U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright mentioned that the Trump administration is likely to extend its temporary emergency waiver of the Jones Act. He believes this measure has helped in moving energy supplies across the country and has kept fuel prices lower during disruptions related to the conflict in the Middle East.
While speaking at the Port of Brownsville in Texas on Tuesday, Wright expressed that the administration views the waiver as successful.
“The temporary waivers of the Jones Act for transporting energy have been very successful,” Wright said. “We’ve had around 200 ship voyages that have used this waiver, especially to areas like California.”
He added that the waiver has aided in reducing energy costs on both the East and West coasts by permitting foreign-flagged vessels to transport petroleum products between U.S. ports.
“The Jones Act waivers have been beneficial in keeping energy prices on both coasts lower than they would have been otherwise. This aligns with the Trump Administration's agenda,” Wright noted. “So, I believe that another temporary extension of the Jones Act waivers is likely to happen. Once energy flows return to normal, things will go back to how they were.”
These remarks indicate that the administration plans to keep using emergency authority under Section 501 of the Merchant Marine Act past the current expiration date, despite increasing opposition from the U.S. maritime industry, labor unions, and a bipartisan group of lawmakers.
The waiver was first introduced in March, highlighting national defense concerns following disruptions in global energy markets due to the conflict with Iran and threats to shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. This measure allows approved foreign-flag vessels to transport petroleum products and other energy cargoes between U.S. ports, which are usually reserved for U.S.-flagged ships under the Jones Act.
Records reviewed by gCaptain indicated there were 196 approved voyages as of July 28.
The waiver has sparked intense debates within the maritime industry. Supporters claim it has boosted shipping capacity and enhanced fuel distribution during market disruptions. On the other hand, critics argue that it has sidelined American vessels and mariners while delivering minimal benefits to consumers.