[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
/d2f;;3 Coastal Zone Information Center U.S. u"CEAN P0'L'@i,-,.,-.CY I IL N N 'HE 1'9'CsE] S US AND ISSUES POLICY OVERVIEVY October 1978 55 46 64 47 brs 53 122 6 42, 1@8 W (15ft ep' 54 ,,,A GIRT 40 48 T E Intl 6sec 60ft ISM V's 46 72 /24/ 50543 50 SEA GIRT S 0 Wor 57 09 3@ 37 S1,81, 11 667Z Wor P". Mal 5 57 671, 59 Vy S4S N 23// 51 -45 -- , wor J7 S@;!3 70 CPOLA 39 41 36 37 69 OWER DANGLP ARE/ if 25Y '1 51 69 0 T S "D _--47' 73 60 P- -;M�yo@ 50 58 _453 S5 Brielle 0 S "C"48 55 Pr- Mood 2 Qu" rNL,1@7- -57 P TO FT AVD-WIDTH AUG 1977 #63 67 74 ca F1 R 4sec 5M @.@3 75no@ v, 1 44, 57 FIG 22sec 41 (cNrt 12324 64 35h 6M HORN `@:::13 71 71 4Bn 308 kHz 53 el 6* M jr2, p69 67 66 65 gyyls 2eei 7ote GONG es POINT PSANT 75 507 9. TAN 3/BEAC AMR 38 51 (25 ft ep) 75 72 7.C 'b'@ 66 69 24 611 67 TANK 51 68 36 2@@ 67 74 :W"ck 6 2 63 L'** 53 6rs 63 74 67 35 RAY HEAD 69 6? 75 22 51 710... Weck 67 66 an Cr.- -L4 -9. I. '61 /35 68 ... 59 Herring 1 21 73 CO?tk -R (use cbarf 1232,1) 6@119 1 47 14@ 71 75 G C S 68 1-(55 ff reP) 75 1020 6 57/ 615 67 64 TAr 53Y ep) 50f 15f' 40 48 50 72 r@6 2 67 Z -5V 57 @70 0 9. & S @55 $5 .U552 36 67 4 1978 1 3 53 ?1) 2 J@4 58@ 75 41 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 1075913 COASTAL ZONE INFORiMIATNON CENTER U.S. OCEAN POLICY IN TH E 1970s: S US AND ISSUES POLICY OVERVIEW October 1978 -I' OF C04, e* Juanita M. Kreps, Secretary of Commerce Jerry J. Jasinowski, Assistant Secretary for Policy James W. Curlin, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Ocean, Resource and Scientific Policy Coordination Robert J. Blackwell, Assistant Secretary for Maritime Affairs Richard A. Frank, Administrator, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration SEP P-rOPG--tY Of CSC Library-1 U S - DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CENTER 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE TAT CHARLESTON 9 SC 29405-2413 For sale by the Superintendent ot Docurnents, U.S. Government Printing Offfce I Washington, D.C.20402". Stock Number 003-017-00429-5 . . - ... I I Foreword and Acknowledgments The ocean has played a major role in the growth of the United States-as a source of food, in the development of commerce, in the Nation's security, and as a rec reational outlet. Today, in the Nation's quest to satisfy expanding needs for energy, minerals, space, food, and recreation, new demands are being placed on the ocean and coastal regions, many of which already are intensively developed. Problems relating to these demands are intensified by increasing concern about the present and future quality of the natural environment and the best use of resources-many no longer thought to be unlimited. These pressures for development are worldwide and are reflected in the continuing effort by the United Nations to reach agreement on an international law of the sea. A decade has passed since the last systematic review of U.S. ocean policy by the Stratton Commission. During the interim, significant changes have taken place in societal values-in the equitable and best use of resources, in environmental law, in technological capabilities, and in the broadening of conflicting interests of use to an international scale. New laws have been enacted to give the Federal Government a measure of control over the use and protec- tion of U.S. ocean,and coastal resources, but many problems remain to be solved. If solu- tions are to be forthcoming, the Federal Government must exercise greater leadership in managing this trust on behalf of all the people. In recognition of this situation, President Carter, in June 1977, requested the Secretary of Commerce to make@ a comprehensive review of U.S. ocean policy. This decision by the President was enthusiastically supported by a number of U.S. Senators and Congressmen. This report is the result of the President's request. It discusses current ocean policies in each major area of civilian ocean and coastal affairs, provides background information on the evolution of policies, describes and appraises the status of Federal ocean programs, identi- fies issues that need to be resalved, and reviews recommendations that have been made by various advisory commissions, councils, and other groups, including legislative proposals where appropriate. The report does not offer recommendations. It is a reference document for study and review of domestic ocean policy, and is intended to provide the background and impetus for discussion and debate of outstanding ocean policy issues. A separate appen- dix includes a compilation of the statutes and executive orders that form the framework of U.S. ocean policy. Preparation of this report was coordinated under the general direction of the Secretary of Commerce, Juanita Kreps, within the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Jerry J. Jasinowski, under the supervision and guidance of James W. Curlin, Deputy Assistant Sec- retary for Ocean, Resource and Scientific Policy Coordination. The study was compiled in consultation with Richard A. Frank, Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Administration, and Robert J. Blackwell, Assistant Secretary for Maritime Affairs. Although the Department of Commerce had major responsibility for compiling the report, major contributions were made by the Department of the Interior, Department of Transpor- tation (U.S. Coast Guard), and the National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmos- phere (NACOA). Over 100 persons were involved. Comments were offered by a wide range of reviewers in the academic and private sectors, at State and Federal levels of government, and