INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE 

DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & 

RECOMMENDATIONS
 

Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee
 

August 2008
 

Congressional Report requirement as stated in Marine Debris Research, Prevention and Reduction Act, 33 U.S.C. 1954. 
 

 

 

 

 

This Congressional Report was developed by the Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee and produced by the 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of Commerce to fulfill requirements of the 

Marine Debris Research, Prevention and Reduction Act, 33 U.S.C. 1954. 

August 2008 

For citation purposes, please use: For information or copies, please contact: 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2008 NOAA Marine Debris Program 

Interagency Report on Marine Debris Sources, Impacts, Office of Response and Restoration 

Strategies & Recommendations. Silver Spring, MD. 62 pp National Ocean Service 

1305 East West Highway 

Silver Spring, MD 20910 

301-713-2989 

www.marinedebris.noaa.gov 
 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE 

DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES 

& RECOMMENDATIONS 

Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee 

2008 
 4 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Report of the 

INTERAGENCY MARINE DEBRIS COORDINATING COMMITTEE 

Co-Chair, Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
 

Co-Chair, Environmental Protection Agency
 

Department of Defense, Navy
 

Department of Homeland Security, Coast Guard
 

Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
 

Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service
 

Department of Justice, Environment and Natural Resources Division
 

Department of State, Office of Marine Conservation 

Marine Mammal Commission
 

United States Army Corps of Engineers
 

Coastal America (Ex Officio)
	
5 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS 

Holly Bamford, Ph.D.
 

IMDCC Co-Chair
 

Department of Commerce
 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
 

National Ocean Service
 

Sarah Morison
 

Department of Commerce
 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
 

David Major
 

Department of Homeland Security
 

Coast Guard
 

Andrew Gude
 

Department of the Interior
 

Fish and Wildlife Service
 

Holly Koehler
 

Department of State
 

Office of Marine Conservation 

Mary Boatman (Alternate)
 

Department of the Interior
 

Minerals Management Service
 

Mike Simpkins
 

Marine Mammal Commission
 

Megan Forbes
 

IMDCC Executive Secretary
 

Department of Commerce
 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

 Administration
 

Molly Madden
 

IMDCC Co-Chair
 

Environmental Protection Agency
 

Office of Water 

Oceans and Coastal Protection Division 

Mike Pletke
 

Department of Defense
 

Navy
 

Mary Sohlberg (Alternate)
 

Department of Homeland Security
 

Coast Guard
 

Richard Clingan
 

Department of the Interior
 

Minerals Management Service
 

Bradford McLane
 

Department of Justice
 

Environment and Natural Resources Division
 

Katherine Weiler
 

Environmental Protection Agency
 

Office of Water 

Patricia Mutschler
 

United States Army Corps of Engineers
 

William Nuckols
 

Coastal America, Ex Officio
	

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 6 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Acknowledgements 

The Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee would like to acknowledge the many people in 

addition to the IMDCC Committee members who provided outstanding input, support, editing, and review 

of this report throughout the entire process. We would first like to recognize Neal Parry, Interagency Report 

Coordinator, for his outstanding efforts in researching, drafting, and organizing the report, as well as working 

with and consolidating the many agency comments throughout this process. His role in the development and 

completion of this report was invaluable. We would also like to thank the many others who were involved in 

the development of the report, including Liz Shaner, David Redford, Leonard Pace, Libby Etrie, Courtney 

Arthur, and Bret Wolfe. A thank you also goes to editors Mary Swift and Kris McElwee for their review of 

the final drafts of the document and Carey Morishige for her assistance in document layout. 

We would also like to acknowledge the IMDCC executive committee, the Subcommittee on Integrated 

Management of Ocean Resources, for their review and approval of this document and the Joint Subcommittee 

on Ocean Science and Technology for their review. Finally, we would like to recognize the Interagency 

Committee on Ocean Science and Resource Management Integration members for their final review and 

approval of the report before final submission to the Office of Management and Budget and Congress. 
 

 

 

 

7 

List of Tables

 Page 

Table 1 Significant sources of marine debris ............................................................................... 18
	

Table 2 Federal authorities by agency that 

(1) specifically mention marine debris in the authority, 

(2) address sources and items that could become marine debris (e.g., plastic, 

fishing gear, garbage), and 

(3) address entities that may be impacted by marine debris. 

An “X” in the last column represents legislation that has any regulatory 

component. Appendix I includes detailed information on these 

authorities............................................................................................................................. 30 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 8 

List of Acronyms
 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

APPS Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships 

BHA Boston Harbor Association 

CSO Combined Sewer Overflow 

CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act 

DOJ U.S. Department of Justice 

ENRD Environment and Natural Resources 

Division 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency 

ESA Endangered Species Act 

EU European Union 

FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

ICC International Coastal Cleanup 

IMDCC Interagency Marine Debris 

Coordinating Committee 

IMO International Maritime Organization 

IOC Intergovernmental Oceanographic 

Commission 

IRT Innovative Readiness Training 

JSOST Joint Subcommittee on Ocean 

Science and Technology 

MARPOL International Convention for 

Prevention of Pollution from Ships 

MPPRCA Marine Plastics Pollution Research 

and Control Act 

MDRPRA Marine Debris Research, 

Prevention, and Reduction Act 

MMC Marine Mammal Commission 

MMS Minerals Management Service 

NAS National Academy of Sciences 

NMDMP National Marine Debris 

Monitoring Program 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9 

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

NPS National Park Service 

NSC Northwest Straits Commission 

NWHI Northwestern Hawaiian Islands 

OCS Outer Continental Shelf 

PSA Public Service Announcement 

RCRA Resource Conservation and 

RINA Registro Italiano Navale Group 

SCAT Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment 

Technique 

UNEP United Nations Environment 

Programme 

UNESCO United Nations Educational, 

Scientific, and Cultural Organization 

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

USCG U.S. Coast Guard 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 10INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS
 

 

 

 

11 

Table of Contents 

1.0 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 12
 

2.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 14
 

2.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................................ 14
 

2.2 History of Federal Marine Debris Coordination ...................................................................... 15
 

2.3 Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee................................................................. 16
 

2.4 Charge to the IMDCC...................................................................................................................... 16
 

3.0 Sources of Marine Debris................................................................................................................ 18
 

3.1 Land-based Sources .......................................................................................................................... 19
 

3.2 Ocean-based Sources........................................................................................................................ 20
 

4.0 Ecological, Human, and Economic Impacts ................................................................................ 23
 

4.1 Ecological Impacts............................................................................................................................ 23
 

4.2 Human Impacts................................................................................................................................. 25
 

4.3 Economic Impacts............................................................................................................................ 25
 

5.0 Current Actions ................................................................................................................................. 27
 

5.1 Education and Outreach .................................................................................................................. 28
 

5.2 Legislation / Regulation / Policy.................................................................................................... 30
 

5.3 Incentive Programs ........................................................................................................................... 35
 

5.4 Enforcement ...................................................................................................................................... 37
 

5.5 Cleanups.............................................................................................................................................. 39
 

5.6 Research.............................................................................................................................................. 40
 

5.7 Technology Development................................................................................................................ 42
 

5.8 Fostering Coordination .................................................................................................................... 43
 

6.0 Recommendations............................................................................................................................. 45
 

6.1 Education & Outreach ..................................................................................................................... 46
 

6.2 Legislation / Regulation / Policy.................................................................................................... 46
 

6.3 Incentive Programs ........................................................................................................................... 46
 

6.4 Enforcement ...................................................................................................................................... 47
 

6.5 Cleanups.............................................................................................................................................. 47
 

6.6 Research.............................................................................................................................................. 47
 

6.7 Technology Development................................................................................................................ 48
 

6.8 Fostering Coordination .................................................................................................................... 48
 

APPENDIX I : Detailed Description of Authorities as Related to Marine Debris............................. 49
 

Literature Cited................................................................................................................................................ 59
 

Photography Credits and Captions............................................................................................................... 63
 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 

 

 12 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Section 1.0 Executive Summary 

For the purposes of this document, the Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee (IMDCC) 

considered persistent solid man-made debris from both land-based and ocean-based sources and its adverse 

impacts on the marine environment and navigation safety.1 

Marine debris can degrade ocean habitats, endanger marine and coastal wildlife, interfere with navigation, 

esult in economic losses, and threaten human health and safety. Sources of marine debris are wide ranging. 

Marine debris can originate from ocean-based sources, such as a ship that loses its cargo, and land-based 

sources, such as material that runs off of the landscape into rivers and oceans. The nature, type, and impacts, 

however, are similar regardless of where the debris originates. Research indicates a broad range of ecological, 

human health and safety, and economic impacts. 

There are many challenges to addressing the issue of marine debris. The vast number of possible sources both 

on land and at sea, as well as the potential for debris to travel far from its origin and persist in the ocean for 

years complicates prevention efforts. Successful prevention also depends on changing attitudes and behavior 

which can be difficult if the public and relevant stakeholders do not understand the links between their actions 

and marine debris. Despite existing regional and species specific studies, gaps in knowledge remain and limit 

a complete characterization of the marine debris issue and its ecological, human, and economic impacts. 

 The United States Coast Guard (USCG) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have been tasked through 

the Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act (33 U.S.C. 1954) with jointly developing, in consultation with the IMDCC, a definition of marine debris for the purposes of the aforementioned Act. USCG and NOAA have not finalized a definition of marine debris as of the 

completion of this document in June 2008. Any description of marine debris in this document is intended only to assist readers of this document to better understand the issue of marine debris. It is not intended that any description of marine debris in this document be proposed as a 

legal definition. 

1
 

 

13 

Existing legislation, policies, and regulations address marine debris both directly and indirectly; however, the 

number of agencies and mixture of federal, state, and local authorities requires extensive coordination to be 

effective. 

In recognition of the complexity of the marine debris issue, the IMDCC was reconvened as recommended by 

the Administration’s 2004 Ocean Action Plan. The IMDCC was formally established by statute through the 

Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act in order to coordinate a comprehensive program of 

marine debris research and activities among federal agencies. The IMDCC is charged to submit to Congress 

a report that identifies: sources of marine debris; the ecological and economic impact of marine debris; 

alternatives for reducing, mitigating, preventing, and controlling the harmful affects of marine debris; the 

social and economic costs and benefits of such alternatives; and recommendations to reduce marine debris 

both domestically and internationally. 

This report fulfills the charge given to the IMDCC. The report describes sources and impacts of marine 

debris, as well as the challenges associated with their characterization. Also discussed are the alternatives, 

or current activities, to address marine debris that have occurred over the past 20 years, including activities 

recommended in the report of the 1988 Interagency Task Force on Persistent Marine Debris. Finally, this 

report contains 25 recommendations intended to guide the Federal government’s strategies on marine debris 

(See Section 6, “Recommendations,” on page 45). 

The recommendations presented in this report are designed to be broad in scope, with the intention that 

federal agencies work collaboratively through the IMDCC to develop more detailed priorities and action plans 

to implement these recommendations. In addition to having a federal-level focus, these recommendations 

also attempt to address the different agency mandates and policies associated with issues related to marine 

debris reduction and prevention. While the recommendations are general in nature, individual agencies are 

expected to lead coordinated efforts and work together to enhance and develop existing capacities so that 

individual agency efforts can work to address collective needs, threats, and challenges. Federal agencies are 

further encouraged to enhance their efforts to provide technical and educational materials to state, local, tribal 

and non-governmental entities. 

A comprehensive approach to the issue of marine debris is organized around four main themes: 

(1) prevention; (2) response to debris already in environment; (3) research and development; and (4) crosstheme (i.e., coordination). The IMDCC’s recommendations are organized by the following subsets of these 

themes: 

1. Marine debris prevention through education and outreach, legislation/regulation/policy, and incentive 

 programs. 

2.	 Response to debris already in the environment through enforcement and cleanups. 

3. Research and technology development to assess next steps, address gaps, reduce or prevent material 

 from entering marine system, and mitigate impacts. 

4.	 Cross-theme efforts that foster coordination among federal agencies and other government and 

non-governmental partners to share information, coordinate efforts, and implement actions to prevent, 

 reduce, or mitigate impacts of marine debris. 

The IMDCC and its member agencies are committed to a collaborative approach to marine debris and to 

the implementation of these recommendations. The IMDCC intends to develop an action plan for the 

implementation of these recommendations. The IMDCC will report on progress with these recommendations 

as part of the IMDCC’s regular progress report to Congress. 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 14 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Section 2.0 Introduction 

2.1 Overview of Issue 

Marine debris can injure and kill marine wildlife, degrade ocean habitats, interfere with navigation safety, 

cause economic loss to shipping, fishing, and coastal communities, and pose a threat to human health. These 

adverse impacts have been documented all over the world. From fishing nets to medical equipment to food 

packaging, many man-made persistent objects play key roles in supporting the economy and protecting human 

health. However, when these same objects are abandoned or even disposed of improperly, they may enter the 

marine environment and become marine debris. As consumption and use of these objects increases globally, 

the challenge of containing and properly managing them becomes even greater, regardless of whether these 

materials enter the marine environment directly from activities on the water or indirectly from activities on 

land. 

The problem of marine debris can be dealt with effectively only by ensuring a comprehensive approach that 

is local in scale and global in scope, directed at source prevention, and establishes an educated community 

that can be empowered to action. While it is important to address marine debris already present in the 

environment, such as through beach cleanups or preventing entanglements of marine wildlife, this is not the 

only type of strategy and action that should be taken. An effective response must be comprehensive and 

include research, prevention, and reduction. Ultimately, any successful solution requires a mobilization of 

public and stakeholder actions resulting in a change in attitudes and practices that will prevent marine debris 

at its many sources. Developing such public concern and behavior change requires educating the public and 

specific audiences about the causes, impacts, and both the global scope and local relevance of marine debris, as 

well as providing the tools necessary to reduce and prevent debris at its source. In this report, the Interagency 

Marine Debris Coordinating Committee recommends a comprehensive strategy to address marine debris that 

relies on a coordinated approach among existing and new partners to support actions at many levels. This 

strategy is an integral step towards solving the marine debris problem. 
 

 

15 

2.2 History of Federal Marine Debris

 Coordination
 

Since the early 1970s, numerous federal programs 

have been created to address various aspects 

of the marine debris problem. However, these 

programs have been scattered among agencies 

that have markedly different mandates and 

authorities. 

Coordination among these 

numerous programs has always 

been challenging. 

It was not until the mid-1980s that the Federal 

government attempted to address the marine 

debris problem holistically. Events such as the 

extensive marine debris wash-ups along New Jersey 

and New York beaches in 1976 and 1987 spurred 

the Administration and Congressional leaders in 

1987 to recognize the need to assess the problems 

caused by persistent marine debris. 

♦ The White House Domestic Policy Council 

formed an “Interagency Task Force on Persistent 

Marine Debris” in 1987 to develop a report 

that assessed the need for research, reduction 

measures, and alternative actions to address 

the problem of plastic marine pollution. That 

report was completed in 1988 and included 

23 recommendations focused on federal 

leadership, education programs, regulations, 

research, beach cleanups, and monitoring. 

