-------
COASTAL RESOURCES AT RISK
Closed beaches...
polluted waters...
unsafe seafood...
destroyed habitats.
Courtesy of Center
for Marine Conservation
We have all heard about these problems, and we know the
cause: today, almost half the U.S. population lives in coastal
areas, and growth there proceeds at about four times
the national average. As more and more people
move to the coast, they need jobs, homes, and services.
Industry and business expands; highways and
shopping centers are built. These highly developed
urban and suburban communities place tremendous
stress on our coasts' essential natural resources.
Wetlands — swamps, marshes, bogs and similar
areas where water meets the land — improve water
quality, reduce flood and storm damage, provide important fish and wildlife habitat, and offer recreational
opportunities. Yet, over the past 200 years, nearly half the original acreage of wetlands in coastal areas has been
lost—dredged, filled, or otherwise destroyed—to make way for human activity. In 1989, income from coastal
commercial fisheries neared $2 billion. Nevertheless, important fisheries, such as striped bass, salmon, oysters, and
dungeness crab continue to decline. Pollution and habitat degradation threaten not only the health and productivity
of coastal environments, but also human health and economic security.
-------
X"> ~W T""^^
SOURCES AND IMPACTS OF DEGRADATION
Coastal degradation has diverse sources, many of which are regulated by federal laws. Inadequately treated municipal
and industrial wastewater releases bacteria, chemicals, heavy metals, and organic pollutants into our waterways.
During heavy rains, combined-sewer overflows send untreated sewage and stormwater directly into coastal waters.
These overflows often contain improperly disposed household wastes such as disinfectants, fertilizers, and insecticides,
as well as oil, silt, and debris from roads,
parking lots, and construction sites. Air
pollution also causes water pollution—
prevailing winds and rain carry toxic soot
and gases out over the coast where they
settle down into the water. Eventually,
chemical and biological contaminants can
accumulate in the edible tissues of fish and
other wildlife to levels considered unsafe
for human consumption. Unauthorized
modification or elimination of wetlands and
other important natural areas can increase
sedimentation, pollution, and flooding, as
well as reduce food and habitat available for wildlife. Accidental
spills and illegal "midnight dumpers" also contribute to coastal
pollution and degradation.
The cumulative effect of numerous pollutants and impacts on any
water body can be especially harmful. Even healthy coastal systems
have a limited capacity to absorb or neutralize pollutants. Without
proper protective measures in place, continued loss of coastal
habitats and contamination of waters as they flow from river to bay
to ocean eventually degrade entire ecosystems.
Vigorous enforcement of federal and state laws helps protect the
nation's coastal environments. Several federal agencies, including
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Army Corps of En- courtesy of center for Marine conservation
gineers (COE), the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), the Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Department of Justice
(Justice) work with state and local authorities to enforce pertinent laws. To be most effective, the agencies strive to
eliminate violations within entire watersheds and not simply prosecute individual violators. The cases described in
this brochure illustrate the federal government's expanding efforts to promote coordination among responsible
agencies and more effective enforcement of the laws that protect our coasts.
DANGER
BEACH
CLOSED
-------
FEDERAL LAWS PROTECT COASTAL RESOURCES
Steve Delar
Federal and state agencies administer coastal protection programs and act as stewards for coastal resources. Their
authority derives in part from several key federal laws.
The Clean Water Act (CWA) authorizes
the government to set limitations on the
discharge of pollutants into the nation's
waters and to enforce these limitations by
seeking penalties, fines, injunctions, and
imprisonment against violators.
The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA)
imposes substantial penalties and liability
for oil spills. Violators are liable for the
costs of cleanup and restoration of natural
resources, as well as compensation for
injury to real or personal property and for
loss of use of natural resources.
The Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA), also known as the "Superfund Act," authorizes the government to compel potentially responsible
parties to clean up or contain hazardous wastes. The Act also allows federal, state, and Indian Tribal governments to
recover the costs of investigations, cleanups, and remedial efforts, and to serve as trustees of the nation's natural
resources. As trustees, the governments may seek compensation from polluters for injuries to natural resources, and use
that compensation to restore the injured resources.