from the Congress. The principal authors and their organizational affiliations are: Alfred W. Anderson, Office of Legislative Affairs, National Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Administration, Department of Commerce iii � Berton J. Braley, Jr., Maritime Administration, Department of Commerce � James W. Curlin, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Ocean, Resource, and Scientific Policy Coordination, Department of Commerce � Harry Feehan, Office of General Counsel, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce � Nancy M. Foster, Office of Ocean Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce � Bruce G. Gellin, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Department of Com- merce � Harold F. Gortner, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Department of Com- merce � Chris Heller, President's Reorganization Projects, Office of Management and Budget � Robert C. Junghans, Office of Policy and Planning, National Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Administration, Department of Commerce � Capt. William E. Lehr, Office of the Chief of Staff, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Transportation � Barbara Lloyd, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Energy and Minerals, Depart- ment of the Interior � Catherine E. Meleky, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce � Edward J. Pastula, Jr., National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce � Richard N. Rigby, Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce � Brian J. Rothschild, Office of Policy and Planning, National Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Administration, Department of Commerce � Charles F. Treat, Office of Ocean, Resource and Scientific Policy Coordination, Department of Commerce � John T. Willis, National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere � Patrick H. Windham, U.S. SeD ite Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transpor- tation � William W. Windom, Office of the Naval Deputy, National Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Administration, Department of Commerce Production of the study was overseen by Neil A. Benfer, Scientific and Technical Publi- cation Division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Production was by Carol A. Owenby, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Department of Commerce, and Debra L. Walker, National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere. iv Contents Page OVERVIEW ................................................. I MARINE FISHERIES ......................................... 5 COASTAL RESOURCES ...................................... 12 MARINE TRANSPORTATION ................................. 21 THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT ............. ................. 28 MARINE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY .....*............. ...... 35 MARINE EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION, AND TRAINING 41 ORGANIZING THE NATIONAL OCEAN EFFORT ............... 45 Overview Introduction our increased knowledge about the characteristics, The study that is highlighted in this summary, U.S. composition, and condition of ocean resources and Ocean Policy in the 1970s.- Status and Issues, is the in part to a number of major changes in national result of the first extensive review of national ocean needs and priorities. affairs since 1969. This review was requested by Pres- The ocean and coastal resources of the United ident Carter with the encouragement and support of States include: 545,000 square nautical miles of open leading U.S. Senators and Representatives. The re- ocean over which the United States has absolute ju- view is to serve as a reference for further discussion risdiction; another 1,500,000 square nautical miles of of national ocean policy and as a focal point for ocean over which the United States has partial juris- future debates on critical ocean policy issues. In diction; approximately 101,000 linear miles of coast- directing the Secretary of Commerce to undertake line; more than 26,000 islands; and uncounted bays, this study, the President specified that it was to be estuaries, tidelands, and wetlands. The vastness of comprehensive in its treatment of major elements of these resources is illustrated by the fact that, U.S. ocean policy and objective in its identification together, the 50 State governments and the Federal and discussion of issues. Government control an ocean area which is nearly Accordingly, the contents of this study consider three times larger than all of the publicly owned land the Nation's overall stake in its ocean and coastal in the United States. It is also important to note that resources and review the status of the six major ele- almost no ocean resources are privately owned. In- ments of U.S. ocean policy: marine fisheries; coastal stead, these resources are held and managed in trust resources; the marine environment; marine science for all the people by various units of government. and technology; marine transportation; and marine This "common property" characteristic of ocean re- employment, education, and training. The study also sources increases the importance of public policy in considers the organizational structure that is managing our Nation's ocean affairs, and dominates employed by the Federal Government in carrying out what may be termed the "national interest" in ocean the national ocean effort. and coastal resources. The study concentrates on today's ocean and Today's national interest in the ocean is actually a coastal policies -and on tomorrow's problems and