Disappeared News: Superferry Makeover

Monday, February 08, 2010

Superferry Makeover

by Larry Geller

The news is all over the place: Superferries could be back in Hawaii, either as military transport or as the state’s subsidized interisland ferry system.

The first was expected, the two ferries should be great as military transports, as long as they don’t encounter combat. The speculation all along was that Hawaii Superferry was a trial for military use of similar vessels.

Here’s what the Army announcement is about:

The Army intends to prepare a PEIS for the proposed stationing and operation of up to 12 JHSVs. The JHSV is a strategic transport vessel that is designed to support the rapid transport of Army Soldiers, other military personnel and equipment in the U.S. and abroad. The PEIS will assess the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed stationing of JHSVs at the following military port locations: Virginia Tidewater area; San Diego, CA area; Seattle-Tacoma, WA area; Pearl Harbor, HI area; and Guam.

I’ve copied more complete information at the end of this post with thanks to Maui advocates for circulating it via email.

The interisland ferry bill (HB2667) is ineptly written, raising a number of questions about its authorship. It perpetuates a number of fictions about the prior service and why it failed, and about interisland shipping (which is a cargo, not a passenger service). On first reading, it appears to be as factually challenged as fiscally.

The state doesn’t have the money to keep its offices and schools open, and as indicated by testimony offered by Budget and Finance, the state can’t afford the expense of starting this boondoggle at this time. Georgina Kawamura was quite clear:

This bill also includes an unspecified general fund appropriation in Fiscal Year 2011 for startup and operations of the Hawaii State Ferry System. Due to the current fiscal condition of the State, any diversion of general funds from core services cannot be considered at this time.

The bill overlooks the almost daily loss (by outside estimates) experienced by the Hawaii Superferry company. Even on days when it sailed, it is unlikely that it recovered its operating expenses except perhaps during a very few peak periods. So the state would end up eating fuel and other expenses to keep the service running, if the ships used were comparable to the Alakai. The bill anticipates smaller vessels but is clueless as to their availability or suitability for interisland use in Hawaii.

Now, a municipal ferry service can be subsidized. For example, the Staten Island Ferry in New York City:

The Staten Island Ferry
The Staten Island Ferry provides 20 million people a year (60,000 passengers a day not including weekend days) with ferry service between St. George on Staten Island and Whitehall Street in lower Manhattan.
The ferry is the only non-vehicular mode of transportation between Staten Island and Manhattan. NYC DOT operates and maintains the nine vessel fleet as well as the St. George Ferry Terminal on Staten Island, Whitehall Ferry Terminal in Manhattan, the City Island and Hart Island Facilities, The Battery Maritime Building and all floating dock building equipment.
The Staten Island Ferry is run by the City of New York for one pragmatic reason: To transport Staten Islanders to and from Manhattan. Yet, the 5 mile, 25 minute ride also provides a majestic view of New York Harbor and a no-hassle, even romantic, boat ride, for free! One guide book calls it "One of the world's greatest (and shortest) water voyages." [http://www.siferry.com/]

Yes, for free. It can be done. Hawaii could have its own shiny state-run fleet of interisland ferries (assuming the EISs all work out, of course). Of course it would cost… but never mind that, reality only complicates the dream.

The bill proposes “purchase or lease of the former Hawaii superferry vessels Alakai and Huakai or other ayailable [sic] suitable vessels to commence its operations” with some federal assistance. I wonder if committee chair Souki believes in Santa Claus also. If he could buy those two ships, it would doom the operation to potential daily operational loses.

And the Governor’s answer is already in, via her director of Budget and Finance.

The bill demonstrates its ignorance of interisland shipping and most likely its author is unaware of tariffs and regulation. In Hawaii it is the PUC, not the Legislature, that regulates common carriers. The Hawaii Superferry was tariffed for passenger service, which is why someone had to be in a truck to ferry goods across. HSF could not take on containers of cargo. It also doesn’t have the equipment to handle cargo, so its utility in emergencies is limited.

The Young Brothers testimony corrects that and plenty of other fiction in the bill.

The strangest thing to me is that the bill passed out of the House Transportation Committee unanimously.

The following is information on the Army plan that was circulated today via email.

Programmatic Environmental Impact Statements

Joint High Speed Vessel http://aec.army.mil/usaec/nepa/topics00.html

The Army intends to prepare a programmatic environmental impact statement in 2010 for the proposed stationing and operation of joint high speed vessels. The JHSV is a strategic transport vessel designed to support the rapid transport of military troops and equipment in the U.S. and abroad. All interested members of the public, including native communities and federally recognized Native American Tribes, Native Hawaiian groups, Guam Chamorro Groups, and federal, state, and local agencies are invited to participate in the scoping process for the preparation of this PEIS. Comments may be sent to the Public Affairs Office, U.S. Army Environmental Command, 5179 Hoadley Rd, Attn: IMAE-PA, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5401; (410) 436-2556; fax (410) 436-1693;
e-mail: APGR-USAECNEPA@conus.army.mil <APGR-USAECNEPA@conus.army.mil>

From the "Federal Register" /Vol. 75, No. 24 / Friday, February 5, 2010 /Notices

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army Preparation of a Programmatic

Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for the Stationing and Operation

of Joint High Speed Vessels (JHSVs)

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Army intends to prepare a PEIS for the proposed stationing and

operation of up to 12 JHSVs. The JHSV is a strategic transport vessel that is

designed to support the rapid transport of Army Soldiers, other military

personnel and equipment in the U.S. and abroad. The PEIS will assess the

potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed stationing

of JHSVs at the following military port locations: Virginia Tidewater area; San

Diego, CA area; Seattle-Tacoma, WA area; Pearl Harbor, HI area; and Guam.

