**1998 Year of the Ocean**

**PERSPECTIVES ON MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TODAY**

# 

**Contents**

1\. INTRODUCTION E-2

2\. THE VALUE OF MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY E-3

3\. PRESSURES ON MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY E-5

4\. THE STATE OF MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY E-11

5.  RESPONSES TO CHANGES IN MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY E-17

6\. CONCLUSION E-26

7\. REFERENCES E-27

8\. DOMESTIC LEGAL REGIME E-31

9.  LIST OF ACRONYMS E-45

This Year of the Ocean document was prepared as a background discussion
paper and does not necessarily reflect the policies of the U.S.
Government or the U.S. Government agencies that participated in its
preparation.

> "\... \[M\]an's fingerprint is found everywhere in the oceans.
> Chemical contamination and litter can be observed from the poles to
> the tropics and from beaches to abyssal depths\...But conditions in
> the marine environment vary widely. The open sea is still relatively
> clean\...In contrast to the open ocean, the margins of the sea are
> affected by man almost everywhere, and encroachment on coastal areas
> continues worldwide\...If unchecked, this trend will lead to global
> deterioration in the quality and productivity of the marine
> environment."
>
> *The State of the Marine Environment, 1989;*
>
> Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution

**INTRODUCTION**

Covering nearly three-quarters of the earth's surface, marine and
coastal waters are the earth's largest and most vital resources,
influencing global energy cycles and biological processes upon which all
life depends. The ocean provides food, medicine, natural resources,
habitat, and essential ecological services, contributing to many
valuable commercial, recreational, and cultural opportunities. Each
resource and service provided by the ocean relies upon high marine
environmental quality. The complexity and interdependence of these
resources, cycles, and biological processes are just being realized as
answers are sought to questions such as:

-   What are the existing conditions of marine environmental quality?

-   Are marine environmental conditions getting better or worse?

-   Are coastal and ocean ecosystems healthy?

-   Can the fish and shellfish be eaten?

-   Can swimming be permitted?

-   Is enough being done to manage environmental quality in marine and
    coastal waters?

-   Are there alternatives to traditional regulatory approaches that
    should be considered in managing pressures (e.g., land-based sources
    of pollution and coastal development) on the marine environment?

-   How will increases in human population, increases in consumption,
    and improvements in technology affect the way people use the ocean,
    and what will be the resulting impacts on marine environmental
    quality?

-   Can/should the assimilative capacities of the ocean be seen as the
    "ultimate sink" for high-risk wastes from human activities?

This paper will address marine environmental quality using a
"pressure--state--response" approach. "Pressure" is the demand placed
upon the marine environment and its resources by users, pollution, and
land-based activities. "State" describes the current conditions
resulting from these pressures. "Response" is what is being done to
address the pressures. For the purposes of this paper, "ocean" will be
broadly defined to include estuarine, marine and other coastal waters
(e.g., the Great Lakes).[^1]

**THE VALUE OF MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY**

The ocean plays a critical role in energy and nutrient cycling; it
supplies minerals and other natural resources, energy, and habitat for
sustaining living resources, and provides a medium for recreation,
learning and enlightenment. Nearshore ecosystems are supported by the
ocean and the interrelationship between oceanic and land systems. This
interrelationship can affect the profit and growth potential of many
economic sectors, including natural resource harvesting (e.g., minerals
and oil), commercial and recreational fishing, real estate,
manufacturing, tourism, and waste assimilation. For communities and
businesses around the country, clean water can mean the difference
between economic decline and a bright, prosperous future. For marine
organisms and ecosystems, marine environmental quality can mean the
difference between life and death.

Value can be quantified for some oceanic resources (e.g., oil energy)
and services (e.g., transportation), while for other resources, values
can only be approximated. Each year, 64,000 million tons of sand is
mined from the ocean for construction purposes and for beach
renourishment. In the United States, offshore crude oil sites generate
between \$1 and \$9 billion annually and directly employ 85,000
Americans. These sites account for 15 percent of U.S. oil production and
26 percent of natural gas production. While offshore petroleum drilling
sites are still a viable source of energy, "alternative" non-hydrocarbon
renewable energy sources such as temperature gradients and tidal energy
are being explored. These alternative energy sources may depend upon
marine environmental quality. Approximately 95 percent of all U.S.
foreign trade is carried by vessels and passes through U.S. ports
(MARAD, 1994). In 1992, 897 million tons of goods equaling \$488 billion
passed through U.S. ports (DOT, 1994).[^2]

Food harvested from the ocean generates approximately \$38 billion in
economic activity for the nation annually. The bulk of this revenue is
generated by the commercial fishing industry which employs nearly
250,000 people and 70,000 vessels. Recreational fisheries contribute an
additional \$18 billion annually to the U.S. gross national product. The
impacts of poor water quality include fish kills and shellfish bed
closures, contributing to millions of dollars in lost fishing revenues.
Wetland losses, water diversions, and other construction activities have
resulted in the loss of spawning and nursery habitat, further reducing
commercial and recreational fisheries' profits. (U.S. EPA, 1996).

From coral reefs to kelp forests, marine and coastal areas are as
different as the life they support is diverse. As a result, these areas
attract a multitude of tourists and provide a large variety of
recreational activities. In 1993, the recreation and tourism industry
was the second largest employer in the nation, with annual sales
exceeding \$380 billion. Healthy coastal ecosystems are critical to
places like Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, Santa Cruz, California,
the Florida Keys, and similar coastal communities which enjoy revenue
from tourists seeking places to swim, fish, boat, hunt, dive, hike, and
observe wildlife. The importance of good marine environmental quality
was evident in a recent survey conducted for Conde Nast Traveler
magazine, wherein 25 percent of respondents revealed that they had
changed travel plans because of environmental problems at their intended
vacation destinations.

Along with direct monetary contributions, healthy marine ecosystems
provide indirect contributions to local economies through their
aesthetic, artistic, cultural, and spiritual value. For example, a 1991
American Housing Survey found that "when all else is equal, the price of
a home located within 300 feet of a body of water increases by up to 28
percent." (Smith, 1995). Community and business leaders understand the
potential value of waterfront locations, and often use them as a focal
point for urban renewal.

Coastal wetlands, mangroves, and tidal flats play essential roles in
nutrient cycling and providing habitat for wildlife, as well as
protecting coastal developments from storm surges and filtering
sediments and toxins from waters. Where development has been permitted
in low lying areas close to the waters edge or in converted wetlands,
infrequent yet intense storms cause billions of dollars in damages
(e.g., damage costs from Hurricane Andrew in 1993 were \$25 billion).
Wetlands, barrier islands, and tidal flats provide a buffer from storms
and assist in reducing shore erosion. Many municipalities and some
industries are incorporating wetlands into their wastewater treatment
systems to remove nutrients, process some chemical and organic wastes,
and reduce sediment loads prior to discharge into riverine and marine
waters. This form of pretreatment reduces industry and municipality
costs, protects shellfish and swimming areas from closures, and reduces
the number of fish consumption advisories issued. While wetlands help to
improve and maintain water quality, they also play an important role in
sustaining the health and abundance of marine species. It is estimated
that 77 percent of shellfish and marine commercial species (Chambers,
1991) and 75 percent of all U.S. migrating waterfowl depend upon these
areas during some stage of their life cycle.

Although it is difficult to quantify, an article in *Science* by
Costanza et al. (1997), estimates the global value of the ocean and the
services it provides to be \$33 trillion per year. Most of this value
lies outside the traditional market system (e.g., commercial fisheries),
and comes instead from services such as waste treatment, nutrient
cycling, and regulation of disturbances such as floods or storms. Thus,
it is important not only aesthetically, but economically to take care of
the health of the ocean and its resources.

**PRESSURES ON MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY**

Population growth, coastal development, resource demand, climate,
relative sea-level rise, and natural coastal processes all affect marine
environmental quality. Yet, nearly all of the threats to habitat and
marine environmental quality are human induced pressuresfrom physical
alteration of the environment to pollution impacts from human activities
conducted either directly in/on marine waters or within the
watershed.[^3] Land based activities impact marine environmental
quality, which in turn influences other land and water activities.
Increasing rates of economic growth and urbanization, pollution, and
changes to ecosystems, can result in user conflicts in the marine
environment.

**Economic Growth**

Coastal areas are becoming increasingly crowded, with approximately 130
million people---more than half of the total U.S. population---currently
residing within 80 miles of the coast. Growing at a faster rate than the
nation as a whole, U.S. coastal populations are expected to reach 165
million people by the year 2015 (NOAA, 1997). Population growth
translates into employment opportunities, economic prosperity, new
industry, improved regional infrastructure, enhanced educational
opportunities, and increased tax revenues. However, as coastal
populations grow, so does the stress placed on the environment. The
features that first attracted people to the coast can be lost or
diminished if growth is not planned for or addressed during development.
Of course, one outcome of economic growth is that an economic base is
developed from which funds can be provided to ameliorate the impacts of
growth.

Increasing population generally results in the conversion of open land
and forest for activities such as commercial development, agriculture,
forestry, and other activities that provide economic growth. In addition
to physically altering the habitat, coastal development can reduce
permeable surface area, thereby increasing the rate of runoff and
impacting water quality by transporting sediments, toxic chemicals,
pesticides, herbicides, pathogens, nutrients, and other pollutants to
local waterways. Water recharge capacities can be reduced as habitat is
changed to accommodate urban development. This "hardening of the coast"
places stress upon the water table and can lead to saltwater intrusion
and other marine environmental quality issues.

As urbanization and inland activities increase, so do the volumes of
municipal and industrial waste discharged into local waterways. This can
potentially impair water quality at the same time that demands for
potable water, natural resources, energy supplies, wastewater treatment,
and transportation of goods increase. Whether from runoff or discharges,
excess nutrients, sediments, pathogens, and toxic chemicals can impair
water quality. This in turn can result in a degradation or loss of
fishing opportunities, changes in wildlife populations, a reduction in
the value of wetlands and estuaries, decreases in wetlands available for
water treatment, and decreased protection from storms. When habitat is
lost, wildlife suffers from a lack of area to maintain life cycle
processes.

The ongoing increase in global economic interdependency is expected to
raise the value of U.S. imports and exports from \$488 billion in 1992
to \$1.6 trillion in 2010, while the volume increases from 897 million
metric tons to 1.5 billion metric tons (U.S. DOT, 1994). Associated with
this economic growth is an increase in potential impacts on marine
environmental quality from the additional vessels, port activities,
personnel, and other associated industries required to accommodate the
production and transport of these additional goods and services. For
example, with greater numbers of ships accessing U.S. ports, the
potential for the introduction of non-indigenous species through ballast
water exchange has increased proportionally.

Increasing demands for shellfish and commercial fish have spurred
competition and technology improvements to increase fishing
capabilities. According to the National Marine Fisheries Service,
commercial landings by U.S. fishermen reached 10.5 billion pounds in
1993. Increased catches in the 1990s, however, reflected the increasing
harvest of lower-valued species, as traditional commercial stocks became
overfished in the late 1980s and 1990s (NMFS, 1996). Over-exploitation,
in concert with impacts from pollution, habitat degradation, habitat
modifications such as dams, and by-catch waste[^4], has resulted in a
depletion of some edible fish stocks, placing some ecosystems on a path
toward unsustainability, and leaving some fishing industries on the
brink of collapse.

The travel and tourism industry is the largest and fastest growing
segment of the expanding service industry in the United States. About 85
percent of all tourism revenues are received in coastal states, but with
these revenues come increased demands for drinking water, housing,
wastewater treatment, and recreational activities. As leisure pursuits
change, so do the demands on waterway uses and water quality. According
to the Sports Fishing Institute, Americans participated in 166 million
days of fishing in 1990, and approximately 4 million people over the age
of 16 participated in shell fishing. The recreational boating industry
is growing rapidly with 73.4 million boaters having spent \$10.5 billion
on related products and services in 1991. Already stressed from
pollution, reefs are at risk as increasing numbers of recreational
divers concentrate at the ever fewer number of reefs still harboring
great biological diversity.

Demands for energy and natural resources promote offshore exploration
drilling and mining. These activities can impact marine habitats and
water quality through physical disturbances, introduction of pollutants,
and suspension of sediments into the water column.[^5]

Eventually, the benefits derived from unregulated and uncontrolled
economic growth and urbanization in an area can come full circle and be
outweighed by losses of economic growth as residents, tourists,
businesses, and industry choose to move to other areas where an
infrastructure exists that can support the demands of multiple uses and
still provide an aesthetically pleasing environment.

