Overview
Title
To require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to assess certain fees on shipping and other vessels, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill wants big ships to pay money if they pollute the air too much, and it will use this money to help make ships cleaner and protect the ocean.
Summary AI
H. R. 9013, also known as the "International Maritime Pollution Accountability Act of 2024," requires the Environmental Protection Agency to impose fees on shipping vessels based on their carbon emissions and other pollutants. The bill aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the marine shipping industry and includes support for developing low-emission maritime technologies and electrifying the Jones Act fleet. It outlines extensive reporting requirements for operators of large cargo vessels making voyages to or from the United States, and establishes various programs to promote clean energy and reduce air pollution in port communities. The fees collected will also fund multiple environmental and security initiatives related to oceans and ports.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary
The bill titled "International Maritime Pollution Accountability Act of 2024" aims to impose fees on shipping and vessels based on their greenhouse gas and other pollutant emissions. Starting in 2025, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in collaboration with other government bodies, will assess fees on shipping voyages that use significant fuel quantities and emit pollutants during their journeys. The funds collected from these fees will be used to support various environmental and research programs directed at reducing maritime emissions, boosting technology development, and monitoring air quality around ports.
Significant Issues
The bill tackles a pressing concern by addressing emissions from the marine shipping industry, which is a notable source of global greenhouse gases. However, there are several issues within its provisions:
Complex Regulations and Definitions: The bill contains complex and detailed reporting and fee structures that may create challenges in compliance and enforcement. For instance, the definition of "covered voyage" includes various conditions and exceptions that might complicate interpretation for both operators and regulators.
Fee Calculation and Consistency: The calculation methods for emissions fees lack precision, particularly regarding the lifecycle emissions profiles and inflation adjustments. This absence of clarity may lead to inconsistent application and make administrative tasks burdensome.
International Considerations: The bill recognizes pollution fees from other countries, but this could introduce complications, especially where international regulations conflict or intersect.
Financial and Programmatic Uncertainty: Section 7 bases funding for certain programs on a percentage of the fees collected, which may vary annually, leading to inconsistent support for environmental initiatives.
Broad Public Impact
The bill is designed to hold the maritime shipping industry accountable for its emissions, aiming to reduce the industry's environmental footprint. By imposing fees on emissions, it seeks to incentivize cleaner technologies and practices. The potential benefits of improved air quality could be substantial, especially for communities living near ports, who often experience significant air pollution.
However, the administrative burdens and potential for inconsistencies in fee assessments might translate into increased costs for shipping companies, which could eventually pass these costs onto consumers. If not balanced correctly, the regulatory requirements could also pose compliance challenges, particularly for smaller operators.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For shipping companies, the bill could mean increased operational costs and the need to navigate complex regulatory terrain. Yet, companies investing in cleaner technologies might find competitive advantages or subsidies under various programs funded by the fees.
For ports and nearby communities, the bill promises potential environmental and health benefits through reduced emissions and funded monitoring initiatives. However, the effectiveness of these benefits depends on the consistent and efficient collection and allocation of funds.
For regulatory bodies like the EPA, the bill could present challenges in terms of implementation and enforcement, given the complexities in defining and assessing the fees. These bodies would need to develop robust systems to ensure accurate fee collection and dependable funding for the proposed environmental programs.
In conclusion, while the bill addresses a critical environmental issue, its implications depend significantly on how effectively these complex regulations are executed and integrated into the global maritime framework. The success of the legislation in achieving its goals hinges on careful and clear administrative execution to ensure that its environmental benefits outweigh the potential economic challenges.
Financial Assessment
The bill, titled the "International Maritime Pollution Accountability Act of 2024," involves several financial aspects related to addressing pollution from the marine shipping industry. The bill's primary purpose is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants by imposing fees on shipping vessels based on their emissions. It also establishes various programs that are financially supported by these collected fees.
Financial Appropriations and Allocations
A key component of the bill is the imposition of fees on shipping vessels based on their carbon dioxide-equivalent emissions and other criteria air pollutants. Specifically, Section 5 outlines that a fee of $150 per metric ton of carbon emissions will be assessed, with adjustments for inflation and specific regional considerations. Additionally, Section 6 specifies fees for nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and fine particulate matter, set at $6.30, $18, and $38.90 per pound, respectively. These fees are subject to annual inflation adjustments beginning in 2026.
The funds collected from these fees are allocated to various initiatives and programs each fiscal year beginning in 2027. For example, Section 7 indicates that 25% of the collected fees will be appropriated to modernizing vessels under the Jones Act to support the transition to low-carbon or zero-emission technologies. Another 25% is directed to the Department of Energy to support research and development of low-emission maritime technologies and fuels. Additionally, 5% is earmarked for workforce development related to the operation and maintenance of zero-emission port equipment.
10% of the fees are allocated to the Environmental Protection Agency for replacing or retrofitting harbor craft and ferry vessels with battery-operated propulsion systems. These allocations aim to support workforce training and development, as well as air monitoring in port communities.
