Good news and some PITA news for boaters.........

The act permits and all but encourages states to establish "no
discharge zones." While untreated sewage, waste oil, etc should never
be discharged anyway- the concept of keeping grey water from showers,
dishwashing, etc in a separate holding tank will severely limit the
number of days most boaters can stay "on the hook". In some
ridiculously "green" states, we could indeed see regulations against
dumping cooling water etc into the waterways.



**************
Commerce Committee Approves Measure that Tempers Spread of Invasive
Species

For Immediate
Release






September 27, 2007






Contact: Jenilee Keefe (202) 224-7824












Commerce Committee Approves Measure that Tempers Spread of Invasive
Species












WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Committee today approved S. 1578, The Ballast Water Management Act of
2007, as amended, which strengthens the existing national ballast
water management program for aquatic nuisance species, including
uniform, mandatory national standards for ballast water treatment.












"This ballast water legislation strengthens existing federal
authorities and enhances important environmental protections aimed at
further stemming the tide of invasive species entering our waters from
ships," said Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye. "The
Committee's approach is a pragmatic, bipartisan approach that offers
the opportunity for meaningful and effective environmental legislation
to move through the Senate and ultimately reach the President's
desk."












Ballast water is the water ships generally carry for stability that is
usually discharged as cargo is unloaded. It is a major source of
invasive species in U.S. waterways that can cause both environmental
and economic damage.












Specifically, the Ballast Water Management Act of 2007, introduced by
Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Vice
Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska):







Implements a recommendation by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy to
adopt a national ballast water management program for aquatic nuisance
species, including uniform, mandatory national standards for ballast
water treatment. It also implements an international agreement,
negotiated in the International Maritime Organization.






Strengthens existing federal law by amending the Nonindigenous Aquatic
Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (NANPCA) to require
mandatory ballast water treatment technology on all vessels that come
to a U.S. port. The bill sets performance standards 100 times stronger
than the minimum international standards and includes provisions for
strengthening these standards in the future, with a goal of zero
discharge.








Requires, until treatment is required, the exchange of ballast water
with water in mid-ocean to reduce the number of aquatic nuisance
species being transported.






Provides states with the authority to develop programs to regulate
invasive species from ships so long as the provisions do not conflict
with the federal program. Such programs could include all of the
provisions included in the federal program - treatment standards,
other management practices, research and technology development, as
well as other provisions such as the imposition of port fees.






Allows states to establish no discharge zones in sensitive state
waters, a mechanism for strengthening the performance standards in the
future, and a right of action for states against the Coast Guard and
EPA.






Authorizes $50 million for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012 for
the Coast Guard to implement the bill, of which up to a total of $10
million could be provided to states that enter cooperative agreements
with the Coast Guard.

On Sep 28, 5:30 pm, Chuck Gould wrote:
Good news and some PITA news for boaters.........

The act permits and all but encourages states to establish "no
discharge zones." While untreated sewage, waste oil, etc should never
be discharged anyway- the concept of keeping grey water from showers,
dishwashing, etc in a separate holding tank will severely limit the
number of days most boaters can stay "on the hook". In some
ridiculously "green" states, we could indeed see regulations against
dumping cooling water etc into the waterways.

**************
Commerce Committee Approves Measure that Tempers Spread of Invasive
Species

For Immediate
Release

September 27, 2007

Contact: Jenilee Keefe (202) 224-7824

Commerce Committee Approves Measure that Tempers Spread of Invasive
Species

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Committee today approved S. 1578, The Ballast Water Management Act of
2007, as amended, which strengthens the existing national ballast
water management program for aquatic nuisance species, including
uniform, mandatory national standards for ballast water treatment.

"This ballast water legislation strengthens existing federal
authorities and enhances important environmental protections aimed at
further stemming the tide of invasive species entering our waters from
ships," said Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye. "The
Committee's approach is a pragmatic, bipartisan approach that offers
the opportunity for meaningful and effective environmental legislation
to move through the Senate and ultimately reach the President's
desk."

Ballast water is the water ships generally carry for stability that is
usually discharged as cargo is unloaded. It is a major source of
invasive species in U.S. waterways that can cause both environmental
and economic damage.

Specifically, the Ballast Water Management Act of 2007, introduced by
Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Vice
Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska):

Implements a recommendation by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy to
adopt a national ballast water management program for aquatic nuisance
species, including uniform, mandatory national standards for ballast
water treatment. It also implements an international agreement,
negotiated in the International Maritime Organization.

Strengthens existing federal law by amending the Nonindigenous Aquatic
Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (NANPCA) to require
mandatory ballast water treatment technology on all vessels that come
to a U.S. port. The bill sets performance standards 100 times stronger
than the minimum international standards and includes provisions for
strengthening these standards in the future, with a goal of zero
discharge.

Requires, until treatment is required, the exchange of ballast water
with water in mid-ocean to reduce the number of aquatic nuisance
species being transported.

Provides states with the authority to develop programs to regulate
invasive species from ships so long as the provisions do not conflict
with the federal program. Such programs could include all of the
provisions included in the federal program - treatment standards,
other management practices, research and technology development, as
well as other provisions such as the imposition of port fees.

Allows states to establish no discharge zones in sensitive state
waters, a mechanism for strengthening the performance standards in the
future, and a right of action for states against the Coast Guard and
EPA.

Authorizes $50 million for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012 for
the Coast Guard to implement the bill, of which up to a total of $10
million could be provided to states that enter cooperative agreements
with the Coast Guard.

Well, I mucked through this and still don't know if I am going to have
to get another permit to play in my boat? Any simple answer out there?

On Sep 28, 5:30 pm, Chuck Gould wrote:
Good news and some PITA news for boaters.........