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) authorizes the government to require permits for hazardous
waste management and demand cleanup of contaminated lands and waters. Violators are subject to administrative, civil,
or criminal actions.
The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) regulates the dumping of material into ocean
waters and prohibits ocean dumping without a permit. Violators are subject to administrative and criminal penalties.
The Act was amended in 1988 to make the ocean dumping of sewage sludge or industrial waste unlawful after
December 31,1991. Under the Act, violators of National Marine Sanctuary Regulations are subject to adminstrative
penalties. The Act also allows the federal government to seek and use compensatory funds for the enhancement and
restoration of injured National Marine Sanctuary resources.
The Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS) regulates the discharge of oil, noxious liquid substances, and
garbage generated during the normal operations of vessels, and implements the international treaty on prevention of
pollution by ships, known as MARPOL. Among other things, APPS prohibits ships from discharging plastic wastes.
Violators are subject to civil or criminal penalties.
The Clean Air Act of 1990 (CAA) regulates emissions from industrial plants including toxic chemicals such as mercury,
lead, sulfur dioxide, and nitrous oxides that can settle from the atmosphere into the water. Violators are subject to
administrative, civil, or criminal actions.
The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, also known as "The Refuse Act," prohibits the discharge of refuse of any kind
into navigable waters, their tributaries or upon their banks. Violators are subject to penalties up to $2500 a day. The Act
also provides for imprisonment for up to one year.
-------
AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO ENFORCEMENT
Federal agencies are now joining forces and targeting whole coastal systems — from rivers to bays to coastlines — for
comprehensive enforcement actions.
Federal, state, and local laws provide government agencies with a wide range of tools to protect the nation's coastal
resources and, thus, to promote their vitality. Traditionally, each agency has followed its own mandate, and great strides
have been made to restrict the discharge of specific wastes and protect particular resources.
Integrated actions by federal, state, and local agencies strengthen law enforcement capabilities, allowing the agencies to
build on each other's expertise and authority. Increasingly, the federal agencies are working towards greater cooperation
among all concerned parties, including state and local governments and regional, interagency partnerships. Often local
residents also help by detecting and reporting violations, monitoring water quality, and bringing enforcement suits.
Other partnership programs also strive to protect ecological, economic, and esthetic values of our coastal areas. These
programs enlist public and private organizations to carry out research on, planning for, education about, and
implementation of coastal protection. Some examples are: the National Estuary Program, the Nonpoint Source
Management Program, the Coastal Zone Management Program, Coastal America, the Chesapeake Bay Program, the
Great Lakes Program, and the Gulf of Mexico Program.
The federal agencies are broadening their
approach, taking actions to correct the
harmful, cumulative effects of multiple
pollutant sources within watersheds. As a
result, existing pollution problems will be
resolved and future problems will be
deterred more effectively. Ultimately, the
health of vitally important coastal
environments will be better protected.
-------
ENFORCING THE LAWS
PUGET SOUND, WASHINGTON
The Urban Bay Action Program is a hallmark of cooperative efforts to
protect the coast. Initiated by the Puget Sound Estuary Program, teams of
federal, state, and local agency staff work with citizens and businesses to
control sources of contamination to Puget Sound. The teams educate, offer
technical assistance, and seek voluntary cleanups. They also use their regu-
latory authority to carry out field inspections, negotiate site cleanups, and
enforce discharge permits. A geographic focus is the key to success.
Recent enforcement actions illustrate federal support of this focus:
• In Elliott Bay, the Justice Department, on behalf of NOAA, filed a civil
claim against the City of Seattle and the Municipality of Metropolitan
Seattle for natural resource injuries allegedly caused by contaminants in
combined-sewer overflow discharges.
• On Harbor Island, in Elliott Bay, several EPA-initiated consent orders
required that studies be carried out to determine the best methods to
clean up contaminated sediments.
• In Commencement Bay, the U.S. and the State of Washington brought
civil actions for cleanup of contaminated sediments, as well as natural
resource damage claims against both private and public entities.
SAN FRANCISCO BAY, CALIFORNIA
Wetlands are essential in any estuary for habitat, for flood control and for
cleansing waters. The few remaining wetlands in San Francisco Bay are
protected by implementation of spill-prevention plans and stringent controls
on dredging and filling. In April 1988, a spill of more than 400,000 gallons from
a Shell Oil storage tank oiled 150 acres of wetlands and roughly 50 miles of San
Francisco Bay shoreline. Hundreds of birds and numerous mammals died.