complex M' ixture of three different interests: the tra- issues. Particular attention is paid to the many im- ditional strategic value of ocean resources; their con- portant changes that have been made over the past temporary economic value; and their long-term in- decade in this Nation's laws and policies concerning trinsic and esthetic value. Although the relative prior- the use and preservation of ocean and coastal re- ities of these three interests have waxed and waned sources. Each chapter also highlights the principal over the past decade, the Nation's overall stake in its Federal organizations and programs that are engaged ocean and coastal resources has grown and is now in carrying out the national ocean effort. greater than ever before. Until the end of World War 11, the strategic impor- Importance of Ocean and Coastal tance of the ocean controlled our national policy. Resources to the United States The seas have always provided this Nation with a An awareness of the size and importance of the natural barrier against military invasion, and sea- ocean and coastal resources available to the United power was the predominant aim of Federal ocean in- States is central to the consideration of possible new terests for many decades. To some extent, the ocean directions in national ocean policy. Although the continues to fulfill this function today, and U.S. ocean has always had a great influence on American naval power still depends on advances in ocean life and culture, today's national interest in our science and technology. ocean resources is much different than it has been in Another traditional strategic use of the oceans has the past. The difference can be attributed in part to been for transportation and trade. Although ships 1 are no longer the principal means of transporting Basic intrinsic and esthetic values are the third people from coast to coast or from country to coun- major component of national interest in ocean and try, the United States is still highly dependent on coastal resources. The intrinsic value of the world's waterborne transportation for the movement of trade ocean should not be underestimated, The climates of goods. In fact, almost all of the Nation's commerce the world are largely determined by oceanic and at- with international trading partners moves over sea mospheric currents that transport heat. Ocean waters lanes and through port facilities-more than $145 also are instrumental in controlling gas exchanges billion worth in 1976. that maintain the balances of oxygen and carbon A third strategic concern arises from the impor- dioxide in the atmosphere. Esthetic goals, such as tance which ocean issues have assumed in the interna- protection of the marine environment and preserva- tional arena over the past decade. During this time tion of natural resources, have become increasingly over 100 nations have met repeatedly, under the important in the past decade. Further, these goals auspices of the United Nations, to seek international have become important not only to the enjoyment of agreement on a new "Law of the Sea." There have the Nation's ocean and coastal riches, but also to the been many issues raised in this arena: the creation of preservation of their economic value. Our ocean and economic resource zones, passage of vessels through coastal regions have also become a mecca for recrea- straits, access to deep seabed mineral resources, and tion in recent years, and over 40 percent of the U.S. access to coastal waters for scientific research pur- population resides in coastal counties. As the popula- poses, to name only a few. All of these have strategic tion continues to increase, and as the trend toward significance to one nation or another and, therefore, more leisure time continues, it is expected that the in- to the United States. Accordingly, the strategic value trinsic and esthetic worth of the ocean will grow in of the ocean is still a major component of the nation- terms of its importance in the overall national interest. al ocean interest, although its relative importance U.S. Ocean Policy Today: may have diminished somewhat in recent years. Status and Trends At the forefront of today's national interest in ocean and coastal resources is a second concern: their National interests in the ocean, as reflected in Fed- economic value. The energy crisis of the 1970s has eral civilian ocean policy in the United States today, focused attention on the oil and natural gas resources encompass five interrelated goals: of the seabed. It has been estimated that two-thirds a Development of ocean and coastal resources, of the recoverable reserves of oil and natural gas in 9 Protection and preservation of ocean and coast- the United States lie under the Outer Continental al resources, Shelf and the coastal margins of Alaska. At 1978 9 Management of ocean and coastal resource use, market prices, these resources would be worth almost a Provision of services to ocean users, and a trillion dollars. American coastal waters and estu- * Advancement of marine science and technology. aries also support the most productive fisheries in the To a large extent, the goals apply equally to both world, yielding almost one-fifth of the world's har- the domestic and the international ocean policies of vestable supply. Commercial fishing contributes the United States. Although national security goals nearly $4 billion a year to the economy in terms of are beyond the scope of this policy discussion, they processed fish at wholesale prices, and employs over are likely to play a major role in determining interna- a quarter of a million people on a seasonal basis. tional ocean