The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently approved usage of an ethanol blend of up to 15 percent in gasoline. This gasoline blend is approved for automobiles but not on boats.

The problem with this is that many consumers will fuel their vehicles and boats at the same pumps. It is clearly a decision that will confuse many. The EPA must proceed through several more steps before the E15 blend will appear at the pump, including state approval and structural changes to gas stations to ensure tanks are compatible with the new blend formula.

The House Committee on Science, Space and Technology approved a bill, H.R. 3199, on February 7 by a vote of 19 Yes to 7 No that would require a comprehensive assessment of the scientific and technical research on the implications of fuel with more than 10 percent ethanol. Specifically, the bill recommends that the assessment compare mid-level ethanol blends of 15 to 20 percent to gasoline with blends of 0 to 10 percent. It would require an evaluation of the environment, safety, durability, and performance effects of mid-level blends on on-road, non-road, and marine engines, on-road and non-road vehicles, and related equipment.

In addition, the National Marine Manufacturers Association continues with its law suit in the D.C. Circuit Court, which challenges the EPA action. Oral arguments are scheduled for April 17.

The Marine Retailers Association of the Americas supports S. 2245, a bill introduced by Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) that would stop the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from taking over all private water in our country and has started a grassroots co-sponsor campaign.

The “Preserve the Waters of the U.S. Act” prevents the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers from using their overreaching guidance to change legal responsibilities under the Clean Water Act. MRAA believes the Clean Water Act is already so far reaching that we cannot afford to give these agencies carte-blanche authority to regulate private land and waters.

MRAA supports the rights of private property owners to be good stewards of their lands and waters. MRAA believes the new fees under the form 404 permits would be unaffordable if the EPA takes over private lakes. S. 2245 has 30 co-sponsors, but more are urgently needed for passage.

MRAA authored a letter encouraging Senator Barrasso that you can read by clicking this link.

 

Now, it’s YOUR turn to get involved.

MRAA has written a letter template that you can use to encourage your Senators to support this effort. There are four simple steps.

1. Find your Senator at MRAA.com. Scroll to the bottom of the page to find contact details for your Senator.
2. Select the link next to the words Web form in your Senator’s area of the site.
3. Use the available contact form to email your Senator on a legislative issue.
4. Copy and paste the following text into the body of the message. You will need to update part of this to make it specific to your business and your interests.

 

Dear Senator _____________:

I write to ask that you co-sponsor S. 2245, the Preserve the Waters of the U.S. Act.

(DESCRIBE YOUR BUSINESS INCLUDE WHAT YOU SELL, NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES, LOCATIONS, ETC,)

As a small business, we are very concerned about government agencies overreaching their authority to change legal responsibilities under the Clean Water Act. We understand the U.S. EPA wants to expand its authority by threatening private property rights, which will only serve to discourage economic growth and suppress job creation. It is time to cut through red tape and excessive government regulation to protect property owners, help small businesses, and to get people back to work.

An expansion of the Clean Water Act over private waters with an unfunded mandate will pre-empt states’ rights, which should not be done. S. 2265 will stop this action. Without passage of the bill, we will see increased cost of dredging permits, fill permits, NPDES permits, storm water permits, and other Clean Water programs.

But, most of all, we believe expanding federal control over intrastate waters will substantially interfere with the ability of individual property owners to use and be good stewards of their own property.

Please co-sponsor S. 2245.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

 

The Washington Post reported today that the House and Senate both approved a 90-day extension for transportation funding. The House endured what The Post suggested was “an angry, finger-pointing debate,” but ultimately extended the funding at the same level for the next 90 days. The Senate, described as angry over the House’s earlier decision, “bowed to the will of the House” and agreed to a 90-day extension. As you may recall, transportation funding, or Highway Bill, is the vehicle for passage of the important Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund

Read the full article here.

The Connecticut Marine Trades Association is alerting its members of what it calls “a very intrusive bill,” HB 5128, An Act Concerning Certain Revisions to the Coastal Zone Management Statutes. This bill, which would permit a “rise in the sea level” to be a factor in denying the use of or rebuilding on your waterfront or coastal property, has been approved by the Environment Committee and referred on to the House.

The Marine Retailers Association of the Americas, along the CMTA, believe that this bill gives unprecedented new powers to the state and local planning entities to interfere with development on the shore. The bill also uses language that we find puzzling, such as “to encourage the strategic realignment of development.” Marinas and other marine facilities could be at risk.

