HAL's Florida, Home Port, Port Everglades, FLL.

[sail7seas]

I heard Jones Act mentioned while lisening to coverage re: Irma and projections for Florida frfom gthis monster storm. . It seems, the shorgtage of gas making it a problem for peop le to evacuate, required tankers to come to both Port of Tampa and Port Everglades to re-supply. The President signed a waiver of the Jones Act to enable this to happen, gthe tankers carried the fuel and the ports welcomed them. I was ' musing' to myself, 'maybe they';ll leave the Jones Act Waiver in place and PVSA might be waived which would opermit some "interesting itinineraries that now violate the Act. Anyone want to 'tweet" he idea? Maybe the pressident sill see it 'act'. :D

 

I can't leave this post without wishing all in Irm'as path good luck and best t wishes.

[chengkp75]

I heard Jones Act mentioned while lisening to coverage re: Irma and projections for Florida frfom gthis monster storm. . It seems, the shorgtage of gas making it a problem for peop le to evacuate, required tankers to come to both Port of Tampa and Port Everglades to re-supply. The President signed a waiver of the Jones Act to enable this to happen, gthe tankers carried the fuel and the ports welcomed them. I was ' musing' to myself, 'maybe they';ll leave the Jones Act Waiver in place and PVSA might be waived which would opermit some "interesting itinineraries that now violate the Act. Anyone want to 'tweet" he idea? Maybe the pressident sill see it 'act'. :D

 

I can't leave this post without wishing all in Irm'as path good luck and best t wishes.

 

I haven't seen anything that says Trump has actually signed any Jones Act waivers, and the refinery that placed the request for the waiver, Phillips 66 in Belle Chasse, LA, in hoping to keep their refinery open in the wake of others closing due to Harvey, has now withdrawn their request for a Jones Act waiver, as they have sufficient Jones Act tonnage to meet their needs. So I'm not convinced that any foreign tankers carried US petroleum cargo into Florida. There are constantly foreign tankers bringing product into Florida from overseas, but this is not Jones Act cargo. Since Florida has no pipelines, they rely 100% on tankers bringing refined petroleum products to their market.

 

In fact, my Jones Act tanker, which I'm waiting to join, is currently sitting idle off Port Arthur, TX, since the refineries there are idle due to "port recovery" (the ports of Port Arthur and Beaumont determining that the channels are clear and berths are clear to receive the ships). If there was any need for Jones Act tonnage, we would have been able to pick up a pretty lucrative spot charter.

 

And despite all the rhetoric that the, mainly agricultural, lobby spouts about the adverse affects of the Jones Act, it supports nearly a half million jobs in the US, and over $15 billion in domestic economy (where all tax revenue and consumer/commercial spending is in the US). The PVSA does the same for the US economy, at a smaller level, and both Acts keep US ports and waterways safe and clean.

[sail7seas]

I haven't seen anything that says Trump has actually signed any Jones Act waivers , and the refinery that placed the request for the waiver, Phillips 66 in Belle Chasse, LA, in hoping to keep their refinery open in the wake of others closing due to Harvey, has now withdrawn their request for a Jones Act waiver, as they have sufficient Jones Act tonnage to meet their needs. So I'm not convinced that any foreign tankers carried US petroleum cargo into Florida. There are constantly foreign tankers bringing product into Florida from overseas, but this is not Jones Act cargo. Since Florida has no pipelines, they rely 100% on tankers bringing refined petroleum products to their market.

 

In fact, my Jones Act tanker, which I'm waiting to join, is currently sitting idle off Port Arthur, TX, since the refineries there are idle due to "port recovery" (the ports of Port Arthur and Beaumont determining that the channels are clear and berths are clear to receive the ships). If there was any need for Jones Act tonnage, we would have been able to pick up a pretty lucrative spot charter.

 

And despite all the rhetoric that the, mainly agricultural, lobby spouts about the adverse affects of the Jones Act, it supports nearly a half million jobs in the US, and over $15 billion in domestic economy (where all tax revenue and consumer/commercial spending is in the US). The PVSA does the same for the US economy, at a smaller level, and both Acts keep US ports and waterways safe and clean.

