Incentivizing the Expansion of U.S. Ports Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT]
- Committees
- Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jun 11, 2026
Bottom line
The bill seeks to reduce costs and accelerate U.S. port development by easing restrictions on foreign-built dredging vessels and the transport of dredged material, potentially impacting domestic maritime industries.
What it actually does
This bill proposes to eliminate specific requirements related to dredging vessels and the transportation of dredged material. It amends Title 46 of the U.S. Code to allow foreign-built dredging vessels to obtain necessary certificates for operation in U.S. waters and exempts dredged material from domestic transportation requirements, such as those typically associated with the Jones Act. The aim is to reduce regulatory burdens on port expansion and maintenance projects.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that the bill will significantly reduce the cost and time required for essential port dredging and expansion projects, making U.S. ports more competitive globally. They contend that current regulations create unnecessary hurdles, limiting access to specialized equipment and efficient transportation methods, thereby hindering economic growth and infrastructure modernization.
Opponents contend
Critics contend that the bill undermines critical protections for the U.S. shipbuilding and maritime industries, potentially leading to job losses and a weakening of national security by increasing reliance on foreign vessels and crews. They argue that existing laws like the Jones Act are vital for maintaining a strong domestic maritime industrial base and ensuring fair labor practices.
The bill text is exceptionally short and can be read and understood quickly, allowing ample time for a thorough evaluation of its implications.
Section 2(a)
Modifying Dredging Vessel Certificate Requirements
This provision amends section 55109(a)(3) of title 46, United States Code. It allows vessels engaged in dredging to be eligible for certain certificates and endorsements without needing to meet the 'built in the United States' requirement specified in section 12112(a)(2) of the same title. This change would permit foreign-built dredging vessels to operate more easily in U.S. waters for dredging purposes.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this provision will allow U.S. ports to access a wider range of modern and specialized dredging equipment, which can be more efficient and cost-effective than domestically available options. This flexibility is crucial for accelerating critical infrastructure projects and maintaining competitive port depths.
Critics contend
Opponents contend that this change directly undermines the U.S. shipbuilding industry, which is vital for national security and economic stability. They argue that allowing foreign-built vessels to dominate dredging operations could lead to a loss of skilled jobs and a diminished capacity to build and maintain essential maritime infrastructure domestically.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the immediate economic benefits of lower dredging costs and potentially faster project completion against the long-term strategic goal of supporting and protecting the domestic shipbuilding industry and its associated jobs.
Section 2(b)
Excluding Dredged Material from Domestic Transportation Requirements
This provision amends section 55110 of title 46, United States Code, by removing all references to 'dredged material'. Section 55110 generally governs the transportation of merchandise and passengers in the coastwise trade, often referred to as the Jones Act. By striking 'or dredged material', the bill exempts dredged material from these domestic transportation requirements, meaning it could be transported between U.S. points by foreign-built, foreign-owned, or foreign-crewed vessels.
The amendment to 46 U.S. Code 55109(a)(3) allows dredging vessels to be eligible for certificates and endorsements without regard to the U.S.-built requirement under section 12112(a)(2). This means foreign-built dredging vessels can now operate in U.S. waters for dredging purposes.
Section 2(a)(2)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to amend specific sections of existing law rather than restating the entire context. However, it requires a reader to look up the referenced code to grasp the full implications.
Case for: Supporters argue that this change provides necessary flexibility to utilize advanced or more cost-effective foreign-built dredging equipment, which may not be readily available from U.S. manufacturers, thereby speeding up and reducing the cost of critical port infrastructure projects.
Case against: Critics contend that this directly undermines the U.S. shipbuilding industry, which relies on such requirements to ensure demand for domestic construction. They argue it could lead to a decline in U.S. shipbuilding capacity and jobs, impacting national security and economic independence.
Estimated impact: Potentially significant cost savings for port dredging projects, but also a shift in market share for dredging vessel construction and operation from U.S. to foreign entities.
The bill strikes 'or dredged material' from 46 U.S. Code 55110, effectively exempting the transportation of dredged material from the Jones Act's domestic carriage requirements. This means foreign-flagged, foreign-built, or foreign-crewed vessels could transport dredged material between U.S. points.
Section 2(b)
Why it matters:This is a common legislative technique to modify existing law. The 'burial' is due to the technical nature of statutory amendments, requiring familiarity with the underlying code section to understand the full policy shift.
Case for: Proponents argue that this exemption will significantly reduce the logistical costs associated with disposing of or relocating dredged material, which can be a major component of port project expenses. They believe it will allow for more efficient and economical management of these materials.
Case against: Opponents argue that this change represents a direct weakening of the Jones Act, a foundational law for the U.S. maritime industry. They contend it would lead to job losses for U.S. mariners, undermine the domestic shipping fleet, and potentially compromise national security by increasing reliance on foreign vessels for critical domestic transport.
Estimated impact: Potential for substantial cost reductions for large-scale dredging projects, but also a significant shift in the market for dredged material transportation from U.S. to foreign maritime operators.