VES-3-02-OT:RR:BSTC:CCI H102156 JLB
Mr. Brett Howe
Norton Lilly International
3902 Wharf Road
Galveston, Texas 77550
RE: Coastwise Transportation; 46 U.S.C. § 55103; 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b)
Dear Mr. Howe:
This letter is in response to your correspondence dated April 20, 2010, in which you request a ruling on whether the coastwise transportation of the individual mentioned therein aboard the HOEGH TRIDENT 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 HOEGH TRIDENT (“the vessel”). The individual will embark on April 22, 2010 at Galveston, Texas and will disembark at the port of Jacksonville, Florida on April 27, 2010. The individual, a superintendent, will travel aboard the vessel to perform an internal audit. This audit will involve a complete inspection of the vessel including its equipment and machinery, evaluating the crew’s performance, and reviewing the company’s procedures with the captain and chief engineer.
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 an internal audit. Under the facts presented, the individual would be “directly and substantially” related to the operation and business 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