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

HQ H050235 January 28, 2009 VES-3-02-OT:RR:BSTC:CCI H050235 JLB CATEGORY: Carriers Ms. Nora Pasca Norton Lilly International 249 E. Ocean Blvd., Ste. 200 Long Beach, California 90802 RE: Coastwise Transportation; 46 U.S.C. § 55103; 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b) Dear Ms. Pasca: This letter is in response to your correspondence dated January 28, 2009, in which you request a ruling on whether the coastwise transportation of the individual mentioned therein aboard the M/V APL CHINA 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 M/V APL CHINA (“the vessel”). The individual embarked on January 28, 2009 at Long Beach, California and will be disembarking at San Francisco, California on January 29, 2009. The individual is the wife of the 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 p. 50. It is CBP’s longstanding position that the spouse and children of officers of a vessel are not passengers for purposes of the passenger coastwise statute. See General Letter No. 117 (May 20, 1916) from the former Bureau of Navigation. A chief engineer qualifies as an “officer of a vessel,” therefore, the spouse and children of the vessel’s chief engineer may be aboard a non-coastwise-qualified vessel during a coastwise voyage and are not "passengers" within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. § 55103 and 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b). See Headquarters Ruling Letter H007256, dated February 26, 2007; Headquarters Ruling Letter H020279, dated November 30, 2007. 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