SAVE THE DATE – TUESDAY-JANUARY 29, 2008

Click Here For More Information on the Conference

MA BOATING CAUCUS MEETS AT STATE HOUSE

LEGISLATIVE BOATING CAUCUS DISCUSSES KEY LEGISLATION RELATIVE TO THE RECREATIONAL BOATING MARINE TRADES

Many thanks to MMTA's Public Affairs Director Nathalie Grady, Esq. for preparing this Massachusetts Legislative Boating Caucus Meeting Summary Report

On September 27, 2007 the Massachusetts Legislative Boating Caucus met at the State House to discuss issues relative to the Massachusetts recreational marine trades and boating community.  The Caucus consists of over 50 members of the Legislature who meet several times throughout the year to discuss and advance initiatives directed at preserving the marine trades' recreational boating industry in Massachusetts and enhancing the boating experience. 

The Massachusetts Marine Trades Association ("MMTA") is honored to support Boating Caucus Chairman Anthony Verga and his dedicated staff in facilitating the Boating Caucus.  Chairman Anthony Verga (Gloucester) led an engaging discussion among Massachusetts Legislative Boating Caucus members and guests on key legislative and regulatory issues with implications for the recreational marine trades and the boating industry.

Participating in the meeting were Representatives Paul Kujawski, a 2006 MMTA Legislator of the Year, Representative Antonio Cabral (New Bedford), Representative Brad Hill (Ipswich), Representative Susan Gifford (Wareham), Representative Frank Hynes (Scituate), Representative John Scibak (South Hadley), Representative David Linsky (Natick), Representative Matthew Patrick (Falmouth), Representative Mary Grant (Beverly), Representative Cleon Turner (Dennis), Representative Brian Wallace (S. Boston), Representative Michael Rodrigues (Westport), Representative Kay Kahn (Newton), and Representative Eric Turkington (Falmouth).  Staff members attended on behalf of Senator Michael Morrissey (Quincy), also a 2006 MMTA Legislator of the Year, Senator Robert O'Leary (Cape and Islands), Representatives Robert DeLeo (Winthrop), Mark Falzone (Saugus) Bruce Ayers (Quincy), Lida Harkins (Needham), and David Torrisi (North Andover).  Agency officials included Director Jack Sheppard and Doug Cameron of the Office of Fishing and Boating Access, and Stephanie Cunningham of the Division of Marine Fisheries. 

Caucus participants discussed various legislative vehicles for assisting marinas and boatyards with financing projects required to meet environmental regulatory codes.  Senator Morrissey is working with MMTA Legislative and Legal Counsel, Jamy Buchanan Madeja, Esq. to explore the feasibility of legislation to provide low interest loans to marinas and boatyards that are already under enormous financial strain as well as regulatory hurdles. 

MMTA recently conducted an Environmental Compliance Project Status & Finance Survey of Association members which yielded startling results.  The average cost of environmental compliance projects exceeds $67,000. Staff from Senator Morrissey's office stated that federal and state environmental regulations are putting a tremendous strain on Quincy area marinas and boatyards and that the Senator would like to attach a loan program to some legislative vehicle, citing as examples a bond bill or economic stimulus bill.  Additionally, Senator Morrissey believes it is important to include private facilities in such a program, given that public facilities often have more existing options to work with the Commonwealth on funding issues.

Representative Grant suggested that the federal government could be a source of funding: these are federal mandates that marinas and boatyards are trying to meet.  Representative Patrick stated that the Massachusetts Congressional Delegation should be contacted by the Boating Caucus to generate interest at the federal level.  Representative Rodrigues expressed support for Caucus efforts at both the state and federal levels. Representative Sciback posed the issue of a potential "backlash" from marine businesses that have already reached compliance without state or federal loan programs.  Attorney Madeja responded that the MMTA compliance survey was crafted with those businesses in mind and each respondent expressed full support because the entire marine industry would benefit from establishing a low cost environmental compliance funding source. Stephanie Cunningham stated that there exists a federal Clean Marina Fund; the problem is that it is not properly funded.  Ms. Cunningham also suggested that state marine trades associations follow the Florida Marine Trades Association in offering low interest loan programs to members.  Attorney Madeja responded that MMTA has reached out to Florida and other states for information to consider feasible options for the membership. Representative Hynes reinforced Representative Patrick's suggestion that the Caucus send the MA Delegation a letter on this matter, regardless of what efforts are made at the state level.  Representative Hynes added that there are many related issues, such as fisheries and dredging, about which the Caucus should request a meeting with the Delegation. It was agreed that MMTA Public Affairs Director, Nathalie K. Grady, Esq., would contact Representative Patrick and Chairman Verga's staff to assist with drafting a letter for the Caucus to consider sending to each Massachusetts congressman.

Tom Cox, President of Constitution Marina in Charlestown and Past President of MMTA, presented a study recently completed by the Recreation Marine Research Center at Michigan State University to determine the Economic Impacts of Spending By the Owners of Boats Kept at Constitution Marina, Boston MA.  The startling results revealed that Constitution Marina generates $6 million annually for the local economy, including 30 direct and indirect jobs, $328,000 in restaurant sales, $348,000 in retail sales and $60,000 in entertainment sales.  Additionally, seasonal boaters at Constitution Marina generate over $3.8 million annually in craft and trip spending and guest boaters spend approximately $2.4 million annually in the Boston area.  The economic importance of marinas and boatyards cannot be overstated. Representative Hill suggested that this study should be conducted statewide.  Mr. Cox responded that Dr. Mahoney would welcome the opportunity to collectively study the Commonwealth's marinas and boatyards if enough participants sign on by visiting the website and completing a rather short series of study questions (http://www.prr.msu.edu/rmrc/boatresearch.asp). 