 

[b ]

 

I was listening to a joint press conferfence with Head of Fe MA and head of HHS. they both sounded so competent and knoeldgeable, I could not turn off Weather channel where I was listending/watching when I heard Jones Act and it c aughgt my attention. They adressed so many issues during their prepared remarks the the prress literally had NO questions when they finished. Every imaginable subject was co v ereed. Yes, I head them say President had signed the Waiver. I seriously doubt they were r mistaken. They quoted amouunts but I am vague as to numbers. b ut it was millions of gallons of fuel thagtg was f delivered. .

They also stated they had either military or police escorts to b ring r the fuel to gas stations These two men were very impessive IMO and wrack my brain, I could not think of a thing I would have liked to have heeard about preparations. they did not mention. Put on Weather Channel, maybe they will broadc ast a tape of the meeting as the day goes on. How would it even occcur to me to mention such if I had not hearrd it? AAlso....... perhaps the Jones Act waivier was needed not becuase of amount of approvedJones Act vs. foreign tonnage but because of u.S. prot to U.S. port ? I certainly know you are far bettter versed in all this than I am but I know what I heard. :) C ould gthey have misspoken andd really meant that applicaion was made? I suppose so but I'd b e sufprised. As I said, gthey were so prerparrdd, confident and seemingly competent.

Edited September 8, 2017 by sail7seas

[chengkp75]

What I have heard is that the EPA has granted a waiver for on-road diesel, meaning that off-road diesel (agricultural) that is not dyed red as on-road diesel is, may be used for on-road uses in Florida. The two types of diesel have different sulfur content allowed.

 

And while numbers like "millions of gallons" seems impressive to the general public, my company's tankers, which are of a class known as "handy-sized" due to its ability to bring an economical load of product, and still be small enough for nearly every port, carry 12-13 million gallons at a time. We have 4-5 ships making twice weekly runs to Florida ports from the US Gulf coast, so we bring in around 113 million gallons of gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel to Florida weekly. And we are only one company.

 

As stated, the only reason for a Jones Act waiver would be if a US refinery could not get enough US ships to move product to Florida. Given that most of the US refineries, in Texas, were shut down, there was nothing to move, and only the New Orleans refinery was moving product, and they are satisfied with their Jones Act tonnage to meet their needs. Whether Florida needs additional fuel, and this has to come from overseas (because the US refineries were shut down) is another matter, and shipments from overseas are not Jones Act trade.

Edited September 8, 2017 by chengkp75

[rafinmd]

How stringently are PVSA requirements enforced when nature gets in the way. I'm thinking in particular of the Maasdam which is due in Ft. Lauderdale 9/13 and going through the Panama Canal to San Diego. If Ft. Lauderdale is not open on 9/13 and the sailing had to be delayed a day, I think the only way to get to the canal on time would be to eliminate the call in Cartagena, the only distant foreign port. Might the ship get a PVSA waiver in that circumstance? Also, what would happen if one of the Florida ports had extensive damage and a ship had to return to a different open port?

 

Roy

[sail7seas]

What I have heard is that the EPA has granted a waiver for on-road diesel, meaning that off-road diesel (agricultural) that is not dyed red as on-road diesel is, may be used for on-road uses in Florida. The two types of diesel have different sulfur content allowed.

 

And while numbers like "millions of gallons" seems impressive to the general public, my company's tankers, which are of a class known as "handy-sized" due to its ability to bring an economical load of product, and still be small enough for nearly every port, carry 12-13 million gallons at a time. We have 4-5 ships making twice weekly runs to Florida ports from the US Gulf coast, so we bring in around 113 million gallons of gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel to Florida weekly. And we are only one company.

 

As stated, the only reason for a Jones Act waiver would be if a US refinery could not get enough US ships to move product to Florida. Given that most of the US refineries, in Texas, were shut down, there was nothing to move, and only the New Orleans refinery was moving product, and they are satisfied with their Jones Act tonnage to meet their needs. Whether Florida needs additional fuel, and this has to come from overseas (because the US refineries were shut down) is another matter, and shipments from overseas are not Jones Act trade.

 

Thanks, Cheng kp.

[sail7seas]

Would a stop in ABC island work better?

 

Good questions especially considering if someone dies on a cruise and body is removed from ship, Depending upon where , applilcagtion fine must be made for waiver of PVSA violation , seeing disembark in oggher than por where embarrked. I've been told it is not automatically granted f tyhat is true, . If death is not good enough for automatic waiver, :shrug, who knows w hat is?