Linking Financial Allocations to Identified Issues
The bill's financial structure is designed to support its environmental objectives but faces some challenges, as noted in the identified issues. One issue is the reliance on a percentage-based funding model, which could result in inconsistent financial support due to fluctuations in fee collections. This might affect the stability of programs intended to modernize shipping fleets and support clean energy technologies.
Another concern involves the complex interactions caused by international recognition of pollution-based fees. The bill indicates reductions in fees if similar levies are imposed by a foreign nation. This could potentially create financial inconsistencies, especially if international regulations or fee structures conflict with the bill's provisions.
Additionally, the financial penalties and fee structures lack clear definitions, which may lead to interpretive challenges. These ambiguities could result in unequal application and enforcement, thus impacting revenue consistency, which forms the financial backbone of the bill's outlined programs.
In summary, while the bill makes substantial financial allocations to support its goals, the success of these efforts will heavily depend on consistent fee collection and clear regulatory definitions. Addressing these aspects could help ensure that the necessary funds are available to support the proposed environmental initiatives effectively.
Issues
The bill's fee structure for shipping emissions and pollutants (Sections 5 and 6) lacks a detailed and clearly defined formula for calculating emissions profiles and adjusting fees, potentially leading to inconsistent application and increased administrative burden.
The definition of 'covered voyage' in Section 3 is complex and includes nested conditions and exceptions that may lead to interpretive challenges for stakeholders, affecting compliance and enforcement.
The bill provides no clear plan or recommendation for mitigating emissions from the marine shipping industry as highlighted in Section 2, creating uncertainty about achieving environmental objectives.
Compliance and enforcement measures for reporting requirements in Section 4 are vague, potentially leading to inconsistent enforcement without specified penalties for non-compliance within the specified deadlines.
The exception clauses in Sections 5 and 6 concerning the safety-based penalty exemptions could be subjectively interpreted, potentially allowing operators to circumvent fee payments under undetermined safety circumstances.
The funding model in Section 7 relies on a percentage of fees assessed, which may cause fluctuations in available funds and result in inconsistent program support over time.
Definitions within Section 3 often refer extensively to external documents without providing essential summaries within the bill text, possibly causing accessibility issues for stakeholders unfamiliar with these references.
The bill's process for international recognition of pollution-based fees in Section 5 could result in complex interactions with international regulations, especially in cases of conflicting fee structures across different countries.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the bill gives it the name “International Maritime Pollution Accountability Act of 2024.”
2. Findings Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress states that the marine shipping industry contributes significantly to global carbon dioxide emissions, which are increasing, and criticizes the International Maritime Organization for not enforcing emissions reductions aligned with global decarbonization goals. Additionally, Congress highlights that ports cause significant air pollution, negatively affecting the health of nearby communities.
3. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides definitions for terms used in the legislation, such as "Administrator" for the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, "calendar quarter" as a three-month period, and "covered voyage" as a journey involving large, self-propelled vessels primarily for transporting cargo. It also explains exceptions to these terms and defines key maritime and regulatory concepts like "exclusive economic zone" and "territorial sea."
4. Reporting requirements Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The text outlines the reporting requirements for operators of certain voyages starting January 1, 2025. They must provide detailed information about the voyage, such as ports, distances, fuel consumed, and cargo details, to specific authorities within 30 days after each calendar quarter.
5. Fee on lifecycle carbon dioxide-equivalent emissions from cargo vessels Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
This bill section establishes a fee for carbon emissions from cargo vessels starting in January 2025. The fee is based on the type and amount of fuel burned, with adjustments for inflation and voyages in polar regions. Importers must pay a related fee if they transport goods to the U.S. from overseas, but these fees can be reduced if the vessel is already paying a pollution fee to another country. The regulations in this section will end if a global fee is implemented by the International Maritime Organization.
Money References
- — (A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph (B) and subsection (d), the amount of a fee assessed under paragraph (1) with respect to a covered voyage shall be the total sum of, for each type of fuel consumed during the covered voyage, the product obtained by multiplying— (i) the total mass of the fuel consumed during the covered voyage; (ii) the carbon dioxide-equivalent emissions of the fuel, expressed in metric tons per unit mass of fuel consumed, as determined under subsection (a); and (iii) $150. (B) ADJUSTMENTS.
6. Fees on criteria air pollutants Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines a fee system for emissions from fuels used in maritime shipping, starting January 1, 2025. The fees are based on the emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and fine particulate matter during voyages within U.S. waters, with adjustments for inflation from 2026 onwards; failure to pay may result in prohibiting operators from entering U.S. waters unless safety is at risk.
