We're down to 54 days to get this straightened out.

From Boat/US this morning:

NEWS From BoatU.S.
Boat Owners Association of The United States
880 S. Pickett St., Alexandria, VA 22304
BoatU.S. News Room at http://www.BoatUS.com/news/releases.asp

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press Contact: Scott Croft, 703-461-2864,
Date: August 8, 2007

U.S. DISTRICT COURT RULING THREATENS RECREATIONAL BOATING

Legislative Solution, H.R. 2550, Gains Steam in Congress with 27 Co-
sponsors

Without Congressional approval of corrective legislation or a
successful legal appeal, a September 2006 court decision by the U.S.
District Court for Northern California designed to hold the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) accountable for the regulation
of the discharge of ballast water from ocean going commercial ships
will have unintended and serious consequences for recreational
boating, according to Boat Owners Association of The United States
(BoatU.S.).

"As it stands now, a permit will be required for 'normal operational
discharges' on every recreational boat - even your dinghy - in every
state where you boat," said BoatU.S. Vice President of Government
Affairs Margaret Podlich. "This is an attempt to apply a complex
permitting system designed for industrial dischargers to recreational
boats that will not yield significant environmental benefits."

Instead, BoatU.S. is pushing for passage of H.R. 2550 "The
Recreational Boating Act of 2007." It would continue a 34-year-old
exemption applied to recreational boats and release the EPA from
having to implement an expensive and bureaucratic national permit
system for all recreational boats by September 30, 2008.

The original lawsuit was brought against EPA in an effort to control
the spread of invasive species contained in commercial ships' ballast
water tanks. The tanks, which add stability, are filled overseas and
then discharged in U.S. waters when cargo is uploaded. Ballast water
is a primary pathway for non-native species, such as the Zebra Mussel,
to invade U.S. waters.

However, 99% of recreational boats do not have ballast tanks, nor do
they cross oceans in any significant numbers. For over three decades
the EPA understood that everyday deck runoff, bilge water, engine
cooling water, or grey water from sinks or showers, was not the same
as commercial vessels discharging millions of gallons of imported
ballast tank water. As a result, it exempted these normal operational
discharges from the Clean Water Act permit system. But in 2006 the
District Court ruled that EPA overstepped its authority, and started
the clock on the September 30, 2008 permit implementation deadline.

BoatU.S. is urging all boaters to contact their legislators to co-
sponsor H.R. 2550 which is a common sense solution designed to make
the previous exemption for recreational boats permanent. "It's
important to know that H.R. 2550 does not weaken any existing
environmental regulations for recreational boaters. The main sources
of potential pollution from boats - oil, fuel, sewage and trash - are
already regulated and will remain so," added Podlich.

For more information on this issue, or for help contacting your
legislators, go to http://www.BoatUS.com/gov BoatU.S. is the nation's
leading advocate for recreational boaters with over 650,000 members.

On Aug 8, 9:43?am, Chuck Gould wrote:
We're down to 54 days to get this straightened out.

From Boat/US this morning:

NEWS From BoatU.S.
Boat Owners Association of The United States
880 S. Pickett St., Alexandria, VA 22304
BoatU.S. News Room athttp://www.BoatUS.com/news/releases.asp

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press Contact: Scott Croft, 703-461-2864,
Date: August 8, 2007

U.S. DISTRICT COURT RULING THREATENS RECREATIONAL BOATING

Legislative Solution, H.R. 2550, Gains Steam in Congress with 27 Co-
sponsors

Without Congressional approval of corrective legislation or a
successful legal appeal, a September 2006 court decision by the U.S.
District Court for Northern California designed to hold the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) accountable for the regulation
of the discharge of ballast water from ocean going commercial ships
will have unintended and serious consequences for recreational
boating, according to Boat Owners Association of The United States
(BoatU.S.).

"As it stands now, a permit will be required for 'normal operational
discharges' on every recreational boat - even your dinghy - in every
state where you boat," said BoatU.S. Vice President of Government
Affairs Margaret Podlich. "This is an attempt to apply a complex
permitting system designed for industrial dischargers to recreational
boats that will not yield significant environmental benefits."

