Long reaction time to that break out from last year, but it’s somewhat nice to see that they are publicly talking about the need to reconstitute the fleet. I would have liked to see verbiage from Esper mentioning the American Flag flying from these “commercial” ships he mentions.
Was hoping it meant seagoing tankers until I read the story. Buzby has spoken many times on the need for tankers for the MSC fleet, no matter how they obtain them. Perhaps the few coins thrown that way will help, Buzby and Chao may be gone by then.
and yet here we see MarAd dumping $220M in more port infrastructure which for the most part helps foreign flagged carriers. That money should have gone to expanding the MSP fleet! Where in their mission are that mandated to put ports ahead of ships?
Secretary Chao Announces $220 Million in Port Infrastructure Grants
By The Maritime Executive 10-14-2020 09:58:00
The U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Elaine L. Chao today announced the award of more than $220 million in grant funding to improve port facilities in 15 states and territories through the Maritime Administration’s (MARAD) Port Infrastructure Development Program.
“This $220 million in federal grants will improve America’s ports," said Secretary Chao. “Nearly half the projects are located in Opportunity Zones, which were established to revitalize economically distressed communities.”
The funding is directed at facilities at or near coastal seaports, and it provides support for planning, capital improvements, project management and operations. “These grants will help our nation’s economy and ensure that America’s ports can continue to operate effectively in the competitive global marketplace," said Maritime Administrator Mark H. Buzby in a statement.
“AAPA and our member U.S. ports are extremely appreciative and grateful to MARAD and Congress for ensuring continued investment in our nation’s multimodal port infrastructure through the Port Infrastructure Development Program,” said Christopher J. Connor, president and CEO of the American Association of Port Authorities. “These awards represent a significant step toward investing in one of our country’s most precious and important assets - our seaports.”
Highlights of the grant announcement include $20 million for rail yard improvements at Norfolk International Terminals; $22 million for the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Crown Bay Terminal on the island of St. Thomas; $10 million for repairs on the Port of Coos Bay’s 134-mile railroad line; and $10 million for a dock conversion to help the former Avondale Shipyard transition into its new use as a cargo terminal.
In Bellingham, Washington, a $7 million grant will underwrite terminal improvements to increase the port’s capacity for barge loading. It will also support the construction of a larger, more robust heavy load area and the removal of rock outcroppings that limit the draft of ships docking at one of the berths.
“This is great news for our working waterfront,” said Port of Bellingham Executive Director Rob Fix. “The grant funding will allow us to modernize our shipping terminal to accommodate a much wider range of vessels and cargoes, and offer a viable shipping alternative to the crowded Canadian ports just north of Whatcom County. Increasing trade and commerce at the Bellingham Shipping Terminal will create working waterfront, family-wage jobs and support state-wide, Covid-19-related economic recovery efforts.”
Other grant highlights include:
Baltimore, Maryland: Mid-Atlantic Multi-Modal Transportation Hub ($10 million)
This grant will add additional waterside access, create a bulk import and export terminal, install a modern gate complex, and upgrade the heavy-duty road network. The project will upgrade rail connectivity and repair all degraded utilities.
Wilmington, North Carolina: Container Gate Innovation & Access ($16 million)
This grant will provide for a new container gate featuring Optical Character Recognition and Weigh-in-Motion Sensors, which will allow drivers to enter and exit the port without stopping for processing. The proposed improvements also allow the Port to streamline container traffic flow throughout the terminal and open up additional yard storage capacity.
Conneaut, Ohio: Port of Conneaut Connector ($20 million)
This grant will help connect truck and rail freight to the Port of Conneaut, a Great Lakes deep-water port on the shores of Lake Erie. The project entails construction of a dredge material facility to maintain shipping access; a new roadway from US 20 to the Port of Conneaut; and a new rail spur.
Seattle, Washington: Terminal 5 Uplands Modernization and Rehabilitation Project ($10.7 million)
This grant will support infrastructure improvements including surfacing, paving, and reinforcement of a terminal-wide storm water treatment system. Additionally, the project will focus on upsizing electric refrigerated plug capacity and on-terminal rail infrastructure improvements.
$220M would have added 44 ships to the fleet and over 2500 more US mariners would have jobs. That would materially improve the US ability to provide surge sealift far more than some stoopid port projects. FUCK WASHINGTOON, D(istrict)ofC(lowns)
Given the chance to spend more money on “the fleet” and they still didn’t.
Better shut down KP though
I see you have just joined this site recently. Shut down KP will not solve the problem of misdirected/directed monies that we all wish would have gone to building a few new ships, myself included. As John has stated, much more revenue is created by the grads that stay the course and , after honoring their 5 to 8 year commitment, become very involved in the maritime/military/commercial field, whether it be infrastructure, sailing or career military service. The one’s that don’t honor that are frowned upon by all. The one’s that do are also frowned upon, but not as much. Port infrastructure is very important for revenue to our country and tax base. Many on here will disagree, I’m ok with that. Seriously, do you think shutting down KP will build a few ships? I think not.
And that seems to be the worst consequence that they get. Make 'em all go active duty or MSC for 6 years after graduation. As taxpayers, let’s get our money’s worth
Contrary to popular belief, many go MSC, commercial, or a military commitment. Many wish there were more commercial ships .It’s not “Make them”, they signed on knowing after acceptance what the obligation/ requirements are well before graduation. No getting out of that . They go to the path that can be taken, Green, out of the Academy is up to them.
That should be changed to “all”. Even the shipyard mgmt guys. Someone with a degree in shipyard mgmt and real experience working on board ships would be far more valuable to our nation than someone that goes right into shipyard mgmt out of school.
History has shown that this is not really the case.
This isn’t an even a possibility with any of the other service academies.
West Point: 5 years active duty followed by three reserve
Annapolis: 5 years active duty
USAF Academy: 5 years active duty followed by three reserve
USCG Academy: 5 years active duty
USMMA: 5 years of service within the maritime industry, 8 years reserve.
I’m not advocating closing KP, but I do think that our nation is getting a bit of a raw deal for our investment. None of the other academies have the option of going private sector to fulfill their obligation, why is there an exemption for KP?
Respectively disagree sir. There have been many discussions on this site regarding KP. Perhaps this is getting off subject regarding original post about Marad giving funds to infrastructure. Which is quite important.
Unless you are talented enough to become a pro athlete and are granted a sports waiver. (A BS policy in my opinion.)
SeaEagle —I was being facetious. What I was saying was these guys railed against KP (in another thread) for being wasteful and bla bla bla. And then, low and behold, the government spends 220 million on something else. Gosh, who would have thought it possible?
(Want a good laugh? Check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfAE5emMCs8)
TLDR: Governments (city, state, or federal) spend money - Shutting down KP is not the answer- nor was it to invest 220 million dollars in port projects that will (without a shadow of a doubt) go right back into the pockets of some special interest group without even a minutia of taxpayer oversight. Those old crusty crabs here seem to think 100 million will save the USMM - they have no idea.
All good sir.