HQ 223476: Request for binding ruling; Transportation and Storage of Cargo Pending Lay-Order; International Carriers Bond; 19 CFR 4.37 and 4.31(1)

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 223476

                        December 23, 1991

BON-3-02-CO:R:C:E 223476 CB

CATEGORY:  Entry

Dennis T. Snyder, Esq.
7600 Red Road
Suite 200
S. Miami, FL  33143

RE:  Request for binding ruling; Transportation and Storage of
     Cargo Pending Lay-Order; International Carriers Bond;
     19 CFR 4.37 and 4.31(1)

Dear Mr. Snyder:

     This is in response to your letter of June 12, 1991, to the
Carrier Rulings Branch wherein you requested a binding ruling on
behalf of King Ocean Services de Venezuela S.A. and its wholly
owned Florida corporation, Sun Terminals, Inc..

FACTS:

     According to your letter, King Ocean Services de Venezuela
S.A. is a steamship company which operates several container
ships in the South and Central American trade.  King Ocean
restricts its operations to house-to-house containers.  It does
not accept palletized cargo, nor does it permit the stuffing or
devanning of containers on its premises.  King Ocean's U.S.
landside operations are conducted by a wholly owned Florida
corporation, Sun Terminals, Inc..

     Sun Terminals, Inc. has a leasehold interest in a pier area
north of the Port of Miami known as Albury Docks.  King Ocean
vessels have been loading and unloading at Albury Docks for
several years.  Typically, inbound containers are off loaded and
stacked or parked adjacent to the pier during the lay order
period.  Once Customs entry is made, the container is trucked
directly to importer's premises for devanning.  If U.S. Customs
designates the container for intensive examination, it is trucked
to a bonded devanning station for this purpose.

     Outbound containers are prepositioned at Albury prior to
arrival of the vessel, where they are readily available for
lading as soon as incoming containers are fully discharged.  You
state that the facilities at Albury Docks are no longer adequate
to handle the volume of traffic generated by King Ocean, and
                               -2-

there is no room for expansion on to adjacent property.  Sun
Terminals, Inc. has acquired a five acre parcel located
approximately five miles from Albury Docks, is within the
existing port limits, and is in the area nearest Albury Docks
where local zoning permits cargo handling operations.

     By letter dated May 8, 1991, Sun Terminals applied to the
district director for permission to immediately transport landed
containers to the new facility where they would be stored during
the lay order period.  The district director granted Sun
Terminals' request for a six month trial, but directed that an
immediate request for a ruling to determine the legality of the
proposed operation be made to Headquarters.

ISSUE:

     Does the District Director of Customs, Miami, have the
discretionary authority to permit full containers of merchandise
to be transported to and stored during the lay order period at a
facility within the port limits but approximately five miles
distant from the place of unlading?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     Section 448, of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19
U.S.C. 1448(a)), provides in pertinent part that:

     After the entry, preliminary or otherwise, of any vessel...
     such customs officer may issue a permit to the master of the
     vessel,..., to unlade merchandise or baggage...but
     merchandise or baggage so unladen shall be retained at the
     place of unlading until entry is made and a permit for its
     delivery granted.

     The "place of unlading", although not specifically defined
in the Customs Regulations, is by implication addressed in
section 4.30(l), Customs Regulations.  That section provides that
a district director may issue a permit to unlade if (1) it is
determined that the applicant provides sufficient space, capable
of being locked, sealed, or otherwise secured for the storage
immediately upon unlading of cargo, and (2) that the applicant
provides an adequate number of vehicles, capable of being locked,
sealed, or otherwise secured, for the transportation of such
cargo between the point of unlading and the point of storage.

     The Customs Service has previously ruled on this issue.
In C.S.D. 79-368, the Customs Service held that an air carrier
was permitted to store merchandise away from its own premises as
long as the storage facility was within the port limits.  In the
instant case, your client was granted permission to utilize the
                               -3-

inland facility on a six month trial basis contingent upon
certain conditions.  Therefore, upon termination of that six
month trial period, the district director may approve the use of
the inland facility if she is satisfied that the conditions set
forth in 19 CFR 4.30(l) are met.  It is assumed that the permit
to unlade will specify the correct location of the place of
unlading.

     The trial period was approved by letter dated June 6, 1991.
In that letter the district director advised you that a rider
must be attached to your vessel bond so that the bond included
the proposed container yard.  However, there is no need for a
rider because the existing bond covers the container yard.  In
C.S.D. 79-360, the Customs Service concluded that an air
carrier's blanket bond, by its terms, covers any off-airport
facilities located within the port limits.  Along the same lines,
in C.S.D. 79-368 it was held that no additional bond or bond
rider is necessary to secure the carrier's performance for off-
premises storage.  However, it was also held that the procedure
must be done under a written request which states the specific
storage location and obligates the bond to guarantee performance.

     The present International Carrier Bond incorporates all of
the conditions set forth in 19 CFR 113.64.  Under section
113.64(b), the principal agrees to comply with all laws and
regulations applicable to unlading, safekeeping, and disposition
of the merchandise.  If the principal defaults, the obligors
agree to pay liquidated damages.  Therefore, inasmuch as the
conditions of the bond are in effect wherever the merchandise is
unladen and the container yard is located within the port limits,
no rider is required for the proposed facility, assuming the
district director is satisfied that all other requirements for
the facility have been met.

HOLDING:

     A district director may authorize the use of an off-wharf or
off-pier facility located within the geographical area of any
port provided the district director is satisfied all other
requirements for the facility have been met.  The International
Carrier Bond does not require a rider because, by its terms, the
bond covers all such locations.

                                   Sincerely,




                                   John Durant, Director
                                   Commercial Rulings Division