Instead, BoatU.S. is pushing for passage of H.R. 2550 "The
Recreational Boating Act of 2007." It would continue a 34-year-old
exemption applied to recreational boats and release the EPA from
having to implement an expensive and bureaucratic national permit
system for all recreational boats by September 30, 2008.

The original lawsuit was brought against EPA in an effort to control
the spread of invasive species contained in commercial ships' ballast
water tanks. The tanks, which add stability, are filled overseas and
then discharged in U.S. waters when cargo is uploaded. Ballast water
is a primary pathway for non-native species, such as the Zebra Mussel,
to invade U.S. waters.

However, 99% of recreational boats do not have ballast tanks, nor do
they cross oceans in any significant numbers. For over three decades
the EPA understood that everyday deck runoff, bilge water, engine
cooling water, or grey water from sinks or showers, was not the same
as commercial vessels discharging millions of gallons of imported
ballast tank water. As a result, it exempted these normal operational
discharges from the Clean Water Act permit system. But in 2006 the
District Court ruled that EPA overstepped its authority, and started
the clock on the September 30, 2008 permit implementation deadline.

BoatU.S. is urging all boaters to contact their legislators to co-
sponsor H.R. 2550 which is a common sense solution designed to make
the previous exemption for recreational boats permanent. "It's
important to know that H.R. 2550 does not weaken any existing
environmental regulations for recreational boaters. The main sources
of potential pollution from boats - oil, fuel, sewage and trash - are
already regulated and will remain so," added Podlich.

For more information on this issue, or for help contacting your
legislators, go tohttp://www.BoatUS.com/govBoatU.S. is the nation's
leading advocate for recreational boaters with over 650,000 members.

And here's a link through which you can contact your representative:

http://www.house.gov/writerep/

No, but it will yield significant revenue from recreational boaters, who
have to grab their ankles for the 'Permit". It's no accident.
JR

Chuck Gould wrote:

"This is an attempt to apply a complex
permitting system designed for industrial dischargers to recreational
boats that will not yield significant environmental benefits."


--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 09:43:36 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:

BoatU.S. is urging all boaters to contact their legislators to co-
sponsor H.R. 2550 which is a common sense solution designed to make
the previous exemption for recreational boats permanent

I just finished the following - in the mail tomorrow:

08/08/07


Captain Thomas E. Francis
XXXXXX
XXXXXX
XXXXXX

The Honorable Joseph Courtney
Representative - 2nd Congressional District, CT
215 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Representative Courtney:

I am writing you concerning H.R. 2550 - Recreational Boating Act of
2007.

In September of 2006, The Federal District Court for Northern
California negated a recreational boating exemption from commercial
EPA requirements. In effect, the Court is requiring the EPA to apply
the same standards and permitting process to recreational boaters as
it currently does for commercial shipping. The EPA had previously
exempted recreational boaters from regulations concerning everyday
deck runoff, bilge water, engine cooling water, or grey water from
sinks or showers recognizing that the environmental impact to our
oceans, lakes and rivers is not the same as commercial vessels. The
Court held that the EPA did not have the authority to exempt
recreational boaters from these regulations and directed the EPA to
enforce the standards across the board including a complicated,
onerous and expensive permitting process.

H. R. 2550 - The Recreational Boating Act of 2007, seeks to address
this by continuing the exemption through legislation and removing the
requirements of commercial regulations from the recreational boating
community.

I urge you to vigorously support and/or co-sponsor H. R. 2550. I am
sure you are aware of the importance that recreational boating has to
your District. Requiring recreational boaters to adhere to commercial
standards and permitting system is not solving a problem, it is
creating one. Your support for H.R. 2550 will go a long way towards
releasing recreational boaters in your District from these ridiculous
requirements.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely, etc., etc., etc...

On Wed, 08 Aug 07, Chuck Gould wrote:
We're down to 54 days to get this straightened out.

Where's the original thread? Wasn't long ago but I can't find it. I'm
sure I saw it though. In fact, I'm sure I *replied* to
it.......................... I think.
Can't locate it now though.
Anybody remember the Subject Line?
Maybe I saw it in a different group? -shrug-

Rick ------ maybe going daft.

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 17:58:35 -0500, lid wrote:

Rick ------ maybe going daft.

