HQ 111614: Vessel Repair; Heavy Weather; PRESIDENT MADISON; Entry No. 335-0100590-5; 19 U.S.C. 1466; 19 C.F.R. 4.14(d)(1)(iii).

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 111614

                         August 5, 1991

VES-13-18   CO:R:IT:C  111614  JBW

CATEGORY:   Carriers

Chief, Technical Branch
Commercial Operations
Pacific Region
1 World Trade Center
Long Beach, CA 90831

RE:  Vessel Repair; Heavy Weather; PRESIDENT MADISON; Entry No.
     335-0100590-5; 19 U.S.C. 1466; 19 C.F.R. 4.14(d)(1)(iii).

Dear Sir:

     This letter is in response to your memorandum of March 26,
1991, which forwards for our review the application for relief
filed in conjunction with the above-referenced vessel repair
entry.

FACTS:

     The record reflects that the subject vessel, the PRESIDENT
MADISON, arrived at the port of Seattle, Washington, on December
29, 1990.  Vessel repair entry, number 335-0100590-5, was filed
on January 4, 1991.  The entry indicates that foreign repairs
were made to the vessel to repair damages caused by heavy weather
encountered by the vessel during the voyage of the vessel from
Seattle, Washington, to Yokohama, Japan, through Dutch Harbor,
Alaska.

     The documentation submitted indicates that the damages
occurred between November 26, 1990, and December 1, 1990, and
that further damages occurred between December 2, 1990, and
December 6, 1990.  The vessel log and damage reports indicate
that the vessel encountered force six to eleven winds, force six
to nine seas, and force five to eight swells.

ISSUE:

     Whether the evidence submitted demonstrates that the repairs
performed to the ship in a foreign shipyard were necessitated by
stress of weather and were necessary to secure the safety and
seaworthiness of the vessel.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     Title 19, United States Code, section 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.
The statute provides for the remission of the above duties in
those instances where good and sufficient evidence is furnished
to show that foreign repairs were compelled by "stress of weather
or other casualty" and were necessary to secure the safety and
seaworthiness of the vessel to enable her to reach her port of
destination.  19 U.S.C. 1466(d)(1).

     Customs Regulations require that certain supporting
evidence be submitted with an application for relief for damages
resulting from stress of weather.  This evidence includes
photocopies of the relevant parts of the vessel's logs,
certification of any claimed casualty by the master or other
responsible vessel officer with personal knowledge of the facts,
and a certification by the master that the repairs were necessary
for the safety and seaworthiness of the vessel to enable her to
reach her port of destination in the United States.  19 C.F.R.
4.14(d)(1)(iii)(D)-(F) (1989).

     In Treasury Decision 78-180, we set out guidelines to be
used when relief is requested on the basis that the vessel
encountered high winds. T.D. 78-180, 12 Cust. B. & Dec. 382
(1978).  We held that winds of force 9 on the Beaufort Scale, a
numerical scale rating winds according to ascending velocity from
zero (calm) to twelve (hurricane), accompanied by a reasonable
description of the conditions and verified as required in the
regulations, raise a presumption that damages caused were due to
stress of weather.  Id.  The damage reports filed by the ship's
master and the vessel log indicate winds of up to force 11.  The
log entries during the periods during which the damages occurred
frequently note that the vessel was "pitching moderately to
heavily" in "very rough seas."  This evidence appears sufficient
to support the applicant's claim that the damages for which
relief is sought resulted from the weather conditions described.

     As noted above, to claim remission because of stress of
weather, the applicant must demonstrate not only that the foreign
repairs were compelled by stress of weather, but also that the
repairs were necessary for the safety and seaworthiness of the
vessel.  Such evidence may take the form of a certificate
furnished by the master as required by the regulation.
Notwithstanding claims in the applicant's letter of February 20,
1991, the record in this case does not contain certification or
any other statement by the master that the repairs were necessary
for the safety and seaworthiness of the vessel to enable her to
reach her United States port of destination.  The application for
relief, therefore, must be denied.

HOLDING:

     This evidence appears sufficient to support the applicant's
claim that the damages for which relief is sought resulted from
the weather conditions described.  However, absent a
certification or other statement by the master that the repairs
were necessary for the safety and seaworthiness of the vessel,
the foreign work for which the applicant seeks relief is
dutiable under 19 U.S.C. 1466.


                              Sincerely,



                              B. James Fritz
                              Chief
                              Carrier Rulings Branch