Изображения страниц

sonally know Mr. Eric Johnsen, and have the highest respect for this gentleman. I am well aware of his personal commitment to maintain the integrity of the Jones Act, as I do the maritime unions.

Some of these people will not agree with us on the Section 2 citizenship issue. They may be in favor of allowing foreign-controlled documentation citizens with equivalency with Section 2 U.S. citizens under certain circumstances, within this subject program.

So, Mr. Chairman, we would, respectfully, ask the panel to include specific language, as this hearing proceeds, to make it clear that no matter what the outcome of these hearings may be, there should be no action taken or inference made available through the hearings which could have a precedential impact or influence with respect to weakening Jones Act operations.

And I believe that everybody in this room today, while we may have some disagreements, would agree and support that if the committee sees fit and finds it possible to do that.

We submit that our concerns are real and not theoretical. We are already seeing that since 1996 foreign companies have used several newly available loopholes in the law to proceed to infiltrate maritime services that have been traditionally protected by the Jones Act.

And we, therefore, urge Congress to move quickly, but cautiously, to reauthorize the MSP, but to reject, in this process, any effort or proposal that would weaken U.S. Maritime Law and the Jones Act, specifically.

Our nation, at this time and in the current circumstances, we feel needs a U.S. merchant marine that is truly, effectively controlled by Section 2 American citizens, dedicated to serving our domestic and international commerce. I do not feel-and many of us will agree that this can be accomplished equally by foreign-controlled corporations who may be run by decent people. But under the circumstances today, that is not enough.

In conclusion, we wish to acknowledge the complexity of this matter, Mr. Chairman. And we feel compelled to reiterate that, while we strongly disagree with the proposition to repeal or modify the requirement for Section 2 citizenship to operate vessels within the Military Security Program, we are committed to keeping dialogue open, and look forward to working with you, and all concerned, to find common ground from which we can constructively advance the broad interests of the U.S. maritime industry.

And above all, we are committed to the proposition that this nation must be persuaded that its security and welfare is at risk and that our country will be exceptionally vulnerable until Congress acts to rebuild a healthy and versatile U.S. Merchant Marine, based on U.S. built bottoms, owned and operated by U.S. Section 2 citizens and crewed by well trained, loyal U.S. citizens.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are grateful to you and the panel for your thoughtful attention to our views, and for your kind attention to our comments.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Alario can be found in the Appendix on page 52.]

Mr. HUNTER. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Alario.

Mr. ALARIO. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUNTER. I appreciate your very thoughtful statement. And I understand that you do not represent a Section 2 citizen, but that, nonetheless, you feel that the

Mr. ALARIO. All of my members are Section 2 citizens, sir. I represent them, in essence.

Mr. HUNTER. Oh, okay. You do represent

Mr. ALARIO. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUNTER [continuing]. Section 2 citizens.
Mr. ALARIO. Yes.

Mr. HUNTER. But you feel that this proposed change could start us on a slippery slope with respect to citizenship requirements embedded in the Jones Act.

Mr. ALARIO. We feel intensely that that could be the case. And we have evidence that that is already beginning to happen.

Mr. HUNTER. Okay. Thank you very much for your statement. We appreciate you being with us today.

Mr. Truchan.


Mr. TRUCHAN. Mr. Chairman, members of the panel, my name is Jordan Truchan. I am the president and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Patriot Holdings, American Ship Management, ASM, and Patriot Contract Services (PCS) all based in Walnut Creek, California. It is an honor for me to appear before you today to speak about the Maritime Security Program and the role the United States Section 2 citizens fulfill in that program.

We believe the MSP program is working well. MSP is absolutely essential to the continuing existence of the American Merchant Marine and, therefore, the national defense and security of our nation.

I respectfully submit it as a statement to the record. And at this time, I would like to make some highlighted key comments.

Mr. HUNTER. And without objection, all written statements that have been prepared by the witnesses will be accepted into the record. But do not feel that you have to repeat your statement word-for-word. It will be accepted in and you are free to summarize in any way you wish.

Mr. TRUCHAN. Okay. It is fairly-bit of a summary.

Mr. HUNTER. Okay.

