A maximum of a $5.00 fee may be charged, with no justification, for use of
pumpout facilities constructed, operated or maintained with grant funds. If
higher fees are charged, they must be justified before the proposal can be
approved. Such proceeds shall be retained, accounted for, and used by the
operator to defray operation and maintenance costs as long as the facility is
needed and it serves its intended purpose. The maximum fee shall be evaluated
for inflation, etc., each year.
-
Created by
Steve Leggans on Mar 18, 2014
1 minute read
12 Comments
Lisa Van Alstyne
Mar 25, 2014As you all are aware, the fee schedule has never been reevaluated and we must consider that it may not receive attention in future years - so we prefer to set a reasonable standard that will stand the test of time. Please consider alternatives. If YOUR State has implemented a sliding scale or other response to fees, please let me know so we can consider actions already taken by States.
Anonymous
Mar 31, 2014Mike Wichrowski - Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department - mike.wichrowski@state.vt.us
This $5 limit should be raised to at least $10, without justification. When this legislation was originally passed, a $5 maximum service fee was a reasonable amount. Unfortunately due to inflation that amount is more like $8.50 today. Many of my grantees are losing money on any fee less than $12.
Most marinas are charging $15 dollars (the going rate on Lake Champlain), so reducing their fee by 66% is not feasible. As a result, it is a struggle to get any marina to even apply for a grant due to this limit.
Anonymous
Mar 31, 2014Raise the fee to $10.00 ( no-minimum fee) and allow up to a 5% rate increase every year; with the rate to be re-evaluated in 2020.
Anonymous
Apr 09, 2014Donna Morrow, MD: With approval of our Regional Administrator, we have a sliding scale in MD. Marinas may charge $5 for up to the first 50 gallons, and may charge .10 cents per gallon above that. So a 100 gallon tank pumpout would be $10 This helps in harbors frequented by yachts with very large (or multiple) holding tanks. However, a common question from marinas is "how do we know how big their tank is?" That can be resolved with a meter or by asking the customer (if the customer knows and is willing to share).
Operation and Maintenance is another way to help offset marinas' costs. We allow (with documentation) reimbursement for staff time doing pumpouts based on $10/hour wage.
We get many requests from marinas to charge more for portable pumpouts. We tell them the pumpout must be $5, but if they want to add a service charge that has to be seperate. This might be worth clarifying.
Recommend codifying a sliding scale and increasing the basic fee to adjust for inflation at this time. Remove the languange that it will be adjusted for inflation each year. Change to "adjusted for inflation any time 50 CFR 85 is ammended" or similar language.
Anonymous
Apr 17, 2014Janine - Can the maximum fee be removed from rule and instead provide language about regional evaluation. In Oregon when someone proposed to increase their launch fee we have them provide a list of fees that other facilities are charging on the waterbody and regional or surrounding counties. We then compare the level of services being provided to determine if the fee is equitable. We also ask for information on what they want to do with the fee.
Anonymous
Apr 22, 2014To help marina operators cover costs due to inflation I recommend a flat fee of $10.
Paul Hayduk, WSFR Grant Manager, paul_hayduk@fws.gov
Anonymous
Apr 22, 2014Teresa Jarrett, (NDOW)
If this is not going to be revisited again for the next 7-10 years, we need to account for inflation in this fee in the future and what that rate should be. I think we should actually have a flat fee of $20, that is discretionary by the State to prove such as Janine recommended based on a regional evaluation. It is not fair for a Pumpout boat to charge $5 for 100-250 gallons of sewage on a houseboat. It is very difficult to convince marina's to participate in the program when they are not going to receive enough fee's to cover the maintenance that they are responsible for, and as much use and abuse the equipment must undergo. The fee should be fair, but equitable based on the number of gallons pumped.
Anonymous
Apr 23, 2014Al Wolslegel (WA Parks)
The San Juan Islands again are a difficult area as the islands are mostly rock with some topsoil and drain fields are expensive to construct as all the materials have to be transported to the islands by ferry which is quite expensive. Marinas have started to consider above ground holding tanks for sewage but the disposal cost is way above normal as again, the pumper truck has to use the ferry system. Having the option of funding 100% of the disposal costs for high cost areas like the San Juan's would make marina operators more willing to consider pump outs.
Anonymous
Apr 24, 2014Pumpout boats purchased with the 75%-25% CVA grant should become the property on the marina that paid the 25% match.
at the end of the grant period. Some states consider them tools and state that they must be returned to the state at the end
of the grant cycle.
Anonymous
Apr 25, 2014Julie Morin - WSFR Region 3 - I recommend a flat fee of $10.
Anonymous
Apr 25, 2014Al Ortiz, USFWS, WSFR R5
Risking to sound like the old timer of the program, at the beginning of CVA, in the early 90's, someone looked into the differences in use when the fees were high ($20+ in those days) and low or free, and the quoted difference in use was outstanding (I think that may have been the force behind the $5 max. fee). It seems to me that the less it is charged, the more we encourage boaters to use facilities and not to dump. That said, the burden of the cost of pumping out to keep the waters clean from boat sewage should not rest solely in the marinas charging say, $5 or not at all, since CVA can cover 75% of their eligible expenses through O&M. A marina that chooses to participate in the State's O&M program can receive more from O&M. Examples:
$10,000 eligible expenses/year but $1,000 fees collected = $1,000 total recovered by the marina. However, if CVA provides O&M:
$10,000 eligible expenses/year, fees collected = $1,000 after deducting the fees =$9,000 eligible for reimbursement X 75% = $6,750 total recovered by the marina. However, if no fees are charged:
$10,000 eligible expenses X 75% = $7,500 total recovered by the marina.
What may render the above rationale null is that it is a lot harder for the states to run O&M programs and therefore, some has chosen not to offer O&M funds. Some language that we could use (from BIG's 85.31): "You may charge the public only a reasonable fee, based on the prevailing rate in the area. You must determine a fee that does not pose an unreasonable, competitive amount, based on other publicly and privately owned
tie-upfacilities in the area. You must approve any proposedchanges in fee structurecharges over $5 by a sub-grantee.Anonymous
Apr 30, 2014David Kennedy, BoatU.S.
It is appropriate to revisit the allowable fee levels however it is important to recognize the price sensitivity of many in the recreational boating community. Fees should not be set at a level so high that they might deter the use of pumpouts. Given that the $5 fee set in 1992 would now be equivalent to $8.42, a $10 fee with a sliding scale for higher volume vessels (>50 gallons) would be reasonable.