CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
BIODIESEL MARINE COMMITTEE
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2007, 11:00 A.M.
PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO, PIER ONE
CONFERENCE ROOM BAYSIDE 3
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102
TASK FORCE MEMBERS: Eric Bowen (Chair), Richard Berman, Joe Burgard, Kate Horner
ORDER OF BUSINESS
1. Call to Order and Roll Call. The Biodiesel Marine Committee meeting convened at 11:20 a.m. Present: Chair Bowen, Members Berman and Burgard. Excused: Member Horner.
2. Approval of the September 11, 2007 Biodiesel Marine Committee Regular Meeting Draft Minutes (Discussion and Action). Upon Motion by Member Burgard and second by Chair Bowen, the September 11, 2007 Meeting Minutes were approved (AYES: Chair Bowen, Members Berman and Burgard) (Explanatory Document: September 11, 2007 Approved Meeting Minutes).
3. Port Staff Maritime Biodiesel Activities. Port staff participating in maritime biodiesel activities; e.g. cruise ship environmental awards and fuel dispensing will have an informational conversation with the Marine Committee (Information and Discussion).
Member Berman introduced Mr. Michael Nerney, Port Maritime Marketing Manager, who reported on the environmental cruise ship award program. Mr. Nerney stated that the award program stemmed from a group called the Cruise Terminal Environmental Advisory Committee (CTEAC) that was formed in September 2003 and met on a monthly basis through the end of 2006. The Committee included members from the Blue Water Network, San Franciscans for a Healthy Waterfront, and representatives from labor, cruise lines, regulatory agencies, the Department of the Environment, and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. The Port had been working with a developer (Lend Lease) on a BCDC permit for a cruise ship terminal project at Piers 30 and 32. In September of 2006, due to financial reasons, the Port and the developer decided not to pursue the development any further. A subsequent Port advisory panel, the Cruise Terminal Advisory Panel (CTAP), recommended that the Port’s future cruise terminal project be located at Pier 27. There have been 15 cruise calls over the past two years at that location. Part of the cruise terminal project would be to include shore power. The Port received a $2 million grant and is working to move that project forward. It was stated that Mr. Jay Ach, Environmental Manager for the Port Maritime Division, is managing the project.
Mr. Nerney reported on the “Cruise Ship Environmental Award,” nicknamed the “Green Award,” which was formed by a CTEAC subcommittee to determine meaningful performance standards. The annual award program began in 2005 and is still in place (four awards were given in 2005, and six awards were given in 2006). The application form is available on the Port’s website. The criteria may be modified so companies don’t receive credit simply for complying with the law. There are three main categories to qualify for awards (1) air emissions reduction, (2) recycling and disposal programs for solid waste, and (3) advanced wastewater treatment systems. There are various ways that ships could demonstrate that they are reducing air emissions. The biggest one is a clean fuel strategy used while in Port, which measures the type of fuel that they are using based on the sulfur content. Ships that use 0.5 percent sulfur fuel or less get a certain number of points. There is also lower amount of points for fuel 0.6 to 1% and 1.1 to 1.5%. Engine emission reduction strategies would include use of gas turbine engines which some of the ships had. Some ships have an ability to hook into shore power available at the ports of Juneau, Alaska, and Seattle, Washington. San Francisco and the Ports of Los Angeles and San Diego are moving in the direction of shore power. Ships that have that ability to use shore power receive credit even though they cannot use it in San Francisco at present. A plaque is given to the cruise ships winning the award. The cruise lines are happy to participate in this program.
Mr. Nerney stated that as a result of the CTEAC Committee, the Port received a grant from the US Environmental Protection Agency in order to give a financial incentive to cruise ships to use low-sulfur fuel. The Port received $100,000, and over the course of the 14-month grant period (September 2005-October 2006), 41 ships participated. Sulfur emissions were reduced by 26.1 tons, and particulate matter reduced by 916 pounds. There was widespread participation from all the cruise lines that came here on a regular basis. The cruise lines basically ended up paying double for the fuel use in Port, half of which was offset by the grant and the rest they paid for to go along with this program.
