NEWS CBYCA NEWS

Virginia’s General Assembly convened January 11 with much fanfare about a new governor and transportation woes. Boating legislation seemed again a low priority, but two bills deserved CBYCA attention and resulted in letters to the appropriate committees.

SB2 would require the Virginia Marine Resources Commission to enact regulations that would require all crab pot buoys and floats to be marked with reflective material. This would make the buys and floats visible at night when illuminated and would be welcomed by recreational boaters who are making night passages. The bill passed the Senate and has been referred to the House Committee on Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources. CBYCA communicated its support of the bill.

Virginia boaters could lose their option of turning in their fuel tax receipts for refunds if Senate Bill 678 passes. It was presented on January 20 and referred to the Committee on Finance, which soon received e-mails in opposition from CBYCA.

The bill would eliminate the current refund of fuels taxes for all recreational or pleasure watercraft users. Full tax refunds of 17.5 cents per gasoline gallon and 16 cents per diesel gallon have been available for boaters who save their receips and send then to DMV along with proper forms, which are available on the internet at ww.dmv.state.va.us.

The Philadelphia Gas Works shipping terminal in Port Richmond will soon have developer. PGW has not identified the proposed partner, although folks in the community following the project disclosed Hess LNG, based in New York is the probable vendor. The Port Richmond plant currently has two LNG storage tanks.

Negotiations between the principles could move very swiftly or could take as long as a couple of months. When it happens, Philadelphia City Council will have a hearing about the project. This project is likely to start a national debate about the suitability of locating liquefied-natural-gas facilities in urban populated areas. River users such as recreational boaters are heavily impacted by strict rules of navigation when LNG tankers are moving or docked at the plant facilities.

A number of Council members have placed PGW on notice that they are ageist the idea. Council President Anna C. Verna together with members Frank DiCicco and Joan L. Krajewski, warned PGW of "overwhelming and fierce opposition and uproar from our constituents." Their District is on the waterfront. Mayor Street has sanctioned the facility, saying it could provide the stressed utility with much-needed income.

Liquefied natural gas (LNG) is a liquid form of methane, a flammable gas. LNG tankers require added layers of security to protect them on waterways from other vessels and terrorism.

As to the concern over what would happen if a tanker carrying liquefied gas were damaged either in an accident or by terrorists, the shipping industry sites the safety records. The shipping industry has handled liquefied natural gas with solid safety record stating there have been no tanker accidents in 40 years and 33,000 voyages.

However, public hearings on the subject have reveled that if a tanker were damaged and a spill resulted, the liquid cargo would boil into a flammable vapor cloud covering a wide area. When this exploded and burned, nothing would be left in the affected area.

The question is not only if such large tankers should be allowed to transit a river in densely populated areas but also should terminals be located in urban areas. This may be out of the control of local and state governments.

Even if the PGW project passed Council, the company would have to win the approval of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) as it is the final authority in chain of approvals. Interestingly, even if Council and the residents do not what the facility, FERC may impose Federal power to override local and states governments.

The Coast Guard would have to decide whether the Delaware was suitable for handling the tankers. In that matter, a short time ago the local Coast Guard unit in Philadelphia told BP the precautions it demand in place for securing LNG tankers at the Logan Township proposed site. Before approval, BP must indicate who will pay for those added security procedures, including procedures of Coast Guard escorts. Officials have stated that BP obviously can't pay the Coast Guard for additional security escorts and there will have to be some public funding.

The impact of any LNG shipping on a narrow body of water in a densely populated area has a significant impact on the quality of life. It affects the constant fear and anxiety of the general population. It is disruptive to community activities both on land and water. Effectively it forms a blockade of all conveyances on bridges, roadways and waterways thereby inflicting a social impact to the entire community. Recreational and industrial vessels travel will be impacted for extended periods of time thereby reducing value to investments and recreation of the waterway. ------------------Simply stated, the cost do not offset the benefits either economically or socially.

Jerry J. Donofrio Sr.

Commodore – Chesapeake Bay Yacht Clubs Association

In addition to serving as your Rear Commodore, I also serve as the CBYCA representative to the State of Maryland’s Dredge Material Management Program (DMMP) , and since 2001 have been a member of the DMMP’s Citizens’ Advisory Committee (CAC). DMMP leadership is comprised of representatives of agencies of the State and Federal Government, including the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (Corps). The Corps has the responsibility for maintaining the Federal waterways including bridges, navigation aids, channel dredging and disposal of dredged material (spoils).

CBYCA had a significant role influencing the final decision in 2001 to discontinue future “Open Bay Dumping” of dredge spoils into the Chesapeake Bay. The Hart-Miller and Pooles Island sites will soon be filled to capacity with Bay spoils, hence Bay spoils will go to a newly established site, Poplar Island. The Poplar Island site will differ from Hart-Miller Island in that it has been mandated by the Government to be environmentally friendly. When completed, it will contain landscaped upland areas with planted vegetation and wetlands to promote habitat for waterfowl.

The dredge spoils from Baltimore Harbor are handled differently. Considered to be potentially contaminated, they cannot be disposed of in the Chesapeake Bay except at Hart-Miller-Island. (MD law). Also, they are allowed to be used as “fill material” in restoration areas within the harbor. Over 10 potential harbor disposal sites have been considered by the DMMP over the past several years. The Cox Creek and Masonville sites have now been selected and will be used for future harbor spoil disposal. As part of the projects, the areas will be cleaned up, reclaimed and improved for specific recreational purposes.

If you have any questions regarding dredging issues in the Bay, please do not hesitate to contact me. (410-885-2492)

I went to Richmond again today and learned at 8:45 a.m. before the scheduled opening of the Committee that the bill was to be referred to the Committee on Courts of Justice! Senator Lucas was there and was told at the same time as others who were also there to testify: Jack Nourie, Richard Cook speaking as an individual but also a Coast Guard officer, Charles Sledd of the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. The two NBF reps who were there last week were not there today. Did they know of the referral?

Senator Lucas was surprised and let the chairmen know that we had come the second time to testify, only to be turned away. The Committee on Courts of Justice will meet Wednesday at 2 p.m., but I will leave for Florida that morning. So, I am going to forward my testimony to them. Senator Puller, who I know quite well, is on the Committee. Do you know of anyone else who could go? Senator Norment, sponsor of SB 909, serves on Courts of Justice too, and Senator Lucas says he may think it has a better chance in this committee than on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources.

George Bruner was also at the session and talked to Jack Nourie afterwards, asking if Lucas would consider lowering the age to six, same as Maryland. Nourie said no

TESTIMONY VIRGINIA by DSLVA KNIGHT -"sent to" the VA Committees on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources and Courts of Justice