The act permits and all but encourages states to establish "no
discharge zones." While untreated sewage, waste oil, etc should never
be discharged anyway- the concept of keeping grey water from showers,
dishwashing, etc in a separate holding tank will severely limit the
number of days most boaters can stay "on the hook".

Well, that ought to clear out the scenic vistas.

On Sep 29, 5:12?am, wrote:
On Sep 28, 5:30 pm, Chuck Gould wrote:





Good news and some PITA news for boaters.........

The act permits and all but encourages states to establish "no
discharge zones." While untreated sewage, waste oil, etc should never
be discharged anyway- the concept of keeping grey water from showers,
dishwashing, etc in a separate holding tank will severely limit the
number of days most boaters can stay "on the hook". In some
ridiculously "green" states, we could indeed see regulations against
dumping cooling water etc into the waterways.

**************
Commerce Committee Approves Measure that Tempers Spread of Invasive
Species

For Immediate
Release

September 27, 2007

Contact: Jenilee Keefe (202) 224-7824

Commerce Committee Approves Measure that Tempers Spread of Invasive
Species

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Committee today approved S. 1578, The Ballast Water Management Act of
2007, as amended, which strengthens the existing national ballast
water management program for aquatic nuisance species, including
uniform, mandatory national standards for ballast water treatment.

"This ballast water legislation strengthens existing federal
authorities and enhances important environmental protections aimed at
further stemming the tide of invasive species entering our waters from
ships," said Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye. "The
Committee's approach is a pragmatic, bipartisan approach that offers
the opportunity for meaningful and effective environmental legislation
to move through the Senate and ultimately reach the President's
desk."

Ballast water is the water ships generally carry for stability that is
usually discharged as cargo is unloaded. It is a major source of
invasive species in U.S. waterways that can cause both environmental
and economic damage.

Specifically, the Ballast Water Management Act of 2007, introduced by
Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Vice
Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska):

Implements a recommendation by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy to
adopt a national ballast water management program for aquatic nuisance
species, including uniform, mandatory national standards for ballast
water treatment. It also implements an international agreement,
negotiated in the International Maritime Organization.

Strengthens existing federal law by amending the Nonindigenous Aquatic
Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (NANPCA) to require
mandatory ballast water treatment technology on all vessels that come
to a U.S. port. The bill sets performance standards 100 times stronger
than the minimum international standards and includes provisions for
strengthening these standards in the future, with a goal of zero
discharge.

Requires, until treatment is required, the exchange of ballast water
with water in mid-ocean to reduce the number of aquatic nuisance
species being transported.

Provides states with the authority to develop programs to regulate
invasive species from ships so long as the provisions do not conflict
with the federal program. Such programs could include all of the
provisions included in the federal program - treatment standards,
other management practices, research and technology development, as
well as other provisions such as the imposition of port fees.

Allows states to establish no discharge zones in sensitive state
waters, a mechanism for strengthening the performance standards in the
future, and a right of action for states against the Coast Guard and
EPA.

Authorizes $50 million for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012 for
the Coast Guard to implement the bill, of which up to a total of $10
million could be provided to states that enter cooperative agreements
with the Coast Guard.

Well, I mucked through this and still don't know if I am going to have
to get another permit to play in my boat? Any simple answer out there?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not until the item is approved by the remainder of the Senate and
signed into law by President Bush.

It could go well beyond getting a permit. The most ridiculous
definitions of "no discharge" include engine cooling water- even the
pee stream from the smallest outboard. I'm personally surprised at the
amount of resistance to this bill from senators with lots of boating
constituents.
I couldn't get a straight answer from Cantwell's office or from Norm
Dicks' office regarding their positions on exempting small pleasure
craft from the requirement that each and every sort of discharge would
be subject to permit. Comments like, "This is a complex issue with
environmental as well as recreational aspects......", seem to indicate
a lot of political pre$$ure from the Sierra Club, etc.

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 08:40:59 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:

..
I couldn't get a straight answer from Cantwell's office or from Norm
Dicks' office regarding their positions on exempting small pleasure
craft from the requirement that each and every sort of discharge would
be subject to permit. Comments like, "This is a complex issue with
environmental as well as recreational aspects......", seem to indicate
a lot of political pre$$ure from the Sierra Club, etc.

The last part of that is the critical part.

I spoke directly to my Representative's right hand dudette and she
basically told me that the shipping companies don't care one way or
the other - they will comply with whatever comes up. With respect to
recreational boaters, they are not viewed as an election threat "like
the Sierra Club".

Don't know what that implies, but it don't sound good to me.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 08:40:59 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:

.
I couldn't get a straight answer from Cantwell's office or from Norm
Dicks' office regarding their positions on exempting small pleasure
craft from the requirement that each and every sort of discharge would
be subject to permit. Comments like, "This is a complex issue with
environmental as well as recreational aspects......", seem to indicate
a lot of political pre$$ure from the Sierra Club, etc.

The last part of that is the critical part.

I spoke directly to my Representative's right hand dudette and she
basically told me that the shipping companies don't care one way or
the other - they will comply with whatever comes up. With respect to
recreational boaters, they are not viewed as an election threat "like
the Sierra Club".

Don't know what that implies, but it don't sound good to me.

It means that the recreational boating industry and constituency doesn't
have a PAC with enough cash to get the attention of Congresspeople.

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:36:53 -0400, BAR wrote:

It means that the recreational boating industry and constituency doesn't
have a PAC with enough cash to get the attention of Congresspeople.

Boat US was supposed to fill that role but they have gotten too
wrapped up in their own business interests for my taste. I for one
would be happy to give them more money if they'd get more politically
active.