Ms. Ving requested additional information on the recycling incentive. Mr. Nerney explained that the San Francisco Port has some garbage discharge, but not to the extent of Vancouver or Seattle that have more ships coming in and have more advanced recycling methods. Some of the wastewater treatment systems that are allowed in Alaska cannot be used in California due to state regulations. The award form tries to recognize what is being at all ports, but preferably at the Port of San Francisco. The air emission category definitely applies to San Francisco. Unless a ship is doing something good for the air in San Francisco, it would not qualify for an award. There is a gold and silver award so if a cruise line was doing a lot, they would get a higher award. The program is very popular with the cruise lines because it verifies the value they place on caring for the environment.
Chair Bowen asked if the CTEAC still in existence. Mr. Nerney explained that the Committee is on hold and has not met for about a year because the development at Piers 30/32 was suspended. In 2007, the Port formed a Cruise Terminal Advisory Panel (CTAP), or a Blue-Ribbon Panel, that was instituted by the Port Executive Director, to study what the Port might do in terms of a new cruise terminal. The Panel produced recommendations that were brought to the Port Commission at their meeting on September 25, 2007. The main recommendation was that Pier 27 be the location for the new cruise terminal. People involved in the Committee included financial experts, engineers, labor, cruise lines, some of whom had been involved in the previous process, and neighborhood people.
Mr. Nerney discussed the positive outcomes from CTEAC that included the environmental award and shore power for cruise ships, which has been endorsed by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and PG&E. Princess Cruises, who pioneered shore power for cruise ships at Juneau and Seattle, has been of great assistance to the Port relative to the shore power component of the new project. It was reported that in cruise ship berthing applications, it is a requirement that ships do not have any discharges in San Francisco Bay. Each ship is required to submit a written form stating that they didn’t spill oil, and this has been implemented all of the nearly 300 ships going back to May 2004. The Port Commission is given a monitoring report twice a year.
Chair Bowen reported that one of the things the Marine Committee is working on is how to improve access and encourage use of more biodiesel in the Port marine environment. Chair Bowen commended the cruise ship award program for focusing on air quality, getting the sulfur out of the fuel, and getting the attention of the cruise lines. It created a behavior modification and is a great success. Chair Bowen suggested that the award program evolve to add renewability to the criteria, and stated that biodiesel happens to be the most renewable alternative available today. It was suggested that renewability be added as another subtopic to clean air and any renewable fuel should not come at the expense of air quality, so it needs to meet the air quality standard, and additional points would be added if it is renewable. Additional bonus points would also be given to renewable shore power.
Mr. Nerney explained that the Blue Ribbon panel was formed to look at what the Port should do about a cruise terminal development, have made their report, and have disbanded. It was explained that cruise ships in San Francisco Bay make up only 3% of the total ship arrivals. Most of the ships that come into San Francisco Bay are container ships going to the Port of Oakland (over 50%). Cruise ships are not the prime causers of some of the pollution issues, but are at the forefront of efforts to eliminate pollution and safeguard the environment. Mr. Nerney forwarded backup documents—See page 5.
Items 4 and 6 were discussed together.
4. Boater’s Handbook Review. Recommendations for revisions to the handbook (Explanatory Document: Boater’s Handbook) (Information and Discussion).
SPEAKER: Karri Ving, Biodiesel Task Force SFPUC Representative
Ms. Ving reported that she would be working with Mr. von Wedel to produce a concise version of the overall handbook to send to members and to add to Department of the Environment website. Continued to the November 13, 2007 meeting.
5. Gas House Cove Potential Fueling Site Location (Information and Discussion). Determination on the feasibility of Gas House Cove as a potential fueling site location.
SPEAKER: Karri Ving, Biodiesel Task Force SFPUC Representative
Ms. Ving reported that Gas House Cove would be going through a renovation within the next three years and that they are not interested in any information, addition, or proposals on adding another component to the Gas House Cove site until they determine exactly what their renovations would be. Ms. Ving stated that she would like to find a decision maker and contact person at the site as she believes it could still be an option within the next five years. Continued to the November 13, 2007 meeting.
Public Comment: Ms. Shannon Devine, Fat Free Car Food, discussed her goal to have a concession stand and biofuel fueling station at the only public dock for fishermen and recreational sailing in San Francisco located in the Bayview District. Member Berman reported that the Port is researching an ideal location along the waterfront for a fuel dock.
