b'The federal penalty is oneOn Oct. 21, 1997, the first version of the rail jumper provi-FOGHORN FOCUS sion was passed by the House of Representatives. A second way operators and theversion of H.R. 2204 passed on Oct. 15, 1998, again with the rail jumper provision. During debate, Congressman Coast Guard can work toBob Clement of Tennessee, a speaker at the PVA Annual Convention at MariTrends in 1998, alluded to the problem, curtail the problem of railsaying, We have also included a number of recommenda-tions made by the maritime industry, such as prohibiting jumpers. Through safetypeople from interfering with the safe operation of commer-cial vessels. Some dinner cruises have had problems with announcements and posteddrunken passengers jumping overboard. This disturbance signs, vessel operators canjeopardizes the vessels and all other passengers on board. advise passengers that railThe revised H.R. 2204 was approved by the Senate on Oct. 21, 1998, and the legislation was signed into law by Presi-jumping is a federal dent Bill Clinton on Nov. 13, 1998 (Public Law 105-383).offense that can result in For several years, the maximum civil fine that could be imposed on a rail or wake jumper was $1,000. Congress a hefty financial penalty. dramatically increased the potential fine in 2002, and as noted, it has been adjusted upwards several times to ac-count for inflation.As he noted, the current maximum civil penalty for a railThe federal penalty is one way operators and the Coast jumper from a commercial passenger vessel is now $41,093.Guard can work to curtail the problem of rail jumpers. The U.S. Coast Guard adjusted this figure to account forThrough safety announcements and posted signs, vessel inflation with the higher level announced in the Federaloperators can advise passengers that rail jumping is a feder-Register of Jan. 13, 2023.al offense that can result in a hefty financial penalty.This considerable civil fine is possible because, as explainedBoth Dave Anderson, the general manager of Fire Island above, that person interferes with the safe operation of aFerries in New York, and Chris Myers, the port captain of vessel, so as to endanger the life, limb, or property of a per- The Block Island Ferry, Interstate Navigation Company in son. The statute, the Rail Jumper Safety Amendment,Rhode Island, faced rail jumpers during the prime summer came into law due to the work of PVA. months this year. Theyve shared their experiences below. Enactment of language imposing a federal penalty on railINTERSTATE NAVIGATION COMPANYjumpers and other individuals who interfere with the safeInterstate Navigation Companys ferry M/V Anna C had a operation of a vessel was a key PVA legislative goal in 1997.young male passenger jump overboard in the early evening The necessary language was included in H.R. 2204, theof July 4, 2023. The vessel had departed Old Harbor, Block Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1998. Island, R.I., at 5 p.m. with 1100 passengers and nine crew aboard, and was within five minutes from arriving at the PVAslegislativecommitteechairmanatthetime,Cor- dock at Point Judith, R.I., when the passenger jumped. nel Martin, testified before the House Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation on March 19,The man jumped overboard in the middle of the channel 1997, to explain the need for the amendment. The federalinthevicinityofthejunctionbuoywherethechannel law at the time allowed for a sanction against a vessel oper- into Point Judith Pond splits. The eastern approach leads ator whose conduct endangers others, but the statute wasto the ferry docks at the fishing village of Galilee in Port not broad enough to apply to rail jumpers.Judithandthewesternapproachcontinuesnorthinto FOGHORN 28'