Overview
Title
Requested Administrative Waiver of the Coastwise Trade Laws: Vessel PA860 (Motor Vessel); Invitation for Public Comments
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The government is thinking about letting an old boat called PA860 take people out to see whales in California, even though it wasn't made in the U.S. They want to hear what people think about this idea and are asking for comments by February 25, 2021.
Summary AI
The Maritime Administration (MARAD) of the Department of Transportation has received a request to waive U.S.-build requirements for the coastwise trade laws, allowing a vessel named PA860 to carry up to twelve passengers for hire. The vessel is intended for whale watching tours based in Long Beach, California. The public is invited to comment on whether granting this waiver would negatively impact U.S. vessel builders or companies that use U.S.-flag vessels. Comments can be submitted through various methods, with a deadline for submissions set for February 25, 2021.
Abstract
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to grant waivers of the U.S.-build requirements of the coastwise trade laws to allow the carriage of no more than twelve passengers for hire on vessels, which are three years old or more. A request for such a waiver has been received by MARAD. The vessel, and a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document under review is a notice from the Maritime Administration (MARAD) of the Department of Transportation, concerning a request for a waiver of U.S.-build requirements for the coastwise trade laws. This waiver would permit the vessel PA860, based in Long Beach, California, to carry up to twelve passengers for hire for whale watching tours. Public comments on the impact of granting this waiver are invited, particularly concerning effects on U.S. vessel builders or businesses using U.S.-flag vessels. The deadline for comments is February 25, 2021.
General Summary
The notice announces a request submitted to MARAD to allow the vessel PA860 to operate whale watching tours, despite it not being built in the U.S. This type of waiver is considered under the coastwise trade laws, which typically require vessels involved in U.S. domestic commerce to be U.S.-built. The public is encouraged to provide input on whether granting this waiver might negatively impact American shipbuilders or businesses using U.S.-flagged vessels. Interested parties can submit their comments both online and physically, with pertinent contact information provided within the document.
Significant Issues and Concerns
One of the significant concerns raised by the document is the lack of specific criteria for assessing what constitutes an "unduly adverse effect" on U.S. vessel builders and businesses using U.S.-flag vessels. This could cause ambiguity and inconsistency in the decision-making process. Additionally, while public comments are invited, the document does not clarify how these comments will be evaluated or weighed, which might result in questions about the transparency and fairness of the process.
Furthermore, while there is a provision for submitting confidential comments, the process is notably more cumbersome than the standard submission method. This could inadvertently discourage stakeholders who have sensitive information to share. The document's bureaucratic language might also pose challenges to readers who are not familiar with regulatory or legal terminology, potentially limiting public engagement.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
Broad Public Impact:
The outcome of this waiver request could set a precedent for similar requests in the future. It opens a dialogue about balancing the protection of U.S. industries with the practical needs and economic benefits of tourism and commercial activities.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders:
U.S. Vessel Builders: Granting the waiver could negatively impact American shipbuilders by allowing foreign-built vessels to compete within U.S. waters. This might reduce demand for ships that are built domestically.
Businesses Using U.S.-Flag Vessels: Similar to shipbuilders, these businesses might face increased competition from vessels that benefit from waived requirements, potentially leading to a reduction in their market share or economic viability.
Tourism Operators and Enthusiasts: On the positive side, if the waiver is granted, tourism operators stand to benefit from increased flexibility in vessel operations, potentially leading to more opportunities for employment and business growth, especially in niche markets like whale watching tours.
The broader environmental and economic impacts of such a waiver also merit consideration, as increased tourism activities can have both beneficial and negative effects on local ecosystems and economies.
In conclusion, this document highlights a complex balance of regulatory enforcement, economic interests, and public engagement. The decision MARAD will make extends beyond this single waiver request, potentially affecting future regulatory considerations and the landscape for domestic versus foreign-built vessels operating in U.S. waters. The issues surrounding transparency and public participation underscore the importance of clear policy guidelines and robust public discourse.
Issues
• The document does not specify criteria for determining what constitutes an 'unduly adverse effect' on U.S. vessel builders or businesses using U.S.-flag vessels, which could lead to ambiguity in decision-making.
• There is no clear indication of how the comments received will be weighed or affect the final decision, which could lead to potential skepticism about the transparency and fairness of the process.
• The contact information for submitting comments confidentially is provided, but the process is more cumbersome than standard comment submissions, which may discourage potential respondents.
• Repeated use of terms like 'as represented by' could make the text more complex than necessary and might confuse readers unfamiliar with bureaucratic terminology.
• The document invites public comments but does not specify what specific aspects of the waiver request are open for discussion, potentially leading to unfocused or irrelevant comments.