The environment in the news wenesday, 19 March 2008
Opponents Want Legislature to Halt Construction
Download 451.28 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Ship pilot in S.F. Bay spill is charged
Opponents Want Legislature to Halt ConstructionBy Katherine Shaver Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, March 18, 2008; Page B06 Intercounty connector opponents are asking Maryland lawmakers to yank funding for the 18.8-mile highway or to at least halt its construction until its impact on global warming and the health of nearby residents can be studied. Bulldozers began clearing trees for the toll highway between Gaithersburg and Laurel in November after a federal judge ruled that the state's environmental review of the six-lane road met federal requirements. Opponents are appealing that ruling but say they hope Annapolis lawmakers will step in. Such legislation is probably their last option, legal observers say, because appeals could take several years. The first seven-mile section between Interstate 370 and Georgia Avenue, scheduled to open in 2010, could be nearly finished before the court case is resolved. Even lawmakers backing the legislation say the measure is a long shot. "It's definitely an uphill battle," said Del. Heather R. Mizeur (D-Montgomery), sponsor of a bill seeking to halt construction while health effects of the road are studied. Still, Mizeur said, she will argue that the potential impact on nearby schoolchildren and the state's financial crunch require another look at the $2.4 billion project. Several lawmakers, both for and against the highway, said they don't think their colleagues want to renew the five-decade debate over the connector. Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) has pledged to build it, and lawmakers would be leery of stopping or significantly delaying a major project already well underway, they said. State officials say they have spent $300 million to plan, design and buy land for the connector and have awarded $1 billion in construction contracts. "Obviously, the farther along a project goes, the more difficult it is to stop," said Del. Tom Hucker (D-Montgomery), a connector opponent and co-sponsor of the legislation. Sen. Richard S. Madaleno Jr. (D-Montgomery), a connector supporter, said many of his colleagues think that "we're done with this." He added: "I don't think there's any desire to go back and stop it." Connector opponents are pushing three bills. One would revoke the highway's financing plan that the General Assembly approved in 2005. Another would stop construction to study the impact that traffic emissions would have on the greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. The third would stop construction until the state did a more rigorous study of how emissions would affect the health of people nearby, including senior citizens living in the Leisure World retirement community and students at Drew Elementary School. Frank O'Donnell, president of the nonprofit group Clean Air Watch, said the highway will increase driving and lead to more sprawl development. "Obviously it's going to undercut efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions," O'Donnell said. "That's just common sense." Greg Smith, a longtime connector opponent, said O'Malley's support for the highway contradicts the governor's calls to curb greenhouse gas emissions. If they're serious about fighting climate change, they need to study the impacts of this highway and, if necessary, they need to pull the plug until they do that," Smith said. The connector, the first major highway construction project in the Washington area in a generation, would link the Interstate 270 corridor in Montgomery County and the Interstate 95/Route 1 corridor in Prince George's County. Supporters say it is vital to the state's economy because it will connect high-growth centers and make local east-west roads beyond the Capital Beltway safer and less congested. Opponents say the highway will cause too much environmental damage, pose serious health risks and increase pollution by encouraging more driving. State Highway Administrator Neil J. Pedersen said delaying construction would cost the state $100 million to $200 million in contractor fees. He said the state has studied environmental and health impacts of the highway by following federal requirements and using the best scientific methodology available. Staff researcher Karl Evanzz contributed to this report. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/17/AR2008031702426_2.html Ship pilot in S.F. Bay spill is chargedEmail Picture Federal criminal charges are filed against the pilot of the Cosco Busan, which leaked 58,000 gallons of fuel oil into the San Francisco Bay after it hit the Bay Bridge. By John M. Glionna The Los Angeles Times TuesdayMarch 18, 2008 SAN FRANCISCO -- The pilot of the cargo ship that sideswiped the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge in November and spilled 58,000 gallons of fuel oil was charged Monday with criminal negligence and violating two federal environmental laws. Capt. John J. Cota, 60, was charged in federal court in San Francisco with one count each of violating the Clean Water Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, both misdemeanors. Cota was at the helm Nov. 7 when the 900-foot Cosco Busan hit the base of a bridge tower in heavy fog, gashing the hull and leaking oil into San Francisco Bay. The spill spread around the bay and into coastal waters beyond the Golden Gate, blackening seabirds, briefly shutting down the fishery and prompting a massive cleanup. In December, Cota gave up his operating license, Coast Guard officials said. He had been employed as a pilot in the Bay Area since 1981. The spill from the 65,000-ton cargo ship killed 2,000 birds, including marbled murrelets and Western grebes. The marbled murrelet is a federally threatened species and an endangered species under California law, federal authorities said. The maximum penalty for a misdemeanor violation of the Clean Water Act is one year in prison and a $100,000 fine, and the maximum penalty for a misdemeanor violation of the bird treaty act is six months' imprisonment and a $15,000 fine. Cota's attorney blasted federal officials for filing criminal charges in what he considered a case of human error. "It is regrettable and unfortunate that the Department of Justice has taken this action. Why is the government criminalizing this incident, when the U.S. Coast Guard itself recognizes that 'Maritime mishaps require a . . . chain of errors and causes,' " attorney Jeff Bronstein said in a written statement. He called Cota a qualified and experienced pilot. "He literally has safely assisted thousands of ships in and out of the bay throughout his career," the statement said. Cota "cares deeply about the San Francisco Bay and its ecosystem and is deeply distressed about what happened on Nov. 7." Government attorneys said Cota failed to review the proposed course with the captain and crew on navigational charts. He also failed to use the ship's radar as he approached the Bay Bridge, use positional fixes or verify the ship's position using official aids of navigation throughout the voyage, they said.
Directory: cpi -> briefs briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news Download 451.28 Kb. Share with your friends:
|