HQ 111701: Vessel repair; Casualty claim; Storm damage; Late filing of entry; Vessel S/S CORONADO, V-322; Entry No. C53-0012165-0

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 111701


                        December 17, 1991



VES-12-18-CO:R:IT:C  111701 LLB

CATEGORY:  Carriers

Deputy Assistant Regional Commissioner
Commercial Operations Division
South Central Region
New Orleans, Louisiana 70130-2341

RE:  Vessel repair; Casualty claim; Storm damage; Late filing of
     entry; Vessel S/S CORONADO, V-322; Entry No. C53-0012165-0

Dear Sir:

     Reference is made to your memorandum of May 20, 1991, which
forwards for our consideration the Application for Relief filed
by Keystone Shipping Company, seeking relief from vessel repair
duties in regard to the above-captioned vessel repair entry.

FACTS:

     Over the course of a seven day passage from Whitegate,
Ireland, to Come-by-Chance, Newfoundland, Canada, the vessel
CORONADO encountered rough seas and winds as high as force 10 on
the Beaufort scale.  Repairs, limited to areas damaged during the
stormy crossing, were effected in Come-by-Chance.  The file
contains ample evidence of the heavy weather and of the damaged
condition of the vessel upon its arrival in Canada.  The vessel
first arrived in the United States on January 24, 1991, and a
vessel repair entry was filed in Houston, Texas, its port of
arrival, on February 8, 1991.

ISSUE:

     Whether the evidence establishes that the foreign shipyard
repairs obtained in the present matter were necessitated by
stress of weather, thus permitting refund or remission of vessel
repair duties.

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 which, like stress of weather, comes
with unexpected force or violence, such as fire, explosion, or
collision (Dollar Steamship Lines, Inc. v. United States, 5
Cust. Ct. 28-29, C.D. 362 (1940).  In this sense, a "casualty"
arises from an identifiable event of some sort.  In the absence
of evidence of such a casualty event, we must consider the repair
to have been necessitated by normal wear and tear.  See Customs
Ruling Letter 106159  LLB (9-8-83).

     The Customs Regulations provide at section 4.14(b)(2) (19
CFR 4.14(b)(2)), that entry of all foreign repairs, equipment,
parts, and materials purchases, shall be made to Customs at the
first port of arrival within five (5) working days of such
arrival.  In recognition of the fact that it is often the case
that not all information is at hand in such short order, the
regulations provide that the entry may be marked to indicate that
it is incomplete.  Sixty (60) days are provided to submit cost
evidence to render the entry complete, and provision for further
extensions is made.  Not extendable, however, is the regulatory
time period for submitting the vessel repair entry.  This time
limit is mandatory and carries the force of law since it is
promulgated pursuant to the specific authority conferred by
statute.  (See 19 U.S.C. 1498(a)(10)).

     There can be no doubt that the evidence submitted supports
a finding that the statutory conditions for refund or remission
have been met.  However, since the time limit set for submission
of an entry carries the force of law, the Application for relief
cannot be considered since it supports a delinquent and defective
entry.

HOLDING:

     Following a thorough review of the evidence submitted and an
analysis of the applicable law and precedents, we have determined
that, as a matter of law, the Application for relief cannot be
granted for the reasons set forth in the Law and Analysis section
of this ruling.  This entry should be liquidated and the vessel
operator should be informed of the right to file a protest of the
liquidation under 19 U.S.C. 1514 and 19 CFR Part 174.

                              Sincerely,




                              B. James Fritz
                              Chief
                              Carrier Rulings Branch