Mr. TRUCHAN. American Ship Management is a United States Section 2 citizen as defined by the Merchant Marine Act of 1916. It is wholly owned by myself and my two founding principals, all of whom are U.S. citizens.

ASM holds nine MSP slots with the Maritime Administration (MARAD) and is a member and an active participant in the Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement.

Our affiliate, Patriot Contract Services, is a major contractor for the military sealift command, holding the contract for the operation and maintenance of 11 Large Medium Speed Roll On/Roll Offs (RO/ ROs), or Large, Medium Speed Roll On/Roll Off (LMSRs).

Additionally, PCS employed in the United States Navy (USN) Military Sealift Command, MSC, surge program. Additionally, PCS manages six ships for the Maritime Administration's Ready Re

serve Fleet. All together, our company currently manages 26 U.S. flag commercial and government vessels.

ASM employs over 1,500 U.S. citizen seafarers covering over 500 seagoing billets. In addition, we have 150 shore-based positions also filled by the maritime unions. We employ over 50 shore-based management personnel working in offices in the states of California, Louisiana and Virginia.

In 1997, ASM was formed by the three principals to be a completely independent U.S. citizen entity. This entity would operate U.S. flag vessels enrolled in MSP, in accordance with U.S. law.

ASM submitted applications with MARAD for MSP agreements to cover the fine containerships American President Lines (APL) had committed to the U.S. Government for participation in MSP. Throughout a seven-month period, ASM underwent intense scrutiny by MARAD to confirm its independent status before finally being awarded these MSP agreements. ASM assumed operational control of the APL U.S. flag fleet in November of 1997, concurrent with the sale of all APL stock to Singapore-based Neptune Orient Lines.

ASM provides unique ship management services and wholly responsible for the safe navigation of the vessel; provides officers and crew; places all insurances for the vessels, crew, and cargo; outfits and provisions the vessels; maintains the vessels in a seaworthy condition at all times; ensures regulatory and statutory compliance; enforces crew discipline and compliance with collective bargaining agreements; and provides emergency response and contingency planning for the vessels operations.

As the responsible party in stage 3 of the Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA), ASM enjoys close working relationships with the United States Transportation Command, MARAD, and MSC. ASM has participated in numerous Joint Planning Advisory Group exercises and all visa CEO meetings.

ASM maintains collective bargaining agreements with six maritime unions. As a concerned U.S. citizen company, ASM has worked diligently to develop opportunities for American seafarers and recruit new seafarers to augment the aging and diminishing American seafarer workforce.

ASM's business model is the prototype for the current MSP Section 2 citizen operator to operate U.S. flagships on behalf of nonU.S. citizen carriers in the U.S. flag trades. This business arrangement provides the carrier with the ability to carry U.S. Government impelled cargoes while providing strategic sealift capacity to the U.S. Government and jobs for U.S. seafarers and shore-based workers.

ASM is committed to its ongoing participation in the current MSP, and ASM is equally committed to working with all the parties to accomplish reauthorization and expansion of MSP.

In closing, I want to thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony before this panel on the subject of MSP. ASM is a wholly U.S. citizen-owned Section 2 company formed for the purpose of providing U.S. flag sealift capacity to the U.S. Government. In this effort ASM creates jobs for American seafarers and office workers while providing tax revenues for the U.S. Government.

ASM provides our country an industrial base for ship operation and management in the United States. And last, but most important, ASM, as a United States Section 2 company, is committed to the security and prosperity of the United States of America and its loyal citizens.

Thank you very much, sir.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Truchan can be found in the Appendix on page 61.]

Mr. HUNTER. Thank you, Mr. Truchan. Thank you very much for your statement.

Mr. Keegan.



Mr. KEEGAN. Mr. Chairman and members of the panel, my name is Jay Keegan. I am president and CEO of U.S. Ship Management Incorporated (USSMI). And I am pleased to be here today.

Mr. Chairman, On April 26, 2001, you stated that U.S. ownership and U.S. control requirements are critical to the continued viability of the MSP program and must be preserved. It is gratifying that in a letter to you, dated June 18, 2001, all of the other members of this panel agreed with your position.