[Copper10-8]

Oranjestad, Aruba can be a substitution for Cartagena, Colombia

[sail7seas]

Right NOW, there is a news briefing from the podium in the White House

 

WSe , Tom Brissert, Homland Seucreity Advisor just commented b about waiver of the Jones Act and he said it has been wiaved He explaine d what it means in terms of foreign flagged vessels.

[adrift@sea]

Sail is correct regarding the waiver of the Jones Act. The White House just stated this during a press conference.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[sail7seas]

sail is correct regarding the waiver of the jones act. The white house just stated this during a press conference.

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iphone using forums

. Thanks, adrift . :)

[chengkp75]

How stringently are PVSA requirements enforced when nature gets in the way. I'm thinking in particular of the Maasdam which is due in Ft. Lauderdale 9/13 and going through the Panama Canal to San Diego. If Ft. Lauderdale is not open on 9/13 and the sailing had to be delayed a day, I think the only way to get to the canal on time would be to eliminate the call in Cartagena, the only distant foreign port. Might the ship get a PVSA waiver in that circumstance? Also, what would happen if one of the Florida ports had extensive damage and a ship had to return to a different open port?

 

Roy

 

Weather waivers have been issued all the time, for when a ship cannot make any foreign port call at all. Whether or not CBP would grant one for a ship missing its canal slot (and given that the cruise ships pay a premium for an immediate transit, so they will usually be able to slip a transit date) in order to meet the distant foreign port rule, I have no idea. CBP typically does not care about the shipping lines' financial problems.

 

As to returning to a different port due to storm damage, that is the kind of waiver the CBP grants all the time, as it is not under the cruise line's control.

[chengkp75]

Right NOW, there is a news briefing from the podium in the White House

 

WSe , Tom Brissert, Homland Seucreity Advisor just commented b about waiver of the Jones Act and he said it has been wiaved He explaine d what it means in terms of foreign flagged vessels.

 

Sail is correct regarding the waiver of the Jones Act. The White House just stated this during a press conference.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

Yes, I watched this, and he does say that a waiver has been granted, but since the only refinery that has asked for one has taken the request back, I'm not sure what this will actually do. I think that this is a case of the White House, and a lot of agencies not knowing exactly what the Jones Act does. As Tom Bossert says, the refineries in Texas are shut down, so there is a limited amount of fuel available domestically, which is what the Jones Act tankers would be carrying. Anything brought from outside the US doesn't have anything to do with the Jones Act. Also as Mr. Bossert says, the ports in Florida where the fuel needs to get to are closing and will likely be damaged, so this all seems to be a bit of PR effort, since there isn't any domestic product to carry (as I said, we are scheduled into the refinery in Beaumont today, with a discharge of gasoline in PEV (but with an arrival time of Tuesday, without adverse weather, we might not be able to deliver, and even then our delivery is too late to help with evacuation), and we are one of the first tankers loading in the newly opened refineries of Beaumont. He's talking about helping fuel supply within the next 24 hours, and there just isn't that much available within that distance to get to Florida in time (about 350 miles from Miami, or about the distance between Miami and Jacksonville). Unfortunately, what I have observed taking refined product to Florida for the last 10 years is that the storage tanks are not sufficient to build a reserve, we are constantly discharging to empty tanks and sometimes going directly to the "farm" where the tanker trucks are loaded.

[rafinmd]

Oranjestad, Aruba can be a substitution for Cartagena, Colombia

 

Why would a stop in Aruba take less time than a stop in Cartagena. It seems to me that ether stop would necessitate a delay in reaching the canal. What am I missing?\

 

Roy

[Copper10-8]

Why would a stop in Aruba take less time than a stop in Cartagena. It seems to me that ether stop would necessitate a delay in reaching the canal. What am I missing?\

 

Roy

 

You're not missing a thing! You said Cartagena was the only distant port; I added Oranjestad to the equation. Regardless, it seems pretty sure Maasie's time table to get to FLL, then to the canal, and then northbound is going to need amending

[oregon50]