**Pollution Pressures**

*Direct Discharges*

Direct discharges are defined here to include releases from vessels,
discharges of municipal and industrial wastewater via pipelines, and
dumping of waste materials, such as dredged material, into ocean waters.
In the United States, there are more than 2,000 sewage treatment plants,
municipalities, and industrial facilities discharging effluents into
estuarine and coastal waters. Approximately 2.3 trillion gallons of
effluent are discharged into marine waters from sewage treatment
facilities annually. While most of this sewage meets secondary treatment
standards prior to disposal, nutrients and pathogens from such
discharges can contribute to the degradation of local marine
ecosystemscreating "dead zones"[^6] and forcing the closure of
shellfish beds and swimming areas. Nutrient loading can be significant
causes of degradation to coral reefs and other coastal ecosystems.

More than 2.8 billion gallons of industrial waste water per day[^7] are
discharged directly into U.S. ocean waters (U.S. EPA, 1994). Many of the
chemicals discharged into marine waters can be toxic even in minute
concentrations, and can compromise the water column, contaminate
sediments, and concentrate in marine organisms. Leaching from hazardous
waste sites has been the source of many toxins in marine waters (e.g.,
In New York, PCBs are leaching into the Hudson River in from an
abandoned industrial plant). Exposure to these chemicals and metals can
pose risks of acute or chronic[^8] toxicity to marine organisms. In
addition, the risks to predators and humans can be increased if toxins
become concentrated through the food chain. In some locations, thermal
pollution from electric generating plants has been shown to stress
marine organisms by raising the ambient temperature of the water.

During operations, vessels may be responsible for directly discharging
oil, sewage, garbage, and non-indigenous species into marine waters.
Some pollutants are from direct discharges (e.g., the emptying of sewage
from vessel toilets, or ballast water exchange), while others may be a
result of leaching (e.g., anti-fouling agents or paints).[^9] Once
discharged, pathogens in sewage can impact drinking water intakes (e.g.,
in the Great Lakes), and necessitate the closing of shell fishing and
swimming areas; discharged nutrients, meanwhile, can increase
eutrophication.[^10]^,^[^11] Oil and other chemical contaminants washed
or discharged into the ocean may be suspended in the water column,
ultimately settling in sediments and concentrating in marine organisms.
Discharged garbage[^12] adversely affects marine life (due to
entanglement or ingestion), and can also cause vessel damage through
propeller entanglement and by disabling engines when sucked into intake
valves. The potential negative consequences of invasions of
non-indigenous species are becoming an increasing concern at ports and
coastal areas.

In U.S. coastal and ocean waters, dredged material is the primary waste
transported and directly disposed.[^13] The U.S. disposes of
approximately 300 million cubic yards of dredged material each year from
inland and coastal waters, only 60 million cubic yards (20 percent)[^14]
of which are disposed of in open ocean waters. Unregulated and
uncontrolled disposal of dredged material can increase suspended solids
in the water column and smother benthic organisms. If the sediments are
contaminated, there is a potential for acute or chronic toxicity in
marine organisms and a risk to human health (U.S. EPA, 1991).

*Indirect Discharges*

One to two-thirds of pollutants contributing to the degradation of
coastal and marine waters are from indirect sources, and include
sediments, nutrients, pathogens, and toxic compounds. The difficulty in
controlling these pollutants is the diverse array of sources (which
include runoff and seepage from agricultural and urban areas, and air
deposition onto land and into water) and the multiple methods of
transport. Nationwide, it has been estimated that indirect loadings
account for more than half of the suspended solids, nutrients, fecal
coliform, and metals entering coastal waters annually. Runoff from
non-urban areas, sewage spills and overflows, urban storm water runoff,
and combined sewer overflows are often responsible for seafood
advisories and shellfish bed and beach closings.

Pollutants from agricultural and pasture lands include sediments,
fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and animal wastes which contain
bacteria and nutrients. Eighty-eight percent of the total suspended
solids entering marine waters are from agricultural runoff, contributing
to water quality problems such as light attenuation and the smothering
of sensitive ecosystems (U.S. EPA, 1995). Excessive nutrients can
stimulate the growth of algae and other plants and organisms, which in
turn deplete the levels of dissolved oxygen and harm aquatic life; too
many nutrients can also trigger toxic algal blooms. Bacteria and
pesticides from agricultural and pasture lands can kill aquatic life,
contaminate seafood, and necessitate the closing of shellfish beds.
Cleared land has a reduced capacity to absorb water, resulting in
increased sediment transport, increased flooding, reduced recharging
capabilities of local aquifers, and increased quantities of toxic
chemicals and nutrients transported to local waterways.

Many of the pollutants from urban areas are washed to sea through storm
sewers. The volume and flow rate of runoff from yards and streets into
sewers increases as more land is developed, thus the volume of
pollutants such as oil, fertilizers, and litter that is transported to
waterways also increases. Fourteen percent of estuarine miles in the
United States are impacted from oil and grease (U.S. EPA, 1994c). Oil
and grease together are major contributors to estuarine degradation,
with 363 million gallons of oil originating from land and municipal and
industrial wastes. Annually, oily road runoff from a city of 5 million
could contain as much oil as one large tanker spill (Ocean Planet,
1995). Over two million pounds of cadmium, copper, and zinc are carried
to U.S. waters from urban areas annually (U.S. EPA, 1984). Nearly 80
percent of marine debris comes from land-based sources, either washed
directly into waterways or arriving through storm sewer and combined
sewer overflows (Coe, 1996).

Another source of indirect discharges is atmospheric deposition. The
scientific community and coastal managers now recognize the importance
of atmospheric deposition in causing surface water contamination, and
have developed and refined models describing the processes of
atmospheric deposition of nitrogen, phosphates, mercury, and other toxic
chemicals. As much as 67 percent[^15] of the total nitrogen load
delivered to the Tampa Bay, Florida, watershed (TBNEP, 1996), and 80
percent of PCBs in Lake Superior (NOAA, 1997), are believed to originate
from atmospheric deposition.

*Accidental Releases*

Because industrialized society depends on petroleum products to maintain
its accustomed standard of living, large volumes of petroleum are
transported each day in the coastal and marine environment. These large
volumes are moved by vessels as cargo and fuel, and through pipelines.
Fixed facilities, offshore exploration and production platforms, tanker
spills, and natural oil seeps contribute millions of gallons of oil to
the world's marine waters annually. Spills and leaks cause the formation
of tar balls, oil slicks, and tar mats, and can impact the micro-layer,
the benthos, the coast, and marine life.

**Ecosystem Alteration**

While often necessary to ensure vessel accessibility to ports or to
control flooding, hydro-modification projects, such as dams, flood
control channels, dredging, water diversions, and the development of
wetlands, have profound impacts on coastal and marine habitatschanging
the natural flow, timing, and volume of freshwater inflow and sediment
depositional patterns in bays and estuaries. This is of particular
concern in estuarine areas where changes in water flow can alter the
salinity of the ecosystem, increase stress on marine organisms, decrease
or eliminate protection from storms[^16], and reduce recharge areas.
Alteration of flow can also impact marine systems by transporting
pollutants and resuspending sediments and toxic chemicals, thereby
increasing the potential for concentration of toxins in marine organisms
and humans. Activities such as sandmining, drilling, and shell fishing
can physically disrupt benthic habitats and resuspend toxic chemicals
and sediments in the water column.

The introduction of non-indigenous species often results in unexpected
ecological, economic, and social impacts to the coastal and marine
environment. Predation and competition by non-indigenous species has
resulted in the eradication of some native populations and the drastic
reduction of others, thereby altering local food webs. This process is
often compounded by the exploitation of commercial fish. Overpopulation
of some non-indigenous species has resulted in the degradation and loss
of wetland vegetation and other submerged aquatic vegetation as a result
of overgrazing (e.g., nutria). Additional impacts of non-indigenous
species can include (U.S. EPA, 1997):

-   the introduction of pathogens to coastal waters

-   alteration of water tables

-   modification of nutrient cycles or soil fertility

-   increased erosion

-   interference with navigation

-   a reduction in sport and commercial fishing yields

-   negative impacts on recreational boating and beach use

Overfishing can portend the beginning of an ecologically unsustainable
trend. Practices such as "Growth overfishing"[^17], cyanide, or dynamite
fishing[^18] involve the taking of all marine species without concern
for size or species. The result is that noncommercial species are killed
during the harvesting process of desirable species, or that species are
harvested before they reach maturity and can reproduce. This removal of
multiple species can alter the ecosystem.

**Climate Change**[^19]

Throughout time, climate change has affected coastal and marine
environments and will continue to do so in the future. However, human
activities and alterations to the environment have rendered coastal
resources more vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Such effects
include accelerated sea-level rise, increased siltation, altered
rainfall patterns, and changes in storm frequency and intensity. Over
the past 100 years, the relative sea level has risen by 1 to 2.5 mm/yr.
Climate change and a rise in sea level or changes in storms patterns
could result in increased erosion of shores, changes in coastal and
marine habitats, increased coastal flooding, changes in salinity of
estuaries and freshwater aquifers, altered tidal ranges in rivers and
bays, changes in sediment and nutrient transport, and changes in the
pattern of chemical and microbiological contamination of coastal areas.
Projections based on long-range climate models

suggest that freshwater discharges from the Mississippi River to the
coastal ocean will increase 20 percent if atmospheric carbon dioxide
concentrations double. This is likely to affect water

column stability, surface productivity, and global oxygen cycling in the
northern Gulf of Mexico. Increased temperatures in the open ocean could
result in a shifting of the geographical distribution of certain
species.

**THE STATE OF MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY**

Good environmental quality is essential for sustaining coastal and
marine ecosystems,[^20] commercial and recreational fisheries, and
economic growth in coastal communities. It is also an important means of
providing natural protection against rising sea levels and storm damage.
The health of coastal and marine ecosystems is affected by water
quality, and in turn, water quality is dependent upon ecosystem health.
If one is impaired, the other is threatened. Despite their value and the
programs designed to protect them, many coastal waters are being
degraded at an alarming rate. According to the 1994 National Water
Quality Inventory, 44 percent of U.S. estuarine waters are not
supporting their designated uses (e.g., fishable or swimmable). Figure 1
shows the major sources of pollution impairing monitored estuarine
waters in the United States.

**Water Quality in Marine Ecosystems**

To understand the current status of water quality in marine
environments, it is necessary to consider nutrients levels, along with
the extent of contamination by pathogens, chemicals, oil, and
debris/litter.

*Nutrients*

Nutrients have an ambiguous position in the assessment of water
qualitythey are necessary to support healthy marine ecosystems, but in
excess, they can lead to severe oxygen depletion. Excess nutrients also
stimulate the growth of dinoflagellates and nuisance algae, such as
blue-greens which are often toxic to estuarine and marine animals. This
stimulation in growth know as blooms, can have such effects as causing
fish kills or manatee deaths, and in some instances may threaten human
health. Since the end of World War II, increases in human population
density, fertilizer use, animal husbandry, and changes in land use, have
contributed to increased nutrient inputs from runoff that range in
magnitude from two- to ten-fold. It has been estimated that 40 percent
of estuarine and coastal waters are not "fishable or swimmable,"
primarily because of nutrients and bacteria from urban and agricultural
runoff and municipal wastewater discharges (U.S. EPA, 1995a). Recent
studies have shown air deposition of nitrogen is also a significant
contributor to nutrient over-enrichment of marine waters. For example,
21 percent of nitrogen loadings to the Chesapeake Bay are from air
deposition (Valigura, 1996).

*Pathogen Contamination*

Viruses, bacteria, and protozoa can cause diseases in plants, humans,
and other animals. In excess, they contribute to closures of shellfish
beds and swimming areas, fish kills, and seafood consumption warnings.
The good news is that "approved" shellfish harvest waters are at an all
time high. Of the 25 million shellfishing acres classified in 1995,
about 59 percent are "approved" for shellfishing, and restrictions on
shellfishing waters are at their lowest levels since 1980. There has
been a significant decrease in shellfishing acreage that has harvest
limitations due to pollution from industry, wastewater treatment plants,
and direct discharges; however, there has been an increase in the
acreage that is "harvest limited" as a result of boating, marinas, urban
runoff, and agricultural runoff (NOAA, 1997). Overall, the condition of
shellfish harvest waters in the United States is improving.

During 1996, there were at least 2,596 individual closings and
advisories for ocean, bay, and Great Lakes swimming beaches due to
bacterial contamination. Over 80 percent of the beach closings and
advisories in 1996 were based on monitoring that detected bacteria
levels exceeding beach water quality standards.[^21] Decreases in
hurricane activity in Florida and decreases in the number of heavy
storms in California (NRDC, 1997) resulted in fewer combined sewer
overflow events and reduced the number of beach closings in 1996. The
number of beach closings due to pathogen contamination continues to
decrease as a number of metropolitan areas upgrade their sewer systems
and separate their storm drains and sewer systems.

