The Jones Act and PR

[Laszlo]

http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/27/news/economy/jones-act-puerto-rico/index.html

[chengkp75]

And for the other side of the argument:

 

http://gcaptain.com/american-maritime-industry-fights-back-false-claims-regarding-jones-act-relief-efforts-puerto-rico/

[garycarla]

And again, it looks like folks on both sides are in a tizzy without working through the facts and reality. (I admit I have the typical emotional response, but really have little information to make an informed opinion)

[Mosi]

So a small tangent, I assume Pride of America then has to have 75% american crew. For those who've sailed on it was there a noticeable difference good or bad in the service compared to other ncl ships?

[pspercy]

So a small tangent, I assume Pride of America then has to have 75% american crew. For those who've sailed on it was there a noticeable difference good or bad in the service compared to other ncl ships?

 

I believe it's 75% with "green card" or better.

[Hamilton_Rob]

So a small tangent, I assume Pride of America then has to have 75% american crew. For those who've sailed on it was there a noticeable difference good or bad in the service compared to other ncl ships?

 

 

 

Yes, very noticeable.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[pspercy]

Some foreign flag cruise ships are delivering supplies to PR and USVI from US ports, doesn't this violate Jones Act?

[NYcruzzer]

And for the other side of the argument:

 

http://gcaptain.com/american-maritime-industry-fights-back-false-claims-regarding-jones-act-relief-efforts-puerto-rico/

 

Funny thing. CNN only telling one side of the story in their continued effort to BBQ President Trump..

[casofilia]

Surely all Americans want to get supplies to Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Isles any way they can and would prefer to turn a blind eye to the Jones Act rather than sea their fellow Americans suffer any more than they already have.

[chengkp75]

So a small tangent, I assume Pride of America then has to have 75% american crew. For those who've sailed on it was there a noticeable difference good or bad in the service compared to other ncl ships?

 

US flag ships, including the POA, must have all licensed deck and engine officers as US citizens, and the remainder of the crew must be 75% US citizens, and the remainder being resident aliens (green card holders). NCL does have a waiver where they can substitute some of the 25% with NRAC (non-resident alien crew) that require a US merchant mariner document, background check, and a business visa, along with some other requirements.

 

Some foreign flag cruise ships are delivering supplies to PR and USVI from US ports, doesn't this violate Jones Act?

 

The ships are not transporting goods for profit, so the Jones Act does not apply. These supplies are donated by the cruise line.

 

As noted in the gCaptain article, the problem is not a lack of Jones Act tonnage to get the needed relief supplies to PR, but a limit on what can be handled by the port, and how to get those supplies distributed around the island. If it were a question of insufficient tonnage available, I would support a waiver, but that is not the case, there are US flag ships ready to take supplies, or already taking supplies, once the ports can accommodate them and the supplies on shore.

 

And if anyone really believes that most "US consumer products" that are supposedly costing more in PR due to the Jones Act, are manufactured in the US and not overseas, you don't understand the world economy. Walmart, and Target can ship their products in from overseas on foreign ships, as noted about half of the ships calling in PR in the past are foreign flag ships.

[VtMac]

US flag ships, including the POA, must have all licensed deck and engine officers as US citizens, and the remainder of the crew must be 75% US citizens, and the remainder being resident aliens (green card holders). NCL does have a waiver where they can substitute some of the 25% with NRAC (non-resident alien crew) that require a US merchant mariner document, background check, and a business visa, along with some other requirements.

 

 

 

The ships are not transporting goods for profit, so the Jones Act does not apply. These supplies are donated by the cruise line.

 

As noted in the gCaptain article, the problem is not a lack of Jones Act tonnage to get the needed relief supplies to PR, but a limit on what can be handled by the port, and how to get those supplies distributed around the island. If it were a question of insufficient tonnage available, I would support a waiver, but that is not the case, there are US flag ships ready to take supplies, or already taking supplies, once the ports can accommodate them and the supplies on shore.

 

And if anyone really believes that most "US consumer products" that are supposedly costing more in PR due to the Jones Act, are manufactured in the US and not overseas, you don't understand the world economy. Walmart, and Target can ship their products in from overseas on foreign ships, as noted about half of the ships calling in PR in the past are foreign flag ships.

 

 

Thanks Chief, once again you sum it as only a mariner can

[FLACRUISER99]

Does anyone really believe that the the Jones Act is helping PR?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[chengkp75]

Does anyone really believe that the the Jones Act is helping PR?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

 

While the Jones Act is not helping PR, it is not hindering them either, and is providing benefits to the US in general.

[rmf11699]

Following

[Laszlo]

POTUS just waived the Jones act, hopefully this will help speed things up

[JohnIreland]

POTUS just waived the Jones act, hopefully this will help speed things up

 

It won't. The bottle neck is the damaged port.

[hawkeyetlse]

While the Jones Act is not helping PR, it is not hindering them either, and is providing benefits to the US in general.

Many studies suggest that the Jones Act is in fact bad for PR, and this waiver proves that it is possible to create an exemption for PR without scrapping the entire law for the entire US in general.

 

It's not clear whether a 10-day waiver will do much good in the disaster relief effort, but then waiving the law for one week when Irma hit earlier this month probably didn't make a whole lot of difference, either. But they did that as a matter of course for Irma (with hardly a squeak in the media), while they hesitated for many days after Maria hit Puerto Rico (giving rise to a media frenzy and lots of unnecessary bad press for the administration). I find this really inexplicable, especially since the September 8 waiver already included Puerto Rico, too.

