ASC Fleet

[A guest]

Does anyone have an idea as to why the us fleet has not put in place a fleet renewal plan like CSL and Algoma ?

As several have posted, Canadian boats run in salt water out east and U.S. boats remain in strictly freshwater. A renewal plan for the U.S side isn't necessary as the vessels are well maintained and updated, and also commerce (which some is declining with each year) is easily handled with the current number of boats available with a few that remain tied up long term.

[DC from QC]

The Teflon linings are to provide a slippery surface so the cargo slides into the gates more readily, rather than for corrosion protection. Although there is some protection provided to the coatings because it is a cladding.

[Guest]

Algomas new hulls have UHMW (Ultra High Molecular Weight) linings installed in there cargo holds
Basicly a plastic liner to stop corrosion
Not sure if it’s in the ballast tanks

As to there being money hauling salt if it destroys your ship causing you to have to spend millions on new hulls it doesn’t seem to make sense

[diesel]

When ASC had the old John J. Boland and we hauled salt in her, the salt mines paid all O.T and maintenance on the vessels due to salt damage

[Guest]

Does anyone have an idea as to why the us fleet has not put in place a fleet renewal plan like CSL and Algoma ?

One isn't needed.

Adequate capacity exists with hulls fairly regularly made surplus or sold foreign as capacity declines to reflect customer demand, the hulls on the American side are in good condition thanks to operating in fresh water, and the fleet has been properly maintained for the most part.

And with upgrades like Interlake's repowers, they're nearly as efficient as new builds on the Canadian side at a fraction of the cost of building a new Jone's Act compliant vessel.

Why would Interlake for instance spend 5-6 times the money to construct a new build with capacity equal to the John Sherwin for an example, when the existing hull with decades of life left can yield nearly as efficient of a ship just by virtue of being repowered, repaired, and upgraded? Not hard to see why they're repowering rather than buying new.

I doubt we'll see significant new construction even in 15-20 years, when there's no major roadblock to something like the Wilfred Sykes of 20-30 years earlier being repowered in the next few years, yielding a ship fully capable of meeting the century mark if a policy of deferred maintenance isn't implemented.

Unless the lighter built high tensile steel of these 70's era hulls starts to let them down, I imagine we'll see the life of the US fleet from the 70's and early 80's be life extended with an eye towards taking them past 75 years of service.

Barring killing off the Jone's Act, there's just too great of savings at hand for this volatile industry to justify the luxury of a large scale fleet renewal plan, when the existing fleet can be kept in a state of good repair and be modernized.

[Guest]

A good question that’s for sure? To go off subject a bit, there are two that haul salt a lot from CSL the Salarium and Atlantic Huron correct? Why then if both of these lakers carry lots of salt, it seems are they in better condition hull wise then the Algoma ships that carry salt often? Just trying to make some sense of this is all. Also while not traveling through the Welland or Seaway often enough, don’t the LLT fleet carry some salt as well mainly the Calumet, Manitowoc, Mississagi along with the Cuyahoga? I know these four carry some salt at times and granted maybe not as much as others but it seems for now their hulls are in a lot better condition but maybe I’m wrong? Again just trying to make any light out of this is all. Thanks in advance for any information you have.

The truth is, we don't actually know what shape any of these boats are in on the inside. It seems the judgement is often made on their outward appearance.

[Denny]

A good question that’s for sure? To go off subject a bit, there are two that haul salt a lot from CSL the Salarium and Atlantic Huron correct? Why then if both of these lakers carry lots of salt, it seems are they in better condition hull wise then the Algoma ships that carry salt often? Just trying to make some sense of this is all. Also while not traveling through the Welland or Seaway often enough, don’t the LLT fleet carry some salt as well mainly the Calumet, Manitowoc, Mississagi along with the Cuyahoga? I know these four carry some salt at times and granted maybe not as much as others but it seems for now their hulls are in a lot better condition but maybe I’m wrong? Again just trying to make any light out of this is all. Thanks in advance for any information you have.

[Guest]

Begs the question why does Algoma haul so much salt if it turns there hulls into swiss cheese?

It pays.