Representative Hill further suggested that MMTA reach out to Chambers of Commerce throughout the state to generate interest in the RMRC study. Ms. Cunningham stated that Dr. Mahoney is working on another study to determine the economic implications of losing waterfront access.  Mr. Cox added that most of his facility is built onto the water because Boston has virtually no waterfront property left for marinas and boatyards.  Attorney Madeja noted that Rhode Island has given many legislative incentives to maintain and grow the presence of marinas and boatyards on the waterfront.  Chairman Verga added that both New Hampshire and Rhode Island have strong boat building industries because they are purchased tax free.  Attorney Madeja thanked Representative Hynes for offering legislation for years to make Massachusetts as competitive.

Chairman Verga and Representative Cabral discussed their respective Abandoned Vessel bills, which are making considerable headway through the legislative process.  Chairman Verga's bill (HB4188), which is MMTA's top legislative priority, would streamline the process by which marinas and boatyards or any property owner removes vessels abandoned on their land or in their waterways.  Chairman Cabral's bill (HB726), which MMTA fully supports, is focused on vessels abandoned in the water.  Each bill is in Third Reading and is expected to be on the House Calendar for a vote in near future.

Representative Linsky stated that invasive aquatic species are a huge issue, even to inland communities such as Natick where Lake Cochituate has been closed down in some areas.  He added that the Department of Conservation and Recreation has made minimal efforts to address the invasive species problem and suggested following other states issuance of "duck stamps", or a $5 fee attached to each boat registration.  Attorney Madeja responded that while MMTA strongly supports addressing the invasive species issue with General Funds, as has repeatedly testified in support of such funding, canoes and kayaks are the majority source of species transfer because these "car top vessels" are more transient than motor and sail boats that often remain on the same water body throughout the boating season.  If additional boat registration fees were to be imposed, doing so would penalize registered boaters rather than the real source of the invasive species problem: unregistered transient vessels.  Also, waterside property owners' use of nutrient-rich fertilizers and in-ground septic systems is "feeding" the species growth and proliferation, not boaters' use of the waterways. Representative Kujawski stated that in his district the community has been very proactive on this issue.  Associations have been formed, fundraisers have been held and grants have been applied for to attack the invasive species issue at the local level.  Representative Patrick urged support for legislation by Senator Pamela Resor to ban the use of phosphorous in household cleaners sold in Massachusetts.  SB536 recently passed the Senate and awaits action by House Ways and Means.  Phosphorous in water encourages the growth of aquatic species that can choke waterways.

Attorney Madeja stated that the recreational marine trades remain committed to efforts to address vessels abandoned on land and water, workforce development, moorings administration and dredging.  MMTA Government Relations and Legal Counsel, Jamy Buchanan Madeja, would welcome calls or emails to discuss these issues (617-227-8410, ext. 234 or jmadeja@buchananassociates.com).

Please join MMTA in thanking the Representatives and Senators who comprise the Massachusetts Legislative Boating Caucus and encouraging them to continue their involvement:

Click Here for A complete list of members of the Massachusetts Legislative Boating Caucus

UPDATE ON MA HEALTH CARE REFORM LEGISLATION

This October 1 update on the Massachusetts Health Care Reform Legislation is generously provided by Attorney Mary E. ("Beth") O'Neal of Boston's Masterman, Culbert & Tully LLP.




Attorney O'Neal's article addresses Massachusetts' employers obligations under the new Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act.  Because the regulatory authorities fairly frequently amend the implementing regulations with respect to the law and the information MMTA members may have received in the past may not be current.
 
The threshold for determining whether an employer is subject to the new law is fairly low (i.e. 11 or more fulltime equivalent employees, calculated as provided in the handout).  As a result, many more employers are covered by the new law than they may suspect. 
 
Recently, the Division of Unemployment Assistance, being one of the agencies with responsibility to ensure compliance with the new law, has been sending out notices detailing an employer's obligation to comply with an online filing process and setting a date of November 15, 2007 for an employer's completion of the online filing. 
 
"Fair and Reasonable" Contribution (includes self-insured plans)
Effective October 1, 2006, employers with 11 or more Full-Time Equivalent Employees who are employed at Massachusetts locations are required to make a "fair and reasonable" contribution to the health insurance costs of its employees.  The Massachusetts Division of Health Care Finance and Policy ("DHCFP") has set forth a test to determine whether an employer is making a "fair and reasonable" contribution.

Employers must determine whether, in the 12 consecutive month period beginning October 1, 2006 and ending September 30, 2007, they had 11 or more Full-Time Equivalent Employees.  Full-time equivalency is based upon all payroll hours for all employees working in Massachusetts (except those employees who have worked less than 1 calendar month), divided by 2000. If the calculation results in 11 or more, the employer has 11 or more Full-Time Equivalent Employees.  In adding up the payroll hours for all employees, if any employee has worked in excess of 2000 hours, only 2000 hours are to be included. Payroll hours, for purposes of being counted in the calculation, include regular, vacation, sick, FMLA absence, short-term disability, long-term disability, overtime and holiday payroll hours. 

"Fair and Reasonable" Test
An employer is making a "fair and reasonable" contribution where:
1. At least 25% of Full-Time Employees are enrolled in the employer's group health   plan to which the Company is making a contribution (referred to as the Primary Test); or

2. The Company offers to pay at least 33% of the individual premium cost of any group health plan for those Full-Time Employees employed at least 90 days during the period from October 1 through September 30 (referred to as the Secondary Test).

Non-contributing employers who do not meet either the Primary or Secondary Test will be assessed a Fair Share Contribution of up to $295, per Full-Time Equivalent Employee, per year.  This calculation ($295 per Full-Time Equivalent Employee) will include all Full-Time Equivalent Employees regardless of whether they have health insurance coverage.  Initial liability for the Fair Share Contribution will be based upon data from October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2007.  For this initial period, the health care coverage offered by the employer must have been available to all eligible Full-Time Employees no later than July 1, 2007.