Welcome to the club. :)

On Aug 8, 3:22?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 09:43:36 -0700, Chuck Gould

wrote:
BoatU.S. is urging all boaters to contact their legislators to co-
sponsor H.R. 2550 which is a common sense solution designed to make
the previous exemption for recreational boats permanent

I just finished the following - in the mail tomorrow:

08/08/07

Captain Thomas E. Francis
XXXXXX
XXXXXX
XXXXXX

The Honorable Joseph Courtney
Representative - 2nd Congressional District, CT
215 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Representative Courtney:

I am writing you concerning H.R. 2550 - Recreational Boating Act of
2007.

In September of 2006, The Federal District Court for Northern
California negated a recreational boating exemption from commercial
EPA requirements. In effect, the Court is requiring the EPA to apply
the same standards and permitting process to recreational boaters as
it currently does for commercial shipping. The EPA had previously
exempted recreational boaters from regulations concerning everyday
deck runoff, bilge water, engine cooling water, or grey water from
sinks or showers recognizing that the environmental impact to our
oceans, lakes and rivers is not the same as commercial vessels. The
Court held that the EPA did not have the authority to exempt
recreational boaters from these regulations and directed the EPA to
enforce the standards across the board including a complicated,
onerous and expensive permitting process.

H. R. 2550 - The Recreational Boating Act of 2007, seeks to address
this by continuing the exemption through legislation and removing the
requirements of commercial regulations from the recreational boating
community.

I urge you to vigorously support and/or co-sponsor H. R. 2550. I am
sure you are aware of the importance that recreational boating has to
your District. Requiring recreational boaters to adhere to commercial
standards and permitting system is not solving a problem, it is
creating one. Your support for H.R. 2550 will go a long way towards
releasing recreational boaters in your District from these ridiculous
requirements.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely, etc., etc., etc...

Good work!

I sent a reminder to "Baghdad Jim" this morning. :-)

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Aug 8, 3:22?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 09:43:36 -0700, Chuck Gould

wrote:
BoatU.S. is urging all boaters to contact their legislators to co-
sponsor H.R. 2550 which is a common sense solution designed to make
the previous exemption for recreational boats permanent
I just finished the following - in the mail tomorrow:

08/08/07

Captain Thomas E. Francis
XXXXXX
XXXXXX
XXXXXX

The Honorable Joseph Courtney
Representative - 2nd Congressional District, CT
215 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Representative Courtney:

I am writing you concerning H.R. 2550 - Recreational Boating Act of
2007.

In September of 2006, The Federal District Court for Northern
California negated a recreational boating exemption from commercial
EPA requirements. In effect, the Court is requiring the EPA to apply
the same standards and permitting process to recreational boaters as
it currently does for commercial shipping. The EPA had previously
exempted recreational boaters from regulations concerning everyday
deck runoff, bilge water, engine cooling water, or grey water from
sinks or showers recognizing that the environmental impact to our
oceans, lakes and rivers is not the same as commercial vessels. The
Court held that the EPA did not have the authority to exempt
recreational boaters from these regulations and directed the EPA to
enforce the standards across the board including a complicated,
onerous and expensive permitting process.

H. R. 2550 - The Recreational Boating Act of 2007, seeks to address
this by continuing the exemption through legislation and removing the
requirements of commercial regulations from the recreational boating
community.

I urge you to vigorously support and/or co-sponsor H. R. 2550. I am
sure you are aware of the importance that recreational boating has to
your District. Requiring recreational boaters to adhere to commercial
standards and permitting system is not solving a problem, it is
creating one. Your support for H.R. 2550 will go a long way towards
releasing recreational boaters in your District from these ridiculous
requirements.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely, etc., etc., etc...

Good work!

I sent a reminder to "Baghdad Jim" this morning. :-)



I sent a letter this evening to my congresscritter, Steny Hoyer.

PhantMan wrote:
Rick ------ maybe going daft.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Welcome to the club. :)

Thanks.
..... but it turned out to be only a mild to intermediate case of
dementia. I found the thread that was driving me daft in
rec.boats.cruising.
Anyhow, my congresscritter is the guy who wrote the legislation so I
guess it wouldn't help much to ask for his support ;-)
Wouldn't hurt to add some encouragement though.... I'll do that.

Rick