Money References
- — (A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph (B), the amount of a fee assessed under paragraph (1) shall be the total sum of, for each type of fuel consumed during the covered voyage— (i) the product obtained by multiplying— (I) the total mass of the fuel consumed during the covered voyage within the exclusive economic zone, the territorial sea, and the internal waters of the United States; (II) the quantity of nitrogen oxides emitted by the consumption of the fuel, expressed in pounds per unit mass of fuel consumed, as determined under subsection (a); and (III) $6.30; (ii) the product obtained by multiplying— (I) the total mass of the fuel consumed during the covered voyage within the exclusive economic zone, the territorial sea, and the internal waters of the United States; (II) the quantity of sulfur dioxide emitted by the consumption of the fuel, expressed in pounds per unit mass of fuel consumed, as determined under subsection (a); and (III) $18; and (iii) the product obtained by multiplying— (I) the total mass of the fuel consumed during the covered voyage within the exclusive economic zone, the territorial sea, and the internal waters of the United States; (II) the quantity of fine particulate matter emitted by the consumption of the fuel, expressed in pounds per unit mass of fuel consumed, as determined under subsection (a); and (III) $38.90. (B) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—Beginning in calendar year 2026, the Administrator shall annually increase the amounts described in clauses (i)(III), (ii)(III), and (iii)(III) of subparagraph (A) by the percentage that is equal to the sum obtained by adding— (i) the rate of inflation, as determined by the Administrator using the changes for the 12-month period ending the preceding November 30 in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor; and (ii) 5 percentage points. (3) DEADLINE.—A fee assessed under paragraph (1) shall be due and payable to the Administrator not later than the later of— (A) the date that is 30 days after the date on which the fee is assessed; and (B) the end of the calendar year in which the fee is assessed. (4) PENALTY.
7. Decarbonizing shipping and ports Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section focuses on reducing emissions from shipping and ports, including modernizing the Jones Act fleet with low-carbon technologies, supporting research and development for such technologies, and funding workforce training for zero-emission port equipment. It also outlines grants for projects like harbor and ferry electrification, air monitoring in port communities, and funding for existing environmental and infrastructure programs related to maritime activities.
Money References
- (B) PRIORITY.—In selecting the recipients of awards under the program, the Administrator shall give priority to entities the replacement or retrofit of whose vessels would— (i) maximize the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; (ii) maximize the public health benefits from the reduction of criteria air pollutants; (iii) maximize water quality in ports and other bodies of water; (iv) maximize public health and environmental benefits from every dollar spent under the program; and (v) alleviate air pollution in poor air quality areas, including— (I) areas identified by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency as in nonattainment or maintenance of national ambient air quality standards promulgated under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7409) for criteria air pollutants; and (II) other areas that receive a disproportionate quantity of air pollution, as determined by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. (6) CLAWBACK.—If the Administrator determines that the recipient of an award under the program has violated the certification required under paragraph (5)(A), the Administrator shall seek reimbursement of the full amount of the award provided to the recipient.
- , the Secretary of Energy shall give priority to projects that maximize— (A) the domestic production and deployment of sustainable maritime fuels or the use of low-emission maritime technologies in commercial maritime; (B) reductions in greenhouse gas emissions; (C) public health benefits from criteria air pollutant reductions; (D) water quality in ports and other bodies of water; (E) public health and environmental benefits from every dollar spent under that program; and (F) the creation of new jobs in the United States.
- (B) PRIORITY.—In selecting the recipients of awards under the program established under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall give priority to entities the replacement or retrofit of whose harbor crafts with vessels that use batteries for all propulsion power would— (i) maximize the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; (ii) maximize the public health benefits from the reduction of criteria air pollutants; (iii) maximize water quality in ports and other bodies of water; (iv) maximize public health and environmental benefits from every dollar spent under the program; and (v) alleviate air pollution in poor air quality areas, including— (I) areas identified by the Administrator as in nonattainment or maintenance of national ambient air quality standards promulgated under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7409) for criteria air pollutants; and (II) other areas that receive a disproportionate quantity of air pollution, as determined by the Administrator. (5) CLAWBACK.—If the Administrator determines that the recipient of an award under the program established under paragraph (1) has violated the certification required under paragraph (4)(A), the Administrator shall seek reimbursement of the full amount of the award provided to the recipient.
- (B) PRIORITY.—In selecting the recipients of awards under the program established under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall give priority to entities the replacement or retrofit of whose ferry or crew vessels with vessels that use batteries for all propulsion power would— (i) maximize the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; (ii) maximize the public health benefits from the reduction of criteria air pollutants; (iii) maximize water quality in ports and other bodies of water; (iv) maximize public health and environmental benefits from every dollar spent under the program; and (v) alleviate air pollution in poor air quality areas, including— (I) areas identified by the Administrator as in nonattainment or maintenance of national ambient air quality standards promulgated under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7409) for criteria air pollutants; and (II) other areas that receive a disproportionate quantity of air pollution, as determined by the Administrator. (5) CLAWBACK.—If the Administrator determines that the recipient of an award under the program established under paragraph (1) has violated the certification required under paragraph (4)(A), the Administrator shall seek reimbursement of the full amount of the award provided to the recipient.