In light of the events since that time, I would submit that MSP American citizenship policy has become even more critical.

Mr. Chairman, I want to be clear that U.S. Ship Management supports the Maritime Security Program. We also support a properly designed reauthorization of MSP, but we must get it right.

Although we have been excluded from the process, we understand that Maersk, APL and others have drafted proposed legislation to reauthorize the MSP program three years before its current authorization expires, which contains provisions that truly strain credulity.

Their legislation would bind the U.S. Government to 20-year operating agreements while allowing the operators to opt out of the contracts and even transfer their vessels to foreign flag, simply upon giving notice to the secretary of transportation.

For example, just before their vessels are required and the contingency in the Taiwan Straits or Iraq, under their bill, they could give their notice and transfer their vessels, perhaps, to a Peoples Republic of China (PRC) flag or an Iraqi flag.

Their legislation equates a foreign-controlled documentation citizen with a U.S. citizen-owned and controlled company. This would put American companies like mine out of business. And most importantly, would have profound national security implications.

I understand that the seagoing unions feel pressured to support Maersk in these efforts because Maersk has threatened to transfer its American flag vessels to foreign flags if their legislation is not enacted. This is an idle threat. It is not logical for Maersk, a $35 billion company, to abandon U.S. flag vessels and U.S. Government cargo in hope of saving, perhaps, a few million dollars.

But if they did, other companies would certainly step in to operate U.S. flag vessels.

Mr. Chairman, the focus of today's hearing is U.S. ownership and control of vessels operating in the Maritime Security Program. I do

not believe Maersk representatives have fully disclosed to Congress, or to this panel, information which will be critical to your consideration of this important issue.

Specifically, the secretary of state has designated Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Sudan as state sponsors of international terrorism, yet Maersk continues to do business in these countries. I ask that proof of this fact, including material owned from Maersk's own Web site, be included in the record, which I have with me.

According to Maersk, they began serving in Iran in 1950 and, quote, since then provide uninterrupted service to Iranian customers even during the revolution and Iran-Iraq war period, end quote. Therefore, Maersk provided continuous service to Iran while Americans were being held hostage there and throughout the entire period of U.S. economic sanctions against that country.

Let me be clear, I am not suggesting that Maersk has violated U.S. law, because, after all, Maersk is not a U.S. citizen. But Maersk is appearing before this panel and claiming they should be considered as the equivalent of a Section 2 citizen.

Mr. Chairman, it is not enough to be "like" a citizen. Contrary to Maersk's rhetoric, Section 2 companies like mine are not shams. We play a vital role and help to ensure U.S. national security. We also provide real jobs to real people and provide exactly the kind of check and balance intended by Section 2 for U.S. national security.

Let me give you a clear example of why American control of MSP enrolled ships is critical. On November 26, 2001, while news reports were indicating that Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters were being allowed to cross the border into Iran from Afghanistan, Maersk directed one of our ships, the Sealand Express, an American flag D9J class vessel, to proceed to the port of Bandar-e 'Abbas in Iran. The ship was not due by at the time. And Maersk began loading containers on board, destined for Iran, which could not accommodated on Maersk's own foreign-flagged vessel, which goes to Iran every week.

As an American citizen company, wholly owned by American citizens, our loyalty and obligations were clear. We would not allow the ship to go to Iran. The Maersk containers destined for Iran were removed from the Sealand Express and the vessel resumed its normal schedule.

As Eric Johnsen said, a commercially viable, U.S. flag fleet is also the way to ensure that foreign carriers do not exert control over the price of U.S. imports and exports. But is that the case if that U.S. flag fleet is owned and controlled from Beijing or Singapore or Denmark?

Mr. Chairman, some appearing before you today have tried to color their proposal regarding citizenship as one that tightens the requirements. That is pure sophistry. It has been, and remains, the stated policy of the United States to have a merchant marine, and I quote, owned and operated under the United States flag by citizens of the United States insofar as may be practical. Citizen of the United States is defined to mean a Section 2 citizen. To ensure that policy result, if the MSP program is changed at all, we should ensure that only Section 2 citizens can be MSP contractors.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »