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 > 2007 HQ Rulings > HQ H020308 - HQ W116683 > HQ W116682

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
HQ W116682

---

July 7, 2006

VES-3-18-RR:BSTC:CCI W116682 GOB

CATEGORY: CARRIER

Supervisory Import Specialist
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
P. O. Box 1389
Kenner, LA 70063

RE: 19 U.S.C. §1466; Vessel Repair Entry NN3-0000249-4; Protest 2002-06-100070; SEALAND MOTIVATOR, V-601

Dear Sir:

This is in response to your memorandum of May 30, 2006, forwarding for our review the protest filed by Maersk Line, Ltd. (“protestant”) with respect to Vessel Repair Entry NN3-0000249-4. Our ruling follows.

FACTS:

The SEALAND MOTIVATOR (the “vessel”), a U.S.-flag vessel, incurred foreign shipyard costs. The vessel arrived in the port of Charleston, South Carolina on December 30, 2005. A vessel repair entry was filed.

By letter of April 28, 2006, your office denied the application for relief.

ISSUE:

Whether the costs for which the protestant seeks relief are dutiable under 19 U.S.C. § 1466.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Initially, we note that the information in the file indicates that the protest, with application for further review, was timely filed under the statutory and regulatory provisions for protests. 19 U.S.C. 1514(c)(3) and 19 CFR 174.12(e).

Title 19, United States Code, section 1466 (19 U.S.C. §1466) provides for the payment of duty at a rate of fifty percent ad valorem on 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 be employed in such trade.

You have asked for our review with respect to items included on the third item on the CF 226, which is described thereon as follows:

Technician and oil content meters originated from Hazlet, NJ, USA. Technician installed meters to repair ballast discharge pump and then returned to New Jersey.

More specifically, you state that you agree with the protestant that the services of the technician are nondutiable, but you wish this office to review the dutiability of the oil content meters and the retrofitting kit. These items are invoiced on Advanced Marine Technology, Inc. invoice # 6003, dated January 23, 2006. In support of the protestant’s claim that the oil content meters and retrofitting kit are nondutiable, it has submitted an email message from the captain of the vessel in which he states: “Tech was with parts from the US (NJ).”

We find that the protestant has not established that these costs are nondutiable under 19 U.S.C. § 1466. It has not provided satisfactory, documentary evidence that the subject costs for the oil content meters and retrofitting kit are exempt from duty under 19 U.S.C. § 1466. The short email message from the captain is wholly insufficient for this purpose. Unless otherwise exempted, the costs of foreign repairs and costs incident to foreign repairs are subject to duty under 19 U.S.C. § 1466. Therefore, we find that the costs of the oil content meters and the retrofitting kit are dutiable under 19 U.S.C. § 1466.

HOLDING:

The costs of the oil content meters and the retrofitting kit are dutiable under 19 U.S.C. § 1466.

You are instructed to deny the protest with respect to these items.

In accordance with the Protest/Petition Processing Handbook (CIS HB, January 2002, pp. 18 and 21), you are to mail this decision, together with the Customs Form 19, to the protestant no later than 60 days from the date of this letter. Any reliquidation of the entry in accordance with the decision must be accomplished prior to mailing of the decision. Sixty days from the date of the decision the Office of Regulations and Rulings will make the decision available to CBP personnel, and to the public on the CBP Home Page on the World Wide Web at www.cbp.gov, by means of the Freedom of Information Act, and other methods of public distribution.

Sincerely,

Glen E. Vereb
Chief

Previous Ruling Next Ruling