Calculation of the Primary Test
Full-Time for the calculation of this test is defined as the lower of (a) the number of weekly payroll hours an employee is required to work in order to be eligible for the employer's full-time health plan benefits (meaning the equivalent level of employer contribution to the employer's health plan that is offered to full-time employees) or (b) 35 payroll hours per week.   Full-Time Employees do not include Seasonal Employees, Temporary Employees, or Independent Contractors as defined below.
  
In order to calculate whether the employer meets and, if so, to demonstrate the percentage of participation (i.e. 25%), employers will report the average annual number of Full-Time Employees enrolled in the employer's health plan and the average number of Full-Time Employees.  The following calculation has been set forth by the Division of Unemployment Assistance by Administrative Bulletin dated September 14, 2007:

a. Identify and record the number of Full-Time Employees enrolled in the employer's health plan on the last day of each quarter ending on December 31, 2006, March 31, 2007, June 30, 2007 and September 30, 2007.

b. Identify and record the number of Full-Time Employees on the employer's payroll on the last day of each quarter on the days identified above (record 0 if there were no employees on the payroll).

c. Calculate the average number of Full-Time Employees enrolled by adding the values recorded in (a) and dividing by the number of non-zero quarters.

d. Calculate the average number of Full-Time Employees on the employer's payroll by summing the values recorded in (b) and dividing by the number of non-zero quarters.

e. Calculate the average annual employee participation rate by dividing the result of (c) by the result of (d).  If this result is 25% or more, the Primary Test is met.

A "Seasonal Employee," excluded from the definition of a Full-Time Employee, is an employee who is hired to perform services for wages by a seasonal employer during the seasonal period, in the employer's seasonal operations for a specific temporary seasonal period; that has been notified by the Division of Unemployment Assistance that the individual is performing services in seasonal employment for a seasonal employer; whose employment is limited to the beginning and ending dates of the employer's seasonal period; and whose employment does not exceed 16 weeks.

A "Temporary Employee," excluded from the definition of a Full-Time Employee, is an employee who works for an employer on either a full or part-time basis; whose employment is explicitly temporary in nature; and whose employment does not exceed 12 consecutive weeks during the period from October 1 through September 30.

And finally, an "Independent Contractor," excluded from the definition of a Full-Time Employee, is an individual who meets the following definition, including all three of the following tests:

An individual who provides services not deemed to be employment because:

(a) such individual has been and will continue to be free from control and direction in connection with the performance of such services, both under his/her contract for the performance of such services and in fact; and

(b) such service is performed either outside the usual course of the business for which the service is performed or is performed outside of all the places of business of the enterprise for which the service is performed; and
(c) such individual is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, profession or business of the same nature as that involved in the service performed.

Independent Contractor shall also include an individual who provides services not deemed to be employment for federal employment tax and wage withholding purposes in accordance with IRC sections 3121 and 34 and with the 20-factor test established by the Internal Revenue Service Revenue Ruling 87-41.

Under the Primary Test, there is no minimal level of coverage required of the group health insurance plan or to the amount contributed by the employer, but the employer must contribute some amount.  Consequently, a mini-med plan sponsored by an employer to which the employer contributes would qualify as a group health insurance plan.
 
Calculation of the Secondary Test
The definition of a Full-Time Employee is the same as under the Primary Test.  In applying the Secondary Test, the employer must contribute 33% of the premium cost of the lowest cost group health insurance plan offered by the employer.  The 33% contribution applies only to individual coverage for the employee, not dependant coverage.

Free Rider Surcharge / Section 125 Plan
Effective July 1, 2007, an employer with 11 or more Full-Time Equivalent Employees in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is required to adopt and maintain a Section 125 Plan.  The legislation also provides for the assessment of an employer surcharge against employers that employ 11 or more Full-Time Equivalent Employees and that are required to, but do not, maintain a Section 125 Plan, also called a Cafeteria Plan.

Employers must determine whether, in the 12 consecutive month period beginning April 1, 2006 and ending March 31, 2007, they had 11 or more Full-Time Equivalent Employees.  Full-time equivalency is based upon all payroll hours for all employees working in Massachusetts (except those employees who have worked less than 1 calendar month), divided by 2000.  If the calculation results in 11 or more, the employer has 11 or more Full-Time Equivalent Employees.  In adding up the payroll hours for all employees, if any employee has worked in excess of 2000 hours, only 2000 hours are to be included.  Payroll hours, for purposes of being counted in the calculation, include regular, vacation, sick, FMLA absence, short-term disability, long-term disability, overtime and holiday payroll hours.  After this initial calculation, the determination period (for purposes of calculating whether the employer has 11 or more Full-Time Equivalent Employees), will be based upon a fiscal year (i.e., from July 1 through June 30).

If the employer does not adopt and maintain a qualifying Section 125 Plan, the employer will be required to pay a Free Rider Surcharge if its employees or their dependents use state funded care at a predetermined rate and use at least $50,000 in free care provided by the state in a fiscal year.  The surcharge amount is based on another formula that includes the number of employees, the number of admissions and visits made by the employee and the employee's dependents, the total amount of services attributed to the employer, and the percentage of employees for whom the employer does provide insurance.

Section 125 Plans
A qualifying Section 125 Plan must meet both the IRC Section 125 requirements AND the M.G.L. c. 151F Connector requirements.  Once the qualifying Section 125 Plan is adopted, employers have until September 1, 2007, to enroll all eligible employees. 

