Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Panel:
As a United States owner and
operator under section 2 of the Shipping Act,
1916, of commercial cargo vessels in the
United States-flag fleet, I am particularly
pleased to appear before you today to address
the vital need for the reauthorization of the
Maritime Security Program (MSP) to ensure the
continued viability and survival of the
U.S.-flag fleet.
I am Erik Johnsen, the
President of International Shipholding
Corporation (ISC). Through its principal U.S.-flag
subsidiaries Central Gulf Lines, Inc. (Central
Gulf) and Waterman Steamship Corporation
(Waterman), ISC provides a wide range of
oceangoing freight transportation through pure
car/truck carrier services, roll-on roll-off,
breakbulk, and domestic coastwise services. Central Gulf and Waterman collectively
are among the largest participants in the
current MSP program, having operated seven Aactive,
militarily useful, privately-owned@
U.S.-flag vessels under MSP operating
agreements with the U.S. Maritime
Administration (MarAd). Of particular importance to the
Department of Defense and its critical
military sealift needs, Central Gulf and
Waterman operate several of the newest and
largest roll-on/roll-off vessels in the
U.S.-flag fleet under the MSP program. As a result of ramp capabilities and
variable spacing of movable interior decks,
these ARO-RO@
vessels can accommodate a significant number
of large military vehicles, including military trucks, HUMVEEs,
military supply vehicles and many of the most
modern tanks in the military=s
inventory, and can quickly transport large
quantities of such equipment and other
materiel where needed by U.S. armed forces
around the world. Without the MSP program, Central Gulf
and Waterman would not have been able to
acquire such modern tonnage to significantly
enhance the military sealift capacity of the
U.S.-flag fleet.
Mr. Chairman, there is
clearly a need for a strong U.S.-flag fleet to
support our nation=s
armed forces in times of war or national
emergencies. To that end, the MSP program has been a
tremendous success. It has ensured the availability of at least 47
militarily-useful U.S.-flag cargo vessels to
the U.S. Transportation Command (TRANSCOM) of
the Department of Defense for sustained
sealift capability to all points around the
globe. Central
Gulf, Waterman and other U.S.-flag vessel
operators, U.S. seafaring labor unions, MarAd,
and TRANSCOM have all worked closely and
cooperatively together to ensure, under the
MSP program and the associated Voluntary
Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA) program,
that U.S.-flag cargo vessels are fully staffed
and ready should they be called on a moment=s
notice to transport equipment and supplies to
support the U.S. armed forces. Because this Maritime Security Fleet is
readily available to the U.S. military, the Department of Defense has not been forced to duplicate
this sealift capacity through the
prohibitively expensive construction and
operation of its own vessels.
Mr. Chairman, in a statement
on the House floor last year, you expressed
your own strong views on the importance of the
MSP program Ato
the national security and the maritime
capability of the United States@. As you so correctly noted:
Without
the MSP program, U.S.-flag vessel owners would
have been forced to shift their operations to
foreign flags with foreign crews in order to
remain internationally competitive. This would have been detrimental to our
national security interests. ..... Without the MSP the cost to [the
Department of Defense] would be substantial B
approximately $800 million annually would be
required by DOD to provide similar sealift and
related system capacity on its own for the
rapid and sustained deployment of military
vehicles, ammunition and other equipment and
material.
Shortly
before his departure last year as TRANSCOM=s
Commander-in-Chief, General Tony Robertson --
then the highest ranking military officer
responsible for sea and air transportation of
U.S. troops, equipment and supplies around the
world-- reflected on the importance of the MSP
program in his testimony before the Seapower
Subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services
Committee. In that testimony, he also shared your
views by stating the following:
I am a
strong supporter of the MSP... I will tell you if you ask me, I will
sing out in support of anything that increases
the health and vitality of the U.S. flag fleet
and men and women who crew that flag fleet. So MSP has been a valuable, valuable
contributor to the health of that fleet.
Adding
to this chorus of support, Maritime
Administrator William Schubert stated the
following in his testimony before your Panel
just last month:
[T]he
best way to protect our homeland and national
security interests across the globe is a
strong U.S.-flag fleet manned by U.S. citizen
mariners. If we did not have the Jones Act, cargo
preference, and the MSP and VISA programs, I
can assure you it is unlikely that ships would
remain under the U.S.-flag, and the
U.S.-citizen mariner pool needed by the
Department of Defense in times of national
emergency or war would disappear.
Mr.