[Mustangdrew]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/09/28/trump-waives-shipping-restrictions-puerto-rico/711541001/

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[NLH Arizona]

It won't. The bottle neck is the damaged port.

And that they don't have the facilities to get the items into the areas on the island. The governor, yesterday, asked for troops and equipment to accomplish this.

[chengkp75]

Many studies suggest that the Jones Act is in fact bad for PR, and this waiver proves that it is possible to create an exemption for PR without scrapping the entire law for the entire US in general.

 

It's not clear whether a 10-day waiver will do much good in the disaster relief effort, but then waiving the law for one week when Irma hit earlier this month probably didn't make a whole lot of difference, either. But they did that as a matter of course for Irma (with hardly a squeak in the media), while they hesitated for many days after Maria hit Puerto Rico (giving rise to a media frenzy and lots of unnecessary bad press for the administration). I find this really inexplicable, especially since the September 8 waiver already included Puerto Rico, too.

 

And the GAO study quoted in the gCaptain link states that they were not able to substantiate many "anecdotal" claims of higher shipping costs for Jones Act shipping, despite requests to the shippers claiming this. The GAO feels that the problem is too complex to be able to definitively place blame on the Jones Act for the state of PR's economy.

 

There is a difference between Irma/Florida and Maria/Puerto Rico. In Florida, there are no oil pipelines to bring petroleum products in, and the entire state has about a 4 day reserve in their storage tanks. Jones Act tankers have been in a "shuttle" service for decades bringing fuel to Florida on a nearly daily basis. Texas did not need a waiver, because the pipeline infrastructure allowed fuel to be sent to Texas from other areas. The waiver in regards to Irma was way too late for any foreign flag ship to load fuel, get to Florida, and discharge it in order to alleviate the gasoline shortage. It was strictly a public relations gesture. It resulted in exactly one foreign flag ship carrying refined product to Florida after the storm, while there were 6 US flag Jones Act tankers stacked up along the Florida coast waiting on the ports to open (I'm on one of them).

 

In Puerto Rico, there is no shortage of fuel, there is no way to get the fuel from the oil terminals to the power plants and gas stations. This is not a Jones Act problem. Similarly with other relief aid like food and construction materials, there are currently several Jones Act ships waiting in mainland US ports because there is no room for their cargo in the ports of PR, since there is no way to get those goods from the port to the areas that need it. The reason the President held off waiving the Jones Act this time, is that the FEMA director advised that the problem is not shipping goods to PR, but getting the goods distributed around the island. I see this waiver as just one more public relations gesture that will not change the supply chain to the island in any significant way.

 

What the administration should do, if they haven't already, is release some of the Military Sealift ships based on the East Coast and Gulf Coast to provide vehicles and engineering equipment to assist the relief effort, as these ships are designed to offload equipment and rolling stock without the need for port facilities. While they have sent the hospital ship Comfort, and a Marine amphibious assault ship to evacuate people and provide helicopter transport, they need to get the "dirty hands" of Army combat engineers and Navy Seabees deployed and get their vehicles to the island to start cleaning up and distributing the food and supplies already there.

[www3traveler]

Just saw where the Jones Act has officially be waived.

[hawkeyetlse]

There is a difference between Irma/Florida and Maria/Puerto Rico.

Thank you for the interesting details, but you are confirming that in both cases the decision to waive the Jones Act was largely a symbolic public relations gesture. In the case of Irma, they botched it by not getting the story any play in the media, and for Puerto Rico, they botched it by waiting for so long, so that the refusal to waive the Jones Act became a gesture of neglect/indifference for a second-class US territory.

 

The reason the President held off waiving the Jones Act this time, is that the FEMA director advised that the problem is not shipping goods to PR, but getting the goods distributed around the island.

That would be a valid reason, so again from a public relations perspective, that should have been the only reason given. Instead, what the President actually said yesterday in response to this question was "we have a lot of shippers and a lot of people that work in the shipping industry that don’t want the Jones Act lifted". :rolleyes:

[broberts]

What was curious to me was the fact that the Act was apparently waived for TX and FL but not initially for PR. Regardless of logic, the optics are far from positive.

 

I don't envy those trying to balance the resources. Sending more people sounds like a good idea, until one considers the added logistics load. Still I do wonder at how long it is taking to get needed resources in place and functioning.

 

With all the problems PR is facing, we should not forget the USVI or all the other islands affected.

[hawkeyetlse]

What was curious to me was the fact that the Act was apparently waived for TX and FL but not initially for PR.

I don't think that is correct. The September 8 waiver was for ships to travel from New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Louisiana to South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, and Puerto Rico. You can read the text of the decision here. So Puerto Rico was included (and Texas was not, as a destination for fuel shipments, and chengkp75 already explained the reasons for that).

[chengkp75]

What was curious to me was the fact that the Act was apparently waived for TX and FL but not initially for PR. Regardless of logic, the optics are far from positive.

 

I don't envy those trying to balance the resources. Sending more people sounds like a good idea, until one considers the added logistics load. Still I do wonder at how long it is taking to get needed resources in place and functioning.

 

With all the problems PR is facing, we should not forget the USVI or all the other islands affected.

 

Actually, using the Sealift ships would not place any additional strain on the logistics. These ships are already loaded with tentage and the like to house the troops whose equipment is onboard, and there are months of rations onboard. Additionally, the ships have the ability to pump diesel fuel ashore to fuel the vehicles unloaded, and to fill fuel bladders for delivery by those trucks to places in need.