An employer that provides medical care coverage to and pays the full monthly cost of such medical care coverage (both individual AND any dependent coverage as elected by the employee) for all of its employees who are not otherwise excludable (see below) is exempt from the Section 125 Plan requirement.  Section 125 Plans allow employees to create an account into which pre-tax money deducted from wages is deposited. The employer need not make a contribution to the Section 125 Plan, but it must arrange for the payroll deduction for the employee's contribution. Throughout the year, the employee may then deduct from the account to pay for the employee's health insurance premiums. Some plans also include day-care expenses, and other health-care related expenses (such as prescriptions), but these extra benefits are not required.

The Section 125 Plan must be at least a "premium-only plan" that offers access to one or more "medical-care coverage options."  Employers may determine which options are offered so as to limit the number of insurance carriers or entities to which it has to transmit funds on a monthly basis, e.g., certain Connector plans. 

Importantly, an employer's Section 125 Plan must cover all employees (except the excludable employees listed below) and must allow employees the option of paying up to the full cost of their health-care premiums with the pre-tax dollars deducted from their wages and set aside in the Plan. 

Note: An employer needs to ensure that its Section 125 Plan covers regular, part-time employees working 64 hours or more per month, even those who are not employer-benefits eligible.

Excludable employees not required to be included in the Section 125 Plan:
•  Employees under age 18
•  Temporary employees (as defined above)
•  Part-time employees working fewer than 64 hours/month on average
•  Wait staff, service employees, bartenders who earn, on average, less than $400 in  monthly payroll wages (excluding tips)
•  Student interns and coop students
•  Employees whose employers are required to contribute to a multi-employer health  benefit plan based on their employment
•  Seasonal employees on a J-1 student visa or H-2B visa who are required to enroll  in travel health insurance
•  Students who are employed part-time as employees of the educational institution they attend and who, as a condition of attending that educational institution, participate in a qualifying student health insurance program (i.e. section 18 of M.G.L. ch. 15A or a qualifying student health insurance program in another state) or in a health plan with comparable coverage, as required by state law
 
An employer may create different Section 125 Plans to cover different types of employees; for example, if an employer has already established a Section 125 Plan for some employees (e.g., those who are eligible for employment benefits), another plan may be created to cover those who now must be included (e.g., including those who are not otherwise eligible for employment benefits).

Eligibility for Inclusion in Employer's Section 125 Plan
Employers may also impose waiting periods on employees for enrollment in the Section 125 Plan.  For employees eligible for group health insurance coverage, the waiting period for eligibility for the Section 125 Plan may be the same waiting period as for employer's group health insurance coverage for which the employee is eligible and to which an employer is making a contribution toward such coverage.  For employees who are not eligible for the employer's group health insurance coverage and/or the employer makes no contribution towards its group health insurance plan, the waiting period for eligibility for the Section 125 Plan cannot exceed 60 days.

Filing of Section 125 Plan with the Connector
Employers shall be required, but only upon the request of the Connector, to provide a copy of its Section 125 Plans to the Connector within seven business days of the Connector's request.  Plans that are not available to any Massachusetts employee are not subject to the filing requirement. 

Non-Discrimination Requirements
Effective July 1, 2007, the new law also requires that insurance contracts or policies delivered in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts be offered by the employer to all eligible employees who live in the Commonwealth and it also prohibits the employer from making a smaller contribution (fixed dollar amount or percentage) to a full-time employee than the employer makes to any other full-time employee who receives an equal or greater total hourly or annual salary for its group health insurance or HMO offerings.

This part of the law will prohibit employers from offering coverage to certain full-time employees and not other full-time employees.  It will also prohibit an employer from offering to pay a greater amount of the premium cost of the plan for full-time employees with higher incomes.  In other words, the health insurance contracts cannot discriminate against lower paid employees.  These rules do not apply to self-funded (i.e. self-insured) arrangements and there is also an exception for coverage provided under collective bargaining agreements.

Based upon the information published to date by the Division of Insurance, it is likely that the following practices will be permitted:

• an employer may establish different percentage contributions for different plan choices, so long as the contributions made with respect to each plan on behalf of full-time employees do not differ based on the salary level of the full-time employees;

• an employer may establish a fixed dollar amount as a contribution to premiums for all full-time employees regardless of salary;

• an employer may provide greater contribution levels for increasing lengths of service, so long as it is designed as a reward for longevity rather than as a pretext for providing better health insurance contributions to the more highly paid employees; and

• an employer may establish greater contribution levels for those full-time employees who participate in company-sponsored health and wellness programs.

These new rules will essentially eliminate disparate treatment of different classes of full-time employees, hourly versus salaried, etc., both as to waiting periods and employer contribution levels.  It will also prevent small-business owners from, for example, paying 100% of the group health care premiums for themselves, while paying a lesser percentage for the rest of their full-time employees.

Required Forms
Effective July 1, 2007, employers with 11 or more Full-Time Equivalent Employees are subject to reporting requirements.  The same calculation described under the Fair and Reasonable Contribution and the Free Rider Surcharge heading is used to determine whether an employer has 11 or more Full-Time Equivalent Employees (and is subject to these reporting obligations).
 
Employee Health Insurance Responsibility Disclosure ("HIRD") Form
The Employee HIRD form must be completed by each employee who either declines the employer's group health insurance coverage or declines the offer to utilize the employer's Section 125 Plan for the purchase of health insurance coverage.
 
The employer must obtain a signed Employee HIRD form by the earlier of 30 days after the close of the applicable enrollment period for the employer's health insurance and/or its Section 125 Plan, or September 30 of the reporting year.  For employees terminating participation or for new hires, forms must be obtained within 30 days of termination or enrollment.  Copies must be retained by the employer for three years.

