VES-3-17-OT:RR:BSTC:CCR H241562 DAC
Mr. David F. Smith
Cozen O’Connor, P.C.
The Army and Navy Club Building, Suite 1100
1627 I Street, N.W.
Washington D.C. 20006-4007
RE: Coastwise Trade; 46 U.S.C. § 55102; Vessel Sharing Agreement; 46 U.S.C. § 55107; Empty Cargo Containers; 19 C.F.R. § 4.93; Joint Vessel Operator
Dear Mr. Smith:
This letter is in response to your correspondence of April 29, 2013, on behalf of ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Limited (“Zim”) and the following six operating common carriers that collectively make up the G6 Alliance agreement, Federal Maritime Commission (“FMC”) Agreement No. 012194 (See also FMC Agreement 012200): APL Co. Pte. Ltd. and American President Lines, Ltd. (together as “APL”), Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd. (“MOL”), Hyundai Merchant Marine Co., Ltd. (“HMM”), Hapag-Lloyd Aktiengesellschaft (“Hapag-Lloyd”), Nippon Yusen Kaisha (“NYK”), and Orient Overseas Container Line Limited and Orient Overseas Container Line Inc. (together as “OOCL”), in which you seek a determination whether the parties to the agreement described below qualify as joint vessel operators within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. § 55107 and consequently, may transport each others’ empty containers in United States coastwise trade. Our ruling on your request follows.
FACTS
ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Limited (“Zim”) and the G6 Alliance agreement members, include the following: APL Co. Pte. Ltd. and American President Lines, Ltd. (together as “APL”), Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd. (“MOL”), Hyundai Merchant Marine Co., Ltd. (“HMM”), Hapag-Lloyd Aktiengesellschaft (“Hapag-Lloyd”), Nippon Yusen Kaisha (“NYK”), and Orient Overseas Container Line Limited and Orient Overseas Container Line Inc. (together as “OOCL”), which operate as ocean common carriers in the foreign commerce of the United States, are to act as parties to an agreement and are collectively referred to as “Zim and the G6 Alliance.” These parties have entered into the G6/Zim Transpacific Vessel Sharing Agreement, FMC Agreement No. 012194 (hereinafter also “the Agreement”). See also FMC Agreement 012200. The Agreement provides for the establishment of combining vessels from their containership fleets into a joint service operating in worldwide trade, including trade between Vietnam, China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Spain and Sri Lanka and the United States. This ruling relates to the vessels deployed under the Agreement that include vessels that are flagged under the following nations: Bahamas, Hong Kong, Israel, Germany, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Panama, Singapore and the United States. You submitted with your letter a copy of the subject Agreement, as filed with the Federal Maritime Commission (“FMC”) on April 1, 2013 and such Agreement becomes effective during May 2013. The Agreement contains terms and operational details of Zim and the G6 Alliance activities pursuant to such Agreement.
ISSUE
Whether under the terms of the agreement entered into by the parties, as described above, the parties may be considered joint vessel operators transporting their owned or leased empty containers pursuant to 46 U.S.C. § 55107?
LAW AND ANALYSIS
The Jones Act, codified at 46 U.S.C. § 55102, states that “a vessel may not provide any part of the transportation of merchandise by water, or by land and water, between points in the United States to which the coastwise laws apply, either directly or via a foreign port” unless the vessel was built in and documented under the laws of the United States and owned by persons who are citizens of the United States. (See also 19 C.F.R. §§ 4.80, 4.80b). Such a vessel, after it has obtained a coastwise endorsement from the U.S. Coast Guard, is said to be “coastwise qualified.”
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.
Pursuant to 46 U.S.C. § 55107, the prohibition contained within 46 U.S.C. § 55102 does not apply to the coastwise transportation of empty cargo vans, empty lift vans, or empty shipping tanks, and equipment for use with the same. Further, the prohibition does not apply to empty barges specifically designed for carriage aboard a vessel and equipment (except propulsion equipment) for use with those barges, and certain empty instruments of international traffic. See also 19 C.F.R. § 4.93. To qualify for the exemption from 46 U.S.C. § 55102, the aforementioned articles must be owned or leased by the owner or operator of the vessel, and transported for use in handling cargo in foreign trade. In addition, the prohibition does not apply to stevedoring equipment and material which is either owned or leased by the owner or operator of the vessel or by the stevedoring company having the contract for the loading or unloading of the vessel, so long as the stevedoring equipment and material are transported without charge for use in the handling of cargo in foreign trade. The exemptions for empty cargo vans, empty lift vans, or empty shipping tanks apply to vessels of foreign nations that are found to extend reciprocal privileges to the vessels of the United States. See 46 U.S.C. § § 55107(c). Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 4.93(b)(1), the nations that are entitled to the privileges provided by 46 U.S.C. § 55107 include Bahamas, Hong Kong, Israel, Germany, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Panama and Singapore.