Chairman, I can assure you that Administrator
Schubert is absolutely correct in his
assessment of the state of the U.S.-flag
fleet. Without the MSP and other federal maritime programs, our
companies would be unable to compete against
foreign-flag operators who benefit from
unrestrictive laws, little or no tax
liability, minimal vessel registration fees,
and many other operating advantages. We would therefore be forced to leave
the U.S.-flag fleet, thus depriving the U.S.
armed forces of RO-RO and other sealift
capability that it absolutely requires. And Central Gulf and Waterman would not be alone. Other U.S.-flag carriers are similarly
situated and would be unable to maintain their
own vessels under the U.S.-flag without the
support of the MSP program. Without MSP, TRANSCOM would be faced
with a significant and irreplaceable gap in
the sealift capability it needs in times of
war or national emergency.
In
addition to our national defense, the
importance of a U.S.-flag fleet to protect our
economic interest in international commerce is
equally well-established. America has a strong tradition of
participation in international trade, and the
presence of a U.S.-flag merchant fleet is
vital to the world-wide commercial interests
of U.S. companies. Without the participation of U.S.-flag
vessels to ensure fair and balanced
competition, foreign carriers would be able to
exert control over the price of U.S. imports
and exports. It is the U.S.-flag fleet that helps
American businesses to maintain equitable
participation in international commerce, and
that fleet itself depends very heavily on the
MSP program to maintain its presence in the
foreign trade of the U.S.
However,
as currently authorized, the MSP program will
expire at the end of Fiscal Year 2005 on
September 30, 2005. We are only three years away from the
potential end of the MSP program, and we must
work expeditiously together to ensure that the
program is reauthorized in the immediate
future to provide U.S.-flag companies with the
ability to continue to recapitalize their
vessel fleets and to address other economic
issues to secure the long-term stability and
operation of such companies. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased with your
earlier floor statement where you also
recognized the need to quickly Amove
forward with the reauthorization of the MSP@
in order to Aprovide
the [maritime] industry with the timely
assurance they need that the MSP program will
continue beyond the year 2005.@ General Robertson emphasized the same
urgency when he forthrightly stated in his
Senate Seapower Subcommittee testimony that Awe
need to get on with reauthorization [of the
MSP] and probably sooner, rather than later.@ We all agree -- it is imperative that
we act now to reauthorize, as well as
strengthen, the MSP program that is so
critical to the military and economic security
of the United States.
Mr.
Chairman, during the past year, Central Gulf
and Waterman have been working closely with
TRANSCOM, MarAd, other MSP participants and
maritime labor unions in the effort to develop
a legislative proposal to reauthorize the MSP
program that would preserve and enhance the
Maritime Security Fleet of the United States. I am very pleased to report that we
have reached a strong consensus on the
statutory provisions that are required to
ensure the viability of the MSP program. To that end, we strongly support an
extension of the MSP program for a period of
at least 20 years. This extension would give investors and
lending institutions more confidence to
provide the funds necessary for the
replacement of vessels and the expansion of
the U.S.-flag fleet. Additionally, we urge the expansion of
the MSP fleet to at least 60 militarily-useful
vessels. This will bolster the U.S. sealift
capability while providing a greater base of
employment for American merchant mariners. We further propose that each vessel in
the MSP program would be eligible to receive
$3.5 million in the first year of the extended
program, with annual inflationary adjustments
thereafter, to more appropriately compensate
vessel owners and operators for the increased
costs of maintaining vessels under the
U.S.-flag.
A
complete overview of the provisions that
should be included in a reauthorized MSP
program are as follows:
!
Encourage
private lending institutions to invest in
U.S.-flag vessel operations: It
is proposed that the MSP program be extended
for a period of twenty years, i.e.,
to run from October 1, 2005, to September 30,
2025. Financial institutions and the maritime business community
require long-term certainty when making
capital investment and other economic
decisions, especially when the vessel assets
involved in such decisions have a lifespan
frequently in excess of 20 years. Financial certainty and extended vessel
operations require the assured existence of
the MSP program for at least a 20-year period.
!
Enhance
the economic and national security benefits to
the United States resulting from the MSP
program, and provide existing MSP program
participants with an opportunity to
participate in or increase their participation
in the MSP: It is proposed that the MSP program be
expanded to authorize 13 additional
privately-owned, militarily-useful United
States-flag commercial vessels, providing
first priority for the additional 13 MSP
operating agreements to Asection
2" citizens of the United States. It is clear to TRANSCOM, MarAd and MSP
participants that the increasing sealift
requirements of the United States military can
only be met through an expansion of the MSP
program to at least 60 militarily-useful cargo
vessels.
!
Retain
the current priority preference for section 2
United States citizen companies for certain
purposes: It is proposed that all additional MSP
operating agreements, and any other operating
agreements which would have reverted to MarAd
for any reason, be offered and awarded
pursuant to the following priority system: Asection
2@
citizens have a first priority, followed by Adocumentation@
citizens who have entered into a binding
Special Security Agreement with the Department
of Defense.