6. Sausalito Fuel Dock Location. Summary of what steps were taken for installation of a fuel dock, the agencies involved, and their requirements (Information and Discussion). (Explanatory Document: Permit Process Summary)
SPEAKER: Karri Ving, Biodiesel Task Force SFPUC Representative
Ms. Ving reported that Mr. Randall von Wedel is working on the Permit Process Summary for the Sausalito fuel dock and is assembling useful pictures of engines and parts that tend to wear along with an explanation of why and remedies. Ms. Ving explained that permitting for the Sausalito fuel dock is still ongoing, that permit approval had been received from the Fire Department and is now with the Sausalito Zoning and Planning Department. They are going to be working with the Sausalito Zoning and Planning Department to educate the regulators that biodiesel is not a hazardous material and that it is classified under spill control. Ms. Ving stated that this process is the final hurdle and suggested that in the future a biodiesel tank should be located 100 feet from the water so as not to go through as many agencies. Member Berman suggested that Biodiesel Access Task Force Member Virginia St. Jean report on the hazardous material classification of biodiesel at the next Task Force meeting. Ms. Ving stated that she would be forwarding documents to members through the Task Force Secretary on Mr. von Wedel’s assessment of how to go about establishing a fuel dock in the Bay Area. Continued to the November 13, 2007 Meeting.
7. Marine Committee Milestones and Goals. The Marine Committee will discuss incremental steps and set future agenda items in order to achieve Marine Committee milestones and goals (Continued from the September 11, 2007 Meeting) (Discussion and Possible Action).
Ms. Ving and Member Burgard would be working on a Draft Report of the Marine Committee section of the Report to the Board of Supervisors to review at the November meeting and then a final for the December meeting. Chair Bowen reported that the Task Force would be producing a final report in December.
8. New Business/Future Agenda Items (Information and Discussion). Chair Bowen stated that review of the draft report to the Board of Supervisors would be the main focus of the November meeting and requested a review of the Cruise Ship Environmental Award (CSEA) to discuss addition of a renewability component to the criteria.
9. Public Comments: Members of the public may address the Task Force on matters that are within the Task Force’s jurisdiction and are not on today’s agenda. There was no public comment at this time.
10. Adjournment. The Marine Committee meeting adjourned at 12:22 p.m.
The next meeting of the Biodiesel Marine Committee is scheduled for Tuesday, November 13, 2007 at 11:00 a.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Monica Fish, Task Force Secretary
** Copies of explanatory documents are available at (1) the Task Force office, 11 Grove Street, San Francisco, California between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., (2) upon request to the Task Force Secretary, at telephone number 415-355-3709 or via e-mail at [email protected], or (3) on the meeting website as attachments to the agendas or meeting minutes.
Explanatory Documents submitted by the Port:
1. Cruise Ship Environmental Award (Green Award) Form
2005 Award Recap
2006 Awards (6): Dawn Princess, Infinity, Norwegian Sun, Radiance of the Seas, Regal Princess, Summit Regal Princess
2. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Low-Sulfur Fuel Grant.
3. Cruise Ship Berthing Application and Cruise Ship Discharge Report (CSDR) and
4. Cruise Terminal Environmental Advisory Committee (CTEAC). The above initiatives were promoted by the Port's Cruise Terminal Advisory Committee, which was formed in 2003 as an advisory committee to the Port Commission to create an ongoing dialogue between the maritime industry, regulatory agencies, environmental organizations, organized
labor, and community groups regarding cruise ship-related water and air quality issues.
5. San Francisco Bay Ship Arrivals (2006). According to Marine Exchange statistics, there were 3,620 ship arrivals at the Golden Gate in 2006. Of this number, only 85 were cruise ships (2.4%). The large majority were container ships calling at the Port of Oakland (1,923 arrivals, 53.1%). Here is the full breakdown of 2006 Golden Gate ship arrivals by ship type:
Container 1,923 53.1%
Tanker 732 20.2%
Bulk 420 11.6%
Vehicle Carrier 265 7.3%
Other 195 5.4%
Passenger 85 2.4%
TOTAL 3,620 100.0%
(See attached file: Golden Gate Arrivals by Type 2006.pdf)
Approved: November 13, 2007
Biodiesel Access Task Force > Marine Committee > 2007 Meetings >