♦ In 1987, the Marine Plastics Pollution 

Research and Control Act (MPPRCA) was 

passed to amend the Act to Prevent Pollution 

from Ships (APPS), which implements the 

International Convention for the Prevention 

of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) Annex V. 

♦ MARPOL Annex V sets forth regulations 

for the prevention of pollution by garbage from 

ships, and among other things, prohibits discharge 

of all plastics by ships into the sea. In addition, 

the MPPRCA authorized the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), the National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

and the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) to conduct 

programs that engaged volunteer groups to help 

monitor, report, cleanup, and prevent ocean and 

shoreline plastic pollution. 

Since the release of the 1988 Task Force Report, 

federal agencies have implemented some of the 

report’s recommendations for additional research, 

monitoring, and removal, as well as to foster 

stewardship of the oceans. 

♦ The EPA created its Marine Debris Program, 

which supports projects to investigate and address 

sources and transport of marine debris, such as a 

plastic pellet containment study. The EPA also 

initiated the Combined Sewer Overflows Studies 

Program, the Harbor Studies Program, the 

Storm Drain Sentries Program, and the National 

Marine Debris Monitoring Program, which was 

administered by Ocean Conservancy through a 

grant from EPA to determine marine debris status 

and trends on beaches in the United States. 

♦ NOAA created the Marine Entanglement 

Research Program to support projects evaluating 

adverse impacts of persistent marine debris on 

the marine environment, as well as to develop 

educational materials for local coastal communities. 

NOAA also organized four international marine 

debris conferences between 1984 and 2000 and 

led the interagency derelict net cleanup from 

the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands starting in 

1996. USCG prepared regulations to implement 

MARPOL Annex V in 1989. 

♦ Many other federal agencies established 

marine debris reduction and educational activities 

and projects to help address the marine debris 

problem. Although individual agencies created 

and continued programs to address marine debris, 

the Task Force did not maintain formal ongoing 

coordinating meetings. However, informal 

interagency workgroups did meet periodically to 

discuss domestic and international activities for 

marine debris. 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 16 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

2.3 Interagency Marine Debris 

Coordinating Committee
 

In 2004, the topic of marine debris came to 

the forefront again with the release of the U.S. 

Commission on Ocean Policy Report: An Ocean 

Blueprint for the 21st Century. An entire chapter was 

dedicated to discussing the impacts of marine 

debris on the environment. 

The Commission recommended that the Federal 

government take action to address the problem 

by recreating an interagency committee to unite 

all appropriate federal agencies on this issue. 

In response to the Report, the Administration 

released the 2004 Ocean Action Plan and 

reestablished the Task Force, which was renamed 

the Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating 

Committee (IMDCC). The IMDCC’s mandate 

was soon codified with the passage of the Marine 

Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act 

of 2006 (Act), which amended the Coordination 

section of the MPPRCA. 

♦ The role of the IMDCC is to consider and 

address any abandoned or uncontrolled solid 

material that is introduced into the ocean 

and coastal environment or the Great Lakes 

and poses a potential adverse impact to the 

environment, human health, safety, economy, or 

other resources. 

♦ The objective of the IMDCC is to coordinate 

a comprehensive program of marine debris 

research, prevention, reduction and removal 

activities among federal agencies, in cooperation 

and coordination with non-governmental 

organizations, industries, universities, research 

institutions, states, tribal governments, and other 

nations, as appropriate. 

♦ The Act also established a reporting requirement 

for the IMDCC that includes submitting this 

report to Congress on marine debris impacts 

and strategies, followed by progress reports to 

Congress every two years on the implementation 

status of the strategies and recommendations 

presented herein. 

2.4 Charge to the IMDCC 

The IMDCC was charged by the 

Act to address in this report: 

(i) the sources of marine debris; 

(ii) the ecological and economic impact of

 marine debris; 

(iii) alternatives for reducing, mitigating, 

 preventing, and controlling the 

 harmful effects of marine debris; 

(iv) the social and economic costs and benefits 

 of such alternatives; and 

(v) recommendations to reduce marine debris 

 both domestically and internationally. 

In response to the first (i) and second (ii) charges, 

the IMDCC reviewed a number of recently 

published studies of sources of marine debris 

and impacts of marine debris on organisms, 

ecosystems, and the economy. 

♦ The IMDCC also discussed how changes 

in society and the use of so-called disposable 

materials can affect the amount of marine debris 

produced by various sources. For example, recent 

increases in theuse of persistent synthetic materials 

such as plastics demonstrate the importance of 

monitoring and controlling the full “life cycle” of 

these products, including production, distribution, 

use, disposal, and handling of the materials 

throughout all phases. 

♦ In many ways, marine debris sources are a 

societal problem that often reflects a lack of 

knowledge regarding the impacts of marine debris 

and appropriate disposal practices, a general lack 

of interest in following the appropriate practices, 

or an inability to follow appropriate practices if 

infrastructure is missing or costs are too high. 

Both lack of knowledge and lack of interest can 

be addressed by ensuring that all members of 

our society are educated regarding the correct 

practices as well as the potential impacts of 

inappropriate disposal. 

The IMDCC reviewed existing programs and 

projects currently being conducted by or in part 

by the Federal government with partners 
 

 

17 

to determine alternatives for addressing marine 

debris (iii) and the benefits of such alternatives 

(iv). The IMDCC recognized that a clear 

explanation of the economic costs and benefits 

of current alternatives to reduce, prevent, and 

remove marine debris from our environment 

is still lacking. This type of analysis is difficult 

to conduct and requires cost-benefit data not 

currently available. 

♦ Types of data that would be needed include 

overall socio-economic impact, the value of 

resources being impacted, the cost of removal 

technologies and restoration requirements, and the 

total amount of marine debris in the environment. 

Also missing is an understanding of the location, 

source, and impacts of submerged debris. 

♦ A number of efforts have been conducted 

for beach and shoreline monitoring. However, 

limited research has been completed to determine 

how the presence of debris on the seafloor 

impacts submerged habitats, corals, seagrass, fish 

migration, and other living marine resources. 

Likewise, few data exist to quantify the amounts, 

types, and impacts of debris on the surface and in 

the water column in the open ocean. 

♦ Gaps in marine debris research, monitoring, 

costs, and benefits need to be filled in order to 

conduct a proper cost and benefit analysis. 

Overall, the recommendations (v) laid out in the 

report are general in nature to encompass the 

breadth and responsibilities of each agency and 

department dealing with the marine debris issue. 

Many recommendations also seek to fill the gaps 

and data need identified in other parts of this 

report. 

Recommendations are focused 

around four themes encompassing 

several topic areas: 

(1) marine debris prevention through education 

and outreach, legislation/regulation/policy, and 

incentive programs; 

(2) response to debris already in the environment 

through enforcement and cleanups; 

(3) research and technology development to 

assess next steps, address gaps, reduce or prevent 

material from entering the marine system, and 

mitigate impacts; and 

(4) cross-theme efforts that foster coordination 

These recommendations can be best implemented 

through a focus on sustained, collaborative 

efforts in which agencies work in conjunction 

with each other and with non-federal entities to 

address common goals. The IMDCC intends to 

develop an action plan that will prioritize and 

track implementation of these recommendations 

toensure a coordinated effort toward a cleaner, 

debris-free environment. 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 18 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Section 3.0 Sources of Marine Debris
 People and their actions, whether intentional or accidental, are the source of most marine debris. For this 

reason, it is important to identify and target the specific locations or types of activities that generate and 

convey materials that ultimately become marine debris. Marine debris originates from two sources: actions 

that take place on land (land-based sources)and those that take place in the marine environment (ocean-based 

sources) (Table 1). 

Table 1. Significant sources of marine debris. 

Land-based Sources of Marine Debris Ocean-based Sources of Marine Debris 

Municipal Landfills 

Transport of litter and waste (on land or waterways) 

Storm water discharge 

Industrial and manufacturing 

Litter and waste generated in coastal and inland zones from 

improper waste management 

Natural events 

Merchant shipping, ferries and cruise liners 

Fishing vessels 

Public vessels 

Private vessels 

Offshore oil and gas platforms, and drilling rigs 

Aquaculture installations 

Natural events 
 

19 

The National Marine Debris Monitoring 

Program (NMDMP), which monitored debris 

on beaches in the United States, found that landbased sources are responsible for approximately 

49 percent of marine debris items along beaches, 

while ocean-based sources are responsible 

for approximately 18 percent of debris. The 

remaining shoreline debris, about 33 percent, 

was identified as general source debris because 

it could come from either land- or ocean-based 

sources (Sheavly 2007). Plastic bottles and bags 

constituted the vast majority of general source 

items found in the NMDMP shoreline study. 

♦ It is important to note that these results 

do not consider floating and submerged marine 

debris in both the nearshore and open-ocean 

environments, and the relative importance of 

various sources of this unaccounted debris may 

differ from that suggested by debris found on 

beaches. 

♦ Because of ocean transport mechanisms, it 

can be very difficult to determine the source of 

marine debris, which is one reason for this general 

source category of marine debris. 

An example of general source debris cycling in the 

open ocean is a location called the North Pacific 

Subtropical Gyre (Gyre). The Gyre is made of 

the North Pacific, California, North Equatorial, 

and Kuroshio currents, along with atmospheric 

winds. Persistent and pervasive marine debris 

from both land-and ocean-based sources around 

the Pacific Rim aggregates in the currents of the 

Gyre. This debris can remain in the Gyre for 

many years, becoming what is known as legacy 

debris. It is difficult to determine the age, origin 

and source of legacy debris. At certain times 

of the year, convergence zones in the Gyre can 

move southward, depositing debris onto parts of 

the Hawaiian Islands. 

Regardless of whether debris 

originates on land or at sea, the 

nature, type, and impacts of 

debris are similar and persistent. 

3.1 Land-based Sources 

Land-based sources of marine debris may 

originate from coastal areas or farther inland. 

Waterfront areas, including beaches, piers, harbors, 

riverbanks, marinas, and docks, are common landbased sources of marine debris. 

Debris also can originate from the compounded 

effects of material from many diffuse sources that 

is carried by precipitation runoff into waterways 

and, ultimately, to the ocean. 

Debris can be the result of improper trash disposal, 

improper handling of materials, or inadequate 

reception facilities for waste. Litter, regardless of 

whether it is purposely or accidentally discarded or 

lost, has the potential to become marine debris. 

Fishing gear, monofilament line, and other 

fishing-related items may also be introduced into 

the marine environment from waterfront areas 

and fishing piers (Yoshikawa and Asoh 2004). 

Rising populations in coastal 

areas have increased the potential 

for marine debris introduction. 

Improperly disposed trash can wash into streams, 

combined sewer systems, and separate storm 

sewer systems (e.g., storm drains) and eventually 

be carried into coastal and ocean waters. 

♦ Combined sewer systems are older sewer 

systems that combine sewage and stormwater 

runoff into the same infrastructure. These 

systems can become overwhelmed during periods 

of heavy rain, and everything in the pipes, 

including street litter and sewage-related items 

(e.g., condoms, tampons, syringes), is diverted 

away from the treatment plant to the nearest 

receiving waters (EPA 1993a). 

♦ Municipal separate storm sewer systems 

(MS4s) also have the potential to transport 

materials that may become marine debris as 

these systems often do little more than convey 

precipitation runoff down the storm drain and 

into the nearest surface water, bringing with the 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS 
 

 

 

 20 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

runoff all the remnants of human activity from 

around that storm drain. 

The growth in coastal population has also required 

expansion of waste repositories such as landfills 

and transfer stations. 

♦ Overused and poorly managed landfill and 

transfer stations often can result in increased 

marine debris. Trash that is improperly covered 

during transport or deposition into landfills can 

be carried by wind into the marine environment 

or into other aquatic systems that transport the 

trash to the marine environment. 

Industrial facilities are another source of 

land-based marine debris. By-products from 

production, particularly persistent synthetic 

materials such as plastics, may become marine 

debris when dropped, washed, or blown away 

during transport to or from the factory or during 

production. 

♦ While this was particularly true in the past 

during transport of pre-production plastic resin 

pellets, implementation of best management 

practices by industry has helped reduce this 

source of marine debris (ACC and SPI 2007). 

EPA worked with the plastics industry to assess 

the release of these pellets to determine how they 

entered the environment (EPA 1993b). 

♦ An effective example of industry best 

management practices is Operation Clean Sweep, 

developed by the Society of the Plastics Industries, 

Inc., in partnership with EPA. 

Natural events such as tornadoes, floods, 

tsunamis, and hurricanes can all create large 

amounts of debris washed from near-shore areas 

that may end up in the marine environment. The 

high winds, waves, and storm surges produced by 

these natural events cause land-based items to be 

introduced into the aquatic environment. 

♦ After the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, 

smothering by debris was a principal cause of 

damage to coral (Wilkinson et al. 2006). 

♦ The amount of marine debris resulting from 

the hurricane season of 2005 along the Gulf of 

Mexico coast provides a strong example of the 

potential source contribution that a natural event 

can have on the marine environment. In the Sabine 

National Wildlife Refuge in Louisiana alone, an 

estimated nine million cubic yards of debris were 

spread over 1,770 acres of marsh (FWS 2006). 

To address submerged debris in traditional fishing 

grounds, Congressional funding was appropriated 

to NOAA to survey with side scan sonar over 

700 square nautical miles from September 2006 

to September 2007. In the nearshore waters of 

Alabama, Mississippi, and portions of eastern 

Louisiana, nearly 5,000 objects were located, with 

some areas having a density of up to 200 objects 

per square nautical mile (NOAA 2007a). 
 

 

 

 

 

21 

3.2 Ocean-based Sources 

In the ocean, vessels of various sorts and structures 

are all potential vectors for the introduction 

of debris into the marine environment. 

Even with strict adherence to environmental 

regulations, marine debris can still enter the 

marine environment from vessels at sea through 

accidental loss, especially in inclement weather. 

All vessels have the potential to adversely impact 

the aquatic environment by improperly disposing 

of their trash at sea. The type, magnitude, and 

impacts of vessel-generated marine debris 

differ according to vessel size, purpose, and 

their respective enforcement and compliance 

regimes. However, all vessels under United States 

jurisdiction are subject to the discharge regulations 

established under the Act to Prevent Pollution 

from Ships (APPS), which include the prohibition 

of disposal of plastic at all distances from shore; 

a prohibition against the disposal of any type of 

garbage within three miles of shore; and 12- and 

25-mile minimum distance requirements for the 

disposal of other types of garbage. 

♦ Fishing vessels may introduce marine debris 

into the ocean environment when items such as 

nets, traps, monofilament, lines, light sticks, and 

floats are lost or discarded at sea. 

Derelict fishing gear either lost 

at sea or improperly disposed of 

by fishing vessels is of particular 

concern. 

♦ In the Pacific, this type of debris can get 

trapped in the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre 

and accumulate along convergence zones that 

can transport debris to the remote islands of the 

Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument. 

