Coastwise Transportation; 46 U.S.C. § 55103; 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b)

HQ H049586 January 22, 2009 VES-3-02-OT:RR:BSTC:CCI H049586 JLB CATEGORY: Carriers Mr. Adam Young S5/Norton Lilly International 952 Houston Northcutt Blvd, Suite 100 Mount Pleasant, South Carolina 29464 RE: Coastwise Transportation; 46 U.S.C. § 55103; 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b) Dear Mr. Young: This letter is in response to your correspondence dated January 21, 2009, in which you request a ruling on whether the coastwise transportation of the individuals mentioned therein aboard the M/V ST. LOUIS EXPRESS 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 individuals aboard the non-coastwise-qualified M/V ST. LOUIS EXPRESS (“the vessel”). The five individuals embarked on January 22, 2009 at Charleston, South Carolina and will disembark at the port of Charleston on February 1, 2009. ISSUE Whether the use of the non-coastwise-qualified vessel in the voyage described above constitutes an engagement in coastwise trade in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 55103? 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. In its administration of 46 U.S.C. § 55103, U.S. Customs and Border Protection has ruled that the carriage of passengers entirely within territorial waters, even though the passengers disembark at their point of embarkation and the vessel touches no other coastwise point, is considered coastwise trade subject to the coastwise laws. However, the transportation of passengers to the high seas (i.e. beyond U.S. territorial waters) and back to the point of embarkation, assuming the passengers do not go ashore, even temporarily, at another United States point, often called a "voyage-to-nowhere," is not considered coastwise trade. See 29 O.A.G. 318 (1912); see, e.g., Headquarters Ruling Letter H027231, dated May 2, 2008; Headquarters Ruling Letter H014892, dated August 17, 2007; Headquarters Ruling Letter 113846, dated May 5, 1997; Headquarters Ruling Letter 112171, dated May 20, 1992. Based on the facts you provided, the coastwise laws are inapplicable to the subject individuals’ voyage. See Headquarters Ruling Letter H030959, dated June 17, 2008. The proposed itinerary beginning in Charleston, South Carolina and ending at the same port does not violate section 55103 because it constitutes a voyage-to-nowhere and does not involve transportation between two coastwise points. HOLDING The use of the non-coastwise-qualified vessel in the voyage described above does not constitute an engagement in coastwise trade in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 55103. Sincerely, Glen E. Vereb, Chief Cargo Security, Carriers and Immigration Branch