Newly Released CBP HQ Rulings for March 23
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated March 23 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
H323889: Coastwise Transportation; 46 U.S.C. § 55103; 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b).
| Ruling: The individuals are not “passengers." Therefore, the coastwise transportation of such individuals would not be in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 55103. |
| Issue: Whether the individuals described are “passengers” within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. § 55103 and 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b) |
| Item: The subject individuals travel aboard non-coastwise-qualified vessels operating in Alaskan waters transported between Alaskan ports. The individuals will embark and disembark these vessels during the 2022 Glacier Bay Ocean Ranger Program season according to a schedule that will be provided to and coordinated with the CBP port in Juneau, Alaska. The individuals would be transported for the purpose of conducting inspections of engineering, sanitation and health-related operations of the vessels as they relate to the marine discharge and pollution requirements and health and safety operating procedures required under Alaska state law and federal law, while the vessels are underway. |
| Reason: A passenger within the meaning of this part is any person carried on a vessel who isn't connected with the operation of the vessel, its navigation, ownership or business. The proposed activities described in your request would be directly and substantially connected to the operation, navigation, ownership or business of the vessels. |
| Ruling Date: March 22, 2022 |
H321240: Coastwise Transportation; 46 U.S.C. §§ 55102, 55103; Merchandise; Passengers; Vessel Equipment; Oil Well Stimulation; 19 C.F.R § 4.50(b); 19 C.F.R. § 4.80; 19 C.F.R. § 4.80a; 19 C.F.R. § 4.80b.
| Ruling: (1) Method 1 of Well Stimulation Vessel (WSV) transfer to the well constitutes “transportation” within the meaning of the Jones Act insofar as the WSV transports the Well Stimulation Fluid (WSF) from the port to a second vessel, which in turn performs the well stimulation operation. The proposed operation would violate the Jones Act. Method 4 doesn't constitute “transportation” within the meaning of the Jones Act, provided that the floating production storage and offloading (FPSO) remains attached to the well throughout the duration of well stimulation operations. Methods 2, 3 and 5 don't constitute “transportation” within the meaning of the Jones Act and wouldn't violate the act. (2) The subject well stimulation crew are not “passengers” within the meaning of the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the transportation of such individuals is not in violation. |
| Issues: (1) Whether the contemplated well stimulation operation by the non-coastwise-qualified vessel violates the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 55102 (2) Whether the contemplated transportation of individuals onboard the non-coastwise-qualified vessel violates the Passenger Vessel Services Act, 46 U.S.C. § 55103? |
| Items: Two non-coastwise-qualified WSVs equipped with a Well Stimulation Plant (WSP), consisting of tanks, pumps, electronics, mixing equipment and hoses. The WSP will not be removed from the WSV during the project. The WSV will be laden with water, sand and various liquid chemicals and acids that will be mixed in the WSP to make up the WSF that will be used in this operation. The WSV will then transfer the well stimulation fluid to the well via one of five methods: (1) via Coflexip hose to a second vessel which will in turn interface with a subsea facility; (2) via Coflexip hose to access wells via a fixed platform’s piping; (3) via Coflexip hose to access wells via a tension leg platform’s piping; (4) via Coflexip hose to access wells via a Floating Production Storage and Offloading unit (“FPSO”); and (5) via Coflexip hose to access wells serviced by a Single Point Anchor Reservoir (“SPAR”) platform. |
| Reason: CBP has interpreted merchandise not to include “vessel equipment,” including items that aid in the “installation, inspection, repair, maintenance, surveying, positioning, modification, construction, decommissioning, drilling, completion, workover, abandonment or other similar activities or operations of wells." CBP has previously determined that chemicals for oil well stimulation are generally considered equipment when aboard a WSV, provided the WSV actually performs the well stimulation operation. Method 1 violates the Jones Act insofar as the WSF constitutes merchandise and not vessel equipment. It is well established that vessel equipment must be transported on the vessel on which it is used rather than a second vessel. |
| Ruling Date: March 21, 2022 |
H265715: Modification of HQ H016800 and HQ H190655; Country of origin marking of a certain MIC Percutaneous Placement Kit and Medical Kits
| Ruling: The PKK and medical kits at issue must be marked with the country of origin of each component contained within those kits. |
| Issues: whether the containers for the PKK and medical kits at issue are marked in accordance with the requirements of Treasury Decision (“T.D.”) 91-7 |
| Items: Various medical kits, imported into the U.S. from Mexico. The kits contain numerous components, which are organized and packaged into sub-kits. The components include items such as needles, scissors, towels, catheters, sponges, scalpels, plastic bowls, forceps and gauzes. The sub-kits group various components together into a single container -- for example, a box with scissors of different sizes or a sealed bag with a catheter, needles and blades. The components are sourced from various countries, including the U.S., Canada, Mexico, China, the Dominican Republic, South Korea, Thailand and Vietnam, are assembled into sub-kits by outside suppliers, and are packaged into a single container -- the final medical kit -- in Mexico. Upon importation into the U.S., some kits are sold directly to hospitals, and some are repacked, with additional components inserted into the finished kit. The imported kits are marked on the outside container with the names of countries from which the subject merchandise may originate, for example “Products of the U.S., Mexico, China, Taiwan.” The individual components aren't marked. |
| Reason: The principles governing the country of origin marking of sets, mixtures and composite goods were addressed by CBP in Treasury Decision 91-7. If the materials or components have not been substantially transformed, each component must be individually marked to indicate its own country of origin. CBP finds that marking of the outer containers with a list of countries of origin of all articles contained within those containers, without reference to the country of origin of each individual article, isn't consistent with T.D. 91-7. |
| Ruling Date: Jan. 5, 2022 |
H281992: Internal Advice Request; Customs Business
| Ruling: (1) The submission and/or completion of CBP Forms 3461, 7501, 3299 and DOD Form 1252, individually or in combination, constitutes “customs business.” (2) The execution and filing of CBP Forms 7501 and 3461 must be done by a party qualified as the “importer of record” or a licensed customs broker. The filing of CBP Form 3299 and DOD Form 1252 may be done “on behalf of the owner of unaccompanied personal and household effects by either a U.S. Dispatch Agent or a designated responsible military official in his own name.” (3) N/A (4) Either the owner, the U.S. Dispatch Agent, or the designated military official can contract with a customs broker with a duly executed power of attorney to submit CBP Form 3299 and DOD Form 1252. |
| Issues: (1) Does the submission and/or completion of CBP Forms 3461, 7501, 3299 and DOD Form 1252, constitute “customs business”? (2) Is a Customs broker’s license required by an agent that submits CBP Forms 3461, 7501, 3299,and DOD Form 1252?(3) In the event that headquarters determines that the submission of such forms don't constitute customs business, who should be identified as the importer of record? (4) Is a valid power of attorney required when submitting the forms? |
| Items: N/A |
| Reason: (1) The U.S. Court of International Trade clarified in Delgado v. U.S. that the “definition of ‘Customs business’ is very broad.” Customs business includes “transactions with the Customs Service” and any “activities” involving such transactions. The execution and filing of CBP Forms 7501 and 3461 must be done by a party qualified as the “importer of record” or a licensed customs broker. |
| Ruling Date: Sept. 21, 2021 |