Employer Health Insurance Responsibility Disclosure ("HIRD") Form
Regulations issued on June 20, 2007 provide that the Employer HIRD Form will include information effective as of July 1 of each year.  Employers are required to complete the FSC online filing process which includes HIRD information.  Therefore the employer will satisfy both reporting requirements by completing the online filing by November 15, 2007.  The online filing process is available after October 1, 2007 at https://fsc.detma.org
 
MA 1099-HC Department of Revenue Form
The Massachusetts Department of Revenue has issued a draft Form 1099-HC and draft instructions to permit the reporting of whether Massachusetts residents 18 and over have health care coverage during the preceding year.  This relates to that part of the law providing for the loss of a taxpayer's personal exemption if the taxpayer does not have health insurance, as required.  Presently, the law imposes these reporting obligations on employers; however, it is expected that employers will be able to contract with their third-party administrators or insurance carries to fulfill their compliance obligations.

This publication, which may be considered advertising under the ethical rules of certain jurisdictions, is provided as a service to our clients and referring attorneys with the understanding that it does not constitute the rendering of legal advice or other professional advice by Masterman, Culbert & Tully LLP or its attorneys.

Click Here to Access The Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector, the authority created by the statute to provide information and assist individuals and small businesses in obtaining health insurance.

NAUTICAL ACTIVITIES: WHAT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT?

Many thanks to MMTA Member Patrick O. McAleer, Esq. of Looney & Grossman LLP in Boston for bringing this report to our attention.

A September 2007 Study Commissioned by the European Confederation of Nautical Industries – ECNI reports among other things that "water sports as leisure activities have a role to play in encouraging respect for the environment and the preservation of nature. Moreover, water-based recreational activities are an excellent means of raising public awareness about environmental issues."





SELECT FINDINGS OF ECNI REPORT ON BOATINGS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

Almost 80% of all marine pollution is caused by land-based human activities, but those sources remain very difficult to trace. The misconception that marine pollution comes from sea-based activities and to a certain extent from recreational crafts and water-sports needs to be countered.'

Boating and water-sports are sometimes cited as an important source of marine pollution because these activities are more evident than those of the main polluters. Nevertheless, the overall environmental impact of Boating and other recreational marine activities has been shown to be very small.

Oil pollution caused by "small craft" (up to 24 metres in length and up to 130kW in power) accounts for approximately 2% of total maritime oil pollution, including land-based sources. The proportion of oil pollution caused by recreational craft is therefore significantly lower than 2% as "small craft" includes fishing and commercial vessels (transport of goods and passengers).

Emissions of pollutants into air from recreational craft engines were already minor in Europe, compared to other sources of air pollution. Recreational craft emissions only represent 0.56% of total emissions due to human activities and 1.65% of road transport emissions. With the introduction of the emission amendment to the EU Recreational Craft Directive, a further significant reduction in emissions took place in Europe.  Technological advances allowed a further reduction in emissions to levels close to the limits imposed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) which stipulates a 70%reduction in hydrocarbon emissions from petrol engines compared to the pre-1998 level.

It is also appeared that recreational craft users have a key role to play in limiting the impact of their activities on the environment. The recreational marine industry will continue raising awareness among the public and provide them with information. Though it is not determining, the recreational marine industry will make all efforts to deliver its full contribution to the protection of the marine and aquatic environment. However, the overall impact of these environmental efforts will remain limited, since nautical activities themselves only account for such a minor proportion of marine and aquatic pollutions. Moreover, the degradation of environmental quality is a direct threat to the future and sustainability of nautical industries - what makes them an actor for raising public awareness on environmental issues.

To access the full ECNI report online click here:

WATER ACCESS SEEKS VOLUNTEERS

WATER ACCESS ALLIANCE SEEKING INDUSTRY VOLUNTEERS

The Industry's Water Access Alliance is currently seeking several volunteers to serve on two separate Working Groups the Alliance recently formed:The Marketing Working Group is looking for anywhere between 10 and 12 industry volunteers who have experience with creating and maintaining a brand name, both within an industry and for consumers. Expertise in only one of these areas (industry or consumer) is necessary.The Alliance's Permitting Working Group seeks upwards of 20 or more industry volunteers who have experience with the permitting processes required to build a new or expand an existing marina, boatyard, storage facility, etc.

Click Here To Send An Email Stating Your Interest in Water Access

SEEKING NOMINATIONS FOR CHAPMAN AWARD

NMMA is currently accepting nominations for the 2007 Charles F. Chapman Award. The award recognizes and honors individuals or groups within the marine industry who have made outstanding contributions to the sport of boating for the benefit of the recreational boating industry and boating public. Recipients receive a bronze medallion and a $1,000 donation that's made to a marine-oriented organization of his or her choice.  Nominations are due by December 14. For more information on the Award and to view biographies of previous recipients, click here http://www.nmma.org/awards/

To request an award nomination form, contact NMMA Membership director Bryan Welsh by clicking here:

OSHA ISSUES SLING GUIDANCE

OSHA ISSUES GUIDANCE ON THE SELECTION AND USE OF SLINGS FOR HANDLING AND MOVING MATERIALS

New guidance from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) will help employers select and use the appropriate slings when handling and moving materials. The document, Guidance on Safe Sling Use, was recently released by the agency.

"OSHA's current general industry standard is more than 30 years old," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA, Edwin G. Foulke, Jr. "This guidance document will aid users in the safe selection and use of slings, including synthetic round slings, which are not covered in OSHA's standard, as well as the newer grades of materials being used in alloy steel chain and wire rope slings."

OSHA adopted its general industry sling standard on June 27, 1975, based on ANSI B30.9-1971 Slings standard. OSHA has since made only minor corrections. OSHA issued its construction industry sling standard on February 9, 1979, and its sling standard for shipyards on April 20, 1982. Improper selection or use of slings can result in sling failure or load slippage, which in turn can lead to injuries or death. OSHA accident data for the years 1994 through 1996 show that there were four fatalities in general industry involving the misuse or failure of slings. OSHA intends to format the final product for use on the Web. With the document in web format, a user can quickly get information on the type of sling he or she is using without having to look through material that is not relevant to the workplace.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing a safe and healthful workplace for their employees. OSHA's role is to assure the safety and health of America's working men and women by setting and enforcing standards; providing training, outreach, and education; establishing partnerships; and encouraging continual process improvement in workplace safety and health.

