C.F.R. » Title 46 » CHAPTER II—MARITIME ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION › SUBCHAPTER C—REGULATIONS AFFECTING SUBSIDIZED VESSELS AND OPERATORS › PART 296—MARITIME SECURITY PROGRAM (MSP) › Subpart A—Introduction

46 C.F.R. § 296.1

Purpose

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

This part prescribes regulations implementing the provisions of Subtitle C, Maritime Security Fleet Program, Title XXXV of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, the Maritime Security Act of 2003 (MSA 2003), governing Maritime Security Program (MSP) payments for vessels operating in the foreign trade or mixed foreign and domestic commerce of the United States allowed under a registry endorsement issued under 46 U.S.C. 12105. The MSA 2003 provides for joint responsibility between the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) for administering the law. These regulations provide the framework for the coordination between DOD and DOT in implementing the MSA 2003. Implementation of the MSA 2003 has been delegated by the Secretary of Transportation to the Maritime Administrator, U.S. Maritime Administration and by the Secretary of Defense to the Commander, U.S. Transportation Command, respectively.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2018–2023 · leading case: Matson Navigation Co. v. U.S. Dep't of Transp., 895 F.3d 799 (D.C. Cir. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Matson Navigation Co. v. U.S. Dep't of Transp., 895 F.3d 799 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “See 46 C.F.R. § 296.1 . MARAD regulations provide that: A Contractor who disagrees with the findings, interpretations or decisions of the Maritime Administration or the Contracting Officer with respect to the administration of this part or any other dispute or complaint…”
Matson Navigation Co., Inc. v. DOT, 77 F.4th 1151 (D.C. Cir. 2023). · cites it 2× “§§ 53102, 53103, 53105(f); see also 46 C.F.R. § 296.1 . MSP vessels must trade exclusively in foreign commerce with one important exception.”
Matson Navigation Co., Inc v. DOT (D.C. Cir. 2018). “See 46 C.F.R. § 296.1 . MARAD regulations provide that: A Contractor who disagrees with the findings, interpretations or decisions of the Maritime Administration or the Contracting Officer with respect to the administration of this part or any other dispute or complaint…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.