Regarding Sean’s statements below that the CFR definition “does not hold any weight”:

This United States Code of Federal Regulations provision IS the law for federal domestic purposes. The fact that it is the compilation of federal administrative law, and not part of the criminal code, does not make it less official or binding.

Having said that, clearly no one will come lock you up (or otherwise punish you) for asserting that your power boat is a motor vessel. Just know that it is not technically so if not in compliance with the definition.

Mike Curreri

Sent from my iPhone

On 12/6/19 7:00 PM, Michael Curreri via Trawlers-and-Trawlering wrote:

That's not what I said. What I said was that a definition of a term in
the definitions list of any section of the code does not define that
term absolutely, by which I mean outside of the specific code section to
which the definitions list applies. I even gave an example: the
definition of "Commandant" in that section does not apply to, for
example, the US Army.

I know very well what CFRs are. I also know how to read them and how
they are applied by the courts.

The definition of a "Motor Vessel" which you cited applies only to
46CFR24 and not elsewhere. And 46CFR24 applies only to "... uninspected
commercial vessels, certain motor vessels, vessels propelled by sail
carrying passengers for hire, and barges carrying passengers for hire."
(c.f. 46CFR24.01-1).

You will note that 46CFR24 does not apply to pleasure craft.
(Thankfully, because the purpose of the section is to lay out minimum
engineering requirements that many pleasure craft would not meet.) So I
will say it again: the federal codes are silent on whether a 40'
pleasure trawler could be called a "Motor Vessel."

-Sean
m/y (or M/V, since Judy promoted me :) -- thanks Judy! ) Vector
Finally back in the water at Metal Shark shipbuilding, Bayou La Batre
http://OurOdyssey.BlogSpot.com

I'm afraid I must already correct myself:

On 12/6/19 9:47 PM, Sean Welsh wrote:

Correction: That definitions list applies to all of Subchapter C (but
not the entire Federal Code), which includes also 46CFR25-28

Correction: Parts of Subchapter C do, in fact, apply to pleasure craft.
This is what I get for typing late at night after a long day in the
boatyard.

I still stand behind this one. A definition in a table of definitions
for a specific chapter does not dictate terminology that must be used
outside of the purpose of the code, it merely establishes which other
parts of the code something meeting that definition must also meet.
IOTW, calling a 40' boat a Motor Vessel does not, by itself, cause that
boat to have to comply with the Motor Vessel requirements, just as
calling a 100' ship a "boat" would not relieve it of compliance. Yet
it's not unlawful to call a 120' towboat a "boat," nor is it unlawful to
call a rowboat with an outboard a "motor vessel."

In the California Vehicle Code, what most of us think of as a motorhome
is legally called a "Housecar." Yet I can assure you there are no
"housecar" dealers or service centers in California. They are called by
everyone, including law enforcement, motorhomes (or maybe RVs or
campers, less specific). Yet legally they must comply with "housecar"
rules, and nowhere in the code will you find the term "motorhome."
Calling it a motorhome doesn't get you out of the housecar rules, but
you are not required to refer to it as a housecar.

FWIW and with a certain amount of facial redness.

-Sean

I follow this list hoping for useful info however I have come to realize it’s merely a chat space for a couple of people and not really an exchange of useful info . A request for equipment recommendation received two private response , for which I am very grateful , meanwhile days go by defining what a MV is .
Charles Miller
MV or some kind of 43 boat