policy, but not domestic ocean policy at The future economic outlook for ocean use is this time. good. More than 10 billion tons of nodules contain- National policies for ocean and coastal resource ing nickel, cobalt, copper, and manganese may lie on development seek to ensure that the United States the floor of the deep seabed. Closer to shore, large makes full economic and social use of its ocean- quantities of valuable sand, gravel, shells, phospho- related wealth. Resource development has long been rite, and even coal may prove to be of importance. an aim of national ocean policy, and in the post- Seawater itself may become an important source of Sputnik decade of the 1960s, this goal shared top pri- energy in the future, either through the development ority with the goal of advancing marine science and of fusion technology or through conversion of the technology. In fact, during that era, the prevailing heat that the ocean stores in great quantities. Because philosophy was that massive new Federal investments of this economic potential, commercial uses of ocean in marine science and technology were needed to and coastal resources are likely to stay high on the stimulate development of the oceans' economic priority list in terms of the overall national ocean in- potential. Today we recognize that the opposite is terest for the foreseeable future. true. Where there has been significant economic 2 potential, such as in the recovery of offshore oil and tection in all areas, the continued dredging and filling gas, the necessary scientific and technological ad- of coastal wetland areas for developmental purposes, vances have been forthcoming. Accordingly, today's the promise of continued economic development Federal ocean resource development policies empha- pressures in the coastal region, the increase in ocean- size private industry's role in assuming many, if not borne shipments of oil and other hazardous materials, most, of the financial and technological risks associ- and the availability of better scientific information ated with resource recovery and use. demonstrating the ecological fraility of the oceanic However, it has also been Federal policy to en- and coastal environment. courage and, in selected instances, to assist private Today's policies continue to stress the need for industry in the development of ocean and coastal re- adequate marine environmental protection and ocean sources. Major forms of Federal assistance for re- and coastal resource preservation. At the same time, source development include making available for protection and preservation no longer enjoy the over- private development or use ocean and coastal re- riding priority they once had. The energy crisis, gen- sources that are Federally controlled, and providing eral economic conditions, and, to some extent, the financial assistance in the context of the Govern- success of environmental rules and regulations now ment's overall economic development goals. Major, in force have combined to restore a balance between specific policies of this type at the current time pro- development goals and protection goals in the overall vide for: (1) accelerated leasing of Federally owned scheme of national ocean policy priorities. Outer Continental Shelf areas thought to contain oil Major protection and preservation policies now and natural gas; (2) designating or purchasing coastal being pursued by the Federal Government include: parklands, beaches, and other areas for recreational (1) restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, use-often stimulating local economic development and biological integrity of the Nation's waters as a and contributing to resource protection and preserva- whole; (2) eliminating the discharge or dumping tion objectives; (3) making available to State and local of materials into the ocean that adversely affect governments grants, loans, and loan guarantees for human health, the marine environment, or the economic development in coastal areas, particularly oceans' economic potential; (3) protecting U.S. navi- areas that are economically depressed and areas that gable waters and their resources from pollution are affected by offshore energy development; (4) sub- caused by the discharge of oil from ships or by vessel sidizing the construction and operation of U.S. mer- accidents; (4) preserving, protecting, and, where chant vessels, which not only has strategic benefit but possible, restoring the resources of the coastal zone; also helps to maintain healthy levels of local employ- and (5) preserving fishery habitat and protecting en- ment; (5) assisting the fishing industry in construct- dangered marine species and marine mammals. The ing, equipping, and renovating vessels and in devel- primary tool used by the Federal Government in oping new uses and markets for fishery products. In achieving these protection and preservation goals is the near future, the Congress is expected to adopt a the regulatory process, which involves scientific new policy that will provide U.S. industry with legal research and monitoring, legal activities, and en- protection for the recovery and processing of deep forcement efforts. However, other forms of induce- seabed hard minerals. Additional information on ment are also applied, including the provision of the current objectives and Federal Programs involved financial assistance in the construction of sewage in carrying out these development policies is con- treatment facilities and the purchase of coastal land tained in the individual chapter summaries that areas for parks and sanctuaries. follow this overview. The continuing need to strike a balance