H078235 H0 Ruling Active

Coastwise Transportation; 46 U.S.C. § 55103; 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b)

Issued October 1, 2009 by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Tariff classification

HTS codes: 2009, 1975, 2006, 2002

Headings: 2009, 1975, 2006, 2002

Product description

The voyage in question involves the transportation of the subject individual aboard the non-coastwise-qualified M/T VALBRUNA (“the vessel”). The individual will embark on October 4, 2009 at Houston, Texas and will disembark at the port of Corpus Christi, Texas on or about October 5, 2009. The individual will travel aboard the vessel to perform a technical inspection. This will include inspecting the deck and engine department operations to verify the maintenance of the machinery and to ensure that the crew is acting in accordance with the safety & quality system as well as international regulations with respect to safety, security and pollution prevention. In addition, the superintendent will interview the crew to confirm that they are following company procedures.

CBP rationale

The coastwise passenger statute, former 46 U.S.C. App. § 289 recodified as 46 U.S.C. § 55103, pursuant to P.L. 109-304 (October 6, 2006), states that no foreign vessel shall transport passengers “between ports or places in the United States to which the coastwise laws apply, either directly or by way of a foreign port,” under a penalty of $300 for each passenger so transported and landed. See also 19 C.F.R. § 4.80(b)(2). The coastwise laws generally apply to points in the territorial sea, which is defined as the belt, three nautical miles wide, seaward of the territorial sea baseline, and to points located in internal waters, landward of the territorial sea baseline. Under 46 U.S.C. § 55103, a “passenger” is any person carried aboard a vessel “who is not connected with the operation of the vessel, her navigation, ownership, or business.” See also 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b). In this regard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) provides a strict interpretation of “passenger” defining the term as persons transported on a vessel unless they are "directly and substantially" connected with the operation, navigation, ownership or business of that vessel itself. See Customs Bulletin of June 5, 2002, Vol. 36, No. 23, at pp. 50. Pursuant to Headquarters Ruling Letter 101699, dated November 5, 1975, it is well settled that "workmen, technicians, or observers transported by vessel between ports of the United States are not classified as ‘passengers’ within the meaning of section 4.50(b) and section 289 [now section 55103] if they are required to be on board to contribute to the accomplishment of the operation or navigation of the vessel during the voyage or are on board because of a necessary vessel ownership or business interest during the voyage." See also Headquarters Ruling Letter 116721, dated September 25, 2006. In the present case, the individual would be traveling aboard the non-coastwise-qualified vessel to perform a technical inspection. Under the facts presented, the individual would be “directly and substantially” related to the operation of the vessel during the voyage and would not be considered a “passenger” under 46 U.S.C. § 55103 and 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b). Consequently, the coastwise transportation of the subject individual is not in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 55103.

Full text

HQ H078235 October 1, 2009 VES-3-02-OT:RR:BSTC:CCI H078235 JLB CATEGORY: Carriers Mr. Eric Marquette Valls Ship Agencies L.P. 711 W. Bay Area Blvd., Suite 315 Webster, Texas 77598 RE: Coastwise Transportation; 46 U.S.C. § 55103; 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b) Dear Mr. Marquette: This letter is in response to your correspondence dated September 30, 2009, in which you request a ruling on whether the coastwise transportation of the individual mentioned therein aboard the M/T VALBRUNA constitutes a violation of 46 U.S.C. § 55103. Our ruling on your request follows. FACTS The voyage in question involves the transportation of the subject individual aboard the non-coastwise-qualified M/T VALBRUNA (“the vessel”). The individual will embark on October 4, 2009 at Houston, Texas and will disembark at the port of Corpus Christi, Texas on or about October 5, 2009. The individual will travel aboard the vessel to perform a technical inspection. This will include inspecting the deck and engine department operations to verify the maintenance of the machinery and to ensure that the crew is acting in accordance with the safety & quality system as well as international regulations with respect to safety, security and pollution prevention. In addition, the superintendent will interview the crew to confirm that they are following company procedures. ISSUE Whether the individual described above would be a “passenger” within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. § 55103 and 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b)? LAW AND ANALYSIS The coastwise passenger statute, former 46 U.S.C. App. § 289 recodified as 46 U.S.C. § 55103, pursuant to P.L. 109-304 (October 6, 2006), states that no foreign vessel shall transport passengers “between ports or places in the United States to which the coastwise laws apply, either directly or by way of a foreign port,” under a penalty of $300 for each passenger so transported and landed. See also 19 C.F.R. § 4.80(b)(2). The coastwise laws generally apply to points in the territorial sea, which is defined as the belt, three nautical miles wide, seaward of the territorial sea baseline, and to points located in internal waters, landward of the territorial sea baseline. Under 46 U.S.C. § 55103, a “passenger” is any person carried aboard a vessel “who is not connected with the operation of the vessel, her navigation, ownership, or business.” See also 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b). In this regard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) provides a strict interpretation of “passenger” defining the term as persons transported on a vessel unless they are "directly and substantially" connected with the operation, navigation, ownership or business of that vessel itself. See Customs Bulletin of June 5, 2002, Vol. 36, No. 23, at pp. 50. Pursuant to Headquarters Ruling Letter 101699, dated November 5, 1975, it is well settled that "workmen, technicians, or observers transported by vessel between ports of the United States are not classified as ‘passengers’ within the meaning of section 4.50(b) and section 289 [now section 55103] if they are required to be on board to contribute to the accomplishment of the operation or navigation of the vessel during the voyage or are on board because of a necessary vessel ownership or business interest during the voyage." See also Headquarters Ruling Letter 116721, dated September 25, 2006. In the present case, the individual would be traveling aboard the non-coastwise-qualified vessel to perform a technical inspection. Under the facts presented, the individual would be “directly and substantially” related to the operation of the vessel during the voyage and would not be considered a “passenger” under 46 U.S.C. § 55103 and 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b). Consequently, the coastwise transportation of the subject individual is not in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 55103. HOLDING The subject individual is not a “passenger” within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. § 55103 and 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b). Therefore, the coastwise transportation of such an individual is not in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 55103. Sincerely, Glen E. Vereb, Chief Cargo Security, Carriers and Immigration Branch

View original on CBP CROSS →

Ruling history

More rulings on the same tariff codes

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 →