From 1996 to 2007, 570 metric tons of derelict 

nets were removed from the Monument, which 

are known to act as a repository for marine debris 

(NOAA 2007b). These nets can come from all areas 

of the Pacific Rim, get caught in the convergence 

zone, potentially stay in the convergence zone 

for many years, and end up in the Monument. 

♦ Other related items, such as light sticks, buoys, 

and rope particularly constructed of plastic also 

demonstratepersistenceinthemarineenvironment. 

In a 16-year study (Morishige et al. 2007) at French 

Frigate Shoals Tern Island (Papahānaumokuākea 

Marine National Monument), 23 percent of the 

total items collected in this study originated from 

the maritime industry. 

Large, heavily regulated vessels such as cruise 

ships and cargo carriers are a potential vector for 

the introduction of marine debris. Due to their 

size, these ships are subject to Port State Control 

compliance inspections and garbage record book 

requirements, in addition to all regulations placed 

on smaller vessels. Each industry’s potential 

contribution to marine debris is influenced by the 

ship’s purpose (the carriage of crew or cargo). 

♦ Cruise ships carry significantly more passengers 

and crew than cargo carriers; therefore, cruise 

ships are more likely to create a larger proportion 

of domestic waste. 

♦ Cargo ships may lose cargo or cargo containers 

at sea as a result of severe weather or poor 

loading practices. One study indicates that global 

cargo losses during 2006 totaled nearly 2,500 

containers (American Shipper 2007). Geography 

is another key factor; some cruise ships operate 

in environmentally sensitive habitats such as 

Caribbean islands or the Inside Passage of 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 22 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Alaska where marine debris may have a more 

significant impact (Butt 2007). 

♦ Both the cargo and cruise industries have 

initiated programs to minimize the impact of their 

activities. In order to eliminate (to the maximum 

extent possible) the disposal of MARPOL 

Annex V wastes at sea, some cruise ships have 

voluntarily developed advanced programs for 

waste minimization, waste reuse and recycling, 

and waste stream management. Best practices to 

minimize container loss overboard are due to be 

published in 2008 and distributed to containership 

owners and operators (Lloyd’s List 2008). 

Recreational vessels are also a 

potential source of ocean-based 

marine debris. 

Vessels over 26 feet are subject to a MARPOL 

placarding requirement, and vessels over 40 

feet must maintain a garbage management plan. 

Recreational fishing gear and domestic waste are 

likely components of marine debris contribution 

from these vessel types. 

Oil and gas platforms are another ocean-based 

source of marine debris. This can be the result 

of improper disposal of wastes or equipment, or 

loss during heavy weather. 

♦ The Minerals Management Service (MMS) has 

regulations, policies, and programs in place to 

reduce, eliminate, and remove debris emanating 

from facilities and operations under the agency’s 

jurisdiction. However, heavy weather events 

demonstrate that government oversight and 

intervention, as well as industry best practices, 

cannot completely prevent the introduction of 

debris from regulated facilities. 

♦ In 2005, the offshore oil and gas industry lost 

117 platforms on the Outer Continental Shelf, 

and dozens more were significantly damaged as a 

result of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. 

An additional source of marine debris is derelict 

or abandoned vessels and off-shore materials and 

equipment (e.g., research buoys, cables, aquaculture 

infrastructure). In high-wave conditions from 

surf, severe storms events or tsunamis, these 

vessels or structures can be broken up and strewn 

across the ocean floor, adversely affecting habitat 

and navigational safety. In pristine coral reef 

habitats, the iron enrichment from metal debris 

has been demonstrated to lead to algal blooms 

and to upset the ecological balance of the reef 

(Green et al. 1997). 
 

23 

Section 4.0 Ecological, Human, 

and Economic Impacts 

Regardless of origin, debris entering the aquatic environment can have significant impacts on ecology, human 

health and safety, and the economy. The impact of marine debris varies in scope and intensity depending on 

the type of debris (e.g., plastic bags, miscellaneous plastics, derelict fishing gear, or shipping containers) and 

its location (e.g., floating in shipping lanes or sitting on sensitive habitats). 

4.1 Ecological Impacts 

Marine debris can cause adverse impacts on aquatic ecosystems, such as coral reefs, wetlands, fish habitats, 

beaches, and migratory species breeding grounds and pathways. Marine debris can impact species directly, 

such as through entanglement or smothering of species, or indirectly, such as through changes to habitat. 

Ecological impacts can also vary depending on the type of marine debris. 

Derelict fishing gear can cause numerous impacts on habitats and fisheries. For example, derelict gear can 

damage coral reefs by smothering, breaking apart, or abrading corals (Chiappone et al. 2005; Donohue et al. 

2001; Asoh et al. 2004). Derelict gear can also result in “ghost fishing,” which occurs when marine species 

become trapped in lost or abandoned pots or nets that continue to catch prey without being retrieved by 

fishermen to harvest (Matsuoka et al. 2005; Pawson 2003; Bullimore et al. 2001). Ghost fishing does not 

discriminate: local and migratory species including those protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

may be impacted (Seitz and Poulakis 2006). 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 24 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Marine debris of many types can entangle marine 

species by encircling or ensnaring the animals. 

The entanglement can occur accidentally or when 

an animal is attracted to the debris as partof 

normal behavior or out of curiosity. Animals may 

incur lacerations or other wounds from debris, 

potentially leading to infection and debilitation 

(Page et al. 2004). 

♦ When marine species become entangled within 

debris, their mobility is limited. Constricted 

movement may inhibit the animal’s ability 

to collect food or breathe and can lead to 

starvation, suffocation, exhaustion, and increased 

predation. 

It is typical for marine animals such as the 

endangered Hawaiian monk seal to investigate 

foreign items in their local marine habitat, which 

can lead to injury, drowning, or suffocation 

in nets, line (including monofilament), straps, 

or plastic items (Boland and Donohue 2003; 

Henderson 2001). 

♦ In the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands between 

1982 and 2006, 268 entanglements of the 

endangered monk seal were documented (NOAA 

2007c). 

This figure likely underestimates actual 

entanglement rates because it only reflects those 

seals that became entangled but were still mobile 

enough to reach shore at a time of year when 

humans were able to find them. 

Although large debris items, such as derelict 

fishing gear, can have severe and highly visible 

impacts, smaller debris items such as bottle caps, 

lighters, and plastic pieces are also hazardous to 

wildlife. 

♦ Seabirds are known to ingest small debris items 

along with their food (Dickerman and Goelet 

1987; Harrison et al. 1983). Northern fulmars 

and other marine birds which ingest plastic 

debris do not have the capacity to regurgitate the 

indigestible material (Mallory et 

al. 2006). 

♦ Ingestion of marine debris can lead to starvation 

or malnutrition because the ingested items may 

collect in the animal’s stomach and lessen the 

desire to feed. In addition, ingestion of sharp 

objects can damage the mouth, digestive tract, 

or stomach lining and cause loss of nutrition, 

infection, starvation, and even death (Derraik 

2002; Redford et al. 1997). Ingested items also 

can block air passages and cause suffocation. 

♦ Ingestion can occur accidentally, but often 

animals will feed on marine debris because it 

resembles their food (Gramentz 1988). For 

example, sea turtles have been known to ingest 

plastic bags in the marine environment instead of 

their target prey, jellyfish (Carr 1987). In a study 

of green sea turtles, 23 of 38 animals were shown 

to have ingested anthropogenic debris (Bugoni et 

al. 2001). 

An indirect impact of marine debris on shoreline 

habitats occurs on beaches as a result of debris 

reduction and removal efforts. Mechanical beach 

raking, accomplished with a tractor or human 

labor, is used to remove debris from the shoreline 

and can help to remove floatable material from 

beaches and marine shorelines. However, beach 

raking can also be harmful to aquatic vegetation, 

nesting birds, sea turtles, and other types of 

aquatic life. 

♦ A study by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

(FWS) on the effect of mechanical beach cleaning 

on threatened piping plovers found that such 

practices harmed nesting birds by destroying 

potential nesting sites, crushing nests 
 

25 

and chicks, and removing the natural wrack-line 

feeding habitat. To minimize this impact, FWS 

(1996) suggested that beach raking should not be 

conducted during nesting season. 

Storm events, such as hurricanes and tsunamis, 

can mobilize legacy marine debris, altering the 

species impacted as the location or depth of 

the debris is changed. In addition, as the 

material is mobilized, habitats can be impacted 

by the kinetic energy of the debris. Marine 

debris can also indirectly damage the environment 

if it causes vessel accidents that 

spill oil or hazardous materials. 

4.2 Human Impacts 

Marine debris can also endanger 

human health and safety. 

Certain types of marine debris such as fishing 

nets and lines can impact vessel movement and 

navigation by wrapping around boat propellers, 

disabling the vessel, and ultimately endangering 

human lives. In 1993, derelict fishing gear 

contributed to the sinking of the Korean passenger 

ferry M/V Seo-Hae, which resulted in the deaths 

of numerous passengers (Cho 2006). 

Recreational boaters have also been subject to 

stranding due to engine fouling from plastic bags 

blocking intake valves or derelict fishing nets 

or lines becoming entangled around propellers. 

Vessels may directly strike floating or submerged 

marine debris, which may lead to human injury or 

severe damage to the vessel. 

Human impacts from marine debris also may 

occur from direct contact with sharp debris 

objects, such as broken glass, rusted metal, or 

medical debris, on beaches or the ocean floor. 

♦ In the late 1980s, beaches in New York and 

New Jersey were closed to protect the public from 

medical waste, including syringes and bandages 

from hospitals that washed ashore. 

Humans also may be directly impacted by marine 

debris when, for example, scuba divers become 

entangled in lost or abandoned fishing line and 

nets. While this is a rare occurrence, entangled 

divers can be seriously injured or killed. 

4.3 Economic Impacts 

Marine debris can have substantial ecomonic 

impacts.Althoughlackof comprehensiveeconomic 

assessments limits the ability to estimate the overall 

economic impact of marine debris, evidence of 

economic losses for specific cases is available. 

♦ Direct economic losses from marine debris can 

be measured in different ways, including analysis 

of impacts on tourism, losses in catch revenues, 

loss of fishing gear, damaged vessels, and human 

injuries. 

Marine debris can be detrimental 

to the tourism industry by creating 

unsightly, dangerous beaches. 

Beach closures, often a direct result of marine 

debris, can have particularly serious economic 

ramifications in coastal areas dependent upon 

tourism (Oigman-Pszczol and Creed 2007). In 

addition, the costs associated with cleanups and 

proper disposal of debris can be significant. 

♦ Cleanup-related costs may include the cost of 

restoring the habitat impacted by marine debris, 

beach cleanup costs, the costs to clean piers, 

harbors, marinas, docks, and other waterfront 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 26 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

areas, and the costs associated with at-sea 

cleanups. 

Environmental contamination from debris in the 

marine environment, both onshore and in local 

fish habitats, can also have significant economic 

impacts. 

♦ Loss in tourism was estimated to be between 

$706 million and $2,977 million (in 2008 US$) as 

a result of medical debris wash-ups in New Jersey 

in 1988 (Ofiara and Brown 1999). 

Commercial fishery revenues may 

be adversely impacted due to 

bycatch of target fish or shellfish in 

lost nets or other types of “ghost” 

fishing gear. 

♦ An estimated 200,000 pounds of Dungeness 

crab are killed in derelict crab pots every year in 

Puget Sound, an amount worth approximately 

$335,000 (June 2007). Within the European 

Union, it is estimated that 1,500 demersal cod/ 

turbot gillnets are lost each year in the Baltic 

Sea fishery, removing anywhere from 0.01 to 3.2 

percent of the commercial harvest (Brown et al. 

2005). Such bycatch not only reduces the standing 

stock of fish or shellfish available to a fishery but 

also can reduce reproductive capacity and thereby 

the long-term viability of the stock. 

Vessels adversely impacted by marine debris may 

incur economic costs. As described earlier, marine 

debris has the potential to disable vessels through 

collisions, or by wrapping around propellers or 

blocking intakes. 

In 1992 Japan estimated their fishing industry 

spent US$4.1 billion in boat repairs resulting from 

damage caused by marine debris (Proceedings of 

the International Conference, 2000). 

In addition to property damage, 

marine debris can cause lost 

opportunity costs. 

♦ For example, fishermen can lose opportunities 

to fish if they are forced to stop operations as a 

result of entanglement or vessel damage incurred 

from marine debris. This opportunity cost can 

have a range of economic impacts on communities 

dependent on fishing revenues. Additionally, it 

can impose costs to locate, mark and remove 

debris that could pose a hazard to navigation. 
27 

Section 5.0 Current Actions 

The Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act mandates the Interagency Marine Debris 

Coordinating Committee to report on alternatives or current actions intended to reduce, mitigate, prevent, 

and control the harmful effects of marine debris. Actions described in this section come from those in the 

1988 Interagency Task Force on Persistent Marine Debris Report (DOC et al., 1988), as well as other actions 

that have been undertaken by a variety of IMDCC agencies, state coastal zone managers, non-governmental 

organizations, and local entities over the past 20 years. 

These actions are existing measures that are intended to address marine debris in the environment. Many of 

these actions have been in place for years, while others are relatively new concepts recently put into practice. 

As a means of organization, actions were classified into four themes: 

1. marine debris prevention; 

2. response to debris already in the marine environment; 

3. research and development of new methods to understand debris impacts and movement; and 

4. cross-theme efforts to foster coordination. 

Theme 1: Prevention 

Preventing the introduction of debris into the marine environment remains the most elusive component 

of mitigating the impacts of marine debris. Activities intended to enhance and promote the prevention of 

marine debris include robust education and outreach campaigns, development and application of appropriate 

policies, and creation of appropriate incentive programs. 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 

 

 28 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Education and Outreach 

Education and outreach 

campaigns have been successful 

in influencing the human behavior 

that creates marine debris. 

These campaigns remain necessary given the 

influence of people’s attitudes and practices on 

the accumulation of marine debris. 

The target audience for education programs 

spans the entire spectrum from schoolchildren to 

seniors and people engaged in activities ranging 

from leisure to professional pursuits. 

Outreach campaigns, particularly those developed 

in conjunction with the media and those that are 

sustained for a longer period of time, have been 

effective in highlighting both successes and areas 

where additional work is necessary. 

Education and outreach campaigns about marine 

debris have been developed both by and for 

multiple stakeholders. The majority have focused 

on a particular target audience. 

Different perceptions of marine debris by user 

groups ranging from producers to transporters 

to product users necessitate targeted campaigns. 

In addition, national and international campaigns 

provide broad information on marine debris as 

a global issue and address the need to prevent 

further pollution and remove debris already in the 

coastal and marine environment. 

A variety of mechanisms, both specific and general, 

have been employed. These included signage, 

national programs, public service announcements 

(PSAs), and television commercials. 

♦ An example of a national outreach and 

education message is the six-pack ring campaign 

that increased public awareness in the late 1970s 

when environmentalists began calling attention 

to the problem of marine debris. The emphasis 

on six-pack rings is an example of eco-activism 

exemplified in John Javna’s 1990 book Fifty Simple 

Things You Can Do to Save the Earth, in which cutting 

up six-pack rings was cited as Simple Thing #2. 