between Policies aimed at comprehensive protection and resource development goals and resource protection preservation of ocean and coastal resources are goals has given rise to a new type of Federal ocean relative newcomers to the field of ocean affairs as a policy over the past few years: management of ocean whole. However, from the mid-1960s to the mid- and coastal resource use. Few examples of this type 1970s, protection and preservation goals dominated of policy exist as yet, and clear operating objectives new national ocean policy initiatives. During this and philosophies have not been articulated for ocean period, new laws and policies were adopted by the management as a whole. However, the underlying Congress at a rapid rate so that, today, the Federal aim is to develop a system or process that will provide Government has available a large arsenal of protec- a comprehensive and consistent way of resolving tion and preservation tools. The reasons for the potential conflicts over ocean resource use. Such a increased emphasis on protection and preservation system is necessitated by the common property are clear: a general trend toward environmental pro- nature of ocean resources, by the large impact that 3 development at sea has on coastal land areas, by the been regarded as an uncontroversial element of over- split jurisdiction over ocean territory, and by the in- all ocean policy. creasing number of ocean areas that are being s ub- Marine science and technology developed in the jected to multiple uses and possible conflicts (such as 1920s, matured during World War 11, and rose to certain areas off the East Coast that are used simul- prominence (as discussed earlier) in the 1960s. At its taneously for commercial and recreational fishing, zenith, marine science and technology was nearly commercial shipping, recreatio nal boating, ocean synonymous with the term "ocean policy." The lack dumping, oil drilling, and other activities). of adequate scientific knowledge and lack of techno- Major ocean and coastal resource, management logical capability were viewed as the principal bar- policies now in effect provide for: (1) carrying out a riers to realization of the oceans' vast economic and comprehensive program of fishery conservation and social potential. Over the past decade, however, ma- management in the 3- to 200-mile zone; (2) encourag- jor changes have been made in other elements of na- ing and assisting coastal States and territories in the tional ocean policy that have profoundly affected planning and implementation of programs for coast- marine science and technology. The dominant view al zone management; and (3) designating selected today is that marine science and technology consti- ocean and coastal areas as Federal marine sanctu- tute important tools that are best used in the achieve- aries, and restricting the types of activities that may ment of other ocean policy goals and objectives. occur in these areas. Although the future extent and Accordingly, the Federal Government today has direction of Federal policies for ocean resQurce use no overall policy toward marine science and technol- management remains to be resolved, some of the ogy. Although scientific and technological activities techniques that may be applied are: the harmoniza- are common elements of nearly all Federal ocean en- tion of regulations, the development of improved deavors, no overall policy has been established to de- and more comprehensive resource use planning, the fine a Federal role in marine R&D or to guide Federal provision of better scientific information needed for support for it. Instead, individual goals and strate- management, and the use of financial incentives. . gies are pursued by a wide range of different Federal One of the earliest thrusts of ocean policy in the agencies, academic institutions, and industries. This United States was the provision of services to ocean situation notwithstanding, the overall level of Feder- users. This aspect of ocean use remains an ' important al financial investment in marine science and tech- part of today's ocean policy, at least in terms of the nology has remained firm over the past decade, an number and size of Federal activit ies devoted to it. indication of its continuing importance. The main policy goals in this area are to improve nav- Major Ocean Policy Issues igability of the Nation's marine waterways and en- sure the safety and efficiency of marine operations. The full study identifies numerous U.S. ocean pol- The Federal Government has had programs aimed at icy goals and objectives, and also brings out several harbor expansion, channel improvement, and port dozen specific, unresolved issues of consequence to access enlargement since 1824. The Federal role in the individual elements of Federal ocean affairs. this policy area includes the construction of water- These issues are highlighted in the chapter summaries ways and facilities as well as the provision of,assist- that follow this overview. At the same time, there are ance to private sector interests.. Federal efforts to a number of key policy issues that cut across the ensure marine safety and efficiency include the provi- boundaries of several different elements. These issues sion of aids to navigation, the conduct of search and will be harder to resolve and are of greater im- rescue operations, the publication of coastal maps portance. and nautical charts, and the provision of marine One such issue concerns the need for an overall na- weather services. tional ocean policy framework that can be used for Over the years, Federal policy has been to provide the effective long-term