Federal, state, and local agencies worked quickly to develop the case, focusing
on violations of Shell's spill-prevention plan. Shell agreed to pay more than
$2 million in civil penalties and $17.7 million for natural resource damages
and state and local government claims.
Protecting the coast was also an issue in a recent ocean dumping
enforcement action. Settling an administrative case brought by EPA for
violation of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA),
the Port of Oakland agreed to pay $150,000 in penalties for dredging and
dumping 8,800 cubic yards of sediments into the ocean.
GRAND CALUMET RIVER, INDIANA
In 1990, by targeting several violators in a region and enforcing multiple
federal laws, federal agencies broke ground in improving the water quality
of the Grand Calumet River, which flows into Lake Michigan. Responding
to EPA charges of repeated Clean Water Act violations, the USX Corporation
of Gary, Indiana, agreed—in a precedent setting consent decree—to pay
$9.1 million to clean up contaminated sediments and satisfy civil penalties.
USX was also required to upgrade its wastewater treatment facilities.
Meanwhile, as a result of EPA investigations, Justice filed several civil
environmental cases seeking to require location and remediation of water
pollution sources, contaminated sediments, and hazardous wastes
improperly disposed of in and around the Grand Calumet River.
In June 1990, the rapid response of the Coast Guard, EPA, NOAA, the Texas Water Commission, and several
private entities averted a potentially catastrophic oil spill. While offloading crude oil to another ship off the
Texas coast, an explosion took place on board the tanker MEGA BORG. Within hours, federal and state agents
took action to control both the dramatic fire and the resultant spill. The vessel and its remaining cargo were
eventually salvaged and towed into port. Under federal law, the vessel owner paid $3.9 million in cleanup
costs. The owner also provided funding for investigations of possible injuries to natural resources.
Over the past decade, EPA, the Justice Department and the Gulf Coast states have successfully taken many
actions to ensure that municipalities improve treatment of wastewater, for example:
• In 1989, the City of Houston agreed to spend about $800 million by 1997 to study and develop systems
to eliminate wetweather bypasses and overflows of wastewater. The new systems will greatly reduce
pollutants to Galveston Bay.
• In 1991, the City of Houston, in settlement of permit violation charges, agreed to pay a $50,000 penalty
and $800,000 to study the presence and effects of toxics in the lower Houston Ship Channel and Upper
Galveston Bay.
OFFSHORE WATERS
Constant surveillance and enforcement of restrictions on the discharge of garbage from vessels reduces
the threat of entanglement, starvation, and suffocation for many marine animals. Federal regulations
prohibit the discharge of plastics by vessels in any waters and establish certain distances from shore for
the discharge of other types of garbage by vessels.
The Coast Guard, on patrol off the Texas coast, witnessed people on board another vessel dumping
plastic into the water. The owner of the vessel was subsequently fined for illegal discharge of plastic.
In another case, the Coast Guard Cutter TAHOMA was on fisheries law enforcement patrol in the North
Atlantic. As the Cutter approached a fishing vessel for boarding, the fishermen cut their plastic nets to
avoid being caught bringing in an illegal catch. Since the nets were released into the water, the vessel
owner was cited and fined.
PENOBSCOT RIVER, MAINE
Combined-sewer overflow (CSO) discharges are a major source of debris,
urban pollutants, and biological contaminants in our waterways leading to
the coasts. Such discharges occur during heavy rainstorms when municipal
wastewater treatment plants are overloaded with both stormwater and
sewage, forcing the discharge of untreated wastes and runoff into coastal
waters. For many older cities with outdated sewer systems, CSOs are a
complex problem with no easy or inexpensive solution. A case involving the
city of Bangor, Maine, on the Penobscot River, exemplifies intergovernmental
actions to curb pollution from CSOs. In 1991, the Justice Department, on
behalf of EPA, and the State of Maine settled a suit against the city for
violations of the Clean Water Act. The consent decree requires that Bangor
pay a civil penalty, upgrade its wastewater treatment plant, and eliminate
untreated wastewater discharges from CSOs. It also requires the city to
develop both a long-term plan for CSO compliance with state and federal
regulations and an interim plan for CSO management.