*Chemical Contamination*

Since 1940, more than 70,000 synthetic chemicals have been introduced
into the marine environment, impacting areas such as the Mobile Delta,
where excessive levels of mercury in finfish resulted in the closing of
some fishing areas from 1970-72 and again in the early 1990s (U.S. EPA,
1997). Efforts to reduce chemical loadings to marine waters have had
some success. Away from the influence of urban sources, offshore
monitoring of toxic chemicals has shown a decline in the concentrations
of chemicals which have been banned from use in the United States (NOAA,
1997). Meanwhile, reported releases of toxic chemicals to surface waters
of the United States decreased by 4.1 million pounds (a decrease of more
than 10 percent) from 1994 to 1995 (U.S. EPA, 1997b).[^22] The decrease
in toxic chemicals released to surface waters is a reflection of real
changes in industry practices such as source reduction,[^23]
installation of pollution control equipment, increased recycling and
reuse of waste as raw materials, production changes, and a reduction in
the number of one-time events (e.g., spills).

Over the last decade, chemical contamination of aquatic sediments has
been recognized as a serious problem in some U.S. coastal waters. In
Puget Sound, hot spots of toxic chemicals have been shown to alter and
reduce the bottom-dwelling community, to interfere with cellular and
physiological processes, and to cause disease in fish. Most hot spots
are in areas of high vessel traffic, industrial activities, or poor
flushing and are often located near urban centers (NOAA, 1994). Other
adverse economic impacts of contaminated sediments include delaying or
raising the cost of maintenance dredging of navigational waterways due
to the potential dangers of resuspending toxic chemicals into the water
column or the need to find disposal sites for the sediments.

*Oil Contamination*

In 1996, approximately 4,200 oil spills occurred in coastal areas and in
the open ocean. Spill sources range from minor marina activities to
one-time releases from tankers (U.S. DOT), with major tanker spills
accounting for only 5 percent of the volume of oil spills. Fixed
facilities and offshore exploration and production platforms contribute
15 million gallons of oil pollution to the world's ocean bodies
annually. By contrast, 363 million gallons of oil per year reaches the
ocean in runoff from land and municipal and industrial wastes. In fact,
the yearly road runoff from a city of 5 million could contain as much
oil as one large tanker spill (Ocean Planet, 1995). Natural oil seeps
discharge 62 million gallons of oil into marine waters annually. Effects
on organisms from oil spills can be acute, such as fish kills from
initial contact with the toxic fractions of petroleum, or subtle, such
as chronic effects on reproduction which become evident as toxic
chemicals concentrate through the food web of an ecosystem. Effects on
human populations are realized through economic losses, such as those
associated with the loss of a fishery or tourism. Particularly
susceptible to injury from releases of oil are exposed shorelines,
shallow reef environments, estuaries, mangrove forests, and wetlands
(U.S. EPA, 1993).

*Marine Debris/Litter*

Two hundred and sixty-seven species of marine organisms are known to
ingest or become entangled in marine debris that causes injury and
sometimes death (MMC, 1995). Coastal communities can lose millions of
annual tourism dollars, experience declines in commercial and
recreational fish stocks, incur damages to vessels, and see declines in
property values as a result of marine debris. Annually, \$1.5 million is
spent by coastal communities in New Jersey to remove debris from beaches
and coastal waters in order to prevent a repetition of the 1987 and 1988
beach seasons when \$2 billion in tourist revenue was lost as a result
of debris washing ashore. Lost or neglected fishing gear contributes to
the depletion of commercial fisheries.[^24] And while numbers for the
United States are unavailable, Japan estimates that in 1992, the
Japanese fishing industry spent \$4.1 billion dollars in boat repairs
resulting from damage caused by marine debris. Sources of marine debris
include vessels and beachgoers, but recent studies show that 80 percent
is likely to be from indirect sources such as street litter, improperly
sealed waste receptacles, landfills, and from combined sewer overflow
events. Annex V of MARPOL, an international treaty banning the dumping
of plastics from ships and regulating other garbage discharges, has been
in place since 1988 and improvements are being made to reduce marine
debris from ships.

**Ecosystem Change**

U.S. coastal areas, land and water, support an extensive and unique set
of ecological, commercial, and recreational functions, and provide food,
shelter, and nursery areas for birds, marine invertebrates, fish, and
other wildlife. Across the nation, estuaries contain 32,300 square miles
of wetlands, 21,900 square miles of shellfish waters, and 27,000 public
recreation sites (Baily, 1993). Despite their ecological importance,
many of these productive areas have been modified or lost to support
residential, agricultural, industrial, and commercial growth. As habitat
is lost, wildlife systems are strained for sufficient area to maintain
life-cycle processes.

*Habitat Alteration*

Since the 1700s, the 48 contiguous states have lost nearly half of their
original wetlands (Watzin and Gosselink, 1992). Twenty-five years ago,
wetland losses were estimated at 460,000 acres each year. Today, wetland
losses are estimated to be one-fourth of that rate or less (U.S. EPA,
1997). Nonetheless, physical alteration or degradation of habitat
continues to occur, with a concomitant loss of diversity, as a result of
human activities such as channelization, drainage for agricultural
purposes, development, and dredging.

Such a drastic decrease in habitat acreage has had a great impact on
marine and terrestrial species dependent upon these ecosystems for
spawning, nurseries, and habitat. During some stage in life, 77 percent
of all commercial species and 80‑90 percent of recreational fish and
shellfish catches rely upon wetland areas (NOAA, 1997). Eighty percent
of endangered species depend on habitat within 10 vertical feet of sea
level (NOAA, 1995). Between 80 and 90 percent of U.S. shorelines are
undergoing net long-term erosion; while some of this erosion is due to
natural processes, erosion resulting from anthropogenic factors has
increased over the past century. The development of tidal flats and
barrier islands has eliminated unique and essential habitats for many
plants and animal species.

In addition to physical alterations, water quality impairment and
habitat loss can be caused by excess nutrient loading, sedimentation,
and increasing levels of pathogens and toxic chemicals. Sediment and
nutrient loadings have increased turbidity and light attenuation,
thereby killing submerged aquatic vegetation. Only 10 percent of the
seagrass beds that existed several decades ago still exist today. In
Florida, siltation and nutrient loads have reduced mangrove forests by
approximately 24 percent and caused severe damage to coral reef systems
(U.S. EPA, 1997). Alteration of the natural flow can have significant
effects on water quality, health, and distribution of living resources.
In the upper Laguna Madre River of the Corpus Christi Bay, changes in
freshwater flow in 1996 have increased salinities from 10-20 ppt[^25] to
55 ppt (U.S. EPA, 1997). The change in salinity has decreased the total
productivity of the oyster population and reduced the economic value of
the estuary.

While the dredging of harbors and shipping channels can cause temporary
increases in turbidity, dredging is necessary for port accessibility and
navigational safety. Recent years have seen a change in emphasis on
dredged material management. Ports lose revenue when vessels change
their destination to ports with shipping channels deep enough to
accommodate them. It is now recognized that dredged material can also be
a resource for enhancing or building wetland habitats, or for other uses
such as beach renourishment. Beneficial use of dredged material usually
costs more than traditional open water disposal methods. However, with
the passage of more consistent cost-sharing formulas between federal and
local project sponsors (e.g., the Water Resources Development Act of
1996), it is expected that the amounts of dredged material used to build
habitats will continue to increase.

On a more global scale, climate change as manifested by rises in sea
level and changes in storm patterns and storm surges has led to
environmental impacts that include:

-   increased erosion

-   increased salinity of estuaries and freshwater aquifers

-   altered tidal ranges in rivers and bays

-   increased coastal flooding

-   changed sediment and nutrient transport patterns

-   changed patterns of chemical and microbiological contamination in
    coastal areas

-   

Secondary impacts from climate change that may occur include inundation
of waste disposal sites and landfills from storm surges which result in
the reintroduction of toxic materials and increased siltation into the
marine environment. Areas in the U.S. Gulf Coast are experiencing a
relative sea level rise of 10 mm/year. In Oahu, Hawaii, one quarter of
the beaches have been lost or significantly degraded over the past 50
years due a multiple of marine environmental pressures, but heightened
storm surges could greatly increase this rate.

*Adverse Biological Effects*[^26]

The over-exploitation of living resources, the physical destruction of
habitats, pollution, changes in climate, and the introduction of
non-indigenous species, all combine to threaten the biodiversity,
integrity, and productivity of marine and coastal ecosystems.
Over-exploitation of species reduces their ability to maintain
population levels.[^27] Overfishing can create an imbalance in
ecosystems by depleting food resources for predators while allowing
populations on which depleted species would have otherwise fed to grow.
This can be the beginning of an ecologically unsustainable trend.

The introduction of exotic or non-indigenous species into an area,
whether intentionally or accidentally, often results in unexpected
ecological, economic, and social impacts to the marine and estuarine
environment. These occurrences often pose threats to local species that
are relied upon for food, medicine, recreation, and raw materials
(Norse, 1993). Through predation and competition, introduced species
have contributed to the eradication of some native populations and
drastically reduced others, fundamentally altering food webs. In San
Francisco Bay, California, Amur River clams have become so abundant that
they can filter a significant volume of the Bay in less than a day,
removing the bacteria, phytoplankton, and zooplankton that are necessary
to support the local food web. Zebra mussels are responsible for
millions of dollars in water supply maintenance costs in the Great
Lakes. In the Delaware Estuary, *Haplosporidium nelsoni*, a parasitic
protozoan, has caused catastrophic die-offs of American Oyster. It is
thought that this organism was transferred from Asia or the U.S. West
Coast via ballast water (Ford, 1996). The Asian clam, *Corbicula
fluminea*, dominates the bivalve community in the area between Trenton,
New Jersey and the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. In some areas, this
exotic clam makes up 94 percent of the total benthic invertebrate
biomass (Maiden, 1993).

Habitat may be directly affected by development and water control
efforts, but degradation due to toxic chemicals, excessive nutrients,
sediments, and oil can be just as devastating. Habitat alterations from
these causes range from physical smothering to changes in population
structure associated with exposure to chemicals in the water and
sediments. Pollutants such as pesticides and herbicides threaten living
resources by contaminating the food chain and eliminating food sources.
Contaminants in runoff and toxic releases can alter aquatic habitat,
harm animal health, reduce reproductive potential, cause disease, and
contribute to behavioral abnormalities that may affect organism survival
and suitability for human consumption.[^28]

There is evidence that suggests certain pollutants or changes in marine
water quality (e.g., increased nutrients) may initiate, maintain, and
extend the duration of toxic algal blooms and further impact human
health and marine organisms. These blooms are thought to be initiated
from offshore patches of organisms that are transported to coastal
waters where high nutrient levels sustain the bloom conditions. For
example, in 1996, 149 manatees died in Tampa Bay, Florida, after
exposure to a toxic red tide that remained behind the barrier islands
well into the spring migrating season. In another case, high phosphorus
levels are thought to be one of the conditions required to trigger
*Pfiesteria* blooms such as occurred in North Carolina and Maryland, and
resulted in associated fish kills and human health concerns (U.S. EPA,
1997).

**RESPONSES TO CHANGES IN MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY**

Three decades ago, water quality was at an all time low, with rivers
catching on fire, harbor areas of cities being deserted, great numbers
of shellfish beds closing on an annual basis, and people getting sick
from swimming. In the 1970s, Congress passed several laws to address
environmental problems, of which the most significant for the protection
of marine waters were the Clean Water Act, the Marine Protection
Research and Sanctuaries Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act.
However, laws alone do not suffice to cleanup, prevent, improve, or
protect water qualitypeople must become actively involved. Among the
many means to protect marine and coastal waters are:

-   the traditional regulatory approach which includes the permitting of
    specific discharges;

-   risk prioritization and pollution prevention; and

-   the watershed approach which looks at the sources of pollutants as
    well as the system to which they are discharged.

Whether voluntary or as a result of regulations, actions taken to
improve water quality should be based upon sound science, consider the
needs of all users of marine environments, and take into account
technological and economic constraints.

While some shellfish beds remain closed today, and some beaches continue
to be closed for days at a time, overall water quality in the United
States has vastly improved. While much progress has been made, the
environmental problems facing ocean and coastal waters present
formidable challenges to the scientific and technical communities, who
seek to understand natural processes and delineate causes and effects,
as well as to policy makers, regulators, and stakeholders, who
prioritize actions and allocate limited funds.

**Legislative and Regulatory Framework**[^29]

In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act was passed.
Subsequently reauthorized and renamed the Clean Water Act (CWA), this
Act has set the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants
into waters of the United States. The goal of the CWA is the
"restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological
integrity of the Nation's waters" (33 U.S.C. §1251(a)). Various sections
of the CWA provide for monitoring programs, ecosystem management,
non-point source pollution control, best management practices of
pollutants, wetlands protection, and water quality controls. Under the
CWA, it is illegal to discharge pollutants into U.S. waters without a
permit. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible
for establishing water quality standards for specific pollutants and
developing discharges guidelines for specific industries.