This book, along with extensive media attention, 

brought about national awareness regarding the 

need to cut six-pack rings to prevent wildlife 

entanglements if the rings enter the marine 

environment. 

Another effective national media campaign was 

the partnership between Keep America Beautiful 

and the Ad Council to dramatize how litter and 

other forms of pollution hurt the environment 

and how individuals have the responsibility to 

help protect the environment. 

♦ This national media campaign began on 

Earth Day, 1971, when a PSA featuring Native 

American actor Chief Iron Eyes Cody and the 

tagline, “People start pollution. People can stop 

it,” aired for the first time. During the height of 

the campaign, Keep America Beautiful reported 

receiving more than 2,000 letters a month from 

people wanting to join their local team. By the 

end of the campaign in 1983, Keep America 

Beautiful local teams had helped to reduce litter 

by as much as 88 percent in 300 communities, 38 

states, and several countries. 
 

29 

The Storm Drain Sentries Campaign, started in 

1992, was another outreach effort to prevent 

floatable debris from being washed down storm 

drains. This campaign, which involved more 

than 90 organizations and 34 states, stenciled 

educational messages on almost 355,000 storm 

drains in the United States and Canada by 2002. 

Providing the link between 

individual actions and potential 

environmental impacts can be an 

effective outreach method. 

There is significant potential for outreach that 

links prevention of marine debris with better 

handling of waste, such as through increased 

recycling and proper covering of waste during 

transport and deposition into landfills. 

Outreach activities also can facilitate the transfer 

of experimental and proven measures among 

stakeholders, as well as the exchange of relevant 

information on best management practices. 

New and innovative opportunities to prevent the 

introduction of marine debris also can benefit 

from outreach at the early stages of development to 

increase public awareness of these opportunities. 

This has been done through state and non-profit 

web sites. 

♦ The State of Florida has promoted its 

Monofilament (fishing line) Recovery and 

Recycling Program via the internet. Federal 

agencies also have developed programs to educate 

employees. 

♦ As part of the Minerals Management Service 

(MMS) marine debris awareness effort, oilfield 

personnel are educated about the dangers caused 

by marine debris and methods to prevent it. 

MMS also encourages operators to develop waste 

management plans, record trash and debris, and 

conduct operations in a safe and environmentally 

sound manner to prevent accidental losses of 

trash and debris. 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 30 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

5.2 Legislation / Regulation / Policy 

Federal, state, and local governments are able to develop and implement legislation and policies to mitigate 

the impacts of marine debris, prevent its introduction, and reduce the amount of debris that is already in the 

marine environment. A table of existing federal authorities identifies those that explicitly state marine debris 

in the authority, address sources and items that may become marine debris, or address entities that may be 

impacted by marine debris (Table 2). 

Table 2. Federal authorities by agency that (1) specifically mention marine debris in the authority, (2) address 

sources and items that could become marine debris (e.g., plastic, fishing gear, garbage), and (3) address entities 

that may be impacted by marine debris. An X in the last column represents legislation that has any =regulatory 

component. Appendix I includes detailed information on these authorities. 

Authority 

Explicitly states 

marine debris 

in the authority 

Authorities that 

address sources and 

items that may become 

marine debris 

Authorities that 

address entities that 

may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory 

Marine Debris 

Research, Prevention 

and Reduction Act, 33 

U.S.C. 1951 et seq. 

NOAA, 

USCG 

Coral Reef 

Conservation Act of 

2000, 16 U.S.C. 6401 

et seq. 

NOAA 

Coastal Zone 

Management Act of 

1972 (P.L. 92-583; 16 

U.S.C. 1451 et seq.), as 

amended. (Specifically 

the Reauthorization 

Amendments of 1990, 

16 U.S.C. 1455b) 

NOAA NOAA, EPA 

Marine Plastic 

Pollution Research and 

Control Act 33 U.S.C. 

1914 - 1915 

EPA, NOAA EPA, NOAA, USCG 

Driftnet Act 

Amendments of 1990, 

16 U.S.C. 1826 

NOAA, FWS, DOS X 
31 

Authority 

Explicitly states 

marine debris 

in the authority 

Authorities that 

address sources and 

items that may become 

marine debris 

Authorities that 

address entities that 

may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory 

Marine Protection, 

Research and 

Sanctuaries Act, 33 

U.S.C. 1401–1445 

EPA X 

Shore Protection Act, 

33 U.S.C. 2603 EPA, USCG X 

Clean Water Act, 33 

U.S.C. 1251-1385, 

including 33 U.S.C. 

1346(f) as amended by 

Beaches Environmental 

Assessment and 

Coastal Health Act of 

2000, Pub.L.No. 106-

284, (114 Stat. 876) 

EPA, USACE X 

Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act, 42 

U.S.C. 6901-6992k 

EPA 

Pollution Prevention 

Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 

13101–13109 

EPA 

Act to Prevent 

Pollution from Ships 

(APPS), 33 U.S.C. 

1901 et seq. as 

amended by the Marine 

Plastic Pollution 

Research and Control 

Act 

USCG X 

Rivers and Harbors Act 

of 1899, 33 U.S.C. 401 

et seq. 

USACE, USCG X 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 32 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Authority 

Explicitly states 

marine debris 

in the authority 

Authorities that 

address sources and 

items that may become 

marine debris 

Authorities that 

address entities that 

may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory 

Amended Section 2 of 

the Flood Control Act 

of 1954, Sec. 208 

USACE 

Outer Continental 

Shelf Lands Act, 43 

U.S.C. 1331 et seq. 

and Amendments 43 

U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

MMS X 

Energy Policy Act of 

2005, 42 U.S.C. 15801 

et seq. 

MMS X 

Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation 

and Management Act, 

16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

NOAA NOAA X 

National Marine 

Sanctuaries Act, 16 

U.S.C. 1431 et seq. 

NOAA NOAA X 

National Wildlife 

Refuge System 

Administration Act 

of 1966 & National 

Wildlife Refuge 

System Improvement 

Act of 1997, 16 U.S.C. 

668dd 

FWS 

Anadromous Fish 

Conservation Act, 16 

U.S.C. 757a et seq. 

FWS 

Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq. 

NOAA, FWS X 
33 

Authority 

Explicitly states 

marine debris 

in the authority 

Authorities that 

address sources and 

items that may become 

marine debris 

Authorities that 

address entities that 

may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory 

Marine Mammal 

Protection Act, 16 

U.S.C. 1402 

NOAA, MMC, 

FWS X 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 

 

 34 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Marine debris is explicitly addressed in the arine 

Debris Research, Prevention and Reduction Act 

(MDRPRA), the Coral Reef Conservation Act, 

Coastal Zone Management Act, and the Marine 

Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act (33 

U.S.C. 1914). 

♦ MDRPRA, the act pursuant to which this 

report was prepared for submittal to Congress, 

is intended to help identify, determine sources 

of, assess, reduce, and prevent marine debris and 

its adverse impacts on the marine environment 

and navigation safety. The IMDCC, originally 

established under 33 U.S.C. 1914, is re-established 

under the MDRPRA. 

♦ The Coral Reef Conservation Act section 

207(b)(3) authorizes the provision of assistance 

to states for the removal of marine debris from 

coral reefs to conserve living marine resources 

♦ Under section 309(a)(4) of the Coastal Zone 

Management Act (CZMA), states are eligible to 

receive grants to reduce marine debris. None of 

these authorities that explicitly mention marine 

debris are regulatory in nature. 

Although the term “marine debris” is not used 

in other regulatory contexts, federal authority 

does exist for the regulation of certain items that 

may be or have the potential to become marine 

debris. 

♦ Section 13 of the Rivers and Harbors Act 

declares it unlawful to discharge refuse from 

shores, wharfs, and other areas into any navigable 

water and “into any tributary of any navigable 

water from which the same shall float or be washed 

into such navigable water”; it also prohibits the 

deposit of certain items on the banks of navigable 

waters where those items are likely to washed away 

(33 U.S.C. 407). The Rivers and Harbors Act also 

gives USACE and USCG authority to respond to 

marine debris large enough to pose a hazard to 

navigation. 

♦ The Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships or 

APPS (33 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.), as amended by the 

Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control 

Act, regulates the discharge of garbage from ships, 

including section 8(a), the prohibition against the 

discharge of plastic into the ocean or navigable 

waters (33 U.S.C. 1907(a)). 

♦ Dumping of waste at sea is regulated under 

Title 1 of the Marine Protection, Research, and 

Sanctuaries Act (33 U.S.C. 1411-1421). 

♦ Transportation and reception of municipal and 

commercial wastes in coastal waters is regulated 

under the Shore Protection Act. 

Authorities like the Clean Water Act, Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and 

the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 do not 

specifically state marine debris but include 

standards applicable to the control of land-based 

sources of marine debris. 

♦ Although the term is not explicitly used, marine 

debris is a focus of section 406(f) of the Clean 

Water Act. Section 406(f), as amended by the 

Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal 

Health Act of 2000, directs EPA to provide 

technical assistance to states and local governments 

for the assessment and monitoring of floatable 

material, which is a term used interchangeably with 

marine debris in EPA’s guidance document that 

resulted from this section of the Clean Water Act. 
 

35 

♦ The Pollution Prevention Act, unlike the Clean 

Water Act and RCRA, is not a regulatory statute 

in that it does not impose obligations on nonfederal entities. 

Several of these federal prevention or reduction 

statutes are administered by states with federal 

authorization, such as the CZMA grant 

activities, the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization 

Amendments of 1990 related to coastal nonpoint sources of pollution, the RCRA solid waste 

management programs, and the Clean Water Act 

discharge permitting program. 

♦ Other examples of state and local activity 

include but are not limited to the enforcement of 

litter laws, state fishery regulation, derelict vessels, 

waste regulation, beach ordinances, and fees and 

prohibitions related to certain items which may 

become marine debris. 

As requirements and practices may change from 

locality to locality, the potential for variation 

creates a greater need for federal, state and 

local coordination if efforts to prevent and 

reduce marine debris are to be consistent and 

viable. Currently, there is no comprehensive 

understanding of all state authorities relating to 

marine debris and items that may become marine 

debris. 

There are a number of pieces of federal legislation 

with indirect linkages to marine debris that address 

entities that may be impacted by marine debris. 

♦ For example, the ESA could be used to 

address marine debris through recovery plans 

for endangered species. This was used for monk 

seals, for which the plan states “continuing actions 

to remove marine debris and reduce mortality of 

seals due to entanglement” (DOC 2007). 

In addition, under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act, which 

governs fishery management, Regional Fishery 

Management Councils and the National Marine 

Fisheries Service have implemented fishery 

management measures that address the issue of 

ghost fishing, either by reducing the potential for 

it or by mitigating the harm it may cause to living 

marine resources. 

♦ Several fisheries that use pots or fish traps 

are required to have escape mechanisms and 

biodegradable panels to reduce the potential of 

ghost fishing if gear becomes derelict. A review 

of the legislation in Table 2 reveals a diverse set 

of mandates that incorporate some regulatory 

requirements. Evaluating these authorities can 

demonstrate a number of areas where agencies 

can work together and review these authorities 

to determine whether any of these may provide 

opportunities for combating marine debris and its 

impacts to marine resources. A more detailed list 

of these legal authorities and how they relate to 

marine debris are listed in Appendix I. 

5.3 Incentive Programs 

Incentive programs provide unique motivation for 

stakeholders to engage in addressing the impacts 

of marine debris. These programs, however, are 

not stand-alone and typically are implemented in 

conjunction with other prevention efforts. 

Incentives, such as implementation of a depositfree or deposit-refund framework in port reception 

facilities, may enhance waste management 

practices by ports and reduce incentives for vessels 

to dump waste at sea (Georgakellos 2007). 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 36 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

♦ NOAA, the National Fish and Wildlife 

Foundation, and Covanta Energy Corporation 

created in 2007 a partnership program called 

Fishing for Energy to reduce the amount of 

unused fishing gear in the community and marine 

environment. The project provides a place for 

the fishing community to dispose at no cost any 

old or derelict fishing gear recovered while at sea. 

This program eases the burden on fishermen 

caused by the high costs associated with disposing 

of old fishing gear in a landfill. The project is 

modeled on a successful waste for energy multipartner project in Hawaii. 

Another form of incentive programs targets 

marinas and encourages these marinas to advocate 

environmental friendly practices. In the United 

States and abroad, green marina programs have 

been seen as a voluntary, incentive-based method 

for decreasing the environmental impact of 

marinas and watercraft. 

♦ For example, a public-private partnership 

between the National Park Service (NPS) and 

the District of Columbia was initiated to assist 

marina and boatyard owners, operators, and 

concessionaires in voluntary stewardship (NPS 

2001). 

♦ The Maryland Department of Natural 

Resources (2002) similarly developed a Clean 

Marina Initiative for marina operators. The 

Blue Flag Programme, based in Europe, certifies 

marinas and beaches as sustainable. 

♦ The U.S. Department of Transportation (2002) 

reported that a typical one-week cruise ship 

voyage generates approximately 210,000 gallons 

of sewage, one million gallons of graywater (from 

sinks, showers, and laundry), over 130 gallons of 

hazardous waste, over seven metric tons of solid 

waste, and 25,000 gallons of oily bilge water. 

♦ To encourage a reduction in some of these 

wastes, the international operational company 

Registro Italiano Navale Group (RINA) has 

developed the “Green Star Design” program 

which is awarded to ships that address 

requirements found in MARPOL Annex I, IV, 

V, and VI. Although these requirements and 

incentives address more than just marine debris, 

this program demonstrates a possible approach 

to vessel-based incentive programs. 

Incentive programs for passengers on cruise ships 

and other vessels may encourage citizens to report 

illegal activities and act as “whistle blowers.” 

Under the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, 

people who provide information leading to a 

conviction may be rewarded up to one half of 

any resulting fine amount. 

♦ In a 1993 case against Princess Cruises, 

individuals who videotaped and reported the 

illegal dumping of plastic garbage bags were 

awarded half of the $500,000 fine. 

Initiatives designed and implemented 

by states have proven effective in 

mitigating marine debris. 

♦ The Washington State Department of Fish 

and Wildlife operates the “Derelict Fishing Gear 

Removal Project,” in which mariners report 

derelict fishing gear online or via telephone. The 

Project’s “no fault” approach is focused on 
 

 

 

 

37 

removing lost and abandoned fishing gear, not on 

assessing blame. 

Incentive programs may also address prevention 

on land. A September 2007 New York Times article 

reported ­

...an estimated 100,000,000,000 

plastic bags are used by Americans 

annually. 

Discarded plastic bags are prone to being 

transported into the marine environment by wind 

and stream runoff. These bags also are difficult 

to recycle and take an estimated 12 million barrels 

of oil to produce (New York Times 2007). 