Typically, the key issue in cases involving vessel sharing agreements (“VSA”) is whether the parties operating under the provisions of the subject Agreement may be considered to be joint operators of a particular VSA vessel while it is engaged in transporting empty shipping containers. If the parties may be so considered, and if the containers transported are either owned or leased by those parties and transported for use in moving cargo in the foreign trade, the transportation would be permissible under 46 U.S.C. § 55107 so long as the transporting vessel is documented as provided in 19 C.F.R. § 4.93. See HQ 115402, August 10, 2001; HQ 115734, September 23, 2002; HQ H063595, June 9, 2009.
To determine whether the parties constitute joint vessel operators, it is necessary to review and examine the degree to which parties exercise operational control of the vessels. See HQ H011299, October 4, 2007; HQ 116713, August 31, 2006; HQ 116276, August 26, 2004. In reviewing prior VSAs, we note that the factors considered in determining the degree to which the parties shared the operational control of the designated vessels hinges upon the conditions set forth in the argreement, particularly how such conditions govern the parties. For example, the VSA members may jointly agree upon when, where and which vessels they would operate. They may also agree to cooperate in such matters as insurance, leases, sailing schedules, port calls, rate policies and the terms of service contracts, among other terms. Additionally, in other cases, the parties pooled shoreside chassis and made them available for any of the parties’ containers. See HQ 115863, January 9, 2003; HQ 116382, January 25, 2005; HQ H028460, July 1, 2008; HQ H063595, June 9, 2009.
Upon examining the Agreement submitted in this case, we find that the parties pledge to make shared decisions and share responsibilities in several significant areas. Under the Agreement the parties are authorized to discuss and agree upon vessel number, size, type, speed and other characteristics of vessels, as well as the sailing schedule, terminal and port facilities, transshipment, barge and feeder services. Under the terms of the Agreement, the parties will operate up to twenty-seven (27) vessels and space on all vessels will be allocated in agreed slots to each party of the Zim and G6 Alliance. Initially, the parties will deploy nine (9) vessels, four vessels to be provided by the G6 Alliance and five vessels to be provided by Zim. The twenty-seven vessels will have a capacity of approximately 12,5000 Twenty Foot Equivalent Units (TEUs), and the initial nine vessels will have an effectice capacity of approximately 3,800 TEUs.
Pursuant to Article 5 of the Agreement, space on each of the vessels deployed in the Service shall be allocated between the parties in such proportions as the parties may agree from time to time. The parties are also authorized to sell space to each other on an ad hoc basis at such slot charter hire and on terms to which they agree upon from time to time. Further, the parties are authorized to discuss and agree on the ports and terminals to be used by the vessels, and such Agreement provides several criteria in determining which terminal is chosen at each port of call; and to discuss and agree upon operational matters and liabilities including damages, claims, insurance, and indemnities under the Agreement. Under Article 11 of the Agreement, the parties agree to settle disputes by arbitration. All of the provisions in the Agreement taken together, indicate that there are numerous shared responsibilities and that the parties will jointly function together in the operation of the subject vessels and the carrying of cargo.
Accordingly, we believe that the subject provisions establish that the parties intend to exercise joint administration and operational control in implementing the VSA, and thus, all of the parties constitute joint vessel operators. As such, a party to the Agreement may transport aboard any vessel listed in the Agreement empty shipping containers, owned or leased by another party or parties to the Agreement, for the purpose of handling the latter’s cargo in the foreign trade without violating 46 U.S.C. § 55107.
HOLDING
Under the terms of the VSA entered into by the parties, as described above and detailed in the Agreement, all of the subject parties are considered joint vessel operators within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. § 55107 and as such may transport each others’ owned or leased empty containers aboard any of the subject VSA vessels without violating 46 U.S.C. § 55102.
Sincerely,
George Frederick McCray
Supervisory Attorney-Advisor/Chief
Cargo Security, Carriers and Restricted Merchandise Branch
Office of International Trade, Regulations & Rulings
U.S. Customs and Border Protection