!
Authorize
an MSP payment that better reflects the cost
of doing business under the United States-flag
resulting from government imposed rules,
regulations, and tax obligations: It is proposed that, consistent with
all existing operational requirements and
limitations, each vessel in the MSP program
would be eligible to receive $3.5 million in
the first year of the extended program, with
that amount to be adjusted annually by the
increase in an appropriate and acceptable
pricing index beginning with Fiscal Year 2004. The current annual MSP payments of $2.1
million for each participating
militarily-useful vessel do not adequately
address the differences in operating and other
costs between U.S.-flag and foreign flag
carriers. Furthermore, the payments have never
been adjusted on an annual basis to address
the ever increasing operating costs for
U.S.-flag vessels. In his testimony before the Senate
Seapower Subcommittee, General Robertson, on
behalf of TRANSCOM, forcefully stated that Athe
MSP program as it is currently structured in
my view does not adequately compensate the
carriers who get the MSP funding for what MSP
was designed for. In other words, the per ship stipend I think has outlived its
value, inflation has outstripped its value,
and it needs to be adjusted.@ Accordingly, increased MSP operating payments are required to
partially offset the higher costs of operating
vessels under the U.S.-flag.
!
Increase
MSP payments as soon as possible: For purposes of the proposed increased
MSP payment, the effective date would be
October 1, 2002 B
making the increased payment applicable for
the remaining duration of existing MSP
contracts. Again, the current annual MSP payments
for each participating militarily-useful
vessel do not adequately compensate for the
higher operating and other costs and fees
imposed on Central Gulf, Waterman and other
U.S.-flag carriers.
!
Permit
parties to an operating agreement to withdraw
from the MSP before the end of the program: Because it is proposed that the MSP
program be extended for a period of 20 years,
it is possible that a contractor to an MSP
operating agreement may be obligated to, or
decide, to withdraw from the MSP prior to the
end of that authorized 20-year time period. The legislative proposal would permit
early termination following appropriate notice
to the Maritime Administration, and would
require the contractor to assist MarAd in
identifying applicants to replace the
contractor in the MSP.
!
Grant
documentation citizens with a Special Security
Agreement the right to operate vessels
participating in the MSP program on September
30, 2005 directly under any extended MSP: It is proposed that consistent with all
existing age and other eligibility
requirements for MSP vessels contained in the
existing law, each of the 47 United
States-flag vessels in the MSP program as of
September 30, 2005 would be automatically
enrolled in the reauthorized program provided
the entity applying for the MSP operating
agreement in the extended program is, as of
October 1, 2005, a Asection
2@
United States citizen or a Adocumentation@
citizen with a Special Security Agreement with
the Department of Defense. Accordingly, for the specific, limited purpose of awarding
operating agreements under the extended
program for the existing 47 ships in the MSP
program, this legislative proposal would treat
Asection 2" and Adocumentation@
citizen companies with Special Security
Agreements as the same with equal and first
priority for those vessels, while reserving
first priority for Asection
2" companies for the new 13 additional
vessels in the MSP program.
!
Allow
certain proposed changes to take effect prior
to October 1, 2005: For
most purposes
in the reauthorization of the MSP program, the
effective date would be October 1, 2005. However, the proposed legislation would
permit the transfer of operating agreements
from a Asection
2@
citizen to a Adocumentation@
citizen with a Special Security Agreement
prior to October 1, 2005, but only to the
extent consistent with existing commercial
contracts or as otherwise agreed by
the parties to a commercial contract.
!
Repeal
section 804 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936: Consistent with the modification in
eligibility requirements noted above, section
804 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, would be
repealed.
Mr. Chairman, as you can see from this review of proposed
legislative provisions for reauthorization of
the MSP program, hard choices have been made to
address the issues and concerns of U.S.-flag
carriers, maritime labor and other interested
parties. As
two of the leading Asection
2" citizen companies in the U.S.-flag
fleet, Central Gulf and Waterman are keenly
aware of, and sensitive to, the associated MSP
citizenship issues that have been the focus of
much discussion and debate.
The legislative compromise discussed
above provides for the necessary U.S.
citizenship involvement for participation in the
MSP program, and further ensures that at least
60 active, militarily useful, privately-owned
U.S.-flag vessels will be readily available to
the Department of Defense for the expeditious
movement of military equipment and other
materiel in time of war or national emergency.
Mr. Chairman, I very much look forward to working closely
with you on this matter of vital importance to
our national and economic security. Thank you for allowing me to appear before you today.