The CWA has been successful in reducing pollutant loadings from point
sources, but a bigger challenge remains in reducing pollutant loadings
from non-point sources. Under the CWA, states are directed to develop
management plans for non-point sources of pollution, including the
identification of best management practices and programs to implement
such practices on a watershed basis to the maximum extent practicable.
The Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 (CZARA) and the
CWA also established the National Estuary Program (NEP), which is a
consensus-based approach designed to identifying key problems in a
particular estuary, develop a plan to address those problems, and
implement the actions in the plan. There are 28 NEPs nationwide, 17 of
which are now implementing approved plans.

There are many users of the coastal areas of the United States. The
Coastal Zone Management Act was enacted to provide for the management of
the nation's coastlines by balancing economic development with
environmental preservation to "preserve, protect, develop, and where
possible, to restore or enhance the resources of the Nation's coastal
zone" (16 U.S.C. §1452). This Act also provides for a state-administered
regulatory program for non-point sources in coastal areas. The River and
Harbor Act of 1899 states that all modifications to navigable waters
require a permit. The issuance of these permits are subject to public
review and the National Environmental Policy Act.

The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act establishes
national marine sanctuaries for areas that have special significance
based on their "conservation, recreational, ecological, historic,
research, educational or aesthetic qualities" and controls dumping of
wastes into ocean waters. The objectives of the national marine
sanctuaries program are as follows:

\(1\) establish sanctuaries in areas of special national significance
(currently there are 12 national marine sanctuaries)

\(2\) develop and implement coordinated protection and management plans
for sanctuaries;

\(3\) facilitate public and private uses insofar as they are compatible
with resource protection

\(4\) support scientific research and public education in the
sanctuaries

As noted previously, dumping of sewage sludge and industrial wastes
ceased in the United States as a result of the Ocean Dumping Ban Act of
1998. Disposal of dredged material into ocean waters is controlled by
regulations under the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act.

As a result of the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989, Congress passed the
Oil Pollution Act of 1990. This legislation established more stringent
requirements for preparedness and prevention of spills which were
implemented by regulations promulgated by the U.S. Coast Guard. Industry
and government were mandated to take measures to reduce the risk of a
catastrophic release of oil into the marine environment. As a result of
this law, transporters of oil and production facilities were required to
develop and implement response plans, participate in preparedness
drills, and maintain safe shipping and handling practices.

The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships,
commonly known as the MARPOL Treaty, also governs the release of oil,
hazardous substances, and garbage into the marine environment. Annex I
of MARPOL deals with the prevention of pollution by oil and places
requirements on new oil tankers; Annex II governs noxious liquids
carried in bulk; Annex III governs packaged harmful substances; Annex IV
deals with the control of sewage and other "grey water"; and Annex V
deals with garbage (which includes plastics, metal, glass, galley wastes
and other materials.)

The conservation of fish and wildlife is addressed through a number of
statutes such as the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, which requires
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries
Service to review any action that may affect any body of water and to
make recommendations for the conservation of fish and wildlife. This
includes (1) determining standards for water quality, (2) studying
methods for abating and preventing pollution and recovering useful
products, and (3) collecting and distributing data on the results of
investigations. The Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 mandates the
protection of essential fish habitat, including protection from impacts
other than fishing. Living marine resource management within the 200
nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone is the responsibility of the
federal government and regional Fishery Management Councils. Nearshore
fisheries within approximately 3 nautical miles from U.S. shores are
managed by coastal states and interstate marine fisheries commissions.
This joint and overlapping jurisdiction requires that these councils
work together to protect fisheries resources. The Endangered Species Act
directs federal agencies to ensure that actions they authorize or
conduct are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of
endangered or threatened species, or result in the destruction or
modification of their critical habitat. The Marine Mammal Protection Act
provides a framework to develop specific protection programs for marine
mammals.[^30]

In a 1997 report, the National Research Council (NRC, 1997) concluded
that "Developing a coherent framework to guide the nation's activities
in the ocean and coastal regions is especially important in this time of
growing national interest in the ocean, which includes heightened
awareness of the need to protect it, along with recognition of new
opportunities to utilize marine resources." The National Research
Council recommended that the general elements of the framework include:
(1) creation of a National Marine Council which would improve
coordination and facilitate issue resolution among federal agencies, (2)
creation of regional marine councils to coordinate and facilitate issue
resolution at the local level, (3) enhancement of individual federal
ocean/coastal programs, and (4) adoption of management tools by the
regional councils and agencies, such as zoning and the creation of
refuges, and user charges.

**Technical Basis for Action and Research Programs**

Many of the ocean's functions and processes remain a mystery. For
example, studies indicate that the relative contribution of pollutant
loading from atmospheric deposition can be significant. Yet to date,
knowledge of atmospheric and surface water processes is not sufficient
to determine, with confidence, the overall magnitude and impact of
atmospheric deposition on marine waters. Knowledge gaps such as this
have been recognized by researchers, planners, and governments. U.S.
government funding of coastal research was \$673[^31] million between
1991 and 1993 (NSTC, 1995). In 1997, the Department of Defense, the
Navy, and the Army spent nearly \$90 million in basic ocean research and
more than \$50 million in applied ocean research.[^32] State and local
governments, universities, private nonprofit institutions, and
industrial organizations also spend additional large, but unquantified,
sums annually for activities that support coastal science.

The Clean Water Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act, and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990
created an upsurge in research and development efforts. These efforts
have focused on prevention, clean up, and spill mitigation. Recent
emphasis has centered around the human health aspects of marine
environmental quality and on incremental improvements in technology,
resource reduction, equipment, pollution prevention, and response
strategies. Such improvements have resulted in new regulations and the
transfer of "state-of-the-art" technologies to other industries and
sectors. Agencies have incorporated risk analysis and cost benefit
analysis into their programs to ensure they are "reality based." To
offset decreases in funding, agencies are exploring more opportunities
to increase cooperation and share resources while conducting research
and developing management strategies in marine environmental quality.
The challenge for the future will be to continue this trend and to find
new ways for government, industry, academia and nonprofit organizations
to cooperate.

Government agencies and private industry in partnership have developed
new technologies to prevent and reduce the impacts of pollution. For
example, there have been significant improvements in ensuring that ports
and waterways are safe for navigation, and evolving technologies allow
the collection and dissemination of near‑real time tide and current data
to aid ship captains and port authorities. Traditional methods to
contain, recover, and remove oil from the marine environment have been
refined and new ones developed to reduce the environmental impacts of
oil spills. Technologies in the oil and gas industry have contributed to
vast reductions in the volume of oil and hydrocarbons released into the
marine environment from these activities. Traditionally, research has
focused on understanding the transport, fate, and effects of various
types of oil once a release has occurred. The prevention of spills is
now a priority, and risk prioritization studies assist government and
industry in the identification of potential sources and situations in
which accidental releases might occur. This research may have a high
return as many spills have similar causes. Once identified, procedures
can be modified, technologies improved, and situations avoided to
prevent, reduce, or to contain spills.

To advance coastal environmental science and to manage coastal resources
more efficiently, an integrated understanding of fundamental physical,
chemical, and biological processes based on site‑specific comparative
studies of coastal ecosystems is needed. These studies need to account
for the impacts of activities in associated watersheds and airsheds.
Increased communication between researchers and policy makers, greater
coordination among the many organizations responsible for governance and
management, and the application of knowledge derived from one study to
other systems, are necessary to address marine environmental quality
issues, determine the effectiveness of such measures, and assess the
value of healthy marine waters.

**Assessment of the Success of Environmental Protection Programs and
Early Warning Systems: Research and Monitoring**

In the past, research has been stimulated by catastrophes such as fish
kills in North Carolina and the Chesapeake Bay caused by *Pfieisteria
piscicida* or toxic algal blooms. Research into the cause and prevention
of such events has yielded technological advances and furthered
understanding of the ocean. For example, after the Exxon Valdez spill,
government agencies, industry, and the scientific community worked to
develop methods to prevent oil spills and to effectively clean up spills
if they do occur. After the 1987 and 1988 beach closings in New York and
New Jersey, governments, industry and environmental organizations worked
together to implement better management measures to reduce the volume of
plastics and other wastes washing ashore and posing risks to human
health. This reactive approach has serious implications in terms of
monetary and environmental costs[^33]. Standardized and regular
monitoring of waterbodies, the use of water quality indicators, and
implementation of best management practices can assist in the prevention
of major environmental crises.

Because the ocean is "downstream" of all homes, communities, rivers, and
watersheds, the health of the ocean is inextricably linked to the health
of all the watersheds in the country. Identifying and reducing sources
of pollution in "upstream" watersheds will help to maintain and improve
the health of the ocean. In October of 1996, the Index of Watershed
Indicators was released (U.S. EPA, 1996b). This Index is designed to
give the American people ready access to information about water
pollution in their communities, and is a compilation of information that
presents the first national picture of watershed health in the United
States.

The Index is comprised of fifteen indicators or "data layers" that focus
on either the condition of aquatic resources (e.g., fish and wildlife
consumption advisories, source water quality for drinking water
systems), or the vulnerability of the resources to certain activities
(e.g., urban runoff potential, hydrologic modification, or wetlands
loss). The Index will continue to be modified, incorporating new
information such as atmospheric deposition of pollutants and
eutrophication conditions within coastal waters.

A fundamental improvement in the way the United States monitors its
environment is required if it is to meet the challenges of the next
several decades. Current monitoring programs do not provide integrated
data across multiple natural resources at the various temporal and
spatial scales needed to develop policies based on scientific
understanding of ecosystem processes. Many monitoring programs identify
violations of permits or provide status reports. These networks and
programs can be better integrated to provide information needed for
effective ecosystem management across a range of spatial scales (CENR,
1996). For example, the EPA is developing new testing methods,
monitoring protocols, and water quality standards for pathogens in
swimming areas to bring some uniformity to water quality warnings
nationwide. Models for storm events are being developed which will
enable local communities to predict when pathogen levels are likely to
exceed water quality standards due to storm sewer overflows, thus
enabling local officials to close beaches in order to prevent potential
illness. Proactive monitoring efforts can identify potential problem
areas, allowing steps to be taken prior to the collapse of an ecosystem
or an event such as a fishkill.

**Management Approaches and the Long Term Challenges**

Significant progress has been made since the early 1970s when many of
the environmental laws protecting the ocean were passed (e.g., 1997
marked the 25th anniversary of the passage of the Clean Water Act, which
is responsible for among other things for preventing millions of gallons
of raw sewage from entering the ocean). While much progress has been
made in protecting the ocean, there is still much that is unknown about
marine and coastal waters and much that needs to be done to protect them
and their resources. The challenges may be daunting, but they are
manageable. Stakeholders working together in partnerships is a key
component to furthering progress in protecting, restoring, and
maintaining the health and productivity of ocean resources. The major
environmental problems that need continued emphasis through protection
and enhancement programs include:

-   nutrient over-enrichment: eutrophication

-   pathogen contamination

-   toxic chemicals

-   alteration of freshwater inflow

-   loss and degradation of habitat

-   declines in fish and wildlife populations

-   introduction of invasive species

-   accidental spills

The control of non-point sources is key to making further progress in
protection of ocean waters and habitat. Point source management measures
have greatly improved water quality. Industrial and municipal discharges
of waste water are controlled under the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System and this effort has greatly reduced pollutants such
as toxic chemicals and untreated sewage entering marine and coastal
waters. However, major challenges remain in identifying causes and
effects of various pollutant sources, addressing non-point sources of
pollution, reducing wetlands loss, and finding and implementing
solutions to these and the other coastal environmental problems listed
above. Several examples of current actions to address these problems are
provided below.

*Nutrient Over-enrichment*

Increased incidences in 1997 of fish kills and fish with lesions in
tributaries to the Chesapeake Bay highlighted the growing national
concern over the impacts of outbreaks of toxic *Pfiesteria piscicida*
and other harmful algal blooms. Marine biotoxins and harmful algae
represent a significant and expanding threat to human health, marine
mammals, and fisheries resources throughout the United States. In
addition to causing threats to public health and wildlife, the death and
decay of algal blooms can lead to oxygen depletion in the water,
resulting in widespread mortalities of fish, shellfish, and
invertebrates. When oxygen depletion reaches a sufficiently high level,
a "dead zone", or area where marine life cannot survive, may occur (as
in the 7,000 square mile Gulf of Mexico dead zone).