management of ocean and these services largely free of charge. This has been coastal resources under U.S. jurisdiction. There has deemed an appropriate Government function, be- been some question as to whether a policy framework cause the services are needed by many users for a that chooses the ocean as its basic integrating theme wide variety of purposes, and because the cost and is necessary, or even desirable. National energy pol- effort involved in providing them are more than any icy, it is argued, should be sufficient to govern the individual or user group could afford. Generally, recovery of offshore oil and gas, and overall envi- these Government services have been expanded or ronmental policies should be applied to ocean and contracted in accordance with demand. They have coastal areas as well as inland areas. This has been 4 the approach used in the past. The problem is that it the development of ocean and coastal resources and, is a piecemeal approach that may not recognize ade- if so, what that role should be in relation to private quately the unique characteristics of ocean and industry and State and local governments. A related coastal resources and the special nature of the Gov- question is how a vigorous policy for ocean resource ernment's responsibility as trustee of a vast "com- development will affect the achievement of environ- mon property" resource. Increasing congestion in mental and other social goals. offshore areas has already intensified the competi- A final key issue concerns the development of an tion for space and other resources. Activities in U.S. appropriate Federal organizational structure for ocean space affect other countries as well. Accord- effectively discharging national ocean policy respon- ingly, many have felt the need for a policy frame- sibilities. Numerous proposals have been advanced work that will balance ocean use with environmental over the past decade for strengthening the Govern- protection and ocean and coastal resource develop- ment's institutional capability to implement and ment with resource conservation. At the center of coordinate ocean-related activities. The Administra- this issue is the matter of whether a set of laws, prin- tion now is actively considering several additional ciples, strategies and programs can be formulated proposals. The question is whether ocean-related and implemented that will provide a comprehensive activities constitute the best, or even a good, central and consistent approach to the management of ocean theme around which to structure an organization, and coastal resources without unduly hampering the or whether there are other overriding missions or achievement of other goals of major importance to goals which should dictate organizational arrange- the Nation. ments. Another issue of overriding importance concerns the extent to which the United States will exercise Conclusions jurisdiction over ocean and seabed resources. This issue has been a subject of intense international The importance of ocean resources to the United debate at the U.N. Law of the Sea Conference in re- States has increased markedly since the last compre- cent years. The United States has already extended its hensive review of national ocean policy was made jurisdiction over fishery resources seaward to a dis- in 1969. During this same period, there have been tance of 200 miles, and other nations have adopted major changes in emphasis between the various ele- this limit for all resources. The question is whether ments of U.S. ocean policy, and the number of crit- the United States should also consider extending its ical ocean policy issues has grown rather than dimin- jurisdiction over resources other than fisheries in this ished. Leadership during these years has been exer- 200-mile zone. cised largely by the Congress through the enactment A third issue of major importance is the need for a of new laws and the authorization of new programs. national policy toward the development of ocean and Many issues have received inadequate attention in coastal resources. The United States unquestionably this period and some are now beginning to reach the depends upon its ocean and coastal resources for critical stage. The future ability of the United States continued economic growth and stability. However, to develop and use its ocean and coastal resources the United States today lacks a policy deliberately may well hinge on the prompt resolution of several providing for the maximum development of those re- of the critical issues identified in this study. Whether sources, consistent with sound principles of conser- or not that proves to be the case, the study will have vation and management. Again, the Nation's ap- served its purpose if it stimulates and focuses further proach is ad hoc and fragmented. The question is debate over ocean policy issues in the coming months whether a larger Federal role is needed to stimulate and years. Marine Fisheries 1. Background percent of total world landings. Per capita consump- tion of fish in the United States is small compared to When compared with many other countries, the consumption in other countries and to consumption United States is a relatively minor fishing Nation. In of beef and poultry. Total value added to the U.S. 1976, for example, the United States was the world's economy annually by fishing activities is less than I sixth-ranked fishing nation, but accounted for only 4 percent of the Gross National Product. 