This is an incredibly important issue that simply has not received the attention and scrutiny it needs in the short legislative session. Additionally, a Shoreline Preservation Task Force has already been formed, and the issues are too impacting to make any decision before this group has had a chance to discuss all factors.

The MRAA echoes the CMTA’s concern, and we urge our Connecticut-based members to contact your state legislators today about this legislation and ask them to not take action on it this session. Your call to Hartford will be short but it’s very important that you make it. If you need some assistance finding a name or a phone number, call the CMTA office, 860-767-2645. CMTA is also asking that you email a short summary of any discussions you have with legislators on to Linda Kowalski of The Kowalski Group LLC.

For more information on this, you can find the substitute language adopted by the committee on the Connecticut General Assembly web site. 

Read the testimony offered by the CMTA on the subject.

Through the Highway Bill, which we have been following over the last few weeks and months, the House of Representatives is attempting to un-freeze funds from the Harbor Maintenance Fund. The Administration has frozen these funds, which have historically been managed by the Army Corps of Engineers and have been used to dredge larger ports.

Late last week, several Senators crafted a letter urging the Senate to include funding to dredge smaller, seldom-used ports and harbors that fall below the threshold of the Corps. This is an important issue.

Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) has also issued a press release on the letter. You can read both the letter and the press release below, in addition to the letter that the Marine Retailers Association of the Americas has written and sent to the Committee on Appropriations, Energy and Water Development Subcommittee.

Read MRAA’s letter supporting dredging

Read the letter signed by the Senators

Read the press release from Senator Cantwell

I find the article at the link below a little hard to believe, but I wanted to provide you with a brief status on the CAFE issue. Like many lobbyists who work on the CAFE issue, I purchased a car of choice several years ago and have been babying it so the car will last many years in anticipation of significant downsizing of the fleet and a reduced choice of vehicles. 

The Marine Retailers Association of the Americas has long opposed the significant increases in CAFE standards. especially the huge increases being proposed by the Administration (up to 54.5 mpg by 2025 with 5% increase per year.)  MRAA’s concern is that the smaller vehicles that will be produced to meet the high CAFE standards will not be strong enough to safely pull the size of boats popular with consumers. 

Now a newly released study by the University of Michigan Department of Engineering says the automakers will actually be able to increase the size of vehicles due to the way the proposed rule is written. Perhaps that is why there hasn’t been an uproar to oppose these increases in CAFE. The auto manufacturers have not been willing to fund a campaign, for example. Please read the article.  It is brief but good.

Study: CAFE Standards Could Mean Bigger Cars, Not Smaller Ones

The following is a link to an article in the non-partisan newspaper “The Hill,” on the Highway Bill. As you may recall, the Highway Bill is the vehicle for passage of the important Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund. 

In the past, the Highway Bill has been a non-partisan bill. It has been used by Congress to create construction jobs. A Senate version of this bill has passed with 74 “yes” votes, making it non-partisan. Over in The House, where the version of this bill also includes an unfreezing of the important Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund needed for dredging projects, Members refuse to take up the Senate Bill and now are promising to pass a short-term extension next week. Frankly, this action is what we expected. 

However, the majority leadership in the Senate now refuses to take up a short-term extension of the bill. The current funding is set to expire at the end of this week, on March 31, so we are now caught up in Presidential year politics. Passage is also hurt by Members remembering that funds for the famous “Bridge to Nowhere” were contained in a previous Highway Bill of a prior election year.

Here’s the link if you would like to read more:

House sidesteps Senate $109B highway bill for short-term bill

The Marine Retailers Association of the Americas authored a letter opposing a state initiative in Massachusetts known as the Salt Water Angler Buy Back Study, which would use federal dollars to pay people not to fish.

In Massachusetts, the MRAA supports the position of the Massachusetts MTA to oppose a state program which would pay up to $500 to buy back fish licenses. MRAA has long supported the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund, which provides federal money to states for fish hatcheries, habitat restoration, education of anglers and boaters, construction of boat access points, and boating safety.

We have called for studies of fishing and boating to validate the immense social and economic impact of the two industries and strongly support the outreach efforts to increase the exposure of fishing and boating. MRAA fully understands the where, how, and why people choose to boat and fish for family recreation, but MRAA never thought our government would actually pay Americans not to fish as part of a study method of a research project.

The Board of the Massachusetts MTA will be meeting in person with key administrators of the fishing programs in April to discuss this offer.

Read the letter to leaders in Massachusetts