Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 192.0

529US1

Unit: $U35

[09-26-01 09:32:44] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 529 U. S. 89 (2000)

117

Appendix to opinion of the Court

these cases until appeal. Resolution of these cases would
beneﬁt from the development of a full record by all inter-
ested parties.

We infer from the record that Washington is not now en-
If, pending adjudication of these
forcing its regulations.
cases on remand, a threat of enforcement emerges, the Court
of Appeals or the District Court would weigh any application
for stay under the appropriate legal standards in light of
the principles we have discussed and with recognition of the
national interests at stake.

When one contemplates the weight and immense mass of
oil ever in transit by tankers, the oil’s proximity to coastal
life, and its destructive power even if a spill occurs far upon
the open sea, international, federal, and state regulation may
be insufﬁcient protection. Sufﬁciency, however, is not the
question before us. The issue is not adequate regulation but
political responsibility; and it is, in large measure, for Con-
gress and the Coast Guard to confront whether their regula-
tory scheme, which demands a high degree of uniformity, is
adequate. States, as well as environmental groups and local
port authorities, will participate in the process. See 46
U. S. C. § 3703(a) (requiring the Coast Guard to consider the
views of “ofﬁcials of State and local governments,” “rep-
resentative of port and harbor authorities,” and “repre-
sentatives of environmental groups” in arriving at national
standards).

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and
these cases are remanded for further proceedings consistent
with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

APPENDIX TO OPINION OF THE COURT

“1. Event Reporting—WAC 317–21–130. Requires opera-
tors to report all events such as collisions, allisions and
near-miss incidents for the ﬁve years preceding ﬁling of a