♦ Concerned civic organizations in Southern 

California banded together to promote a “Day 

Without a Bag,” a program that leveraged public 

and private support to encourage consumer use 

of reusable bags. Stores donated reusable bags 

and offered discounts and rebates to reusable bag 

users; 22 local governments designated December 

20, 2007 as a day without a bag. 

♦ By leveraging the support of private business 

and local government, these NGOs were able to 

directly reach consumers and spread awareness 

of the link between consumer activity and marine 

debris. 

Theme 2: Response to 

Debris Already in the Marine 

Environment 

Responding to debris already present in the 

marine environment remains a component of an 

overall strategy to mitigate marine debris impacts. 

Total prevention of all debris entering the marine 

environment is a long-term goal, but until that 

goal has been attained, it remains necessary 

to develop appropriate response strategies 

and actions for existing debris. Such response 

activities include nearshore and at-sea cleanups, 

as well as enforcement of existing environmental 

laws pertinent to marine debris. 

5.4 Enforcement 

The primary agencies responsible for enforcement 

of laws relevant to marine debris are: 

1. the USCG; 

2. the NOAA Office for Law Enforcement; 

3. the MMS’ Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) 

Civil/Criminal Penalties Program; 

4. the EPA Office of Enforcement and 

Compliance Assurance; and 

5. the United States Department of Justice 

(DOJ), Environment & Natural Resources 

Division (ENRD). 

Enforcement of illegal dumping and discharge 

of trash or debris into waterways and marine 

environments begins when a responsible 

government official identifies an actual or potential 

violation of applicable environmental laws, such 

as the Clean Water Act, the Marine Protection, 

Research, and Sanctuaries Act, the Act to Prevent 

Pollution from Ships, the Marine Sanctuaries Act, 

or other applicable laws. 

Violations may come to the attention of 

government officials in a variety of ways: a 

government official may witness a violation; 

a violator may report its own violation; or a 

concerned citizen may report a violation to 

government officials. 

♦ The USCG performs inspections for 

compliance with MARPOL Annex V and United 

States regulations. Marine Inspectors inspect 

United States commercial vessels annually and 

examine foreign vessels through the Port State 

Control program. 

In 2006, the USCG performed 

MARPOL Annex V examinations 

onboard over 15,000 commercial 

vessels (US and foreign). 

♦ The pollution prevention verifications include 

a review of vessel waste management systems 

and inspection of the ship to verify compliance. 

In addition, smaller vessels, including recreational 

and commercial fishing vessels that are required 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS 
 

 

 38 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

by law to be inspected, are subject to random 

“at sea” boardings where compliance is verified. 

Coast Guard enforcement boardings, including 

domestic fisheries boardings, boardings within 

marine sanctuaries, and recreational boating 

safety boardings, allow the USCG to do its 

part in ensuring compliance within fishing and 

recreational boating communities. 

The USCG enforces MARPOL Annex V 

obligations implemented domestically by 

verifying that certain domestic waterfront 

facilities maintain the capability of receiving 

garbage and waste from oceangoing ships during 

annual facility inspections and harbor patrol spot 

checks. Ports and terminals, must comply with 

MARPOL Annex V under the criteria established 

for reception facilities for Garbage in 33 C.F.R. 

Subpart D. For ports and terminals described in 

33 C.F.R. 158.135, operation is conditioned upon 

meeting the requirements of a USCG issued 

Certificate of Adequacy. 

♦ The USCG pursues various enforcement 

actions for MARPOL Annex V non-compliance, 

including written warnings, imposition of 

monetary civil penalties, and referral of cases to 

the DOJ for criminal prosecution or civil judicial 

enforcement action. Many pollution violation 

penalties are imposed through the USCG’s civil 

penalty and Notice of Violation process, which 

in essence allows the USCG to write tickets for 

violations. In addition, the USCG may seek to 

suspend or revoke merchant mariners’ credentials 

for willful or negligent acts associated with 

violations of MARPOL or APPS. For the most 

serious cases, the USCG refers violations to the 

Department of Justice for prosecution. 

The NOAA Office for Law Enforcement brings 

both administrative and civil enforcement actions 

and has the authority to enforce numerous statutes 

and treaties relevant to the protection of marine 

resources. 

To assure safe and environmentally sound 

operations on the OCS, MMS inspects all facilities 

under its jurisdiction and enforces its regulations 

through warnings, component and facility shutins, and a Civil and Criminal Penalties Program. 

More than 600 civil penalties were collected 

between 1990 and 2006. 

EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance 

Assurance and EPA Regional offices often 

initiate referrals of violations under statutes 

administered by EPA for subsequent civil or 

criminal enforcement. 

Judicial enforcement of the environmental 

violations is led, in the civil and criminal contexts, 

by the DOJ. Cases referred by agencies such as 

EPA, NOAA and USCG are generally handled 

by the ENRD working with the U.S. Attorneys’ 

offices. For example, in 2006, ENRD brought 

a civil suit on behalf of NOAA seeking 

compensation for natural resources damages to 

the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

sustained as a result of the defendant’s loss of 

15 shipping containers. In settling this case, the 

defendant agreed to pay $3.25 million to provide 

compensatory restoration for damages to the 

Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. 

ENRD also prosecutes criminal violations of 

environmental laws regarding releases of garbage 

into marine waters. 

♦ In March 2006, a company entered a plea 

agreement with the United States Attorney’s 

Office for the District of New Jersey. The 

charged company agreed to pay a $5 million 

criminal fine and make a $1.5 million community 

service payment to the FWS for violations of the 

Act to Prevent Pollution for Ships involving both 

illegal discharges of garbage and oil. 

♦ ENRD prosecuted violations of the Act to 

Prevent Pollution from Ships and the Ocean 

Dumping Act in the Federal District Court for 

the District of Columbia. The defendant was 

found guilty by a jury for instructing employees 

under his supervision to dump “hundreds” of 

plastic bags containing asbestos into the ocean. 

The company pled guilty and was sentenced in 

March 1998 to pay a $250,000 fine. 
39 

5.5 Cleanups 

Many different types of cleanup activities are 

undertaken to reduce the quantity and impacts 

of marine debris. Local beach cleanups tend to 

receive the most media attention, as the public 

is generally involved. Activities may include the 

International Coastal Cleanup (ICC), community 

beach cleanups, or other local efforts. 

Various types of cleanups are 

necessary in both the coastal regions 

and the open ocean for complete 

marine debris removal to be 

effective in the short and long term. 

The majority of beach cleanups are facilitated by 

international and local non-profit organizations. 

Beach cleanups are generally driven by 

community involvement and contribute to the 

education and understanding of marine debris 

issues. 

During the 2006 ICC, Ocean Conservancy 

organized over 350,000 volunteers globally, 

cleaning 3,175 metric tons of trash from over 

30,000 miles of shoreline (Ocean Conservancy 

2006). Since ICC’s inception in 1986, ICC 

activities around the world have collected 52,617 

metric tons of debris (Ocean Conservancy 

2007). The ICC is funded by several federal 

agencies. 

♦ Other initiatives, including the Adopt-ABeach program sponsored by the California 

Coastal Commission, similarly engage 

communities for cleanups on a local level. 

Beach cleanups are also led by federal agencies 

such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which 

has coordinated all-volunteer beach cleanups in 

the Hawaiian Islands and Midway Atoll National 

Wildlife Refuges since 1990. 

Federal and non-federal partners 

initiate and participate in cleanups 

at sea. 

Two significant distinctions between at-sea and 

beach cleanups are the scale of the debris removed 

and the remote locations where removal occurs. 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 40 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

♦ Over a ten-year period, an at-sea removal 

campaign led by NOAA and partners including 

USCG in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands 

has proven to be beneficial, but it is also costly 

to operate and requires extensive coordination 

among project partners. The debris is often larger 

(a conglomerate of derelict fishing nets versus 

plastic bottle caps) and at greater depths, which 

necessitates trained vessel operators and removal 

experts. Underwater marine debris removal efforts 

involve federal partnerships. 

♦ Following the devastation resulting from 

Hurricane Katrina along the Gulf of Mexico 

coast, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(USACE) requested assistance from USCG 

to oversee the removal of submerged marine 

debris in navigational channels and nearshore 

environments. 

♦ NOAA received supplemental funds to conduct 

side scan sonar to locate debris, and estimate its 

size, depth and the overall debris density. To 

access this underwater debris, USCG contractors 

used cranes tethered to a barge for spot removal 

(NOAA 2007a). 

♦ Oil and gas infrastructures that were damaged 

or destroyed in the 2005 hurricane season are 

being addressed by MMS and industry. Obsolete 

platforms may have alternate uses as artificial 

reefs through the Rigs-to-Reefs Program, which 

provides habitat to marine life and is an alternative 

to onshore disposal. 

Removal operations of submerged 

marine debris may necessitate the use 

of specially trained divers. 

♦ To address this need, organizations such 

as the Northwest Straits Commission (NSC) 

have offered targeted diver training programs, 

conducting six classes and training 53 divers from 

2002 to 2007 (NSC 2007).
 

Harbors are unique repositories of marine debris 

given the confluence of vessel traffic, recreational 

activities, and shoreline businesses. 

♦ An example of an effective strategy to mitigate 

existing marine debris in harbors is the partnership 

of federal agencies with non-profit organizations 

to assess and remove debris in New Bedford 

Harbor, Massachusetts. 

♦ Another partnership is the Boston Harbor 

Association (BHA), which developed a marine 

debris mitigation initiative that brought together 

public and private organizations and has removed 

more than 200 short tons of marine debris since 

2000 (BHA 2007). In addition, many harbors 

use skimmer boats to collect debris on a regular 

basis. 

Finally, many areas have watershed cleanups that 

are aimed at keeping parks, creeks, and rivers 

clean. These cleanups can remove materials from 

land-based sources that might otherwise become 

marine debris. 

♦ For example, the Anacostia Watershed Society 

hosts an annual trash cleanup of the watershed, 

located in eastern Washington, DC. 

♦ At a national level, the National River Cleanup, 

sponsored by American Rivers has removed 

more than 907 metric tons of litter and debris 

from 100,000 miles of waterways, since its launch 

in 1991, and has involved more than 600,000 

volunteers (American Rivers 2007). 

Theme 3: Research and 

Developement 

Since distribution of the 1988 Interagency Report 

that provided guidance regarding research focus 

areas, studies of sources and impacts of marine 

debris have continued. In order to maintain a 

thorough understanding of the marine debris 

issue, research must also focus on the impact of 

persistent materials on the marine environment 

and the development of new technologies for 

prevention and removal. 
 

 

41 

5.6 Research 

Although marine debris research to date has not 

been able to provide a sufficiently comprehensive 

description of sources, movement, or impacts 

of marine debris, substantial advances have been 

made in our understanding of marine debris in 

recent years. Some of these advances likely relate 

to the increase in federal funding for marine 

debris research in recent years, while others reflect 

investment by other organizations or the fruition 

of long-term studies. 

♦ The NOAA Marine Debris Program was 

established in 2005. This program has provided 

additional new funds for marine debris research 

projects on topics ranging from sources and 

composition of marine debris to impacts and 

approaches to mitigating those impacts through 

removal of debris or other approaches. Research, 

while focused on national concerns, is frequently 

conducted at a local level, such as in Puget 

Sound, Alaska, and Hawaii, in an effort to better 

understand geographic nuances. 

♦ The benefit of research partnerships is 

demonstrated by the National Fish and Wildlife 

Foundation, NOAA, FWS, and Dow Chemical, 

who are working collaboratively to develop a 

scientific protocol in the Papahānaumokuākea 

Marine National Monument for cataloguing 

plastic marine debris. The goal of the project is 

to determine sources of plastic debris. 

The National Marine Debris 

Monitoring Program (NMDMP) is a 

key example of recent marine debris 

research efforts. 

NMDMP was developed by Ocean Conservancy, 

through support from EPA, to standardize marine 

debris data collection and assess marine debris 

sources and trends in the United States. 

♦ NMDMP used trained volunteers to conduct 

monthly marine debris surveys on designated 

beaches over a five-year period. The volunteers 

were responsible for identifying and recording the 

number of land-based, ocean-based, and general 

source items (i.e., items that originate on land or 

at sea) collected at each beach. 

♦ The NMDMP Report indicates that 

approximately 49 percent of the marine debris 

items collected nationally during the study 

originated from land-based sources, 18 percent 

from ocean-based sources, and 33 percent from 

general sources (Sheavly 2007). 

♦ The Report also indicates that there was no 

significant change in the total amount of debris 

collected over the five-year study period. 

Better understanding of the 

movement and deposition of marine 

debris has been gained through 

studies in specific regions. 

An improved understanding of the factors 

that influence marine debris distribution and 

deposition will improve the ability to predict 

which geographic regions are likely to accumulate 

marine debris under various conditions, as well 

as the likely rates of accumulation and residence 

time of debris in various regions of the ocean 

(e.g., the North Pacific Gyre). 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS 
 

 

 42 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

♦ The Papahānaumokuākea Marine National 

Monument released information that indicates 

that marine debris deposition rates are higher 

during El Niño events than during normal years 

or La Niña events (Morishige et al. 2007). 

♦ Marine debris dispersal models for the Gulf of 

Mexico can predict specific areas that are likely 

to accumulate debris following extreme weather 

events (NOAA 2007a). The development and 

use of these models may improve planning 

and response efforts to mitigate marine debris 

following extreme weather events. 

A variety of studies have focused on the impacts 

of marine debris on specific habitats (e.g., coral 

reefs) or species (e.g., seabirds). In addition to 

funding research projects, some federal agencies 

have improved their operational ability to study 

and mitigate the impacts of marine debris. 

♦ For example, NOAA is integrating training 

on the collection of marine debris data and 

assessment of impacts into ongoing training 

programs for the shoreline cleanup and assessment 

technique (SCAT), which historically has focused 

on shoreline oil spill responses. 

5.7 Technology Development 

Building upon the information gathered from 

research, development of new technologies 

may allow significant reductions in the impacts, 

longevity, and dispersal of marine debris. In 

particular, technology development in the fields 

of biodegradable materials, combined sewer and 

separate storm sewer systems, and debris location 

and removal equipment may help reduce the 

introduction and persistence of marine debris. 

Development of new technologies 

for studying and monitoring marine 

debris will provide opportunities for 

improved data collection and better 

understanding of marine debris and 

its impacts. 

Technologies such as rot cord—a biodegradable 

cord designed to degrade in the marine 

environment and allow trapped animals to escape 

from a derelict trap, pot, or creel—can make 

lost gear less harmful by reducing the duration 

of time that the gear can continue ghost fishing. 

However, in some fisheries rot cord has not 

been required and in others the rot cord was not 

properly implemented on the gear. 

♦ In Puget Sound where rot cord is required on 

crab pots, the Northwest Straits Commission 

is reaching out to educate commercial and 

recreational fishermen on proper installation of 

rot cord. 

To mitigate the effects of combined sewer 

overflow and discharges from separate storm 

sewer systems, development and implementation 

of new technologies are needed. 

