Youre welcome. When I write opinion pieces I am careful to include links to sources to back up my claims - youre never too old to learn that even when youre sure youre right...

Thank you for your diligence and effort.

Good question...

Thanks to Julian Leek, world class NASA photographer and all around stand up guy: The barge in my pic WAS used to transport the external fuel tanks - from New Orleans to Canaveral, apparently the barge had to be rebuilt to a larger dimension after the initial construction.Now, we are back to the original question, did NASA pay a similar port fee for a similar transport?

My bad. I figured they just kinda towed the barge over it and floated it back, after looking into it, the external tank is designed to break up and sink when it impacts. The boosters are towed back alongside a ship, now Im curious what the barge is for, Ill reach out to a contact at NASA and update you. I hope it`s not a taxpayer funded party barge for NASA Christmas parties...

Sounds like the presidential election of 2016 !!

Cool, did it pick them up where they landed or what? It would have to submerge some to get it in correct?

This is the barge used to transport the tank back to the "turning basin", which is the "lagoon" directly behind the big blue clock (before it was torn down & replaced) you would see on TV that did the countdown to launch. http://www.starznbarz.com/Space-shutt...

Indeed, fees are the most equitable. Value for value. However, it is in defining the value and having it be evenly applies where there seems some disconnect.

I do not agree with that idea. Even as a GM of CP, he has made his money in business. Unless he has engaged in some unethical practice, I would say penalizing him for it is the unethical part. I am sure he is blowing big bucks to make this work. His auto end has of course, benefited from all the goodies the politicos have hung out there, but others have as well. Toyota comes to mind...

Maybe the issue was moot, because they were just in line doing business with them as had been done all along for a long time. It seemed that was what the article implied, that they were working under a standard agreement, until the Port decided that Musk could obviously be made to pay more, because, well, he is rich...

Exactly. They rarely have any cogent concepts, except emotional ones. Usually attached to some from of diatribe designed to turn one group against another.

Good questions. Didn't know they had any, the Main Tank was towed back to somewhere but never heard where.

Falcon 9 is fueled with liquid oxygen and kerosene and has no booster residue on landing. Large solid boosters usually fall into the seas.
If government is to have property such as ports, then there are two main ways to pay for their use, taxes or fees for use. Fees are the best way for those who do not use the property.

Spacex is a private company, seems they would do what all private companies do when their taxes / fees are raised, pass it on to the customer - in this case NASA, for resupply to ISS, which will cause NASA to up the fees for pad 41, which will cause Spacex to up the fees for delivery.... Im curious what, if any, the "fees were for the returning shuttle boosters, as well as the sections of Saturn rockets, they went through the port to the turning basin.

Wharfage is charged on any cargo that uses the wharf, whether it be domestic, coastwise, or international. However, many ports have a reduced rate for domestic cargo.

I can see their point, using the port should incur the same fee as any other user of it, but how large the cargo is shouldn't make much of a difference to the port. Ports do operate as an on-going enterprise, and it certainly takes revenue to operate an enterprise. The obvious thing is though that they shouldn't be treated unlike any other customer and pay the same fees and rate. A surcharge for the security requirements would certainly be warranted.

It's not international trade though, which a 'wharfage fee' would typically mean.

Our Dear Leader, The One, Barack Hussein Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm...) has said that the booster issue is not SpaceX's. Remember the words of our Supreme Leader: "If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen."

The Port Authority just needs to find that "somebody else" and present them with the bill.

Agreed...government doesn't like not having influence and control over something.

Orbital Sciences uses the Virginia site (Wallops Island) to launch their ISS resupply missions.

I heard the egyptians upped the charge on large boats going thu the suez canal to $270,000 to make more money for egypt. Governments have no idea of commerce.

The Virginia launch site almost beat Cape Canaveral a few years ago for one of the launches, but I don't remember whether it was SpaceX or not.

Thanks for the correction.

You are requited to chip in for the good of the whole.
Or else.
Atta boy! Have a nice day.
The next boat may dock over here, pretty please.

LOL!!!