ARTHUR KILL, NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY
In January 1990, a large oil spill in the Arthur Kill spurred an exceptional
effort by federal, state, and local agencies to press charges against the
responsible party and obtain compensation for damaged resources. A
ruptured Exxon Corporation pipeline leaked 567,000 gallons of No. 2
heating oil into the estuary and set back the recovery of habitat and wildlife
that has been slowly recuperating from previous environmental
degradation. Pleading guilty to federal criminal charges and settling all
civil claims, Exxon agreed to pay $15 million. Much of the money will be
used to acquire wetlands, restore natural resources, and reimburse the
agencies for spill-related expenses. In addition, to reduce the risk of future
spills, several federal agencies (including DOI, EPA, NOAA and USCG),
New York, New Jersey, local government, industry groups, and terminal
operators are cooperating to inspect and improve facilities and operational
procedures.
CHESAPEAKE BAY, MARYLAND AND VIRGINIA
A strong federal-state focus on reducing illegal wastewater discharges is
expected to improve water quality in the Chesapeake Bay. A joint effort
undertaken in 1990 by EPA and the states of Maryland, Virginia, and
Pennsylvania cut in half the number of municipal and industrial wastewater
dischargers on EPA's list of Significant Non-Compliers. At the same time,
with cooperation from the Department of Defense, 90 percent of those federal
facilities that had serious violations as of December 1989 either resolved those
violations or established formal compliance schedules.
Federal agencies also have cracked down on environmental crimes in the Bay
area. In May 1990, responding to prosecution brought by the Justice
Department, on behalf of COE and EPA, the owner of a 3,200-acre private
estate on Maryland's Eastern Shore pleaded guilty to illegally filling 86 acres
of wetlands on his estate. He was fined $1 million and ordered to pay
$ 1 million in restitution, and required to preserve 2,500 acres of his estate. In
January 1991, the project manager, who supervised the fill activity, was
found guilty of knowingly filling wetlands without a permit, despite repeated
warnings that permits are required. He was sentenced to serve six months in
jail, 4 months home detention, and an additional year probation.
-------
CITIZENS MAKE A DIFFERENCE
At Home — Many people make a personal commitment to prevent pollution and comply with laws that protect our
nation's waters. They conserve water, recycle used motor oil, and properly dispose of hazardous materials, such as
pesticides, fertilizers, and cleaning products.
In the Community—Some citizens patrol waterbodies looking for and reporting possible violations. For example, the
Puget Soundkeeper, who is trained in sampling and chain-of-evidence procedures, spotted a milky pond originating
from an industrial outfall. He called appropriate authorities, and his tip led to an enforcement action. Dumping of highly
alkaline cement waste was halted and the responsible party was fined $150,000.
Citizens also collect water quality data that can help build cases against potential polluters. In Minnesota, for example,
information collected by volunteers pointed out the need for further study by the state pollution control agency. The
study led to a successful enforcement action and, as a result, phosphorus discharges to the lake were reduced.
Thousands of volunteers participate in beach cleanups every year. They collect and categorize metal, glass, paper, and
23 kinds of plastic debris. They also record information on stranded or entangled wildlife. In part, beach cleanup data
led to ratification of the international treaty that prohibits the dumping of plastics at sea.
For more information or to report a possible violation, call your local or state environmental protection, natural resources,
or health departments or contact one of the following federal agencies:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Coastal Enforcement Initiative
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Damage Assessment and Restoration Program
Coastal Enforcement Initiative
6001 Executive Blvd.
Room 425
Rockville, MD 20852
Army Corps of Engineers
Coastal Enforcement Initiative
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Washington, DC 20314-1000
October 1991
U.S. Coast Guard
Marine and Environmental Protection Division
Coastal Enforcement Initiative
2100 Second St., S.W.
Washington, DC 20593-0001
Department of the Interior
Office of Environmental Affairs
Coastal Enforcement Initiative
1849 C St., N.W.
Washington, DC 20240
US Army Corps
of Engineers.
------- |