There is strong evidence connecting harmful algal blooms with nutrient
pollution excessive nitrogen and phosphorusin the water. In general,
three significant sources of nutrient pollution have been identified:
discharges from septic systems or sewage treatment plants, agricultural
runoff from fertilizer or animal wastes, and air deposition of nitrogen,
primarily from electric utility power plants and vehicle emissions. EPA,
NOAA, and other federal agencies are working together with states to
better understand and control harmful algal blooms in general and
*Pfiesteria* in particular. This includes investigating what steps can
be taken to reduce nutrient pollution in an effort to help prevent these
outbreaks and their effects.

*Dredged Material Management*

The disposal of dredged material can be a controversial issue but one
that must be addressed in order to keep the nation's ports and harbors
open. An action plan developed by an interagency federal working group
is now being implemented for improving the management of dredged
materials to ensure timely and effective dredging while meeting
environmental goals (U.S. DOT, 1994). Eighteen specific recommendations
were identified for improving dredged material management, one of which
was to improve federal agency coordination. Consequently, a National
Dredging Team of federal agencies was created and Regional Dredging
Teams are being established to assist in coordination and issue
resolution. In addition, Local Planning Groups are being established
which will include all interested stakeholders. These groups will be
charged with developing long term dredged material management plans.
Finally, a national dredging policy has been established which
recognizes the need for timely and effective dredging to assure the
viability of the nation's ports and that the aquatic environment is a
critical asset which must be protected.

*Marine Debris Monitoring Program*

An interagency workgroup has developed a statistically-based national
marine debris monitoring protocol to quantify amounts of debris and
identify debris sources. Implementation of this protocol began in 1996,
under the National Marine Debris Monitoring Program.[^34] The use of a
statistical protocol will assist in enabling the assessment and
implementation of practices to prevent marine debris from entering
marine waters. This in turn will protect marine life from harm due to
marine debris and reduce costs borne by coastal communities to remove
marine debris from beaches. To date, this monitoring program has been
established on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, and similar programs have
been adopted in other areas of the world such as Ireland, countries in
the Caribbean, and Canada.

*Beaches Environmental Assessment, Closure and Health (BEACH) Program*

Swimming at the nation's coastal areas continues to be one of Americans'
top vacation choices, yet many beaches are not adequately monitored for
disease causing microorganisms. As a result, vacationers may be putting
themselves at risk of illness, which can ruin more than just their day
at the beach. Through the new BEACH Program, initiated in May 1997, EPA
in partnership with state, tribal, and local governments will be working
to keep beachgoers better informed of the water quality conditions where
they are swimming. The adoption of updated water quality standards for
bacteria, faster testing methods, enhanced monitoring and notification
programs, and new scientific research into disease causing
microorganisms under the BEACH Program, will help all beachgoers enjoy a
happier, healthier time at the ocean.

*Uniform National Discharge Standards*

EPA has established a successful partnership with the Department of
Defense to develop Uniform National Discharge Standards (UNDS) for
liquid discharges from armed forces vessels. Currently, vessel
discharges are regulated throughout the country under varying state
water quality standards. These regulations will enable the Armed Forces
to design vessels to one protective uniform standard, instead of
attempting to conform to a diverse array of state standards.

The aim of the UNDS regulations is three-fold. First, uniform,
environmentally protective standards will enhance the operational
flexibility of Armed Forces vessels. Second, the Navy has an extensive
research and development program aimed at constructing environmentally
sound ships for the 21st century; the UNDS development process will
stimulate innovative pollution prevention and control technologies that
will help the Navy achieve this goal. Third, most of the innovative
pollution prevention technologies developed for UNDS eventually will be
available for transfer to the private sector.

*Accidental Spills*

The Oil Pollution Act has led to increased post‑spill monitoring and
improved restoration of affected habitats by facilitating recovery of
damages by state and federal natural resource trustees from responsible
parties. Money recovered by trustee agencies goes directly to restoring
the resource or acquiring the equivalent resource on behalf of the
public. Improvements in understanding how and when to use physical,
chemical, and biological treatment of oil have helped to minimize the
environmental damage caused by large oil spills. Improved response time
to spills and technological advances have increased the opportunities
for response agencies to limit the injury to marine resources. However,
despite significantly reducing the risk, large‑scale releases of oil
continue to occur in the marine environment. There is an ongoing need to
support research and development, and the training required to respond
to oil spills. In addition, there is a recognized need to share
technical capabilities with the international community through
government‑to‑government requests or through the International Maritime
Organization.

*Research Programs*

While progress is being made in identifying solutions to the complex
problems confronting coastal waters, further progress requires
fundamental research in a number of areas to address threats such as
widespread over-enrichment and habitat degradation. Presently, research
programs concerned with coastal systems and related
processes/effects/controls are not guided by a comprehensive national
framework. Such a framework could assess scientific priorities related
to the most serious problems and optimize cooperation and coordination
among federal agencies, states, local communities, and the academic
community. Although significant advances in the scientific understanding
of coastal ecosystems has been generated from numerous studies of
specific systems during the past four decades (e.g., estuarine or
wetland systems), the resulting knowledge of the fundamental properties
and processes of this nation's coastal ecosystems suffers from the
fragmented regional nature of these studies. For example, the impacts of
air deposition on coastal and marine waters and the range of transport
are just beginning to be understood.

*Watershed Protection and Community-Based Protection Programs*

The problems facing the nation's coastal waters are scientifically
complex, are caused by a diverse array of factors, and involve resource
intensive solutions. These coastal problems cannot be addressed through
traditional regulatory approaches, although this is still a component of
the solution. The new paradigm for the 1990s and into the next century
is the need to look holistically at the entire resource being protected
and to examine all of the contributing factors to the resource's
degradation within the watershed. Linked with this comprehensive
examination is the critical need to involve the community in the
identification of problems and the implementation of solutions. One
example of this approach is the National Estuary Program which is
designed to protect and restore estuaries of national significance
through partnerships between government agencies, industry, and the
people who depend on those resources for their livelihood and quality of
life. The National Estuary Program was established because conventional
pollution control programs were not adequate for dealing with complex
estuary problems. Management conferences of the established NEPs do not
have regulatory authority, therefore, recommendations reached by
consensus must be implemented by existing authorities at the federal,
state, and local levels or through voluntary action. Another example is
the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Program, which developed a
comprehensive water quality protection plan through a comprehensive
examination of the entire "watershed, " and through communication with a
broad array of stakeholders.

*Clean Water Action Plan*

Federal agencies are coordinating efforts to develop a comprehensive
Clean Water Action Plan that builds on the successes of the Clean Water
Act over the past 25 years and addresses three major goals: (1) enhanced
protection from public health threats posed by water pollution; (2) more
effective control of polluted runoff; and (3) promotion of water quality
protection on a watershed basis (White House, 1997).

**CONCLUSION**

The ocean plays a critical role in sustaining the life of this planet.
Every activity, whether natural or anthropogenic, has far reaching
impacts on the world at large. For example, excessive emissions of
greenhouse gases may contribute to an increase the sea level, and cause
potential flooding or an increase in storm frequency; this flooding can
reduce wetland acreage and increase sediment and nutrient flows into the
Gulf of Mexico, causing adverse impacts on water quality and reducing
habitat for commercial fisheries. This in turn drives up the cost of
fish at local markets nationwide.

The environment and the economic health of marine and coastal waters are
linked at the individual, community, state, regional, national and
international levels. The interdependence of the economy and the
environment are widely recognized. The United States has moved beyond
viewing health, safety, and pollution control as additional costs of
doing business to an understanding of broader stewardship, recognizing
that economic and social prosperity would be useless if the coastal and
marine environments are compromised or destroyed in the process of
development (President's Council on Sustainable Development, 1996).

Much about the ocean, its processes, and the interrelationship between
land and sea is unknown. Many harvested marine resources depend upon a
healthy marine environment to exist. Continued research is needed so
that sound management decisions can be made when conflicts among users
of ocean resources arise. Although much progress has been made over the
past 30 years to enhance marine environmental quality and ocean
resources, much work remains. The challenge is to maintain and continue
to improve marine water quality as more people move to the coasts and
the pressures of urbanization increase. Through education, partnerships,
technological advances, research, and personal responsibility, marine
environmental quality should continue to improve, sustaining resources
for generations to come.

> "It does not matter where on Earth you live, everyone is utterly
> dependent on the existence of that lovely, living saltwater soup.
> There's plenty of water in the universe without life, but nowhere is
> there life without water. The living ocean drives planetary chemistry,
> governs climate and weather, and otherwise provides the cornerstone of
> the life-support system for all creatures on our planet, from deep-sea
> starfish to desert sagebrush. *That's why the ocean matters.* If the
> sea is sick, we'll feel it. If it dies, we die. Our future and the
> state of the oceans are one."
>
> *Sea Change A Message of the Oceans*
>
> Sylvia Earle, 1995.

**REFERENCES**

Boyce et al. 1992. *American Economic Review*, December. 1992.

CDC. 1997. Centers for Disease Control. Report on seafood contamination
from vessel sewage. November 1997.

Chambers, J.R. 1991. "Habitat degradation and fishery declines in the
U.S." *In Coastal Wetlands*, S. H. Bolton and O.T. Magoon, eds. American
Society of Civil Engineers, New York. 514 pp.

Coe, James, and Donald. B. Rogers. 1996. *Marine Debris, Sources,
Impacts, and Solutions.* Springer. 432p.

Constanza, R., R. d'Arge, R. deGroot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon,
K. Limberg, S. Naeem, R.V. O'Neill, J. Paruelo, R.G. Raskin, P. Sutton
and M. van den Belt. 1997. "The value of the world's ecosystem services
and natural capital." *Nature* 387:253-260.

Constanza, R., et al. 1997. *Science*. May

Earle, Sylvia A. 1995. *Sea Change A Message of the Oceans*. G.P.
Putman's Sons. 362p.

Hagler, B. 1993. Environmental Assessment by RCG, Inc.

Maiden, Alvin L. 1993. Final Report of Survey of Benthos: Delaware
Estuary: from the area of the C & D Canal through Philadelphia to
Trenton. Environmental Consulting Services. 191p.

Marine Mammal Commission. 1995. 1995 Annual Report to Congress.

NSTC. 1995. *Setting a New Course for U.S. Coastal Ocean Science.*
National Science and Technology Council. 111p.

NMFS. 1996. Our Living OceansThe Economic Status of U.S. Fisheries.
1996. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA National Marine Fisheries
Service Tech. Memo. NMFS F/SPO-22.

NOAA. 1987. *The National Coastal Pollutant Discharge Inventory.
Pollutant Discharge Concentrations for Industrial Point Sources*.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

NOAA. 1995. The National Shellfish Register of Classified Growing
Waters. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

NOAA. 1997. National Fish (and Shellfish) Consumption Advisory Database.
1997 edition. July 1997. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.

NOAA. 1997 (on-line). "Population: Distribution, Density and Growth".
Thomas J. Culliton. NOAA's State of the Coast Project. National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration.

Norse, Elliott. 1993. *Global Marine Biological Diversity*, Island
Press, 1993, Ed., Available from the Center for Marine Conservation in
Washington, DC.

NRDC. 1997. Testing the Waters. Natural Resources Defense Council. 1997.
Website: http:\\\\ www.nrdc.org

NRC. 1994. *Priorities for Coastal Ecosystem Science*. National Research
Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

NRC. 1997. *Striking a Balance Improving Stewardship of Marine Areas.*
National Research Council. 177p. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Ocean Planet Exhibit. 1995. Website:
http://seawifs.gsfc.nasa.gov/OCEAN\...L/peril_oil_pollution.html#sources

President's Council on Sustainable Development. 1996. Sustainable
America: A New Consensus for Prosperity, Opportunity, and a Healthy
Environment for the Future. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office.

"Saving our Bays, Sounds and the Great Lakes: the National Agenda."

Shipping Study. 1995. Shipping Study: The Role of Shipping & the
Introduction of Multiple Species to Coastal Waters of the U.S. other
than the Great Lakes and an Analysis of Control Options, April, 1995

Smith, Margurite and Sheryl Nance-Nach. September 1995. "The Best Places
to Live in America." *Money* 24:9.

TBNEP Scientist. 1997. Tampa Bay National Estuary Program. Contact Holly
Greening (813)893-2765.

Thibodeau, Francis R. and Bart D Ostro. 1981. "An Economic Analysis of
Wetland Protection," *Journal of Environmental Management*. 12:19-30
(data converted from \$1977).

Titus, James, et al. 1991. "Greenhouse Effects and Sea Level Rise:
Potential Loss of Land and the Cost of Holding Back the Sea." *Coastal
Management*. 19:171-204.

U.S. EPA. 1984. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Report to
Congress: Non-point Source Pollution in the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water. EPA841-R-84-100. 123p.

U.S. EPA. 1991. Ocean Dumping Report to Congress. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA503-9-91-009. 58p.

U.S. EPA. 1994a. Report to Congress on Inventory of 403(c) Ocean
Discharges. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

U.S. EPA. 1994b. 1992 Permit Compliance System (PCS). Washington, DC:
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Enforcement and
Compliance (OWEC).