♦ To address the problems of an aging sewer 

system, the Department of Justice, representing 

the EPA, reached an agreement in July 2007 with 

the City of San Diego to improve the city’s aging 

infrastructure; the City agreed to spend $1 billion 

over the following six years on new monitoring 

and sewage system replacement technologies 

(DOJ 2007). 

♦ In September 2007, EPA agreed to work with 

the City of Muscatine, Iowa, to develop two 

separate systems over the next 15 years: one for 

stormwater and one for sanitary sewage (EPA 

2007). 

♦ Combined sewer systems serve roughly 772 

communities containing about 40 million people 

in the United States (EPA 2002b). Another 6,000 

communities, serving more than 150 million 

people, are served by separate storm sewer 

systems permitted under Clean Water Act permits 

(EPA 2008). 

Investments in new or improved 

infrastructure will be necessary to 

further identify and address the 

sources of marine debris. 
43 

Marine debris removal is a non-trivial task, 

particularly for large items. Removing fishing 

gear, whether commercial or recreational, is 

dangerous to the people doing it. On land, gear 

is heavy and difficult to move. Underwater, lost 

gear poses a high entanglement risk to divers. To 

lessen the impact to those removing debris and 

to the local habitat, removal techniques would 

benefit from advances in technology. In addition, 

these advances in technology could lead to easier 

and increased removal efforts. 

New technologies developed for 

multiple applications have also 

been applied to study marine debris 

movement. 

In recent years, satellite imagery and Unmanned 

Aerial System technology have been used to 

identify convergence zones that concentrate 

floating marine debris in the ocean. 

♦ These studies have initially focused on the 

convergence zone that influences the delivery 

of marine debris to the Northwestern Hawaiian 

Islands (Pichel et al. 2007), which accumulate an 

estimated 52 metric tons of marine debris annually 

(Dameron et al. 2007). These technologies intend 

to facilitate the location and removal of debris 

before it comes into contact with sensitive habitat 

areas, such as coral reefs. 

Theme 4: Cross-theme 

Efforts to Foster 

Coordination 

The coordination of efforts to address marine 

debris issues among federal agencies and 

between those agencies and other involved 

parties (e.g., state and local governments, tribal 

governments, environmental non-governmental 

organizations, and various industries) is a key 

requirement for ensuring that the other thematic 

components (prevention, response, and research 

and development) are fully implemented. Such 

coordination comprises portions of the three 

aforementioned themes, but does not fit solely 

within them. Thus, coordination is discussed 

here as a “cross-theme” effort. 

5.8 Fostering Coordination 

Despite Congressional mandates and binding 

legislation, federal agencies cannot manage 

marine debris single-handedly. State and local 

partnerships, non-governmental efforts, and 

volunteer commitment must be coordinated to 

reach collective goals. 

Federal coordination is 

necessary to leverage all agency 

capabilities domestically as well as 

internationally. 

The IMDCC is currently responsible for 

coordinating a comprehensive program of 

marine debris research and activities among 

federal agencies, in cooperation and coordination 

with non-governmental organizations, industry, 

universities, and research institutions, states, 

Indian tribes, and other nations, as appropriate. 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 44 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

The IMDCC also ensures the coordination of 

federal agency marine debris activities both 

nationally and internationally, and recommends 

research priorities, monitoring techniques, 

educational programs, and regulatory action. 

Cross-agency collaboration between 

federal, state, and local partners 

allows for leveraging to maximize the 

use of available resources to address 

marine debris issues. 

♦ USCG and NOAA work with state and local 

partners in Hawaii to remove debris in the remote 

NWHI. 

♦ MMS works with industry to develop standards 

and practices to improve platform survivability 

and rig station keeping during hurricanes; some 

standards and practices have already been 

incorporated into regulations. 

♦ In Broward County, Florida, federal, state, and 

local governments leveraged resources to remove 

derelict tires that were dumped during the 1970s 

in hopes of creating artificial reefs. Through the 

Department of Defense’s Innovative Readiness 

Training (IRT), U.S. Navy divers partner with 

ocean resource agencies to remove derelict debris 

while enhancing their own field training. 

♦ Numerous regional meetings and conferences 

have been convened to foster coordination in 

mitigating marine debris. 

♦ In January 2004, the Asia-Pacific Economic 

Cooperation convened a regional seminar in 

Hawaii on derelict fishing gear and marine debris, 

affirming the need to mitigate the impacts of 

marine debris through action at global, national, 

and regional levels (APEC 2004). 

♦ The Department of State and NOAA cohosted a workshop in the Caribbean in July 2007 

to facilitate discussions on derelict fishing gear 

and any potential impacts it may be having on the 

wider Caribbean. 

♦ In April 2008, the NOAA Marine Debris 

Program hosted a National Marine Debris 

Information Forum bringing together over 50 

researchers from around the nation to present their 

marine debris projects to other scientists, federal 

agencies, state, non-government organizations 

and other interested persons. 

♦ In order to improve monitoring and 

assessment of marine debris, the United Nations 

Environment Program (UNEP) and UNESCO/ 

Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission 

(IOC) have launched a project to develop global 

guidelines for the standardization of survey and 

monitoring of marine debris. 

♦ In addition, an ongoing review of MARPOL 

Annex V by the International Maritime 

Organization (IMO), in consultation with 

relevant organizations and bodies, is assessing its 

effectiveness in addressing sea-based sources of 

marine debris. The aim is to complete the review 

by autumn 2008 (IMO 2007). 
 

45 

Section 6.0 Recommendations 

The Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee (IMDCC) presents recommendations intended 

to guide the Federal government’s strategies with respect to the problems of persistent marine debris. 

These recommendations are designed to be broad in scope, with the intention that federal agencies work 

collaboratively through the IMDCC to develop more detailed priorities and an action plan to implement 

these recommendations. In addition to having a federal-level focus, these recommendations attempt to 

address the different agency mandates and policies associated with issues related to marine debris reduction 

and prevention. These recommendations do not presuppose increased budgets for any specific agencies or 

programs, but the implementation of many of these recommendations will likely depend on support from 

new resources to adequately assess and address the complex problem of marine debris. They are written to 

allow individual agencies discretion in allocating their own resources to implement the recommendations, 

though the underlying goal is to enhance interagency cooperation through the activities of the IMDCC. 

These recommendations also encourage agencies to increase their efforts to reduce current marine debris, 

prevent future marine debris, and mitigate the impacts of marine debris on navigation, human health and safety, 

the economy, habitats, and species. While the recommendations are general in nature, individual agencies are 

expected to lead coordinated efforts and work together to enhance and develop existing capacities so that 

individual agency efforts can work to address collective needs, threats, and challenges. Federal agencies are 

further encouraged to enhance their efforts to provide technical and educational materials to state, local, 

tribal and non-governmental entities (including industries, environmental non-governmental organizations, 

councils, academia, and the general public). 

These recommendations address all the specific marine debris types and sources as described in Section 3, 

including debris from land-based and ocean-based sources. The term “marine debris” is used throughout 

these recommendations to encompass marine debris from all sources as well as items of terrestrial debris that 

are likely to become marine debris as a result of common transport (e.g., by terrestrial waterways, wave action 

along shorelines, or wind). 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 46 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Theme 1: Prevention 

6.1 Education and Outreach 

6.1.1: Federal agencies should demonstrate leadership by distributing educational materials to 

personnel on the sources and impacts of marine debris as well as methods for prevention, with the 

goal of reducing the federal contribution to marine debris. 

6.1.2: Federal agencies should support public awareness campaigns by providing technical expertise 

and educational materials and by encouraging private sector participation, when appropriate. These 

campaigns may target specific threats and audiences to address the diversity of the marine debris 

issue. 

6.1.3: Federal agencies should engage and partner with state, local, tribal and non-governmental 

entities to support coordinated events, such as Earth Day, the International Coastal Cleanup, and other 

activities that have relevance to marine debris. These events should include nationwide educational 

and media outreach efforts to enhance awareness of sources and impacts of marine debris and to 

provide recommendations regarding specific actions that can be taken to prevent or reduce marine 

debris. 

6.2 Legislation / Regulation / Policy 

6.2.1: The IMDCC should review the findings from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study 

that will assess the effectiveness of international and national measures to prevent and reduce marine 

debris and its impacts, and federal agencies should take action, as appropriate. 

6.2.2: Federal agencies should seek ways to strengthen and enhance their ability to fulfill both 

regulatory and non-regulatory mandates for marine debris prevention, where appropriate. Table 2, 

which lists federal marine debris related authorities, may be used for review and assessment of existing 

authorities. 

6.2.3: The IMDCC should coordinate a correspondence group of state, local, and tribal governments 

to determine the marine debris–related authorities and policies at those levels, including both those 

that address land-based sources of marine debris and those that address ocean-based sources. The 

correspondence group will be an important component in the IMDCC’s gap analysis of regulatory 

and non-regulatory authorities that can be used to promote marine debris prevention. 

6.2.4: Federal agencies, coordinating through the IMDCC, should review existing international policies 

and strategies regarding marine debris from both land-based and ocean-based sources, and develop a 

white paper outlining possible policies or actions for consideration by the United States. 

6.3 Incentive Programs 

6.3.1: Federal agencies should support voluntary, incentive-based programs that encourage communities 

to adopt environmentally responsible practices. Examples may include Heal the Bay’s “A Day Without 

a Bag” Program (a southern California non-profit organization) and the Clean Marina Program, an 

initiative involving federal agencies and state governments. 
47 

6.3.2: Federal agencies should work with state, local, tribal, and non-governmental entities to develop 

efficient recycling incentive programs for municipalities or appropriate venues. 

6.3.3: Federal agencies, where appropriate, should evaluate methods by which users of products that 

contribute significantly to marine debris can be given an incentive to select environmentally friendly 

alternatives or improve use of recycling infrastructure. Such incentive programs or pilot projects 

should include regular monitoring and evaluation of their effectiveness. 

Theme 2: Response to Debris Already in the 

Marine Environment 

6.4 Enforcement 

6.4.1: Federal agencies should continue to review enforcement authorities regarding marine debris 

and items that may become marine debris, enhance the effective use of those authorities as needed 

and appropriate, and ensure a coordinated approach to enforcement of relevant authorities. 

6.4.2: In appropriate cases, federal agencies should refer violations of federal law, such as the Act 

to Prevent Pollution from Ships, Clean Water Act, and Ocean Dumping Act, to the Environment 

and Natural Resources Division of the U.S. Department of Justice for civil or criminal enforcement 

action. 

6.5 Cleanups 

6.5.1: Federal agencies should work together and contribute to coordinated removal efforts of marine 

debris and items that can become marine debris in areas under federal jurisdiction, with priority given 

to heavily impacted areas. 

6.5.2: Federal agencies should examine how existing programs can be targeted to support difficult 

marine debris removal efforts. 

6.5.3: Federal agencies should partner with state, local, tribal, and non-governmental entities to 

continue to support and conduct cleanup efforts. 

Theme 3: Research and Development 

6.6 Research 

6.6.1: Federal agencies, coordinating through the IMDCC, should sponsor and conduct research to 

characterize the nature of marine debris and further investigate reducing, mitigating, preventing, and 

controlling marine debris and assessing its impacts, with a particular focus on developing cost-benefit 

analyses for these actions. 

6.6.2: Federal agencies, cooperating through the IMDCC, should improve efforts to monitor marine 

debris, including shoreline, floating, and submerged debris, using lessons learned from previous 

federally funded monitoring efforts. 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 48 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

6.6.3: The IMDCC should convene a special session at least once a year to share and discuss the 

latest research findings on marine debris, with summaries and identified gaps to be passed to the 

Subcommittee on Integrated Management of Ocean Resources (SIMOR) and the Joint Subcommittee 

on Ocean Science and Technology (JSOST). 

6.6.4: Federal agencies, coordinating through the IMDCC, should sponsor and conduct research 

regarding the attitudes and practices of users of products that contribute to marine debris. In 

particular, such research should (a) investigate the willingness to alter attitudes and practices in a 

manner that would reduce marine debris; (b) identify preferences with regard to potential incentive 

programs and which types of incentives are most likely to produce positive responses; and (c) develop 

and test incentive programs intended to alter attitudes and/or practices among users of products that 

contribute to marine debris. 

6.7 Technology Development 

6.7.1: Federal agencies should partner with state, local, tribal, and non-governmental entities to 

encourage the development of specific technologies that could prevent or reduce the amount of debris 

entering the marine environment or that could mitigate the impacts of marine debris on navigation, 

human health and safety, the economy, habitats, and species. 

6.7.2: Federal agencies should support research, technology development, and use of materials that 

will not persist in the marine environment. 

Theme 4: Cross-theme Efforts to Foster Coordination 

6.8 Fostering Coordination 

6.8.1: Federal agencies should help sponsor and participate in workshops, conferences, and lectures 

that address issues related to marine debris and sources of marine debris to encourage the exchange 

of information that can inform the development of guidelines and implementation of actions to 

mitigate marine debris impacts. 

6.8.2: Federal agencies should participate in ongoing international activities to mitigate the impacts 

and reduce the amount of marine debris. Federal agencies also should support efforts to increase the 

awareness of such international marine debris efforts and encourage participation of other nations 

and international organizations in those efforts, as well as consider options for new international 

activities and initiatives to mitigate the impacts and reduce the amount of marine debris. 

6.8.3: The IMDCC should serve as a central point for coordination of federal efforts to develop new 

policies, strengthen existing policies, identify new research topics or projects, and address requests 

from Congress for specific information or actions related to marine debris. 

6.8.4: Federal agencies should pursue partnerships, as appropriate, with non-governmental entities 

to develop, promote, and implement strategies for preventing, reducing, or mitigating the impacts of 

marine debris. 
49 

APPENDIX I
 

Detailed Description of Authorities 

as related to Marine Debris
 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 50 

Detailed Description of Authorities as related to Marine Debris 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Authority Explicitly states marine debris in the authority Authorities that address sources and items 

that may become marine debris 

Authorities that address entities that may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory Agency 

Marine Debris Re- Establishes a Marine Debris Program within NOAA to NOAA, USCG 

search, Prevention conduct research, monitoring, prevention, and reduction 

and Reduction activities. 

Act, 33 U.S.C. 

1951 et seq. Under the Act, the Coast Guard and NOAA will define 

Marine Debris, in consultation with the Interagency 

Committee, for the purposes of this Act. This definition 

will be utilized for the purposes of this report. 

In addition, the Act requires the Coast Guard to obtain 

a report from the National Research Council on the 

effectiveness of international and domestic measures to 

prevent and reduce marine debris and its impact. 

In fulfillment of the Act, the Coast Guard will maintain 

its voluntary reporting program, report damage to vessels 

and disruption to navigation caused by marine debris 

and increase international cooperation to reduce marine 

debris. The Act also required the Coast Guard to submit to 

Congress a report evaluating the Coast Guard’s progress 

on these initiatives. 

Reactivates the Interagency Committee (originally 

established by MPPRCA 1987) and designated NOAA 

as chairperson. NOAA thereafter appointed EPA as 

co-chair. The Act requires the Committee to provide a 

report identifying the sources of marine debris, its impact, 

costs, and recommendations. Progress reports from the 

Committee will be submitted to Congress not later than 

three years after the enactment of the Act, and every two 

years thereafter. 
 