Click here to access the online version of Guidance on Safe Sling Use

WASHINGTON WATCH

FROM THE DESK OF LARRY INNIS

TWIC STARTS OCTOBER 16

On October 16, port workers, longshoremen, truckers, and others, including recreational boat captains, at the port of Wilmington, Delaware will become the first workers in the nation to enroll in the Department of Homeland Security's Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) program.  The program is designed to ensure that any individual who has unescorted access to secure areas of port facilities and vessels has received a thorough background check and is not a security threat.

The cost of the five-year TWIC is $132.50.

The TWIC will impact recreational boating only if a facility is located within the security area of a port, however, all licensed boat captains, including the six-pack license will have to carry a TWIC.  More information on the TWIC is available on http://homeport.uscg.mil by clicking on the Maritime Security link or by going to the TSA's Web site.Along with the initial pilot program at Wilmington, the TSA and the Coast Guard announced the next 11 ports that will begin enrolling in November.  They are:

Early November—Corpus Christi, Texas
Mid-November—Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Beaumont, Texas; Honolulu, Hawaii; Oakland, California; Tacoma, Washington
Late November—Chicago/Calumet, Illinois;  Houston, Texas; Port Arthur, Texas; Providence, Rhode Island; Savannah, Georgia

The order of ports is based on a variety of factors including risk, geographic location, size, and contractor resources.  Specific dates for these ports will be released later this month with information on other upcoming major ports.  Lockheed Martin serves as the contractor for TSA to do the enrollment and background checks.

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION MOVES TO STOP BOATING AND FISHING ACCESS TO LAKES

MRAA has issued comments in strong opposition to a recent rulemaking by the Bureau of Reclamation designed to return the shoreline of all Bureau-managed lakes and reservoirs to nature by pulling up existing docks and mooring facilities and constructing a chain-link fence 150 feet around the lake 150 feet from the shoreline.

MRAA believes the proposed rulemaking is in conflict with the Bureau's own policy that states the Bureau must implement appropriate procedures for public involvement in a timely and effective manner for all Bureau decisions that may significantly affect the interest of the public.  We understand the Bureau is already preventing access to homes and water bodies on select Bureau-managed lakes.  One 80-year old couple on Cascade Lake returned home after a brief vacation to find access to their home denied by a chain-link fence.  MRAA asked the Bureau to extend its rulemaking past the October 16 closure date to give many affected people time to learn about the decision and to react and respond to the Bureau.

Specifically, the Bureau has proposed a new agency rule on the use of Reclamation lands, facilities, and water bodies, which would prohibit cabins, residences, outbuildings, and associated landscaping, patios, decks, and porches; boat houses, boat docks, moorings, and launch ramps, and floating structures, including moored vessels and business sites. It is anticipated the scope of the rule will adversely impact recreational boaters and anglers, marinas, boat retailers, and service providers, as well as many ancillary support businesses like grocery stores, bait shops, gas stations, etc.  The Bureau manages properties, lakes and reservoirs in many states, but mostly in the West. The purpose of the rule would prohibit new boat access ramps and docks and would not re-new current leases when they expire.  The idea is clearly to prevent water access.

The rule says the demand for use of Bureau land and water bodies for different kinds of activities has increase dramatically since the properties were developed for water supply, flood control, and hydropower over 100 years ago.  With increased and varied uses conflicts and confusion among user groups is not addressed in current rule-making. At a time in our nation's history when American's are searching for ways to spend free time and discretionary dollars, boating and fishing activities are a natural form of recreation causing the need for increased water access.  MRAA asked the Bureau to re-consider its rulemaking and look to other ways to resolve user conflicts than closure of its properties and lakes.

Comments to the Bureau of reclamation are due by October 16, 2997 and can be sent by email: LandUseRuleComments@do,usbr.gov.  The rule itself can be accessed on the internet by going to www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.  You must enter "page 39530" and click the SEARCH button.  Be sure to use the quotes or a lot of garbage will appear.

BALLAST WATER UPDATE

In September 2006, the U.S. Ninth District Court issued a ruling which nullified over 30-years of precedent where incidental effluent discharges occurring in normal operations of recreational boats, including bilge water, gray water, deck runoff, and engine cooling water were exempted from compliance with the Clean Water Act.  The ruling resulted from a lawsuit brought by environmentalists and states to halt the introduction of invasive aquatic species through commercial ballast water into U.S. waters.   The court directed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to rewrite the regulation pertaining to the Clean Water Act in this regard by September 8, 2008.

It is clear, unless Congress acts, every recreational boat owner in the U.S. would be subjected to these sweeping new rules and unprecedented compliance to the NPDES permitting program.  The NPDES program would require a boater to apply for a permit for every boat owned (including small row boats) in every state the boat operates or travels in at a cost of $200.00 to $1,000.00 per boat per state.The boating industry is united in support of H.R. 2550, the recreational Boating Act of 2007, introduced by Reps. Gene Taylor (D-Mississippi) and Candice Miller (R-Michigan) and S. 2067, an identical companion bill, introduced by Senator Mel Martinez (R-Florida).  Co-sponsors are actively being recruited for both bills.

In addition, MRAA joined with 25 other boating and fishing organizations in signing a letter that was sent on September 24 to Senators Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), Chairman, and Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Vice Chairman, of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee to ask the Committee to codify the historic common sense exemption for recreational vessels.  A colloquy between Senators Bill Nelson (D-Florida) and Barbara Boxer (R-California) at a Commerce Committee mark up hearing resulted in a commitment by Senator Boxer to fix this problem by next September.

