United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 23-20516 ____________ FILED February 7, 2025 Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company, L.L.C., Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Plaintiff—Appellant,

versus Chris Magnus, Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Kristi Noem, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security,

Defendants—Appellees,

American Petroleum Institute,

Intervenor Defendant—Appellee. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:22-CV-2481 ______________________________ Before Willett, Ho, and Duncan, Circuit Judges. Stuart Kyle Duncan, Circuit Judge: The U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency (“CBP”) issued a letter ruling to Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company (“Great Lakes”) ad- dressing whether the Jones Act would protect Great Lakes’ business from foreign competition in the offshore wind farm industry. Believing CBP Case: 23-20516 Document: 137-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/07/2025

No. 23-20516

misapplied the law, Great Lakes sued in federal court to have the letter va- cated. The American Petroleum Institute (“API”) intervened as a defend- ant and moved for summary judgment on the ground that Great Lakes lacked competitor standing to challenge the letter ruling. Agreeing with API, the district court dismissed Great Lakes’ suit. We affirm. I. Great Lakes is a dredging company that lays scour protection for off- shore wind farms. “Scour protection” refers to layers of rock placed around a coastal structure’s foundation to prevent erosion. Transporting and laying scour protection requires specialized vessels. In February 2020, Great Lakes wrote CBP about a wind project off Martha’s Vineyard (the “Vineyard Project”) on the Outer Continental Shelf (“OCS”). Specifically, the company asked for a letter ruling on whether the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. §§ 55101–23, would bar foreign-flag vessels from trans- porting scour protection rock from U.S. points to the OCS seabed. See 19 U.S.C. § 1625; 19 C.F.R. §§ 177.0, 177.9 (authorizing CBP ruling letters). 1 In January 2021, CBP responded with a letter ruling. The letter explained that carrying scour protection rock from a U.S. point to the OCS was the transportation of “merchandise” between “coastwise” points that must be undertaken by Jones Act-qualified vessels. See 46 U.S.C. § 55102(b). 2 By contrast, carrying such rock from a foreign point (such as Canada) to the OCS was not subject to the Jones Act and so could be undertaken by foreign-flag vessels.

_____________________ 1 CBP interprets and enforces the Jones Act’s coastwise trade provisions as they apply to vessel movements. See 19 C.F.R. §§ 4.80 et seq., 177.2(b)(2)(iv), 177.9(b)(4). 2 Jones Act-qualified vessels must be U.S.-built, U.S.-owned-and-operated, and U.S.-registered. Id. §§ 55102(b)(1)–(2), 12112, 12103.

2 Case: 23-20516 Document: 137-1 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/07/2025

No. 23-20516

In March 2021, however, CBP issued a modified letter ruling (the “M