U.S. EPA. 1994c. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Water
Quality Inventory.

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and
Watersheds. EPA503-9-94-006.

U.S. EPA. 1996. Liquid Assets: A Summertime Perspective on the
Importance of Clean Water to the Nation's Economy. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water. EPA800-R-96-002.

U.S. EPA. 1996b. Index of Watershed Indicators. The Index is available
in a hard copy report, and on the Internet at
http://www.epa.gov/surf/iwi. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds. October 1996.

U.S. EPA. 1997. Key Management Issues discussion papers: A Nationwide
Natural Resource Issue as reported by the Nation's Estuary Programs.
Environmental Protection Agency. August 1997.

U.S. EPA. 1997b. 1995 Toxic Release Inventory. Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics. EPA745-R-97-005. Environmental Protection Agency.
April 1997.

U.S. DOT. 1994. The Dredging Process in the United States: An Action
Plan for Improvement. Department of Transportation. December 1994.

Valigura, R.A., W.T. Luke, R.S. Artz and B.B. Hicks. 1996. Atmospheric
Nutrient Input to Coastal Areas- Reducing the Uncertainties, NOAA
Coastal Ocean Program Decision Analysis Series No. 9, June 1996.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Watzin, M.C. and J.G. Gosselink. 1992. The fragile fringe: coastal
wetlands of the Continental United States. Louisiana Sea Grant College
Program, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA; U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

White House. 1997. Clean Water Initiative. White House Press Release
October 18, 1997.

**DOMESTIC LEGAL REGIME**

**Contents**

-   Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (33 U.S.C. §§ 1901
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 7401 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Clean Vessel Act of 1992 (enacting 33 U.S.C. §1322 note)

-   Coastal Barrier Resources Act of 1982 (16 U.S.C. §§ 3501
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1451
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
    Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. §§ 9601 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. §§ 1251
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 661
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.)

-   National Coastal Monitoring Act (33 U.S.C. §§ 2801 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}.)

-   National Contaminated Sediment Assessment and Management Act (33
    U.S.C. § 1271)

-   National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 1431 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}.)

-   National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. §§ 4321
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act (16 U.S.C.
    §§ 4701 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Ocean Dumping Act (33 U.S.C. §§ 1401 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}., [inter]{.underline} [alia]{.underline})

-   Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. §§ 2701 [et]{.underline}
    [seq.]{.underline})

-   Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. §§ 401 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of
    1990 (16 U.S.C. § 1455b)

-   Shore Protection Act of 1988 (33 U.S.C. §§ 2601 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Title IV of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of
    1972 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1447a to 1447f)

-   Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1531 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C.
    §§ 1801 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Marine Mammal Protection Act (U.S.C. §§ 1361 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. §§ 1331
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Hazardous Materials Transportation acts (49 U.S.C. §§ 5101
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}., [inter]{.underline}
    [alia]{.underline})

-   Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 6901 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 2601 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}.)

-   Water Resources Development acts (33 U.S.C. §§ 2280 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}., [inter]{.underline} [alia]{.underline})

The legal regime covering this topic is based on a collection of
important federal statutory authorities. The following is a brief
description of some of those authorities relating to marine
environmental quality. The list is selective and is designed to
illustrate some major marine environmental quality acts. The list is not
meant to be comprehensive.

**[Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships]{.underline}**, as amended,
(APPS), 33 U.S.C. §§ 1901 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.

a\. Oil and Noxious Liquid Substances.

The Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships as originally enacted
implemented Protocols I and II, and Annexes I and II, of the
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships,
1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 (MARPOL). Annex I of MARPOL
establishes requirements to prevent the discharge of oil except in
accordance with specific conditions. Annex II provisions cover the
discharge of noxious liquid substances. (Annex III, which addresses the
prevention of pollution by harmful substances carried by sea in packaged
forms, or in freight containers, portable tanks or road and rail wagons,
is implemented by the hazardous material transportation acts, 49 U.S.C.
§§ 5101 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}., [inter]{.underline}
[alia]{.underline}.)

APPS applies to all U.S. flag ships anywhere in the world and to all
foreign flag vessels operating in the navigable waters of the United
States or while at a port or terminal under the jurisdiction of the
United States. The oil and noxious liquid substances provisions apply
only to seagoing ships. The regulations implementing Annex I and Annex
II of MARPOL limit discharges of oil and noxious substances, establish
report requirements for discharges, and establish specific requirements
for monitoring equipment and record keeping aboard vessels. In
particular, the regulations require that vessels covered by APPS and
MARPOL keep Oil Record Books in which all discharges, disposal and
transfers of oil are kept.

b\. Garbage and Plastics.

APPS was amended by the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control
Act of 1987, which implemented the provisions of Annex V of MARPOL
relating to garbage and plastics. Annex V of MARPOL and the regulations
implementing it apply to all vessels, whether seagoing or not,
regardless of flag on the navigable waters of the United States and in
the exclusive economic zone of the United States. It applies to U.S.
flag vessels wherever they are located.

Under the regulations implementing APPS, the discharge of plastics,
including synthetic ropes, fishing nets, plastic bags and biodegradable
plastics, into the water is prohibited. Discharge of floating dunnage,
lining and packing materials is prohibited in the navigable waters and
in areas offshore less than 25 nautical miles from the nearest land.
Food waste or paper, rags, glass, metal, bottles, crockery and similar
refuse cannot be discharges in the navigable waters or in waters
offshore inside 12 nautical miles from the nearest land. Finally, food
waste, paper, rags, glass, and similar refuse cannot be discharged in
the navigable waters or in waters offshore inside three nautical miles
from the nearest land. There are some exceptions for emergencies. Under
APPS, the definition of ship includes fixed or floating platforms. There
are separate garbage discharge provisions applicable to these units. For
these platforms, and for any ship within 500 meters of these platforms,
disposal of all types of garbage is prohibited. Additionally, all
manned, oceangoing U.S. flag vessels of 12.2 meters or more in length
engaged in commerce, and all manned fixed or floating platforms subject
to the jurisdiction of the United States, are required to keep records
of garbage discharges and disposals.

**[Clean Air Act]{.underline}**, as amended, (CAA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401
[et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.

The CAA is divided into six principal subchapters. Subchapter I
addresses air pollution from stationary sources and requirements for
states to develop plans to meet health-based standards. (Also,
subchapters IV-A, V and VI deal with specific stationary source
programs.) Part A of subchapter I contains the basic provisions to
control air pollution from stationary sources. Based on statutory
criteria, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to list
criteria pollutants and for each such pollutant establish primary and
secondary national ambient air quality standards (NAAQSs). Each state
(or EPA, if the state declines) must submit to EPA a state
implementation plan with individual emission limitations and procedures
to ensure timely attainment of the NAAQSs for each air quality region
within the state.

Part A also includes, among other things, key specialized stationary
source programs. For example, EPA must adopt emission standards for
categories of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) in accordance with a
specified schedule. (HAPs are listed in the statute.) Section 112(m) of
the CAA directs EPA, in cooperation with the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, to assess the extent of atmospheric
deposition of HAPs (and, in the discretion of EPA, other air pollutants)
to the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, Lake Champlain and coastal waters
(defined, for purposes of the subsection, as estuaries under the
National Estuary Program and National Estuarine Research Reserves). The
assessment program is to, among other things, establish a monitoring
network, investigate sources and deposition rates, evaluate any adverse
effects to public health or the environment, and assess the contribution
of such deposition to violations of water quality standards established
pursuant to the Clean Water Act. EPA is to submit biennial reports to
Congress on the matter and issue a determination as to whether the other
provisions of section 112 are adequate to prevent serious adverse
effects to public health and serious or widespread environmental effects
associated with HAP deposition. If EPA determines that the authorities
of section 112 are not adequate, the agency is directed to promulgate
such further emission standards or control measures under section 112 as
may be necessary and appropriate.

Part B of Subchapter I is repealed; Part C addresses the "prevention of
significant deterioration" program, designed to limit the deterioration
of air quality in regions with air cleaner than the minimum federal air
quality standards. Part D addresses plan requirements for non-attainment
areas.

Subchapter II addresses emission standards for moving sources.

Subchapter III addresses administration and enforcement. Amendments to
Subchapter III made in 1990 require EPA, following consultation with the
Department of the Interior and the U.S. Coast Guard, to establish
regulatory requirements to control air pollution from Outer Continental
Shelf sources (except in the Gulf of Mexico, over which the Department
of the Interior has jurisdiction).

Subchapter IV-A addresses acid deposition. This subchapter was added in
1990 to reduce emissions of pollutants, primarily sulfur dioxide and
nitrogen dioxide, leading to the formation of acid precipitation.

Subchapter V addresses permits, requiring each state to submit to EPA
for approval a permit program covering basically every pollution source
subject to the CAA. If a state fails to submit and implement an approved
program, EPA is to step in.

Subchapter VI addresses stratospheric ozone depletion.

The CAA also establishes a great waters program, which looks
specifically at the impacts of air deposition of nutrients and toxics in
coastal waters.

**[Clean Vessel Act of 1992]{.underline}**, subtitle F, §§ 5601 to 5608,
of Title V of Pub. L. 102-587, amending 16 U.S.C. §§ 777c and 777g and
enacting 33 U.S.C. §1322 note

The purpose of the Clean Vessel Act is to provide funds to states for
the construction, renovation, operation and maintenance of pumpout
stations and waste reception facilities. The Act requires the Department
of the Interior (DOI) to issue guidance on what constitutes adequate and
reasonably available pumpout facilities and waste reception facilities.
In order to receive a grant, coastal states are to conduct a survey to
determine the number and location of such stations and facilities and
the number of recreational vessels in its coastal waters with toilets
and develop and submit to the DOI for approval a plan for any
construction or renovation necessary to provide adequate and reasonably
available stations and facilities. Funding authorization for such grants
expired in FY 1997.

**[Coastal Barrier Resources Act of 1982]{.underline}**, as amended,
(CBRA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 3501 [et]{.underline} [seq.]{.underline}

The purpose of CBRA is to promote more appropriate use and conservation
of coastal barriers along the Atlantic, Gulf, and Great Lakes
coastlines. "Coastal barriers" are defined as bay barriers, barrier
islands, and other geological features composed of sediment that protect
landward aquatic habitats from direct wind and waves. They provide
essential habitats for wildlife and marine life, natural storm buffer
zones, and areas of scientific, recreational, historic, and
archeological significance. CBRA seeks to minimize the loss of human
life, wasteful federal expenditures on shoreline development, and damage
to wildlife, marine life, and other natural resources by restricting
future Federal financial assistance, establishing the coastal barrier
resources system (CBRS), and considering the means of achieving
long-term conservation of barrier resources.

**[Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972]{.underline}**, as amended,
(CZMA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1451 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.

The CZMA strives to preserve and protect coastal zone resources. Through
the CZMA, states are encouraged to develop coastal zone management
programs (CZMPs) that allow economic growth that is compatible with the
protection of natural resources, the reduction of coastal hazards, the
improvement of water quality, and sensible coastal development. The CZMA
provides financial and technical incentives for coastal states to manage
their coastal zones consistent with CZMA standards and goals.

State coastal zones include the coastal waters and adjacent shorelands
that extend inland to the extent necessary to control activities that
have a direct, significant impact on coastal waters. For federal
approval, a CZMP must: 1) identify the coastal zone boundaries; 2)
define the permissible land and water uses within the coastal zone that
have a direct and significant impact and identify the state\'s legal
authority to regulate these uses; 3) inventory and designate areas of
particular concern; 4) provide a planning process for energy facilities;
5) establish a planning process to control and decrease shoreline
erosion; and 6) facilitate effective coordination and consultation
between regional, state, and local agencies. The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration grants the requisite federal approvals for
CZMPs and oversees subsequent implementation of the programs.

A state with a federally approved CZMP is eligible for financial
assistance and gains a legal mechanism to control Federal permits and
activities that affect the state\'s coastal zone. Federal agency
activities that affect any land or water use or natural resource of the
coastal zone must be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with
the enforceable policies of the state CZMP. Federally licensed or
permitted activities that affect any land or water use or natural
resource of the coastal zone must be consistent with the enforceable
policies of the CZMP. The Secretary, however, can override a state\'s
determination of inconsistency if the Secretary finds that the federally
licensed or permitted activity is consistent with the objectives of the
CZMA or is otherwise necessary in the interest of national security.

The CZMA establishes the National Estuarine Research Reserve System
(NERR). States may seek Federal approval and designation of certain
areas as NERRs if the areas qualify as biogeographic and typological
representations of estuarine ecosystems and are suitable for long-term
research and conservation. Once an area is designated as a NERR, federal
financial assistance is available for acquisition of property and
management, research, and education related to the NERR.

