Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 4832 JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2017 • FOGHORN LEGISLATIVEREPORT Guard has not yet begun such a rule- making. PVAis requesting Congress to enact legislation to exempt domestic pas- senger-carrying vessels from the un- necessary requirement of an “official logbook.” The proposed amendment is in keeping with current efforts to reduce regulatory burdens for small businesses. Cybersecurity for Vessels and Facilities The Coast Guard has made clear its concern about the danger of cybersecu- rity breaches in the maritime industry. Congress has also paid attention to this emerging issue. In 2016, the House of Representatives approved a maritime cybersecurity bill (H.R. 3878).Among its provisions was a requirement that every vessel and facility security plan required by the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (MTSA) have a cyberse- curity component. The Senate never acted on this legislation, but it is entirely possible that it will be revived in the 115th Congress. PVA acknowledges that cybersecu- rity breaches that affect maritime safety and security need to be analyzed and addressed. However, this should be done in a practical, cost-effective way. The cybersecurity vulnerability of the typical PVA vessel member compared to that of a major container port is like night and day. What is appropriate for one will be completely off-base for the other. PVA knows that when it updates its Coast Guard-approved Alternative Security Program (ASP) later this year, it will need to insert a cybersecurity section. PVA will work with Congress to ensure that any maritime cybersecu- rity legislation developed in 2017 does not impose “over the top” burdens on the U.S. passenger vessel sector. Funding for Small Shipyard Grants For a number of years, the U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) has conducted a competitive grant program under which small U.S. shipyards receive funding for various capital projects. Although funded at relatively modest levels, the program has been hugely popular, generating far more worthy proposals than can ever be funded. Shipyards that are Associate Members of PVA constitute a larger percentage of successful recipients of grants. PVAwill urge Congress to retain the Small Shipyard Grant program and hopefully increase annual funding for it. Enable More PVA Members to Use Capital Construction Fund MARAD’S Capital Construction Fund (CCF) program lets many vessel operators to set up a tax-advantaged account in which to deposit earnings to accumulate capital for new vessel construction or acquisition. A CCF can be likened to a maritime IRA. Private passenger vessel operators in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the Great Lakes have long enjoyed use of the CCF, and recently, a change in the statute enables operators of vehicle- carrying ferries to do so too. PVA’s goal is for Congress to make changes so that even more PVA vessel operators from the private sector can take advantage of the CCF program. n