5 in spite of this situation, marine fisheries resources part, this is due to the fact that many of the edible are of enormous importance in Federal ocean policy species U.S. consumers find desirable cannot be har- affairs. Because as much as one-fifth of the world's vested in U.S. waters. harvestable supply of fish may be found off U.S. At the same time, many species of fish desired by coasts, there is major international concern over U.S. foreign nations live in U.S. waters. Throughout the fishery conservation and management policies. With- 1960s, foreign fishing in U.S. waters increased, in the United States, fishing is more important to reaching a high point of 3.5 million metric tons in some regions than the national picture indicates. In 1971. Japan, the U.S.S.R., the Republic of Korea, Alaska, New England, Maryland, Virginia, Texas Poland, and Canada all conducted intense fishing and Washington, for example, many counties rely on operations off the U.S. coast during that time. Since the fishing industry for income and employment. In 1971, foreign catches have declined in the U.S. zone. these areas fishing is a traditional way of life which is Under a law enacted in 1976 the U.S. now controls pursued by independent individuals. In fact, 90 per- all fishing within 200 miles. cent of all U.S. fishing vessels are independently Many estimates indicate, however, that damage operated and employ fewer than five people. has been done to these fishery resources over the past Some background information on the U.S. fishing 20 years through overfishing, marine pollution, loss industry, U.S. consumption of fishery products, and of habitat, and other factors. Major commercial spe- the nature of U.S. fishery resources is essential to an cies of Atlantic groundfish (such as cod, flounder, understanding of current Federal fisheries policies haddock, hake, and ocean perch) have been depleted. and related issues. The fishing industry consists of Pacific stocks of Alaska pollock, yellowfin sole, and four interrelated activities: harvesting, processing, yellowtail flounder are similarly depleted. The Amer- transporting, and distributing/ marketing. The an- ican lobster is seriously overfished. Oyster landings nual harvest of about 2.1 million metric tons has re- have steadily declined. Twenty-five percent of the mained stable in recent years. The dockside value of clam flats in the two leading hard clam producing 1977 landings was approximately $1.5 billion. About States are closed because of pollution. All Pacific 161,400 people work in the harvesting sector of the salmon stocks are heavily fished and some are de- industry. pleted. Habitat degradation has been a major cause The processing sector employs some 92,000 people of the decline in Pacific Coast salmon runs. each year. In 1976, 1,668 plants in the U.S. processed Recreational fishing is economically healthy, but freshwater and marine fishery products and another has caused a decline in certain fish stocks. It is 1,992 plants were engaged in wholesale distribution. estimated that 207 million days were spent in salt- Unlike the harvesting sector, several large firms water recreational fishing in 1975. Thus, this effort dominate the processing portion of the industry. The results in a $3.4 billion annual industry, but it also total value of processed edible and industrial fishery removes about the same number of fish from the sea products was about $3.9 billion in 1977. as the commercial industry. The U.S. per capita consumption of fish in 1975 2. Current Status of U.S. Marine was 15.1 pounds, nearly 2 pounds higher than it was Fisheries Policy 20 years ago, but still much less than the annual per capita consumption of beef (158.1 pounds) and poul- Today's fisheries policy is an amalgam of many try (49.3 pounds). The demand for fish, however, approaches, both old and new, aimed at dealing with is growing. While the U.S. population has increased the complexities of declining fisheries resources, a by about I percent a year, fish consumption has in- fragmented industry, growing consumption, growing creased about 3 percent a year. Expenditures on fish, imports, increased pressure from foreign fleets, and as a percentage of the food budget, increased from increased competition from recreational fishing. 2.5 percent in 1960 to 4.9 percent in 1974. In addi- Federal fisheries policy is in a state of transition, and tion, the U.S. consumes a disproportionate share is likely to remain so for a number of years. The of the world's supply of relatively expensive species enactment in 1976 of the Fishery Conservation and of fish, including 91 percent of world lobster land- Management Act, more commonly called the 200- ings, 46 percent of world scallop landings, 45 percent mile law, has contributed further to the complex of clam landings, 41 percent of tuna landings, and 27 situation. percent of world salmon and shrimp landings. U.S. This landmark act established, for the first time, a landings account for only 39 percent of the total sup- comprehensive system for managing fisheries in a ply of edible fish products available in American conservation zone that extends seaward from 3 to 200 markets; imports account for 61 percent. In large nautical miles. This act extended the legal jurisdic- 6 tion of the United States from an area of about gained with the new law and its full effects become 545,000 square nautical miles to an area of over clear. Thus, the United States can be described as 2,000,000 square nautical miles. One major aim of entering a "new era" in fisheries policy in the late the legislation was to curb foreign fishing off U.S. 1970s. coasts, but the Act's management controls apply Federal fisheries policy now consists of three ma- equally to domestic fishing. The policy brought into jor components: fisheries research