19 U.S.C. §1466; Vessel Repair Entry C20-0058547-4; Protest 2002-03-100182; MV R.J. PFEIFFER, V-201

HQ W116683 July 7, 2006 VES-3-18-RR:BSTC:CCI W116683 GOB CATEGORY: Carriers Supervisory Entry Officer U.S. Customs and Border Protection P. O. Box 1389 Kenner, LA 70063 RE: 19 U.S.C. §1466; Vessel Repair Entry C20-0058547-4; Protest 2002-03-100182; MV R.J. PFEIFFER, V-201 Dear Madam: This is in response to your memorandum of June 20, 2006, forwarding for our review the protest filed by Matson Navigation Company (“protestant”) with respect to Vessel Repair Entry C20-0058547-4. Our ruling follows. FACTS: The MV R.J. PFEIFFER (the “vessel”), a U.S.-flag vessel, incurred foreign shipyard costs. The vessel arrived in the port of Los Angeles on October 8, 2001. A vessel repair entry was filed. Your office issued a determination of duty letter on December 6, 2002. You state in your letter that the cost of sludge removal (item #2 on the CF 226) was previously found by your office to be nondutiable. The protest was filed on March 5, 2003. The protestant filed a supplemental protest submission on June 12, 2006. ISSUE: Whether the costs for which the protestant seeks relief are dutiable under 19 U.S.C. § 1466. LAW AND ANALYSIS: Initially, we note that the information in the file indicates that the protest, with application for further review, was timely filed under the statutory and regulatory provisions for protests. 19 U.S.C. 1514(c)(3) and 19 CFR 174.12(e). Title 19, United States Code, section 1466 (19 U.S.C. §1466) provides for the payment of duty at a rate of fifty percent ad valorem on the cost of foreign repairs to vessels documented under the laws of the United States to engage in foreign or coastwise trade, or vessels intended to be employed in such trade. You have asked us to review the items described below. The following items involve invoices which are dated after the date of arrival of the vessel: 143, 148, 151, 152, 575, and 581. In HQ 116452, dated May 10, 2005, we stated as follows: An invoice dated after the date of arrival of a vessel is not probative evidence with respect to a claim that an item listed thereon is eligible for an exemption from any provision of 19 U.S.C. §1466 with regard to the subject voyage. [Emphasis in original.] Accordingly, consistent with our position as articulated in HQ 116452 and other rulings, we find that the protestant’s claim for relief with respect to these items is unsubstantiated because the invoices are dated after the date of arrival of the vessel. Therefore, we find that these items are dutiable. The protestant has not submitted invoices with respect to following items: 142, 158, 574, and 577. Therefore, we find that the protestant has not submitted satisfactory documentary evidence to support its claim for relief with respect to these items. Therefore, we find that these items are dutiable. Items 153, 154, 576, and 582 involve filters. It is our position that filters are equipment, not parts, and are thus not eligible for the exemption from duty found in 19 U.S.C. § 1466(h)(2) or (3). See, for example, HQ 116626, dated May 24, 2006 and HQ 114984, dated April 10, 2000. Therefore, these items are dutiable. Items one and three on the CF 226 involve cleaning. The CF 226 provides: “Cleaned up port and stbd tunnels and Engine Room” and “Cleaned up in the Engine Room.” The applicable purchase orders provide: “Cleaning gangs . . . Ship’s maint & upkeep . . . Provide three cleaning gangs for cleaning in the engine room, No. 3 cargo hold, and stbd tunnel” and “”Engine room cleaning . . . provide labor and materials to clean engine room.” Maintenance cleaning has been held to be dutiable. See, for example HQ 115148, dated April 20, 2001. We find that the subject cleaning is dutiable as maintenance cleaning. HOLDING: The costs which you have asked this office to review are dutiable under 19 U.S.C. § 1466, as discussed in the Law and Analysis section of this ruling. You are instructed to deny the protest with respect to the costs which we have reviewed. In accordance with the Protest/Petition Processing Handbook (CIS HB, January 2002, pp. 18 and 21), you are to mail this decision, together with the Customs Form 19, to the protestant no later than 60 days from the date of this letter. Any reliquidation of the entry in accordance with the decision must be accomplished prior to mailing of the decision. Sixty days from the date of the decision the Office of Regulations and Rulings will make the decision available to CBP personnel, and to the public on the CBP Home Page on the World Wide Web at www.cbp.gov, by means of the Freedom of Information Act, and other methods of public distribution. Sincerely, Glen E. Vereb Chief Cargo Security, Carriers and Immigration Branch