51 

Authority Explicitly states marine debris in the authority Authorities that address sources and items 

that may become marine debris 

Authorities that address entities that may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory Agency 

Coral Reef Requires NOAA to provide assistance through grant NOAA 

Conservation Act programs to states in removing abandoned fishing gear, 

of 2000, 16 U.S.C. marine debris, and abandoned vessels from coral reefs to 

6401 et seq. conserve living marine resources. 

Coastal Zone 

Management 

Act of 1972 

(P.L. 92-583; 16 

U.S.C. 1451 et 

seq.), as amended. 

(Specifically the 

Reauthorization 

Amendments of 

1990, 16 U.S.C. 

1455b) 

Provides for management of the nation’s coastal 

resources through the development of state coastal zone 

management programs and National Estuarine Research 

Reserves. 

Under section 309 of the act, states are eligible to receive 

grants for “reducing marine debris entering the Nation’s 

coastal and ocean environment by managing uses and 

activities that contribute to the entry of such debris.” 

Under the Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 16 

U.S.C. 1455b, it encourages states with federally 

approved coastal zone management programs to 

prepare and submit a Coastal Nonpoint Pollution 

Control Program for approval by NOAA and the 

EPA. The purpose of the program is to develop 

and implement management measures for nonpoint 

source pollution to restore and protect coastal 

waters. 

NOAA, EPA 

Marine Plastic 

Pollution Research 

and Control 

Act 33 U.S.C. 

1914-1915 

The Secretary of Commerce (NOAA) shall establish a 

Marine Debris Coordinating Committee. NOAA will 

serve as the Chairperson of the Committee; the Committee shall meet at least twice a year to provide a forum 

to ensure the coordination of national and international 

research, monitoring, education, and regulatory actions 

addressing the persistent marine debris problem. 

Monitoring - The Secretary of Commerce, acting through 

the Administrator of the NOAA, in cooperation with the 

Administrator of the EPA, shall utilize the marine debris 

data derived under title V of the Marine Protection, 

Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 2801 

et seq.) to assist the Committee in ensuring coordination 

of research, monitoring, education and regulatory actions; 

and the United States Coast Guard in assessing the effectiveness of this Act and the Act to Prevent Pollution from 

Ships [33 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.] in ensuring compliance 

under section 1913 of this title. 

The Administrator of the NOAA and the 

Administrator of the EPA shall jointly commence 

and thereafter conduct a public outreach program to 

educate the public (including recreational boaters, 

fishermen, and other users of the marine environment) regarding the harmful effects of plastic 

pollution; the need to reduce such pollution; the 

need to recycle plastic materials; the need to reduce 

the quantity of plastic debris in the marine environment; and the requirements under this Act and the 

Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships with respect 

to ships and ports, and the authority of citizens to 

report violations of this Act and the Act to Prevent 

Pollution from Ships. 

Calls for Citizen Pollution Patrols as a joint responsibility of NOAA, Coast Guard and EPA, and public 

outreach and citizen awards for reported violations. 

Required the Administrator of EPA, in consultation 

with Secretary of Commerce, to study the adverse 

effects of improper disposal of plastic articles on 

the environment and waste disposal, and the various 

methods to reduce or eliminate such adverse effects 

(42 U.S.C. 6981 note). 

NOAA, EPA, 

USCG 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 52 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Authority Explicitly states marine debris in the authority Authorities that address sources and items 

that may become marine debris 

Authorities that address entities that may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory Agency 

Driftnet Act 

Amendments of 

1990, 16 U.S.C. 

1826 

The Driftnet Act directs the Secretary of the 

Interior (FWS), in cooperation with the Secretary 

of Commerce (NOAA) and the Secretary of State, 

to provide information on the impacts of large-scale 

driftnet fisheries on seabirds in the North Pacific 

Ocean. Requires Commerce to collect statistical information on number of US marine resources killed, 

retrieved, discarded, or lost by foreign government, 

driftnet fishing vessels which are fishing beyond 

EEZ of any nation.Commerce has a permit program 

for foreign fishing vessels that enter U.S. waters, 

which takes gear type into consideration. 

X NOAA, FWS, 

DOS 

Marine Protection, Prohibits the dumping of material into the ocean X EPA 

Research and that would unreasonably degrade or endanger 

Sanctuaries human health or the marine environment. EPA 

Act, 33 U.S.C. is the permitting agency for all materials dumped 

1401–1445 in the ocean except dredged material, which is 

permitted by USACE with EPA environmental 

criteria and concurrence. EPA is also responsible 

for designating recommended ocean dumping sites 

for all types of materials. 

Shore Protection Applicable to transportation and reception of X EPA, USCG 

Act, 33 U.S.C. municipal and commercial wastes in coastal waters. 

2601-2609 

Vessel permitting program administered by the 

Coast Guard. Designed to minimize trash, medical 

debris and other harmful materials from being deposited into coastal waters as a result of inadequate 

waste handling procedures by vessels transporting 

such waste. 

EPA, in consultation with the Coast Guard, is 

responsible for developing regulations governing 

the loading, securing, offloading, and cleaning up of 

such wastes from waste sources, reception facilities, 

and vessels. 
53 

Authority Explicitly states marine debris in the authority Authorities that address sources and items 

that may become marine debris 

Authorities that address entities that may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory Agency 

Clean Water Act, Section 402 requires EPA to develop and implement X EPA, USACE 

33 U.S.C. 1251- the National Pollutant Elimination Discharge 

1385, including System (NPDES) program . Sections 301 and 

33 U.S.C. 1346(f) 304 authorize EPA to set effluent limits on an 

as amended industry-wide (technology-based) basis and on 

by Beaches a water-quality basis to ensure protection of the 

Environmental receiving water. NPDES program administered 

Assessment primarily by states with EPA oversight. 

and Coastal 

Health Act of EPA’s Harbor Studies Program and the Combined 

2000, Pub.L.No. Sewer Overflow (CSOs) Studies Program supple106-284, (114 ment existing information on CSOs and municipal 

Stat. 876) separate storm sewer discharges as sources of 

floatable debris through monitoring of combined 

and municipal separate sewer systems and characterizing debris from those discharges. 

Section 406(f) directs EPA to provide technical 

assistance to states and local governments for the assessment and monitoring of floatable material. The 

EPA guidance document implementing this statutory 

mandate uses the terms “floatable debris,” “floatable 

materials,” and “marine debris” interchangeably to 

address marine debris. 

Resource Directs EPA to develop guidelines for solid waste EPA 

Conservation and management plans. Administered by states with 

Recovery Act, 42 EPA assistance. 

U.S.C. 6941-6949 

Pollution 

Prevention Act of 

1990, 42 U.S.C. 

13101–13109 

et seq. 

Declares a national policy that pollution should 

be prevented or reduced at the source whenever 

feasible; pollution that cannot be prevented should 

be recycled in an environmentally safe manner, 

whenever feasible; pollution that cannot be 

prevented or recycled should be treated in an 

environmentally safe manner whenever feasible; 

and disposal or other release into the environment 

should be employed only as a last resort and should 

be conducted in an environmentally safe manner. 

EPA 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 54 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Authority Explicitly states marine debris in the authority Authorities that address sources and items 

that may become marine debris 

Authorities that address entities that may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory Agency 

Act to Prevent Combats marine pollution by regulating the at-sea X USCG 

Pollution from disposal of ship-generated garbage (“all kinds of 

Ships (APPS), 33 victual, domestic and operational waste, excluding 

U.S.C. 1901 et fresh fish and parts thereof, generated during 

seq. as amended the normal operation of the ship and liable to be 

by the Marine disposed of continuously or periodically except 

Plastic Pollution those substances which are defined or listed in other 

Research and Annexes to MARPOL 73/78.”) under the authority 

Control Act of the APPS and its implementing regulations found 

in 33 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Subchapter 

O, “Pollution,” Parts 151.51 through 151.77. 

Under APPS, the discharge of plastics from vessels 

is subject to complete prohibition. APPS establishes 

minimum distances for the discharges of other types 

of garbage. 

In addition, APPS and the regulations under it 

regulate reception facilities and require garbage 

management record books, placarding, and planning 

aboard vessels according to size. 

Rivers and Section 13 of the 1899 Act prohibits the discharge X USACE, 

Harbors Act of of refuse matter into or affecting navigable waters, USCG 

1899, 33 U.S.C. except as permitted by the Corps of Engineer. 

401 et seq. Modified and superceded by Clean Water Act 

section 402(a)(4). 

The Rivers and Harbors Act also gives USACE and 

USCG authority to respond to marine debris large 

enough to pose a hazard to navigation. 

Amended Section Section 208 of the 1954 Flood Control Act provides X USACE 

2 of the Flood authority for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

Control Act of to make improvements providing flood control 

1954, Sec 208 by removing accumulated snags and other debris. 

The Secretary of the Army is authorized to allot 

resources, for removing accumulated snags and 

other debris, and clearing and straightening of 

the channels in navigable streams and tributaries 

thereof, when in the opinion of the Chief of 

Engineers such work is advisable in the interest of 

flood control. 

Outer Continental MMS’ regulations and explanatory notices (NTL’s), X MMS 

Shelf Lands Act, issued in accordance with the Act, target “Pollution 

43 U.S.C. 1331 et Prevention and Control” (30 CFR 250.300) which 

seq. and Amend- includes prevention of and response to sources and 

ments 43 U.S.C. items that could become marine debris. 

1801 et seq. 
55 

Authority Explicitly states marine debris in the authority Authorities that address sources and items 

that may become marine debris 

Authorities that address entities that may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory Agency 

Energy Policy Act The Act amends Section 8 of the OCSLA to include X MMS 

of 2005, 42 U.S.C. alternate energy-related uses of the OCS (i.e., 

15801 et seq. new facilities for renewable energy development 

and alternate uses of existing facilities). MMS is 

developing regulations and explanatory notices in 

accordance with the Act to address marine pollution 

including prevention and response of sources and 

items that could become marine debris. 

MagnusonStevens Fishery 

Conservation and 

Management Act, 

16 U.S.C. 1801 

et seq. 

The Act is the primary law governing marine fisheries management in United States federal waters, 

administered by NOAA. Regulations developed 

under this Act include a prohibition from disposal in 

the EEZ of fishing gear and other articles by operators of foreign fishing vessels (50 CFR 600.510(c)): 

“(1) The operator of an FFV in the EEZ may not 

dump overboard, jettison or otherwise discard any 

article or substance that may interfere with other 

fishing vessels or gear, or that may catch fish or 

cause damage to any marine resource, including 

marine mammals and birds, except in cases of emergency involving the safety of the ship or crew, or as 

specifically authorized by communication from the 

appropriate USCG commander or other authorized 

officer. These articles and substances include, but 

are not limited to, fishing gear, net scraps, bale 

straps, plastic bags, oil drums, petroleum containers, 

oil, toxic chemicals or any manmade items retrieved 

in an FFV’s gear. (2) The operator of an FFV may 

not abandon fishing gear in the EEZ. (3) If these 

articles or substances are encountered, or in the 

event of accidental or emergency placement into the 

EEZ, the vessel operator must immediately report 

the incident to the appropriate USCG Commander 

indicated in tables 1 and 2 to § 600.502, and give 

the information required in paragraph (b) of 

this section”. In addition under section 303(b) 

(2)(A)&(B) of the Act, one of the discretionary 

provisions of fishery management plans is that 

zones may be designated where fishing shall be 

limited, not permitted, or permitted only to specified 

types of fishing vessels or gear. These zones may be 

designated to prevent loss or damage to fishing gear 

from interactions with deep sea corals. 

National Standard 9 of the Act 

states that “conservation and 

management measures shall, 

to the extent practicable, (A) 

minimize bycatch and (B) to the 

extent bycatch cannot be avoided, 

minimize the mortality of such 

bycatch.” Ghost fishing can result 

in bycatch. 

X NOAA 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 56 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Authority Explicitly states marine debris in the authority Authorities that address sources and items 

that may become marine debris 

Authorities that address entities that may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory Agency 

National Marine Sanctuary protection and management efforts Authorizes the Secretary of X NOAA 

Sanctuaries Act, include addressing threats to sanctuary resources. Commerce (NOAA) to designate 

16 U.S.C. 1431 The program uses a number of management tools and protect areas of the marine 

et seq. including education and outreach, research, and 

permitting and enforcement. 

environment with special national 

significance due to their conservation, recreational, ecological, 

historical, scientific, cultural, 

archeological, educational, or 

esthetic qualities as national 

marine sanctuaries. Day-to-day 

management of national marine 

sanctuaries delegated to NOAA’s 

National Marine Sanctuary 

Program. The primary objective 

of the NMSA is to protect marine 

resources, such as coral reefs, 

sunken historical vessels or 

unique habitats. 

National Wildlife 

Refuge System 

Administration 

Act of 1966 & 

National Wildlife 

Refuge System 

Improvement Act 

of 1997, 16 U.S.C. 

668dd 

Requires the Department of the 

Interior (FWS), in developing 

comprehensive conservation 

plan for refuges, to identify and 

describe significant problems 

that may adversely affect the 

populations and habitats of fish, 

wildlife, and plants and the 

actions necessary to correct or 

mitigate such problems. 

FWS 

Anadromous Fish 

Conservation Act, 

16 U.S.C. 757a 

et seq. 

Requires the Secretary of the 

Interior (FWS), on the basis of 

studies, to make recommendations to the Secretary of Health 

and Human Services concerning 

the elimination or reduction of 

polluting substances detrimental 

to fish and wildlife. 

FWS 

Endangered Spe- In consultation with and with X NOAA, FWS 

cies Act of 1973, the assistance of the Secretary 

16 U.S.C. 1531 of Commerce (NOAA) and 

et seq. Secretary of the Interior (FWS), 

each federal agency shall, insure 

that any action authorized, 

funded, or carried out by such 

agency is not likely to jeopardize 

the continued existence of any 

endangered species or threatened 

species or result in the destruction 

or adverse modification of critical 

habitat. 
 

57 

Authority Explicitly states marine debris in the authority Authorities that address sources and items 

that may become marine debris 

Authorities that address entities that may be impacted by 

marine debris 

Regulatory Agency 

Marine Mammal NOAA and FWS regulate and X NOAA. MMC. 

Protection Act, 16 enforce taking of marine mam- FWS 

U.S.C. 1402 mals; determines the condition 

of marine mammal stocks and 

methods for their protection and 

conservation; develops measures 

necessary for the protection and 

conservation of marine mammals; 

and conducts or funds research it 

deems necessary for protection 

and conservation of marine 

mammals. MMC reviews U.S. 

activities pursuant to laws and 

conventions relevant to marine 

mammals and the condition 

of marine mammal stocks and 

methods for their protection and 

conservation. MMC recommends 

to other federal agencies steps it 

deems necessary for the protection and conservation of marine 

mammals and conducts or funds 

research it deems necessary for 

protection and conservation of 

marine mammals. 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 58 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Literature Cited 

ACC (American Chemistry Council - Plastics Division) and the Society of the Plastics Industry, Inc. 2007. 