These locations were selected based on the following criteria: sites have existing

military port facilities that do not require new infrastructure construction

or improvements; sites have existing maintenance facilities for up to, but not

including, depot level facilities for major JHSV repairs and maintenance;

and sites are capable of supporting the strategic needs of the nation’s

Combatant Commanders. Not all of the proposed ports will receive JHSVs and

other viable locations raised during public scoping may be considered as

stationing sites. The Army’s Record of Decision will make the determination as

to which of the potential sites will serve as home port locations.

The Army intends to consider the following alternatives in the PEIS: (1)

The stationing and operation of an Army-wide total of five JHSVs at

military port facilities in the U.S. or U.S. territories, with up to three JHSVs at any

one of the aforementioned locations; (2) The stationing and operation of an

Army-wide total of up to 12 JHSVs at military port facilities in the U.S. or U.S.

territories and overseas locations operated by the U.S. military, with up

to three JHSV’s being stationed at any one location; and (3) The no action

alternative which retains the Army’s existing transport fleet and does not

equip the Army with JHSVs. Under the no action alternative, the Army would

not be able to increase its expeditionary capability as discussed as a key

requirement in the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) nor would it meet the

rapid deployment goals of Army Transformation.

The JHSV will require fueling-at-sea training; aviation training (helicopter);

live fire training; and high-speed, openwater-craft training. It is

anticipated that the vessel will spend 150 days or more

away from the home station. These home-station sites would only be used

to support JHSV berthing and training requirements in and around the

stationing location for 170 days per year. An annual maintenance cycle of

approximately 45 days would occur at the home station or at another location,

if appropriate maintenance facilities are not on site. The PEIS will include

evaluation of the different locations which could reasonably accommodate,

support, and sustain the JHSV and meet its requirements for live-fire training.

The proposed action will require the Army to balance strategic, sustainment,

and environmental considerations to provide greater flexibility and

responsiveness to meet today’s evolving world conditions and threats to national

defense and security. The PEIS will analyze the proposed action’s impacts

upon the natural, cultural, and manmade environments at the

alternative home-stationing sites.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent to:

Public Affairs Office, U.S. Army Environmental Command, Attention:

IMAE–PA, 5179 Hoadley Rd., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010–5401.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Public Affairs Office at (410) 436–2556; fax (410) 436–1693;

or e-mail: APGRUSAECNEPA@conus.army.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The JHSV

is a high-speed, shallow-draft vessel capable of rapid intratheater transport of

Army units. JHSV stationing detachments consist of a 31 member

crew and can accommodate up to 350 additional Soldiers. The vessel can

reach speeds of 35–45 knots and has an equipment carrying capacity of

approximately 700 short tons. It has a shallow draft of 12.5 feet for enhanced

port access for the types of austere piers and quay walls common in developing

countries. The JHSV includes a weapons mount for crew served weapons, a flight

deck for helicopter operations, and an off-load ramp that allows vehicles to

drive off the ship quickly. These characteristics make the JHSV an

extremely flexible asset, able to support a wide range of operations including

maneuver and sustainment, relief operations in small or damaged ports,

flexible logistics support, or as the key enabler for rapid transport.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C. & et seq.)

and the Army NEPA procedures, Environmental Analysis of Army Action

(32 CFR Part 651), require the Army to consider the environmental impacts of

its actions and alternatives, and to solicit the views of the public so it can

make an informed final decision regarding how to proceed. The Army is

working in close coordination with the Navy (which is scheduled to receive 10

JHSVs) in coordinating NEPA evaluations for this action. The Navy is

completing a separate NEPA document to evaluate its requirements for the

JHSV. The Army’s PEIS does not evaluate the direct and indirect

environmental impacts of the Navy’s JHSV program. The Army’s PEIS will

cumulatively consider the impacts of Navy JHSV stationing.

The PEIS will assess, consider, and compare the direct, indirect, and

cumulative environmental effects from the stationing of up to three Army

JHSVs per site. The primary environmental issues to be analyzed

will include potential impacts to air quality, airspace, cultural resources,

noise, and marine life. In addition, the Army will consider those issues

identified as the part of the scoping process.

Scoping and Public Comment: All interested members of the public,

including native communities and federally recognized Native American

Tribes, Native Hawaiian groups, Guam Chamorro Groups, and federal, state,

and local agencies, are invited to participate in the scoping process for

the preparation of this PEIS. Written comments identifying environmental

issues, concerns and opportunities to be analyzed in the PEIS will be accepted

for 30 days following publication of the Notice of Intent in the Federal Register.

There will be no on-site scoping meetings.

Dated: January 25, 2010.

Addison D. Davis, IV, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army

(Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health).

[FR Doc. 2010–2142 Filed 2–4–10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–08–M

Technorati Tags: Hawaii, Hawaii Superferry, interisland ferry

Permalink posted by Larry @ 2/08/2010 09:59:00 PM

Comments:

I was rather hoping that Peace would be the focus when Obama was elected, but it appears that an increase in warmongering/postulating is the focus. I am appalled!

# posted by

Anonymous : February 9, 2010 at 9:59:00 AM HST

Thank you Larry for pointing out that some realized that the whole point of the Super Ferry was to run a prototype for military use. It was never about providing a service for islanders.... Just a look at their board of directors or whatever it was called) showed that almost all were military folks. Why would that group of folks be interested in running a ferry for the public good? Shucks, are most of us that gullible?

# posted by

Anonymous : February 10, 2010 at 1:05:00 PM HST

Disappeared News

Monday, February 08, 2010

Superferry Makeover

Post a Comment

Newer› ‹Older