HQ 0110714 - Response to request for opinion regarding the dutiability of certain foreign shipyard operations performed on the U.S.-flag vessel RALEIGH BAY, V-008, Entry No. 514-3003586-8; arrived at the port of Elizabeth, New Jersey, on December 11, 1988 - United States International Trade Commision Rulings

United States International Trade Commision Rulings And Harmonized Tariff Schedule

faqs.org Rulings By Number Rulings By Category Tariff Numbers

faqs.org > Rulings and Tariffs Home > Rulings By Number > 1992 HQ Rulings > HQ 0110294 - HQ 0110727 > HQ 0110714

HQ 110714
July 19, 1990

VES-13-18-CO:R:P:C 110714 LLB

CATEGORY: CARRIER

Deputy Assistant Regional Commissioner
Classification and Value Division
ATTN: Regional Vessel Repair Liquidation Unit New York, New York 10048-0945

RE: Response to request for opinion regarding the dutiability of certain foreign shipyard operations performed on the U.S.-flag vessel RALEIGH BAY, V-008, Entry No. 514-3003586-8; arrived at the port of Elizabeth, New Jersey, on December 11, 1988

Dear Sir:

Reference is made to your memorandum of December 18, 1989, which forwards for our consideration the vessel repair entry and related documentation filed by Sea-Land Service, Inc.

FACTS:

The vessel arrived in the United States on December 11, 1988, and filed a vessel repair entry the next day covering certain foreign shipyard services which had been obtained during the just-completed voyage. Various invoices to support the entry were filed with Customs on February 10, 1989. Following a solicitation of further information by Customs, Sea-Land supplied invoices for some survey and work items which had not been previously declared. This submission was received on April 11, 1989. In a last submission received by Customs on April 20, 1989, Sea-Land provided statements from the Master, Chief Mate, Second Officer, and Third Officer, detailing the circumstances of a collision with the dock in the port of Algerciras, Spain, which allegedly led to the damage attended to abroad. No request for extension of time to file documentation was ever filed by Sea-Land.

ISSUE:

Whether the submissions made by the vessel owner constituted a vessel repair entry and Application for Relief sufficient to permit Customs to properly process and consider this matter under established regulatory guidelines.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Section 1466 provides, in pertinent part, for payment of duty in the amount of 50 percent ad valorem of the cost of foreign repairs to vessels documented under the laws of the United States to engage in foreign or coastwise trade, or vessels intended to engage in such trade.

Section 4.14(b)(2), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 4.14(b)(2)), provides that a vessel repair entry shall be filed with Customs within 5 days of first arrival in the United States. Such entry must be marked to indicate whether it is a complete or incomplete account of foreign expenditures. The section goes on to provide that the entry papers "shall include" evidence of the cost of each item (the best examples being invoices). This evidence must be supplied at the time the entry is filed, if presented as a complete account, or within 60 days of first arrival for incomplete entry accounts. Thus the statutory entry requirement is satisfied upon timely submission of a vessel repair entry form together with supporting cost evidence.

The regulations provide for the contingency that certain documentation may not be readily available by permitting parties to apply for extensions of filing deadlines (19 CFR 4.14 (b)(ii)). Vessel Repair Liquidation Units may grant up to 30 additional days, and further time to file may be granted by Customs Headquarters.

The Customs Regulations provide that while Applications for Relief need not conform to any particular format, it is necessary to provide certain basics for proper filing to have occurred. The Application may not consist wholly of bald self-serving statements, and to the extent that such statements are made, proof of their verity must be supplied. The whole of the claim for relief appearing in the only submission made to Customs within the 60-day period provided by regulation is:

All foreign equipment, parts or materials purchased for, and all repairs made to the vessel was necessary for the safety and sea worthiness of the vessel.

In this case we believe that we are requested to grant remission of duty pursuant 19 U.S.C. 1466(d)(1), the subsection of the statute under which relief is provided for certain bona fide marine casualty occurrences. The statute requires the submission of "good and sufficient evidence" to support such casualty claims. In this case, no such evidence was timely submitted and no request for extension of time was filed. The cost evidence which was submitted was incomplete. Complete invoices were not received until four months after arrival of the vessel, and some of the invoices were in the Spanish language, despite the regulatory requirement that foreign language documents shall be accompanied by certified English translations (19 CFR

In light of all of the foregoing facts, it is our opinion that an adequate application for relief was not filed in this case. Accordingly, the case cannot be considered on its merits.

HOLDING:

Following a thorough review of the facts and analysis of the law, we recommend that this entry be referred for immediate liquidation.

The vessel operator should be informed that the next, and final, administrative review available is a protest submitted pursuant to Part 174, Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 174).

Sincerely,

B. James Fritz

Previous Ruling Next Ruling