EARLY IDEAS FOR WALLOP-BREAUX RE-AUTHORIZATION

Several groups are already staking out early positions concerning the upcoming re-authorization of the important Wallop-Breaux law.  As a reminder, Wallop-Breaux provides over $500 million annually for sport fish restoration, boating safety, pump outs through the Clean Vessels Act, the construction of docks for transient boats over 26 feet, a national promotion of boating and fishing campaign, and the construction of boat access ramps. At the last re-authorization of the trust fund, each key category of spending was allocated a percentage of the general fund balance allowing each program to grow as the fund revenues increase each year.  This was a major victory for recreational boating safety, which had been tied to a set amount each year between the 5-year re-authorizations.

Some of the ideas being discussed are to increase boating safety from 20% to 22% of the fund's annual revenues, creation of a new source of funding for the Clean Marina program, increase funds for boating and fishing promotion, and creation of a new program to fund the construction of boat docks for transient boats less than 26 feet.  Sufficient funds to support the sport fish restoration program have always been a high priority, because of the close relationship between fishing and boating and the co-dependency of the two sports.  Surveys of the American Sportfishing Association show 70% of all recreational boats are used for fishing.

GLOBAL WARMING, CAFE, AND THE BOATING INDUSTRY

As Congress went home for the August recess, it passed a far-reaching package of energy legislation what would promote conservation and the use of renewable resources at the expense of the country's oil and gas interests.  The bill passed 241 to 172 and would specifically require more energy efficiency in appliances, buildings, and power grids.  It would also provide grants for studies to promote ethanol pipelines and the installation of pumps for 85% ethanol gas.  What the bill did not include was a tougher vehicle fuel economy standard.  The understanding in Congress was that new CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards would be taken up later this year possibly in a separate bill on global warming.

What is the fight on CAFE all about and why have marine retailers been involved for almost 20-years?

Because Congress has jumped on the global warming bandwagon, it is moving on all fronts to limit fossil fuel emissions such as carbon dioxide, a naturally occurring compound in our atmosphere that is one of the identified causes of global warming.  Several bills have been introduced in Congress to fight the increase in carbon dioxide in our atmosphere, but all fingers now point to control of emissions from automobiles, trucks, and SUVs as an easy target through the federal CAFE program administered by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration.  CAFE is a government program or standard set by federal law for the fleet average miles per gallon for vehicles produced or sold in the USA.

Two bills are center stage in this fight in the House of Representatives.  One bill, H.R. 2927 introduced by Reps Baron Hill (D-Indiana) and Lee Terry (R-Nebraska) has 162 co-sponsors and would increase CAFE to 32 mpg by 2022.  It is supported by Rep John Dingell (D-Michigan), the SUVOA, NMMA, and the auto industry.  The other bill is H.R. 1506 introduced by Rep. Edward Markey (D-Massachusetts).  It has 153 co-sponsors and would increase CAFE to 35 mpg by 2018.  An identical bill has already passed the Senate and is supported by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-California).

Supporters of the Hill-Terry bill say it is the lesser of two evils.  MRAA supports neither bill at this time, because both bills are evil and would cause harm to marine retailers.  Instead MRAA is supporting an amendment which would preserve the hauling/towing capabilities of light trucks (pick ups) and SUVs.

In the late 1970s most of the vehicles being produced could safely tow the popular-sized recreational boats of the day, but today, because of the effects of CAFE, only the pick up truck and SUV can safely tow recreational boats.  Light trucks and SUVs have become the popular vehicles of choice of many American families for soccer outings, trips to the grocery store, and family recreational activities of camping, fishing, and boating.

MRAA fears the passage of either the Hill-Terry bill or the Markey bill as currently written would cause considerable downsizing in weight, torque, and horsepower to meet the new CAFE standard.  The investment firm Lehman Brothers has said that six of ten pick ups and SUVs being produced today would be immediately dropped by the manufacturers.  As a clear result of passage of either of these two bills there will be fewer and perhaps no vehicles available to purchase that can safely tow a recreational boat.  With approximately 80% of the boats being sold today of a size that can be towed, it doesn't take rocket science to see what would happen to boating, which MRAA fears would suffer massive business closings and unemployment.  MRAA has heard on the Hill that if the already passed Senate language and the Markey bill become law, two of the three American auto manufacturers would cease operations, at least go into receivership and bankruptcy causing huge economic effects. The issue is becoming complicated because the latest news from the Hill on CAFÉ is that Rep. Markey is considering adding language to his bill which would protect the hauling/towing capabilities of the pick up truck.  This action would clearly kill the SUV of today and contribute to the downsizing of the American automobile, but the pick up truck would survive as the only vehicle available to safely recreational boats.

THE GOOD NEWS--If either bill passes, look to more usage of diesel engines and hybrid technology to existing vehicles in an effort to prolong the effects of the new CAFE standards on popular SUVs.

THE BAD NEWS—The average price of the American auto, pick up truck, and SUV that survives will increase about $8,500.00.  In addition, Congress is considering a separate carbon dioxide bill which would add another $1,500.00 to the sticker price.  These two price increases taken separately or together are significant to hamper vehicle and boat sales.