See also section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments
of 1990.

**[Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
of 1980]{.underline}**, as amended, (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601
[et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.

Hazardous substances that are toxic to living organisms result from
industrial processes and are released into the environment either
intentionally or by accident. CERCLA is designed to respond to these
releases and protect public health and environmental quality including
natural resources.

CERCLA provides for the following two possible actions to protect the
public and the environment from the harmful effects of a hazardous
substance spill. Any combination of these two may be used at a
particular spill.

1\) ResponseCERCLA authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to clean up the spilled substance either at the expense of the
responsible party or with funds from the Superfund. CERCLA § 104(a)(1).
Example of steps include: dredging contaminated sediments, repairing
leaking containers, collecting rain water runoff and relocating
displaced residents.

2\) Damages for natural resource injuriesCERCLA authorizes the trustees
for natural resources, to seek damages from responsible parties to
restore or replace natural resources injured by exposure to hazardous
substances. CERCLA

§§ 107(a)(4)(C) and 107(f).

**[Federal Water Pollution Control Act]{.underline}**, as amended, also
called the **[Clean Water Act]{.underline}**, as amended (CWA), 33
U.S.C. §§ 1251 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.

The CWA establishes the basic scheme for restoring and maintaining the
chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation\'s waters.
The primary mechanism in the CWA regulating the discharge of pollutants
is the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), which is
administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Under the
NPDES program, a permit is required from EPA or an authorized state for
the discharge of any pollutant from a point source into the waters of
the United States. This includes discharges associated with oil and gas
development on federal leases beyond state waters. An NPDES permit for
certain stormwater discharges also is required. Permit discharge limits
are technology-based and, where technology-based limits would not
protect desired water quality for a particular water body in which the
discharge takes place, based on state water quality standards, which are
developed by the states using EPA guidance and are intended to protect
the designated uses of the water body. In the case of discharges to the
territorial sea or beyond, permits are also subject to the ocean
discharge criteria developed under section 403 of the act. Permits for
discharges into the territorial sea or internal waters may be issued by
states following approval of their permit program by EPA; in the absence
of an approved state permit program, and for discharges beyond the
territorial sea, EPA is the permit-issuing authority.

The CWA was amended in 1987 to include the current non-point source
(NPS) program. Under this program (section 319), states must develop
management programs to address NPS runoff, including the identification
of best management practices and measures. In addition, section 319
authorizes grants to assist the states in implementing their approved
management programs.

The CWA generally prohibits discharges of oil and hazardous substances
into coastal or ocean waters except where permitted under the Protocol
of 1978 Relating to the International Convention for the Prevention of
Pollution from Ships. The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) investigates and
responds to discharges of oil and hazardous substances into coastal or
ocean waters in accordance with the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The
USCG, with the cooperation of EPA, generally administers the NCP when
oil or a hazardous substance is discharged into coastal or ocean waters.
Regional contingency plans and area contingency plans are developed to
implement the NCP.

The CWA (section 312) requires vessels with installed toilet facilities
and operating on the navigable waters of the U.S. to contain operable
marine sanitation devices certified as meeting standards and regulations
promulgated under section 312. Section 312 also allows establishment of
zones where discharge of sewage from vessels is completely prohibited.
Amendments made to section 312 in 1996 will require, where appropriate,
the use of marine pollution control devices for operational, non-sewage,
discharges from vessels of the Armed Forces.

Publicly owned sewage treatment facilities must, at a minimum, meet
effluent reductions by secondary treatment, except for certain
facilities discharging to coastal waters for which EPA has approved a
waiver under section 301(h).

Section 320 of the CWA establishes the National Estuary Program, which
uses a consensus-based approach for protecting and restoring estuaries.
There are currently 28 estuaries in the program.

The Army Corps of Engineers (COE) implements the section 404 permit
program. Under section 404, a permit is required for the discharge of
dredged or fill materials into the waters of the U.S. that lie inside of
the baseline for the territorial seas and fill materials into the
territorial seas within three miles of shore. Although COE has the
permitting responsibility under the section 404 program except in
certain waters of two states (Michigan and New Jersey), which have
assumed the authority, EPA is authorized to review and comment on the
impact of proposed dredge and fill activities and to prohibit discharges
that would have an unacceptable impact on municipal water supplies,
shellfish beds and fishery areas, wildlife and recreational areas. EPA,
in consultation with COE, is charged with developing guidelines to be
used in evaluating discharges subject to section 404. ([See]{.underline}
40 C.F.R. Part 230.) The section 404 permit requirement is the
cornerstone for the current wetlands regulatory program. If COE or EPA
determines that a certain property is a jurisdictional wetlands, no one
can discharge dredged or fill materials into it without a section 404
permit. COE and EPA also have cooperative agreements with the Natural
Resources Conservation Service and rely on its determinations as to the
presence of wetlands on agricultural lands.

**[Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act]{.underline}**, 16 U.S.C. §§ 661
[et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.

The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requires that whenever a federal
agency proposes to impound, divert or otherwise control or modify a body
of water for any purpose (including issuing permits or licenses), the
agency must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
National Marine Fisheries Service and the relevant state wildlife
resource agency regarding prevention of loss or injury to wildlife
resources.

**[National Coastal Monitoring Act]{.underline},** as amended, 33 U.S.C.
§§ 2801 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.

The National Coastal Monitoring Act, also known as title V of the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, provides joint
authority for the Environmental Protection Agency and the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to establish a comprehensive
national program for consistent monitoring of the nation\'s coastal
ecosystems. The title provides that the program is to include, but is
not limited to: identification and analysis of the status of
environmental quality in the nation\'s coastal ecosystems (including,
but not limited to, assessment of ambient water quality, benthic
environmental quality, and health and quality of living resources);
identification of sources of environmental degradation affecting the
nation\'s coastal ecosystems; assessment of the impact of governmental
programs and management strategies and measures designed to abate or
prevent the environmental degradation of the nation\'s coastal
ecosystems; assessment of the accumulation of floatables along coastal
shorelines; analysis of short-term and long-term trends in the
environmental quality of the nation\'s coastal ecosystems; and the
development and implementation of intensive coastal water quality
monitoring programs (after designation of intensive coastal monitoring
areas).

**[National Contaminated Sediment Assessment and Management
Act]{.underline}**, 33 U.S.C. § 1271

Section 1271 of the National Contaminated Sediment Assessment and
Management Act requires the Environmental Protection Agency, in
consultation with NOAA and the Department of the Army, to conduct a
comprehensive national survey of data regarding sediment quality and a
continuing program to assess such quality.

[**National Environmental Policy Act of 1969** **(NEPA)**]{.underline},
42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.

NEPA requires, among other things, that for every major federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, the agency
prepare a detailed statement regarding:

\(i\) the environmental impact of the proposed action;

\(ii\) any adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided should
the proposal be implemented;

\(iii\) alternatives to the proposed action;

\(iv\) the relationship between local short-term uses of man\'s
environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term
productivity; and

\(v\) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources that
would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented.

This document is called an environmental impact statement (EIS). It is
in essence a detailed discussion of the environmental consequences of a
given proposed agency action, and it must be made available to the
agency decision-maker on the matter, the public, and other agencies.

Under the regulations implementing NEPA, an environmental document
called an environmental assessment (EA) is used to determine whether a
federal action rises to the level of a "major federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment," thus
triggering the requirement of preparation of an EIS. Based on the EA, if
an action does not rise to that level, a finding of no significant
impact (FONSI) is made.

**[National Marine Sanctuaries Act]{.underline}**, as amended, (also
known as Title III of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act of 1972, as amended), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1431 [et]{.underline}
[seq]{.underline}.

The National Marine Sanctuaries Act, as amended, authorizes the
Department of Commerce to designate as national marine sanctuaries areas
of the marine environment of special national significance due to their
conservation, recreational, ecological, historical, research,
educational or aesthetic qualities. The Act provides authority for
comprehensive and coordinated conservation and management of these
marine areas. It provides for civil penalties for violation of the act
or regulations or permits issued under it and for civil suits to recover
damages if sanctuary resources are injured or destroyed.

**[Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control
Act]{.underline}**, as amended, 16 U.S.C. §§ 4701 [et]{.underline}
[seq]{.underline}.

The Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act, as
amended, directs the Secretary of the department that houses the U.S.
Coast Guard (USCG) (currently the Department of Transportation) to issue
regulations to prevent the introduction and spread of aquatic nuisance
species into the Great Lakes through ballast water. These regulations
are to be issued in consultation with the Aquatic Nuisance Task Force,
composed, [inter]{.underline} [alia]{.underline}, of the Under Secretary
of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, the Director of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency, the Commandant of the USCG and the Assistant Secretary of Army
(Civil Works). Civil and criminal penalties are available for regulatory
violations.

The Act also requires the task force to implement a prevention,
monitoring and control program for aquatic nuisance species in U.S.
waters. States can develop comprehensive aquatic nuisance species
management plans, which can be implemented with federal grants and
financial assistance if the plans are approved by the task force or the
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works).

The act further requires the Departments of Defense and Transportation
to implement ballast water management programs for seagoing Department
of Defense and USCG vessels to minimize risk of introduction of
non-indigenous species from releases of ballast water. The act also
requires the Departments of the Interior and Commerce to conduct a
ballast water management demonstration program to demonstrate preventive
technologies and practices.

**[Ocean Dumping Act]{.underline}**, as amended, (ODA) (Titles I and II
of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as
amended), 33 U.S.C. §§ 1401 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.

The ODA provides the basic authority for the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the Corps of Engineers (COE) to regulate ocean dumping
(Title I) and for the Department of Commerce (DOC), through the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, to carry out research on the
effects on ocean systems of ocean dumping and other man-induced changes
(Title II).

Title I of the ODA: 1) prohibits any person, without a permit, from
transporting from the U.S. any material for the purpose of dumping it
into ocean waters (defined to mean those waters of the open seas lying
seaward of the baseline from which the territorial sea is measured), and
2) in the case of a vessel or aircraft registered in the U.S. or flying
the U.S. flag or in the case of a U.S. agency, prohibits any person,
without a permit, from transporting from any location any material for
the purpose of dumping it into ocean waters. Title I also prohibits any
person, without a permit, from dumping any material transported from a
location outside the U.S. into the territorial sea, or the contiguous
zone extending 12 nautical miles seaward from the baseline of the
territorial sea to the extent that it may affect the territorial sea or
the territory of the U.S. EPA issues permits regulating the ocean
dumping of all material except dredged material, which is permitted by
COE. COE permits are subject to EPA review and concurrence. The specific
environmental criteria used to evaluate permit applications are
developed by EPA; in the case of dredged material, this is done in
coordination with COE.

In developing criteria for the evaluation of permit applications, the
statute provides that the following must be considered: 1) the need for
the proposed dumping; 2) the effect of the dumping on human health and
welfare, fisheries resources, marine ecosystems, and shorelines; 3) the
persistence and permanence of the effects of the dumping; 4) the effect
of dumping particular volumes and concentrations; 5) appropriate
locations and methods of disposal or recycling, including land-based
alternatives; and 6) the effect on alternate uses of the oceans.

The ocean dumping of sewage sludge and industrial waste is prohibited.
In addition, radiological, chemical or biological warfare agents,
high-level radioactive waste, or medical waste may not be dumped. States
may generally adopt and enforce requirements for ocean dumping
activities that occur in their jurisdictional waters.

Title II of the ODA requires the DOC, in coordination with the
department in which the U.S. Coast Guard is operating and EPA, to
conduct a comprehensive and continuing program of monitoring and
research on the effects of dumping of material into ocean or other
coastal waters or into the Great Lakes. The title further requires the
DOC, in close consultation with other appropriate departments, to
conduct a comprehensive and continuing program of research into the
possible long-range effects of pollution, overfishing and man-induced
changes of ocean ecosystems. The title specifies that the program must
include continuing monitoring programs to assess the health of the
marine environment, including but not limited to the monitoring of
bottom oxygen concentration contaminant levels in biota, sediments and
the water column, diseases in fish and shellfish, and changes in types
and abundance of indicator species.

**[Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA)]{.underline}**, 33 U.S.C. §§ 2701
[et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}., [inter]{.underline}
[alia]{.underline}

OPA amends section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (the
Clean Water Act or CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1321 [et]{.underline}
[seq]{.underline}., to clarify federal response authority, increase
penalties for spills, establish U.S. Coast Guard response organizations,
require tank vessel and facility response plans, and provide for
contingency planning in designated areas. OPA, however, does not preempt
states\' rights to impose additional liability or other requirements
with respect to the discharge of oil within a state or to any removal
activities in connection with such a discharge.