Yes, I watched this, and he does say that a waiver has been granted, but since the only refinery that has asked for one has taken the request back, I'm not sure what this will actually do. I think that this is a case of the White House, and a lot of agencies not knowing exactly what the Jones Act does. As Tom Bossert says, the refineries in Texas are shut down, so there is a limited amount of fuel available domestically, which is what the Jones Act tankers would be carrying. Anything brought from outside the US doesn't have anything to do with the Jones Act. Also as Mr. Bossert says, the ports in Florida where the fuel needs to get to are closing and will likely be damaged, so this all seems to be a bit of PR effort, since there isn't any domestic product to carry (as I said, we are scheduled into the refinery in Beaumont today, with a discharge of gasoline in PEV (but with an arrival time of Tuesday, without adverse weather, we might not be able to deliver, and even then our delivery is too late to help with evacuation), and we are one of the first tankers loading in the newly opened refineries of Beaumont. He's talking about helping fuel supply within the next 24 hours, and there just isn't that much available within that distance to get to Florida in time (about 350 miles from Miami, or about the distance between Miami and Jacksonville). Unfortunately, what I have observed taking refined product to Florida for the last 10 years is that the storage tanks are not sufficient to build a reserve, we are constantly discharging to empty tanks and sometimes going directly to the "farm" where the tanker trucks are loaded.

 

I have always enjoyed reading you posts. I now know that the Jones Act is way too far reaching and should be amended or abolished. Kind of like Obamacare. Correct some of the many errors.

[chengkp75]

I have always enjoyed reading you posts. I now know that the Jones Act is way too far reaching and should be amended or abolished. Kind of like Obamacare. Correct some of the many errors.

 

In what ways do you feel that the Jones Act is overreaching? I surely don't feel that way. What errors does the Jones Act provide? Hoping the OP doesn't feel this is taking the thread too far off topic, but the main premise was the Jones Act.

[sail7seas]

In what ways do you feel that the Jones Act is overreaching? I surely don't feel that way. What errors does the Jones Act provide? Hoping the OP doesn't feel this is taking the thread too far off topic, but the main premise was the Jones Act.

 

Yes, my main point was Jones Act. as that is what caught my attention during the briefing. I still find if amazing that with such a load of important information those gentlemen shared in that briefing, the press did not have a single question. Go figure. :rolleyes:

[chengkp75]

Let me put what a Jones Act waiver does for Florida right now. The big question is, "How do I get gasoline into Florida in the next 24 hours?"

 

Let's look at how you do that:

 

While this has nothing to do with the Jones Act, many don't understand that, so here is the first scenario:

 

There is a foreign flag tanker loaded with gasoline from overseas that is bringing it to the US, and the broker decides he can get a better price by taking it to Florida than NY. If the tanker is within 24 hours of Florida, fine, they can bring that gasoline in, and it is perfectly legal, without a waiver, as anything brought to the US from overseas is not regulated by the Jones Act.

 

These scenarios have to do with Jones Act trade:

 

1. There is a foreign flag tanker that loaded gasoline at a refinery in the Gulf, and is on the way to Europe, and is passing Florida and needs a waiver to discharge this US petroleum in the US. This isn't happening now, and won't happen until after Irma, since the US refineries in the Gulf are just reopening, and are producing to make up the shortfall created by Harvey in Texas and surrounding states when they diverted supplies to Texas. So, in my opinion, this isn't viable, and DHS even admits that there isn't enough supply from the Gulf refineries.

 

2. There is a refinery that remained open in the Gulf, and has more production than the Jones Act fleet can carry. So, they apply for a Jones Act waiver to allow foreign flag ships to carry gasoline to Florida. Phillips did this with their NOLA refinery, but since retracted the request for a waiver, as it found enough Jones Act tonnage to carry all it could produce. So, unless the refinery is mistaken about its production or the available tonnage, then this isn't happening.

 

3. There is gasoline in Charleston, SC, or Savannah, GA, or NYC that could be loaded on a foreign flag tanker and brought to Florida. Well, it takes 18-24 hours to load a medium sized tanker (12 million gallons), and then it takes time from these ports to get to Florida (2 days from NYC to Jacksonville, 10 hours from Savannah, and 13 hours from Charleston) and then another 18-24 hours to discharge the gasoline in Florida before the ship needs to get out of Dodge. The time frame just doesn't fit, though it could get a waiver and then wait until the storm passes and go in and discharge, but that doesn't do anything for the evacuation fuel shortage.