Operation Clean Sweep: Pellet Handling Manual. 42 pp. Available: http://www.opcleansweep.org/manual/ 

OCSmanual.pdf (accessed May 30, 2008). 

American Rivers. 2007. About – 2007 National River Cleanup Statistics. Available: http://www.americanrivers. 

org/site/PageServer?pagename=AR7_NationalRiverCleanup_About (accessed May 30, 2008). 

American Shipper. 2007. The Monthly Journal of International Trade and Logistics. Vol. 49, No. 11, p. 76. 

APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation). 2004. Derelict Fishing Gear and Related Marine Debris Seminar. 

Available: http://www.wpcouncil.org/documents/APECSeminar/ (accessed May 30, 2008). 

Asoh, K., T. Yoshikawa, R. Kosaki, and E. Marschall. 2004. Damage to cauliflower coral by monofilament 

fishing lines in Hawaii. Conservation Biology 18 (6): 1645–1650. 

Boland, R., and M. Donohue. 2003. Marine debris accumulation in the nearshore marine habitat of the endangered 

Hawaiian monk seal, Monachus schauinslandi, 1999-2001. Marine Pollution Bulletin 46 (11): 1385–1394. 

Boston Harbor Association (BHA). 2007. What We Do: The Boston Harbor Association’s Marine Debris 

Cleanup Initiative. Available: http://www.tbha.org/programs_marinedebris.htm (accessed May 30, 2008). 

Brown, J., G. Macfadyen, T. Huntington, J. Magnus, and J. Tumilty. 2005. Ghost Fishing by Lost Fishing Gear. 

Final Report to DG Fisheries and Maritime Affairs of the European Commission. Fish/2004/20. Institute for 

European Environmental Policy / Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management Ltd joint report. 132 pp. 

Bugoni, L., L. Krause, and M.V. Petry. 2001. Marine debris and human impacts on sea turtles in Southern Brazil. 

Marine Pollution Bulletin 42 (12): 1330–1334. 

Bullimore, B., P. Newman, M. Kaiser, S. Gilbert, and K. Lock. 2001. A study of catches in a fleet of “ghost 

fishing” pots. Fishery Bulletin 99 (2): 247–253. 

Butt, N. 2007. The impact of cruise ship generated waste on home ports of call: A study of Southampton. 

Marine Policy 31: 591–598. 

Carr, A. 1987. Impact of nondegradable marine debris on the ecology and survival outlook of sea turtles. Marine 

Pollution Bulletin 18 (6, Supplement 2): 352–356. 

Chiappone, M., H. Dienes, D. Swanson, and S. Miller. 2005. Impacts of lost fishing gear on coral reef sessile 

invertebrates in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. Biological Conservation 121 (2): 221–230. 

Cho, D. 2006. Evaluation of the ocean governance system in Korea. Marine Policy 30 (5): 570-579. 

Dameron, O., M. Park, M. Albins, and R. Brainard. 2007. Marine debris accumulation in the Northwestern 

Hawaiian Islands: An examination of rates and processes. Marine Pollution Bulletin 54 (4): 423–433. 

Derraik, J. 2002. The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: A review. Marine Pollution Bulletin 44 

(9): 842–852. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

59 

Dickerman, R., and R. Goelet. 1987. Northern gannet starvation after swallowing styrofoam. Marine Pollution 

Bulletin 18 (6): 293. 

Donohue, M., R. Boland, C. Sramek, and G. Antonelis. 2001. Derelict fishing gear in the Northwestern Hawaiian 

Islands: Diving surveys and debris removal in 1999 confirm threat to coral reef ecosystems. Marine Pollution 

Bulletin 42 (12): 1301–1302. 

Georgakellos, D. 2007. The use of the deposit-refund framework in port reception facilities charging systems. 

Marine Pollution Bulletin 54 (5): 508–520. 

Gramentz, D. 1988. Involvement of loggerhead turtle with the plastic, metal, and hydrocarbon pollution in the 

central Mediterranean. Marine Pollution Bulletin 19 (1):11–13. 

Green, A., J. Burgett, M. Molina, D. Palawski, and P. Gabrielson. 1997. The Impact of a Ship Grounding and 

Associated Fuel Spill at Rose Atoll National Wildlife Refuge, American Samoa. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Honolulu, Hawaii. 60 pp. 

Harrison, C., T. Hida, and M. Seki. 1983. Hawaiian seabird feeding ecology. Wildlife Monographs 85:75. 

Henderson, J. 2001. A pre- and post-MARPOL Annex V summary of Hawaiian monk seal entanglements and 

marine debris accumulation in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, 1982–1998. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42 (7): 

584–589. 

International Maritime Organization. 2007. Air pollution, ship recycling and ballast water management on 

MPEC agenda. Available: http://www.imo.org/Safety/mainframe.asp?topic_id=1472&doc_id=8207 (accessed May 

30, 2008). 

June, J. 2007. A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Derelict Fishing Gear Removal In Puget Sound, Washington. Report 

prepared for The Northwest Straits Foundation, September 29, 2007. 14 pp. 

Mallory, M., G. Roberston, A. Moenting. 2006. Marine plastic debris in northern fulmars in Davis Strait, Nunavut, 

Canada. Marine Pollution Bulletin 52 (7): 813–815.
 

Maryland Department of Natural Resources. 2002. Maryland Clean Marina Guidebook. 102 pp.
 

Matsuoka, T., T. Nakashima, and N. Nagasawa. 2005. A review of ghost fishing: Scientific approaches to 

evaluation and solutions. Fisheries Science 71:691–702. 

Morishige, C., M. Donohue, E. Flint, C. Swenson, and C. Woolaway. 2007. Factors affecting marine debris 

deposition at French Frigate Shoals, Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument, 1990–2006. 

Marine Pollution Bulletin 54 (8): 1162–1169. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2007a. Gulf of Mexico Marine Debris Project, 

2006. Available: http://gulfofmexico.marinedebris.noaa.gov (accessed May 30, 2008). 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2007b. Reducing threats to monument resources. 

Monument Draft Management Plan. Available: http://www.hawaiireef.noaa.gov/management/mp/dmmp_vol1_web.pdf 

(accessed May 30, 2008). 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 60 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2007c. Recovery Plan for the Hawaiian Monk 

Seal (Monachus schauinslandi). Second Revision. National Marine Fisheries Service. Available: http://www.nmfs. 

noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/recovery/hawaiianmonkseal.pdf (accessed May 30, 2008). 

New York Times. 2007. “Human Behavior, Global Warming, and the Ubiquitous Plastic Bag,” September 30, 

2007. 

Northwest Straits Commission. 2007. Derelict Gear Removal – Program Accomplishments. Available: http:// 

www.nwstraits.org/PageID/174/default.aspx (accessed May 30, 2008). 

Ocean Conservancy. 2006. International Coastal Cleanup Report 2006: A World of Difference. Available: 

http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/DocServer/Final_ICC_report_2007_release.pdf?docID=2841 (accessed May 30, 

2008). 

Ocean Conservancy. 2007. A Day Dedicated to Saving Marine Wildlife and Habitats Around the World. Available: 

http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/DocServer/2007ICCFactSheet.pdf?docID=2842 (accessed May 30, 2008). 

Ofiara, D., and B. Brown. 1999. Assessment of economic losses to recreational activities from 1988 marine 

pollution events and assessment of economic losses from long-term contamination of fish within the New York 

Bight to New Jersey. Marine Pollution Bulletin 38 (11): 990–1004. 

Oigman-Pszczol, S., and J. Creed. 2007. Quantification and classification of marine litter on beaches along 

Armacao dos Buzios, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Journal of Coastal Research 23 (2): 421–428. 

Page, B., J. McKenzie, R. McIntosh, A. Baylis, A. Morrissey, N. Calvert, T. Haase, M. Berris, D. Dowie, P. 

Shaughnessy, and S. Goldsworthy. 2004. Entanglement of Australian sea lions and New Zealand fur seals in lost 

fishing gear and other marine debris before and after Government and industry attempts to reduce the problem. 

Marine Pollution Bulletin 49 (1-2): 33–42. 

Pawson, M. 2003. The catching capacity of lost static fishing gears: Introduction. Fisheries Research 64 (2-3): 

101–105. 

Pichel, W., J. Churnside, T. Veenstra, D. Foley, K. Friedman, R. Brainard, J. Nicoll, Q. Zheng, and P. ClementeColon. 2007. Marine debris collects within the North Pacific Subtropical Convergence Zone. Marine Pollution 

Bulletin 54 (8): 1207–1211. 

Porter, J. 2008. Carriers join forces to prevent box losses. Lloyd’s List, January 08, 2008. 

Proceedings of the International Marine Debris Conference: Derelict Fishing Gear in the Ocean Environment. 

Ed. Naomi McIntosh et al. Honolulu, HI. August 2000. 

Redford, D., H. Trulli, and W. Trulli. 1997. Sources of plastic pellets in the aquatic environment. In: Coe, J. and 

Rogers, D., Editors, 1997. Marine Debris: Sources, Impacts, and Solutions, Springer-Velag, New York, pp. 335-343. 

Seitz, J., and G. Poulakis. 2006. Anthropogenic effects on the smalltooth sawfish (Pristis pectinata) in the United 

States. Marine Pollution Bulletin 52 (11): 1533–1540. 

Sheavly, S. 2007. National Marine Debris Monitoring Program: Final program report, data analysis and summary. 

Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by Ocean Conservancy, Grant Number X83053401-02. 76 

pp. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

61 

United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, et al. 1988. Report 

of the Interagency Task Force on Persistent Marine Debris. Chair, Interagency Task Force, Department of 

Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC. 170 pp. 

United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus), 

Atlantic Coast Population, Revised Recovery Plan. Hadley, Massachusetts. 258 pp. 

United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. Testimony of H. Dale Hall Director, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, before the House Subcommittee on Fisheries 

and Oceans regarding natural resource impacts and restoration of National Wildlife Refuges and other lands 

across the Gulf Coast, March 16, 2006. 

United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 2001. Green Marina Guidebook. Available: http:// 

concessions.nps.gov/document/NPSNationalCapitalRegion.pdf (accessed May 30, 2008). 

United States Department of Justice. 2007. San Diego Agrees to Estimated $1 Billion for Sewage System 

Improvements and Maintenance. Press release dated July 31, 2007. Available: http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2007/ 

July/07_enrd_564.html (accessed May 30, 2008). 

United States Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics. 2002. Summary of Cruise 

Ship Waste Streams. In: Maritime Trade & Transportation 2002. 89 pp. Available: http://www.bts.gov/publications/ 

maritime_trade_and_transportation/2002/ (accessed May 30, 2008). 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1993a. Pilot Study to Characterize Floatable Debris Discharged 

from Combined Sewer Overflows and Storm Drains September 1989 through May 1990. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1993b. Plastic Pellets in the Aquatic Environment: Sources and 

Recommendations. EPA 842-S-93-001. Washington, DC. 108 pp. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2002a. Assessing and Monitoring Floatable Debris. EPA842-B-02-002. Washington, DC. 57 pp. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2002b. Combined Sewer Overflows Demographics. Available: 

http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/cso/demo.cfm?program_id=5 (accessed May 30, 2008). 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. EPA and Muscatine, Iowa, Agree on Plan to Fix City 

Sewers. Press release dated September 5, 2007. Available: http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/names/r07_2007-

9-5_compliance_and_water (accessed May 30, 2008). 

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2008. Stormwater Discharges From Municipal Separate Storm 

Sewer Systems (MS4s). Available: http://www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/municipal (accessed May 30, 2008). 

Wilkinson, C., D. Souter, and J. Goldberg. 2006. Status of Coral Reefs in Tsunami Affected Countries: 2005. 

Australian Institute of Marine Science. 154 pp. 

Yoshikawa, T., and K. Asoh. 2004. Entanglement of monofilament lines and coral death. Biological Conservation

117 (5): 557–60. 

INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS
 
 

 

 

 62 INTERAGENCY REPORT ON MARINE DEBRIS SOURCES, IMPACTS, STRATEGIES & RECOMMENDATIONS

Photography Credits and Captions 

Front Cover: (Top left) A researcher takes in debris littered across the uninhabited beaches of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. 

NOAA 

(Bottom left) Derelict fishing gear, nets and ropes wrap around natural debris along the shorelines of Unalaska, Alaska. NOAA 

(Top right) A crab gets caught up in derelict netting. NOAA 

(Bottom right) Trash and debris are collected in the sand dunes on a beach in Puerto Rico. NOAA 

Page 3: Monofilament line wraps around benthic coral habitat. NOAA
	

Page 6: Debris left in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. NOAA
	

Page 12: (left) Microplastics collected from a beach in Hawaii. NOAA
	

(middle) A sea lion entangled in derelict fishing net hauls out on the beach. NOAA
	

(right) Bags collected during the International Coastal Cleanup. EPA
	

Page 14: Coastal resorts are not immune to marine debris and litter on their beaches. EPA
	

Page 18: Storm drain warning. EPA
	

Page 20: Hurricane damage in a marina in the Gulf of Mexico. NOAA
	

Page 21: Derelict nets smother a coral reef. NOAA
	

Page 23: Carelessly tossed trash can wind up in the ocean and into the mouths of marine animals. (left) EPA, (right) NOAA.
	

Page 24: An Albatross mother and chick forage for food amongst the trash in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. NOAA
	

Page 25: A Humpback whale strands because of net entanglement. NOAA 

Page 27: (left) Deputy Undersecretary for NOAA Tim Keeney surveys tire reef debris in Florida. Coastal America 

(middle) Coast Guard Seaman Brian Grebe (CGC Walnut WLB-205) offloads fishnet from the CG Cutter Walnut. USCG 

(right) Debris and bags collected during Ocean Conservancy’s International Coastal Cleanup. EPA 

Page 28: Mokupapapa Discovery Center marine debris exhibit. NOAA 

Page 33: Microplastics sampling from beach. NOAA 

Page 34: Debris along the C&O Canal. NOAA 

Page 35: Derelict pots wash up on the shore of a rocky beach. NOAA 

Page 36: Derelict nets and pots are unloaded into a bin and recycled into energy through the Fishing for Energy Program. NOAA 

Page 39: Members of the USCG Cutter Walnut offload 28 tons of marine debris collected from the NWHI. USCG 

Page 41: National Marine Debris Monitoring Program Report. EPA 

Page 43: NOAA Researchers prepare to launch an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) to search for derelict nets in the 

Pacific Ocean. NOAA
	

Page 44: A cameraman documents the debris scattered from a failed tire reef. Coastal America
	

Page 45: The remnants of a devastated marina highlight the irony of a sign that remains after Hurricane Katrina. NOAA
	

 

Carlos M. Gutierrez 

Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce 

Vice Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr., USN (Ret.)
 

Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator 

John H. Dunnigan
 

Assitant Administrator, Ocean Services and Coastal Zone Management
 

NOAA Ocean Service