language being an extension of the eo nomine provision for “Radium,” ‘which first appeared in paragraph 659 of the Tariff Act of 1909.

The earliest judicial interpretation of the term is found in the case of E. Stegemann, Jr. v. United States, 26 Treas. Dec. 16, T. D. 34052, which held certain merchandise invoiced as “Radiogen-Trinkwasser,” consisting of “radioactive water and bandages impregnated with a radioactive solution, used for medicinal purposes,” to be free of duty under paragraph 659 of the Tariff Act of 1909. The decision was followed in the cases of Morgenstern & Co. v. United States, 27 Treas. Dec. 346, T. D. 34863, and Carl Machel v. United States, 61 Treas.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Protests 59155-K of Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
11 Cust. Ct. 247 (U.S. Customs Court, 1943)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 Cust. Ct. 227, 1943 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 738, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/firestone-tire-rubber-co-v-united-states-cusc-1943.