OTHER TIDBITS FROM LARRY INNIS:

Testimony of Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. Before the House Committee on Financial Services On the Legislative and Regulatory Options For Minimizing and Mitigating Mortgage Foreclosures  http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/hp565.htm

2007 MARINE EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION AWARD

Click Here to Download the 2007 Marine Trades Employee Recognition Award

WATER ACCESS SYMPOSIUM NOW ONLINE

Working Waterways & Waterfronts 2007 A National Symposium On Water Access was held last May.  Abstracts, Presentations and Papers from the conference are now available online at http://www.wateraccess2007.com

Several of the featured speakers were from New England and addressed New England harbors, marinas and common water access issues.  Among them were:

Keeping Vessels at the Water's Edge: Progressive Stewardship of Public Trustlands in Massachusetts
by Dr. Dennis W. Dicsik, MA Office of Coastal Zone Management
http://www.wateraccess2007.com/docs/day2/presentations/Ducsik_Vessels_Waters_Edge.pdf

Boating Access Surveillance and Monitoring System: Newly Established Center for the Spatial Analysis of Recreation and Tourism Industries
by Michigan State University's by Ed Mahoney & Yue Cui
http://www.wateraccess2007.com/docs/day1/presentations/Mahoney_pp.pdf 

Preserving and Promoting a Working Harbor: The Experience of Gloucester, Massachusetts
by Jack Wiggin, Urban Harbors Institute, University of Massachusetts Boston
http://www.wateraccess2007.com/docs/day2/papers/Wiggin.pdf

Access All The Symposium Papers & Presentations Here:

SPACE AVAILABLE

2,650 SF SPACE AVAILABLE – QUINCY

2,650 sq. ft. marine shop.  Highly visibility location at marina with direct water access.  Contact David, Town River Marina at marina@townriver.com or call 617-745-9813.

1,100 SF SPACE AVAILABLE – PLYMOUTH

Retail/Office space with street frontage available in the heart of Plymouth at Brewer's Plymouth Marine.  Ideal for a compatible marine business including small boat or outboard sales or satellite sales office for multiple location dealer. Canvas shop, yacht broker and tackle shop already on location. For more information contact Tim Moll at tmoll@byy.com or call 781.746.4500.

Access The MMTA News Bulletin Board Here:

DON'T MISS THESE UPCOMING EVENTS!

November 26 - 28, 2007
Marine Retailers Association of America (MRAA)
Annual Conference
Las Vegas, NV
http://www.mraa.com

January 12 - 20, 2008
New England Boat Show
Boston Convention & Exhibition Center
http://newenglandboatshow.com

Tuesday, January 29th 2008
The Business Of Boating In Massachusetts
MMTA 3rd Annual Professional Development Conference
Marriott Hotel - Quincy, MA
http://www.boatma.com/conference08

February 8 - 10, 2008
Cape Cod Boat Builder's Show
Four Points Sheraton - Hyannis, MA
http://boatcapecod.org

February 18 - 20, 2008
Conference On Marine Industry Technical Training (COMITT)
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
http://www.comitt.org

LINKS OF INTEREST

Marine Trades Links

2007 MA Shrinkwrap Recycling Program: http://www.boatma.com/membersonly/index.html
Boater Information Pipeline Signup:http://www.boatma.com/boatersenewssignupform.html
MA Marine Industry Careers: http://www.boatma.com/education.html
Advertise @ BoatMA.com: http://www.boatma.com/membersonly/banneradinfo.html
Link to Archived ENews: http://www.boatma.com/membersonly/archivednl.html
CZM Marina Workshop Presentations: http://www.boatma.com/czmworkshops/presentations

Navigation & Boating Safety

Massachusetts Tides: www.boatma.com/tides/index.html
MA Boater Safety & Education: www.mass.gov/dfwele/dle/boatrvsafe.htm
Boating Safety Education Providers & Courses: http://www.boatma.com/learntoboatsafely.html
National Association of State Boating Law Administrators: www.nasbla.org
Trailering Guide: http://www.boatma.com/pdf/Forms%20and%20Applications/Trailering%20Guide%202007.pdf 
US Coast Guard NavCenter Notice To Mariners: www.navcen.uscg.gov/lnm
US Coast Guard 1st District Boston: www.uscg.mil/d1
US National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration: www.noaa.gov
US NOAA Charts: www.chartmaker.ncd.noaa.gov

Government & Regulatory

MA Coastal Zone Management: www.mass.gov/czm
MA Department of Environmental Protection: www.mass.gov/dep
MA Find Your Elected Representatives: www.wheredoivotema.com
MA Legislation: www.mass.gov/legis
MA Office of Fishing & Boating Access: www.mass.gov/dfwele/pab
MA Office of Technical Assistance: www.mass.gov/envir/ota
MA Official Website of the Commonwealth of MA: www.mass.gov
MA Workforce Development: www.mass.gov/dwd
US EPA-Region 1: www.epa.gov/region1
US Occupational Safety & Health Administration: www.osha.gov
Boating Infrastructure Grants: http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dmf/programsandprojects/projectbig.htm#big
Clean Vessel Act Grants:  http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dmf/programsandprojects/cvabig.htm#cva

New England Sales & Titling

MA Department of Revenue: www.mass.gov/dor
MA Boat Registration & Titling: www.mass.gov/dfwele/dle
ME Boat Registration: www.maine.gov/ifw/rv/boatlaws.htm
NH Boat Registration: www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/ss/marinepatrol
RI Boat Registration: www.dem.ri.gov/programs/bpoladm/manserv/hfb
VT Boat Registration: www.aot.state.vt.us/dmv/REGISTRATION/Motorboats/MOTORBOATS.htm
USCG Vessel Documentation Center: www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/vdoc/nvdc.htm

Marine Industry Links

ABBRA: American Boat Builders & Repairers Assn: www.abbra.org
ABYC: American Boat & Yacht Council: www.abycinc.org
AMI: Association of Marina Industries: www.marinaassociation.org
AMTECH: Association of Marine Technicians: www.am-tech.org
Discover Boating: www.discoverboating.com
Grow Boating Rising Tide Campaign: www.growboating.org
MRAA: Marine Retailers Association of America: www.mraa.com
NMMA: National Marine Manufacturers Association: www.nmma.org

Click Here For MMTA Members Only Content