Gentlemen of the Coast Guard:

On March 28^th^ in the middle of the afternoon, the world saw a boatload
of Haitians disembarking on the beach at Hallendale, FL in front of the
startled eyes of a crowd of sun seekers. How long this boat took to make
the crossing is a question, but what is certain is that it made it
without Coast Guard notice or intervention. When asked how this could
happen, Admiral Thad Allen, the Coast Guard Commandant basically said,
what do you expect? We only have 45 boats to guard the entire coast of
the United States. Assuming I had misheard Admiral Allen, I went online
and found that, in fact, in addition to a few planes and helicopters the
Coast Guard really does only have 45 cutters.

By the the weekend of March 31st my knowledge of the lack of Coast Guard
resources was enhanced by a story out of the East Coast that the Coast
Guard would miss its April 1, 2007 Congressionaly mandated deadline to
implement a long-range vessel tracking system to could identify
dangerous ships (or even boatloads of starving Haitians) approaching our
shores from far enough at sea to stop them reaching here. In fact, I now
have learned, the Coast Guard has not even started the long-range
tracking phase of the mandated National Automatic Identification System
(NAIS) that would use satellites to track ships from as far as a
1,000-2,000 miles out and yet the Coast Guard is hesitant to join the
private tracking system known as Maritime Information Systems of North
America which is already in place. Many ships participate on a voluntary
basis, and with Coast Guard help,at least in the waters off Alaska, so
the Pacific model does already exist. Apparently, due to an
international madate, all ships have the beacons for satellite tracking,
but keep them dark knowing the Coast Guard cannot track them.

Instead, of the GPS system, the Coast Guard is still dependent on its 96
hour rule, meaning a ship must notify it of its intention to come into a
US port 96 hours prior to doing so but how many bad guys are going to
tell you they are on their way? So the Coast Guard uses a radio tracking
system which can detect the ship 12-20 miles out, which is about one
hour\'s sailing time from shore. But Cabrillo Port is 14 miles out,
giving our coastal guardians no margin, no window and no win.

Perhaps the secret security plan that is much talked about but little
examined has found a way around this, but the General Accounting Office
is alarmed about the inadequate examination of the security risks posed
by LNG transport has ordered further study this year. In addition, the
Coast Guard had to perform a more stringent analysis for a similar
project proposed for Long Island Sound and found its present resources
inadequate. By a quirk of law, they are not required to perform a
waterways suitability analysis for Cabrillo Port until after it is
licensed. Since they found their resource inadequate in NY, we might
assume the conclusion will be similar on this coast.

At the same time this information was being disseminated to the public,
I happened to catch, on the National News, a demonstration of the
Navy\'s plan to keep terrorist divers away from ships, shore and
presumably LNG platforms. Their solution is our old friend Flipper. They
are sending trained Atlantic Bottlenose Dolphins and CA sea lions to
Puget Sound as part of their CETATION INTELLIGENCE PATROL. These are
dolphins and sea lions outfitted with harnesses controlled by the Navy
and 9depending on which news report you read) either using toxic darts
to tranquillize bad guy divers for later interrogation or even ankle
cuff them or plant trackers. So maybe this is the secret security plan
we are not allowed to know. But probably not, because the Cabrillo Port
is supposed to be so noisy (180Db) that it will disrupt the cetation
sonar of our migrating gray whales and, therefore, the dolphins would
also be hearing handicapped and unable to perform their duty. So I guess
Flipper is not the back-up after all.

What this all means is that there does not seem to be any agreement that
we have an adequate security system to surveil and protect this gigantic
platform and its off loading tankers. Are we going to see shut downs of
the kind that occur in Boston when LNG tankers are off loading for
Everett? If the surrounding shipping lanes and the Port of Hueneme are
forced to endure periodic closures (like LAX every time there is a
security breach) that could mean economic hardship for our wonderful
Port of Hueneme and would severely impact the Ventura County economy.
Worse yet, our BRAC taskforce has worked assiduously for years to ensure
that Naval Base Ventura County does not close down its operations here
as the hit to our economy would be staggering. If the Navy is impeded in
its Pacific Missile Range testing activities in the channel because of
security concerns for Cabrillo Port, it may just decide that it can
serve its interests best by leaving the county. No amount of temporary
jobs from Cabrillo Port could offset the

economic impact on our local economy from losing Naval Base Ventura
County. The next round of base closures will be considered just as
Cabrillo Port is finishing construction, if it is approved in 2007 and
if it stays on its timeline.

So, aside from the 20 unmitigatable environment impacts enumerated in
the final EIS and the unexamined national security implications of the
Coast Guard\'s own estimates of its limitations, there are unexamined
potential economic consequences that far outweigh any economic benefits
from the project. This is the wrong project in the wrong place at the
wrong time. I urge you NOT to certify the EIS/EIR, or at the very least,
to insist that all these issues be addressed in supplemental
submissions.

Lauraine Effress

2831 Harbor Blvd.

Oxnard, CA93035