HQ 110638: Protest No. 300019-000957, RALEIGH BAY V-1 Date of Arrival: May 9, 1988 Port of Arrival: Tacoma, Washington Vessel Repair Entry: 110-0103679-4

Native CBP ruling rendition. Applicability is fact-specific; modification/revocation relationships and original publisher date are retained. Publisher sentinel year0001 means unknown date, not a historical legal adoption.

                            HQ 110638

                          May 24, 1990


VES-13-18-CO:R:P:C  110638 KVS

CATEGORY:  Carriers

Chief, Technical Branch
Pacific Region
1 World Trade Center
Suite 705
Long Beach, CA  90831

Re:  Protest No. 300019-000957, RALEIGH BAY V-1
     Date of Arrival:  May 9, 1988
     Port of Arrival:  Tacoma, Washington
     Vessel Repair Entry:  110-0103679-4

Dear Sir:

     Your memorandum dated October 12, 1989, forwarded a protest
regarding vessel repair entry no. 110-0103679-4.  Our findings
are set forth below.

FACTS:

     Headquarters earlier had occasion to render a decision
regarding this vessel repair entry.  Customs Letter Ruling 110193
RAH (dated July 12, 1989) determined that the entry should be
liquidated as dutiable since an application for relief had not
been timely filed.

     The vessel arrived in the United States on May 9, 1988 at
Tacoma, Washington.  Formal entry documents were filed on May 16,
1988.  On July 7, 1988,  Sea-Land filed a request for a 30-day
extension to the 60-day time period given by the regulations in
which to file an Application for Relief.  The request was granted
and the applicant was given until August 8, 1988, in which to
file.  Sea-Land failed to file an Application for Relief within
the extended time period and on August 8, 1988, Headquarters
denied Sea-Land's request for further extension of time to submit
evidence of cost (see Customs Letter 109658 GV (dated August 8,
1988)).  The entry was liquidated on August 11, 1989.  The
protest currently under consideration was filed August 21, 1989.



                              - 2 -


ISSUE:

     Whether the work performed on the subject vessel constitutes
dutiable repairs within the meaning of 19 U.S.C. 1466.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     Section 466, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1466)
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
foreign or coastwise trade, or vessels intended to engage in such
trade.

     In its application of the vessel repair statute (19 U.S.C.
1466), Customs has held that modifications/alterations/additions
to the hull and fittings of a vessel are not subject to vessel
repair duties.

     The protest under consideration asserts that the various
items of foreign shipyard work performed on the RALEIGH BAY
constitute such a nondutiable modification.  In support of this
claim, Sea-Land has submitted Keppel Shipyard invoice no.
4501/88.

     Among the many items listed on Keppel invoice no. 4501/88
claimed to be non-dutiable is the cost involves in changing the
name of the vessel.  Item 8186 reads:

          NAME CHANGE
               Existing name on bow, transom, bridge
          name boards, removed and new name installed.
          On hull, name outlined by bead-welds.  Name
          boards on bridge of chengal wood with weather
          varnished...

               Ship's name "NEWARK BAY" on bow transom
          and bridge name board removed and new name
          "RALEIGH BAY" installed.  On hull, name
          outlined by bead-weld.

     Contrary to the information contained in Keppel invoice
4501/88, Lloyd's Register indicates that the NEWARK BAY and the
RALEIGH BAY are two different vessels.

     Furthermore, along with its application for relief for the
subject entry, Sea-Land submitted a letter dated December 19,
1988, (copy enclosed) which addressed the clarification of dates
for the entries of 12 Sea-Land vessels, one of which was the
RALEIGH BAY.

                              - 3 -


     The letter indicates that the RALEIGH BAY entered the United
States at Tacoma, Washington on 5/9/88 and that the entry number
for this voyage is 559-1236280-7.  The protest currently under
consideration for the RALEIGH BAY V-1, indicates that the vessel
arrived on 5/9/88, made entry on 5/16/88, and that the entry
number for the voyage in question is 110-0103679-4.

     As the above discussion demonstrates, the information before
us is unclear.  The documentation submitted by Sea-Land contains
inconsistencies regarding both the name of the vessel and the
entry number under consideration.  Since the record does not
clearly establish the requisite elements to permit a finding that
the foreign shipyard work was a non-dutiable modification, we
decline to do so.  Accordingly, the protest is denied in full.

HOLDING:

     Absent clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, the
work performed on the subject vessel constitutes dutiable repairs
within the meaning of 19 U.S.C. 1466.

                                     Sincerely,




                                     B. James Fritz
                                     Chief
                                     Carrier Rulings Branch