Entry No. C11-0034380-0; Vessel repair; Casualty; 19 U.S.C. 1466; M/V RAINBOW HOPE

HQ 112167 May 20, 1992 VES-13-18:CO:R:IT:C 112167 GFM CATEGORY: Carriers Deputy Assistant Regional Commissioner Classification and Value Branch ATTN: Regional Vessel Repair Liquidation Unit New York NY 10048-0945 RE: Entry No. C11-0034380-0; Vessel repair; Casualty; 19 U.S.C. 1466; M/V RAINBOW HOPE Dear Sir: Reference is made to your memorandum of April 1, 1992, which forwards for our consideration the Application for Relief filed in regard to the above-captioned vessel repair entry. FACTS: The record reflects that on November 15, 1991, the subject vessel, the M/V RAINBOW HOPE, while engaged in cargo operations at Praia da Vatoria, Azores, experienced an on-board crane malfunction which prevented the replacement of hatch covers which were previously placed ashore. As no other crane facilities were available to replace said covers, and as replacement of the covers was required in order to ensure the vessel's seaworthiness, a repair technician effected repairs to the ship's crane. Applicant now seeks to establish that said malfunction constituted a casualty and that subsequently assessed repair duties should be remissible. ISSUE: Whether the evidence submitted is sufficient to demonstrate that the equipment malfunction in question constitutes a casualty entitling applicant to remission of duties under 19 U.S.C. 1466. LAW AND ANALYSIS: Title 19, United States Code, section 1466(a), provides in pertinent part for payment of duty in the amount of 50 percent ad valorem on the cost of foreign repairs to vessels documented under the laws of the United States to engage in the foreign or coastwise trade, or vessels intended to be employed in such trade. Title 19, United States Code, subsection 1466(d)(1), states that the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to remit or refund such duties if the owner or master furnishes good and sufficient evidence that the vessel was compelled to put into a foreign port and make repairs to secure the safety and seaworthiness of the vessel to enable her to reach her port of destination. The term "casualty", as it is used in the statute, has been interpreted as something, like stress of weather, that comes with unexpected force or violence, such as fire, explosion, or collision. Dollar Steamship Lines, Inc. v. United States, 5 Cust. Ct. 23, 28-29, C.D. 362 (1940). In this sense, a casualty must arise from an identifiable event of some such sort. In the absence of evidence of such a casualty causing event, we must consider the repair to have been necessitated by normal wear and tear. C.S.D. 89-95, 23 Cust. B. & Dec., No. 43, 4, 5 (1989). In the present case, although the applicant provided documentation regarding the ship's specific malfunction and subsequent repairs, the applicant furnished no information whatsoever to show that said malfunction was caused by an event similar in nature to those enumerated above. Under these circumstances, "good and sufficient" evidence of casualty has not been provided. Accordingly, remission cannot be granted. HOLDING: Based upon the absence of evidence concerning the vessel's alleged casualty, the request for remission of duties is denied. Sincerely, B. James Fritz Chief Carrier Rulings Branch