Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6974

Bill Overview

Title: To amend title 46, United States Code, to exempt certain vessels transporting crude oil, petroleum, petroleum products, and liquified natural gas between a port in Hawaii and another port in the United States from Jones Act vessel requirements for the duration of any ban on the transportation of crude oil or petroleum products from the Russian Federation, and for other purposes.

Description: This bill revises coastwise laws, commonly known as the Jones Act, to temporarily allow foreign vessels that are not Russian to transport oil, liquefied natural gas, and related products between a port in Hawaii and another U.S. port. The Jones Act requires that vessels transporting cargo domestically must be U.S.-built and generally owned and crewed by U.S. citizens. Foreign vessels may transport petroleum crude oil, petroleum, petroleum products, and liquefied natural gas between Hawaii and other U.S. ports while there is a ban on transporting such products from Russia. However, the bill does not apply to Russian-flagged vessels or vessels that are owned by a Russian national or the Russian government.

Sponsors: Rep. Case, Ed [D-HI-1]

Target Audience

Population: People involved in or affected by the maritime transportation of oil and gas products in Hawaii

Estimated Size: 2100000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Oil Import Operations Manager (Honolulu, Hawaii)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is beneficial as it can reduce costs related to importing oil, ultimately lowering fuel prices for local consumers.
  • However, this might mean we have to adapt quickly to different logistical demands when foreign vessels enter and operate differently from local vessels.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Maritime Lawyer (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 48 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might offer new legal questions and compliance issues, potentially increasing demand for our services.
  • Long term, I am concerned this could erode some aspects of the Jones Act, affecting U.S. maritime jobs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 5 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Gas Station Owner (Hilo, Hawaii)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If this leads to lower supply costs, I can offer better fuel prices to customers, helping my business.
  • However, I worry about relying on foreign companies for critical supplies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Dock Worker (Anchorage, Alaska)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like these can disrupt local jobs as international vessels compete for routes traditionally served by American ships.
  • While Alaska isn't directly targeted, changes in Hawaii often ripple through our operations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 5 6
Year 5 4 5
Year 10 4 5
Year 20 4 5

Energy Sector Analyst (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 44 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy adds an interesting competitive element to the market, and I'm keen to see how pricing and logistics evolve.
  • My main concern is potential unintended consequences in the sector if reliance on foreign fleets grows.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Engineering Student (New York, New York)

Age: 24 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy seems like a case study of shifting logistics practices and competitive strategy.
  • It could highlight potential career opportunities or shifts in what we focus on academically.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Retired Logistics Executive (Kailua, Hawaii)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 20/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Allowing foreign vessels could result in lower fuel prices locally, benefiting consumers, but I'm skeptical about how that impacts local jobs.
  • The long-term implications on local shipping industries could be significant.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 6 6

Petroleum Distribution Manager (San Francisco, California)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 17/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might open up new sources of supply, potentially easing some distribution bottlenecks.
  • There might be added complexity in managing a more diversified supply base which could lead to logistical challenges.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Maritime Fleet Owner (Houston, Texas)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The competitive pressure from foreign vessels could be challenging for us, potentially impacting jobs and profits.
  • I'm concerned that this policy might set precedents that undermine traditional protections for American maritime jobs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 5
Year 2 4 5
Year 3 3 5
Year 5 3 5
Year 10 2 5
Year 20 2 5

Environmental Activist (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm wary of policies that increase oil transport without clear environmental regulations being imposed on these foreign vessels.
  • This might incentivize greater fossil fuel dependence when we should be focusing on sustainable energy.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)

Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)

Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)

Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000)

Key Considerations