OPA is a comprehensive statute designed to expand oil spill prevention,
preparedness, and response capabilities of the federal government and
industry. OPA establishes a new liability regime for oil pollution
incidents in the aquatic environment and provides the resources
necessary for the removal of discharged oil. OPA consolidates several
existing oil spill response funds into the Oil Spill Liability Trust
Fund (Trust Fund), resulting in a \$1-billion fund to be used to respond
to, and provide compensation for damages caused by, discharges of oil.
In addition, OPA provides new requirements of response planning by both
government and industry and establishes new construction, manning, and
licensing requirements for tank vessels. OPA also increases penalties
for regulatory noncompliance and broadens the response and enforcement
authorities of the federal government.

Title I of OPA contains liability provisions governing oil spills
modeled after the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601 [et]{.underline}
[seq]{.underline}., and section 311 of the CWA. Specifically, section
1002(a) of OPA provides that the responsible party for a vessel or
facility from which oil is discharged, or which poses a substantial
threat of a discharge, is liable for:

\- certain specified damages resulting from the discharged oil; and

\- removal costs incurred in a manner consistent with the National
Contingency Plan.

The scope of damages for which there may be liability under section 1002
of OPA includes:

\- natural resource damages, including the reasonable costs of assessing
these damages;

\- loss of subsistence use of natural resources;

\- real or personal property damages;

\- net loss of tax and other revenues;

\- loss of profits or earning capacity; and

\- net cost of additional public services provided during or after
removal actions.

**[Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899]{.underline}**, as amended, (RHA), 33
U.S.C. §§ 401 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.

The RHA prohibits the unauthorized obstruction of navigable waters of
the United States. The construction of any structure or the excavation
or fill in the navigable waters of the United States is prohibited
without a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. The Act also
prohibits the discharge of refuse and other substances into navigable
waters, but has been largely superseded by the Clean Water Act.

**[Section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of
1990]{.underline},** 16 U.S.C. § 1455b

Section 6217 of Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990
required the 29 coastal states with federally approved coastal zone
management plans in 1990 to develop and submit coastal non-point source
(NPS) pollution control programs for approval by the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). The submissions were to lay out a state program to restore
and protect coastal waters by providing for the implementation of
management measures developed by EPA. The statute gave states 30 months
from the date of publication of the final EPA guidance to submit a
program to NOAA and EPA for approval. The statute required that
penalties be levied if a state failed to submit an approvable program
within the allotted time. There has been no need to assess penalties as
yet, as all the states have submitted programs found to be conditionally
approvable.

**[Shore Protection Act of 1988]{.underline}**, 33 U.S.C. §§ 2601
[et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.

Under the Shore Protection Act of 1988, municipal or commercial waste
cannot be transported by a vessel in coastal waters without a permit
from the Department of Transportation. Municipal or commercial waste
includes solid waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, but excludes waste generated by the vessel during normal
operations, construction debris, dredged or fill material, and sewage
sludge. The loading, securing and off loading of these wastes must be
conducted in a manner to minimize any waste deposited into coastal
waters.

**[Title IV of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of
1972]{.underline}**, as amended, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1447a to 1447f

The purpose of Title IV of the Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended, is to establish regional research
programs, under effective Federal oversight, to: 1) set priorities for
regional marine and coastal research in support of efforts to safeguard
the water quality and ecosystem health of each region; and 2) carry out
such research through grants and improved coordination. The regions are:
the Gulf of Maine, greater New York bight, mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic,
Gulf of Mexico, California, North Pacific, Alaska and insular Pacific.

Specifically, a regional marine research board is to be established for
each region, consisting of eleven members \-- three appointed by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), two by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and six by governors of states
located within the region. Each board is to develop and submit to NOAA
and EPA for approval a comprehensive marine research plan for the
region, to be updated at least every four years. Each board is also
to: 1) provide a forum for coordinating research among research
institutions and agencies, 2) provide for review and comment on its
research plan by affected users and interests, 3) ensure that the
highest quality of research projects will be conducted to carry out the
plan; and 4) prepare, for transmittal to Congress by NOAA and EPA, a
periodic report on the marine environmental research issues and
activities within the region.

Each marine research plan is to include: 1) an overview of the
environmental quality conditions in the coastal and marine waters of the
region and expected trends in these conditions; 2) a comprehensive
inventory and description of all marine research related to water
quality and ecosystem health expected to be conducted during the
four-year term of the plan; 3) a statement and explanation of the marine
research needs and priorities applicable to the marine and coastal
waters of the region over the upcoming ten-year period with emphasis on
the upcoming three-to-five-year period; 4) an assessment of how the plan
will incorporate existing marine, coastal and estuarine research and
management in the region; and 5) a general description of marine
research and monitoring objectives and timetables for achievement
through the funding of projects under this title so as to meet the
priorities specified in the plan in accordance with 3) above.

Each board may annually submit a grant application to NOAA to fund
projects aimed at achieving the research priorities set forth in the
relevant research plan. The title provides that the boards shall cease
to exist on October 1, 1999, unless extended by Congress. Authorization
of appropriations for the title expired at the end of fiscal year 1996.

**Other Statutes Relating to Marine Environmental Quality:**

-   Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.: See Ocean Living Resources Year
    of the Ocean Discussion Paper.

-   Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, as
    amended, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1801 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.: See
    Ocean Living Resources Year of the Ocean Discussion Paper.

-   Marine Mammal Protection Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1361
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.: See Ocean Living Resources Year
    of the Ocean Discussion Paper.

-   Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, as amended, 43 U.S.C. §§ 1331
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}.: See Ocean Energy and Mineral
    Resources Year of the Ocean Discussion Paper.

-   Hazardous Materials Transportation acts, as amended, 49 U.S.C. §§
    5101 [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}., [inter]{.underline}
    [alia]{.underline}, which, [inter]{.underline} [alia]{.underline},
    implement Annex III of MARPOL (prevention of pollution by harmful
    substances carried by sea in packaged forms, or in freight
    containers, portable tanks or road and rail wagons).

-   Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, also known as the Resources
    Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 6901 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}., which governs treatment, storage and disposal of
    solid and hazardous waste. The act also has as a goal the reduction
    of generation of hazardous waste.

-   Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2601
    [et]{.underline} [seq]{.underline}., which is the first
    comprehensive legislation governing toxic substances, including
    providing the Federal government authority to prevent unreasonable
    risk of injury to health or the environment, particularly imminent
    hazards.

-   Water Resources Development acts, 33 U.S.C. §§ 2280 [et]{.underline}
    [seq]{.underline}., [inter]{.underline} [alia]{.underline}, which
    are the Corps of Engineers authorization acts. Among other things,
    mitigation of damages to fish and wildlife resources resulting from
    water resources projects is addressed.

**LIST OF ACRONYMS**

CWA Clean Water Act

DOT Department of Transportation

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

MMC Marine Mammal Commission

NEP National Estuary Program

NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NRC National Research Council

UNDS Uniform National Discharge Standards

U.S.C. United States Code

[^1]: This broad definition is required because of the extensive use of
    estuaries, wetlands, and other coastal areas by humans, marine
    organisms, and wildlife dependent upon coastal ecosystems. In
    addition, evaluation of the interconnections between the land,
    particularly coastal watersheds, and the sea is critical to
    understanding the value of the resources and services provided by
    the ocean, and the potential impacts of land-based activities, often
    far from the ocean, upon ocean waters.

[^2]: For more information, see the Ocean Energy and Minerals Resources
    and the Marine Transportation Year of the Ocean Discussion Papers.

[^3]: Examples of activities that can impact marine environmental
    quality include conversion of open land and forests for commercial
    or residential development, agriculture, forestry, construction,
    marinas, commercial fishing, shell-fishing, hydro-modification
    activities (e.g., dams, dredging), and offshore drilling.

[^4]: By-catch waste is defined here as marine life caught during
    commercial operations which are not the targeted species. Often
    these organisms are discarded.

[^5]: For more information see the Ocean Energy and Mineral Resources
    Year of the Ocean Discussion Paper.

[^6]: Dead zones are areas within a water body where the oxygen level in
    the water is so low that plants, fish, and other marine organisms
    are unable to survive.

[^7]: This estimate excludes electric utilities and offshore oil and gas
    effluents.

[^8]: Acute levels of toxins are defined as lethal, while chronic levels
    are sublethal and result in disease or disruptions to physiological
    or reproductive processes.

[^9]: According to 1991 customs data, ballast water exchanges from
    foreign vessels exceeds 58 million gallons per day (Shipping Study,
    1995).

[^10]: Eutrophication is the increase in biological productivity of an
    aquatic system as a result of natural or artificial inputs of
    nutrients.

[^11]: The Centers for Disease Control have linked an outbreak of
    illnesses during the summer of 1997 to waterborne pathogens
    originating from vessel discharges of sewage in shell fishing areas
    in the Gulf of Mexico (CDC, 1997).

[^12]: Garbage includes but is not limited to: glass, metal, paper,
    plastics, and food wastes.

[^13]: While several other nations dump industrial wastes and sewage
    sludge into ocean waters, the U.S. stopped industrial waste dumping
    in 1988 and ended such sewage sludge disposal practices in 1992.

[^14]: It should be noted that an estimated 5-10 percent of all
    sediments dredged in the United States are not suitable for open
    water ocean disposal (NRC, 1997). Alternative disposal is sought for
    these sediments.

[^15]: This includes dryfall and wetfall to both the bay and the Tampa
    Bay Watershed.

[^16]: The Charles River Basin in Massachusetts determined that the loss
    of 8,442 acres of wetlands would increase flood damage costs by
    approximately \$17 million (Thibodeau, 1981).

[^17]: Growth overfishing refers to harvesting that results in a
    reduction in the average size of fish or shellfish landed, and often
    involves taking fish prior to their reaching sufficient size for
    reproduction.

[^18]: In some regions of the world, cyanide and dynamite are used in
    the harvesting of fish. This method kills not only the target
    species but all marine life in the area.

[^19]: For more information on oceans and climate change issues such as
    relative sea-level change, tectonic subsidence, sediment budgets and
    longshore currents, see the Climate and Weather Year of the Ocean
    Discussion Paper.

[^20]: Marine and coastal areas include a wide variety of systems, such
    as: wetlands, tidal marshes, sea grass beds, kelp forests, mangrove
    swamps, coral reefs and deep-sea vents. They provide refuge, food,
    and nursery areas for shellfish, fish, birds, worms, other wildlife,
    and a diversity of plant and bacterial life.

[^21]: For, example, beaches can be closed to swimming when there is a
    risk of catching waterborne diseases from raw sewage contamination.

[^22]: This information is from Table 5-1 in the 1997 Toxic Release
    Inventory. It has been corrected for additions and subtractions of
    chemicals to the list and for changes in the number of industries
    monitored, but does not include ammonia, hydrochloric acid, or
    sulfuric acid.

[^23]: This includes such actions as elimination of spills and leaks
    during normal operations, process changes, and chemical
    substitutions.

[^24]: For example, approximately 31,600 crab pots were lost in Bristol
    Bay, Alaska, between 1990 and 1991; if each trap caught and killed
    one legal-sized crab per year, the annual catch would be 205,400
    pounds.

[^25]: ppt equals parts per thousand

[^26]: For more information, see the Year of the Ocean Living Resources
    Discussion Paper.

[^27]: For example, total finfish landings have declined from 2.9
    million pounds in 1980 to less than 340,000 pounds in 1989, mainly
    as a result of "growth overfishing", a reduction in the size of fish
    caught and stock depletion. Of the species found in the Indian River
    Lagoon basin in Florida, 75 are listed as rare, threatened,
    endangered, or species of special concern by state or federal
    agencies. In Corpus Christi, Texas, the numbers of shrimp landed in
    the bay fishery have increased more than 300 percent since 1972. In
    1996, 1,871 bay shrimp boat license holders plus 1,806 bait shrimp
    license holders trawled in these bays harvesting an already depleted
    stock.

[^28]: In Sarasota Bay, Florida, the alteration and degradation of
    juvenile fish habitats, seagrass beds, and wetlands are the most
    likely causes of the 50 percent decline in commercial landings of
    sea trout over the past 30 years. Over the past 50 years, bird
    populations in the Tampa Bay area have dramatically decreased due to
    water quality impacts on their natural habitats (U. S. EPA, 1997).

[^29]: This section on Legislation/Regulation is only a sample of the
    most important legislation and regulations related to coastal and
    marine waters.

[^30]: See the Living Resources Year of the Ocean Discussion Paper.

[^31]: DOD contributions to coastal science are not included in this
    figure.

[^32]: These funding levels do not cover marine environmental quality at
    the basic research level; those funding levels are included in
    Chemistry by DDR&E.

[^33]: Coastal communities in New Jersey, for example, spend hundreds of
    thousands of dollars a year to remove marine debris from their
    beaches.

[^34]: Implemented by the Center for Marine Conservation under a grant
    from the U.S. EPA.