[Pjwh12]

Begs the question why does Algoma haul so much salt if it turns there hulls into swiss cheese?

[diesel]

We have all new enviro packs in our EMDs at ASC, we get 5 yrs and then change out. A

[Duluthian]

The time charter is the Burns Harbor. This is why it carries almost exclusively to its namesake port for ArcelorMittal. The time charter means that ASC owns the vessel and it is chartered by ArcelorMittal, not the other way around.

Thanks tugboathunter. That makes a lot of sense.

[Brian Ferguson]

With an average lifespan of 40 years and service lives of 65 years, it will be interesting to see what happens in the fleet over the next 10-15 years as its units reach retirement age. The lack of any significant construction on the US side since the early 80s is going to be a major factor in the not too distant future.

Does anyone have an idea as to why the us fleet has not put in place a fleet renewal plan like CSL and Algoma ?

Less Salt. The US Fleet spends virtually no time in the Seaway and on Salt water unlike CSL and Algoma and far less time hauling salt than Algoma. That means way less corrosion in the ballast systems, unloading gear and holds. They also make far less locks than vessels that use the Welland and Seaway, that's less bumps and bangs a year. Interlake has enacted fleet renewal with all of it's re-powers. GLF seems to be following the trend by re-powering the Munson. The ASC ships (minus the Spirit) have engines that still have replacement parts being cranked out by EMD and the railroads have proved the model 645 EMD is nearly indestructible so unless they become a fuel liability or they change emission regulations they should be fine. The EMD's run #2 or #3 diesel rather than #6 marine fuel oil (bunker C) so they have avoided the cost of running scrubbers like the new re-powers.

[Pjwh12]

A time charter is the hiring of a vessel for a specific period of time; the owner still manages the vessel but the charterer selects the ports and directs the vessel where to go. The charterer pays for all fuel the vessel consumes, port charges, commissions, and a daily hire to the owner of the vessel.

[tugboathunter]

Does anyone have an idea as to why the us fleet has not put in place a fleet renewal plan like CSL and Algoma ?

It's because any new ships for the U.S. trade have to be built in the U.S., whereas new Canadian ships can be built anywhere. Also, the U.S. fleet is in better shape than the Canadian fleet because they don't operate on saltwater and most of them don't carry salt.

[tugboathunter]

The time charter is the Burns Harbor. This is why it carries almost exclusively to its namesake port for ArcelorMittal. The time charter means that ASC owns the vessel and it is chartered by ArcelorMittal, not the other way around.

[Pjwh12]

With an average lifespan of 40 years and service lives of 65 years, it will be interesting to see what happens in the fleet over the next 10-15 years as its units reach retirement age. The lack of any significant construction on the US side since the early 80s is going to be a major factor in the not too distant future.

Does anyone have an idea as to why the us fleet has not put in place a fleet renewal plan like CSL and Algoma ?

[Guest]

Could the time charter involve the Walter J. McCarthy Jr. or St. Clair? I believe both were originally owned by Detroit Edison. With an average lifespan of 40 years and service lives of 65 years, it will be interesting to see what happens in the fleet over the next 10-15 years as its units reach retirement age. The lack of any significant construction on the US side since the early 80s is going to be a major factor in the not too distant future.

[Duluthian]

In it's Form 10-K, GATX made the following statement about the American Steamship Company's fleet.

"At December 31, 2017, ASC’s fleet consisted of 12 vessels with a net book value of $251.2 million. All vessels are compliant with applicable regulatory guidelines. The vessels are diesel powered, with an average age of 40 years and estimated useful lives of 65 years. In December 2017, ASC sold three vessels and also returned a vessel that was previously leased. In addition, in March 2017, ASC returned the articulated tug-barge that was leased. See the ASC section in Part II, Item 7 of this Form 10-K for further details. For 2018, eleven of ASC’s vessels are generally available for both service contracts and spot business; the remaining vessel is dedicated to a time charter agreement that is scheduled to expire following the 2018 sailing season."

Does anyone know which vessel is under a time charter agreement? Is it the American Courage since it was the only vessel not to run last year? If it is the American Courage, who owns the time charter and why haven't they been using it?