 

Even a Jones Act tanker is most likely going to go to Tampa to discharge, and then you need to rail or truck the gas to south Florida, and Tampa's storage tanks, and dock space is of course a limiting factor, just like any port.

 

If the administration really believed that a Jones Act waiver was needed, since as I've mentioned Florida does not rely on pipelines like Texas does (and they had shortages), then they should have acted days ago, not less than 48 hours before the storm hits, and probably less than 24 hours before everyone should be evacuated.

[Dunelm]

Thank you Cheng KP for being so informed. I am also thankful for the thousands of people who have believed the supposedly "fake news" and are evacuating. Whew!

[VennDiagram]

.....

 

If the administration really believed that a Jones Act waiver was needed, since as I've mentioned Florida does not rely on pipelines like Texas does (and they had shortages), then they should have acted days ago, not less than 48 hours before the storm hits, and probably less than 24 hours before everyone should be evacuated.

 

Thank you for all the information you provide, and for confirming my suspicion that this is too late to be of help.

[Modern_Viking]

Why would a stop in Aruba take less time than a stop in Cartagena. It seems to me that ether stop would necessitate a delay in reaching the canal. What am I missing?\

 

Roy

 

While Aruba would seem to be a perfectly legal distant foreign port on a Panama Canal itinerary, it looks like the total travel distance from Port Everglades to Aruba then to the Panama Canal exceeds the distance from Port Everglades to Cartagena then to the Panama Canal. So, I agree that it doesn't seem like substituting Aruba for Cartagena would save any time.

 

 

That said, I am not sure that there is a legal minimum in-port time for such a visit. So, perhaps Maasdam could enter Cartagena harbor, board a local official via pilot boat to clear the ship, disembark the official the same way, then leave the port without letting any passengers ashore. That might still be legal (from a US point of view) and could save a few hours of time to help make the Canal the next morning as scheduled.

 

 

I know such technical stops used to be common in Mexico on cruises round trip between California and Mexico, although it also seems like there was a push to extend the stop in Mexico to at least 4-6 hours. In this case, a shorter stop might be allowed.

 

 

On a separate note, I see at least 2 cruise ships (one operated by Carnival and one by RCCL) are scheduled in Port Everglades Tuesday 9/12. I'm not sure if those calls will actually happen, but if they do, that bodes well for the Maasdam being there on Wednesday 9/13, when she appears to be one of two cruise ship scheduled in. (The other is the Allure of the Seas.)

[chengkp75]

As of 5pm yesterday, the official PEV site shows the port not open yet, pending clearance from the USCG that the channel and harbor area are free of obstructions and safe to navigate. Port facilities appear to be up and either operating or capable of operations when the port opens.

 

I am on a tanker headed to PEV, ETA late Wednesday, so we are watching this closely. Petroleum terminals there are open and operating, loading tank trucks for deliveries to gas stations and airports.

[rafinmd]

I know several cruise ships are circling outside PEV and Miami but none appeared to have actually entered yet. I assume if there were major problems they should have been discovered by now and would expect actual entry would start soon.

 

I would expect the Maasdam to sail on time. My guess is that if she is delayed her best possibility might be to go through the canal on time and stop at Ensenada and bus PAX to San Diego.

 

Roy

[chengkp75]

I know several cruise ships are circling outside PEV and Miami but none appeared to have actually entered yet. I assume if there were major problems they should have been discovered by now and would expect actual entry would start soon.

 

I would expect the Maasdam to sail on time. My guess is that if she is delayed her best possibility might be to go through the canal on time and stop at Ensenada and bus PAX to San Diego.

 

Roy

 

While the PEV and Miami entrances are nothing like the Neches/Sabine river in Beaumont, TX, there were ships stuck in Beaumont until Sunday due to changes in the channel from Harvey, with a couple of car carriers touching bottom due to shifting bottom. Also, USCG and Corps of Engineers are still not sure that all aids to navigation are in the correct positions.

 

So, it may still be a day or two before the USCG Captain of the Port opens PEV or Miami for navigation. And remember, this also applies to the approach channel and buoys outside the port.

 

As well as the 2 cruise ships circling for PEV, and about 4 for Miami, there are 4 tankers waiting to get in with loads of gasoline, jet fuel, diesel and bunker fuel, the latter needed for these cruise ships.