and information; effect by the Act is to assure that fish are harvested fishery management and conservation; and develop- responsibly in accordance with regionally developed ment of fishery resources and the fishing industry. plans. These are based on the best available scientific Principal policy efforts and ongoing Federal activ- information and must meet specified national stand- ities in each area are described in the following ards. A key goal is the attainment of what is termed paragraphs. the "optimum yield" of each fishery. Optimum yield a. Fisheries research and information is a concept which denotes the amount of fish that will provide the greatest overall benefit to the United Since enactment of the 200-mile law, the primary States, including both food production and recrea- goal of Federal fisheries research and information tional opportunities. The concept not only takes- into policy has been to ensure that adequate scientific account the maximum harvest that will permit a spe- data are made available for conservation and man- cies to sustain itself, but also includes consideration agement purposes. Basic biological and ecological of any relevant economic, social, political, or ecolog- research pertaining to fisheries, however, has been a ical factors. mainstav of Federal fisheries programs for many The Act limits foreign fishing in the U.S. 200-mile years. While much of this work is now being applied zone to that portion of the optimum yield which will to fisheries management problems, other basic re- not be harvested by U.S. vessels. Both the optimum search and information programs are being con- yield and the amount to be made available for for- ducted to eign fishing are determined by the eight Regional gain knowledge about particular species of fish, Fishery Management Councils established by the Act their environment, and their sensitivity to envi- and approved by the Secretary of Commerce. The ronmental change, surplus is allocated among foreign nations by the protect marine mammals and endangered ma- Secretary of State, in cooperation with the Secretary rine species, of Commerce. Permits to fish are issued to individual resolve problems related to fish culture and hus- vessels by the United States, and enforcement is the bandry, and responsibility of the Coast Guard of the Department improve harvesting and processing technology. of Transportation and the National Marine Fisheries In all, nine Federal departments and agencies ad- Service of the Department of Commerce. Domestic minister marine fisheries research and information fisheries management rules are also drawn up by the programs, including the Departments of Commerce, Regional Fishery Management Councils, in the form Interior, Army (Corps of Engineers), Energy, Navy, of fisheries management plans, and promulgated by and Agriculture; the Environmental Protection the Secretary of Commerce. For the most part, fish- Agency; the National Science Foundation; and the eries management plans are prepared on a species- National Aeronautics and Space Administration. by-species basis and cover a specified geographical The Federal Government's principal marine fisheries area. Although the Regional Fisheries Management programs are administered by the National Marine Councils are Federal entities, their membership is Fisheries Service (NMFS), a part of the Department drawn primarily from nominations made by the of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Governors of the States in each geographic region of Administration. NMFS is responsible for monitoring the country. Thus the Councils' membership is repre- and assessing the composition, distribution, abun- sentative of all applicable fisheries interests, not just dance, and availability of living marine resources, in- Federal interests. cluding threatened and endangered marine species implementation of the Fishery Conservation and and marine mammals. The data and information re- Management Act of 1976 is the dominant factor in sulting from this program are used for various pur- U.S. marine fisheries policy at this time, Because the poses, but their primary value is in implementing Act is relatively new, many policy adjustments repre- Federal fishery conservation and management meas- sent the normal "fine tuning" associated with carry- ures. The work is carried out at'seven- regional centers ing out any major new law. Many more fundamental and 17 associated laboratories; and involves numer- policy revisions may be needed as experience is ous at-sea surveys by research vessels. Another De- 7 partment of Commerce effort, the National Sea ment of information on the abundance and dis- Grant Program, supports university-based fisheries tribution of fishery resources, the computation research in aquaculture, ecology, and basic biology. of optimum yield, the determination of U.S. Although the primary responsibility of the Depart- harvesting capacity, and the development and ment of the Interior is for freshwater species, the Fish promulgation of fishery management plans and Wildlife Service operates several laboratories specifying catch, levels and seasons along with that perform basic biological research, conduct re- other conservation measures. The Department search on fish diseases, and operate a variety of pro- of Commerce provides much of the information grams related to anadromous species (species which needed to prepare the plans, reviews the plans spawn in freshwater but live in the sea as adults). for 'conformance to national standards, and Significant fishery research and information efforts promulgates the plans in the form of Federal administered by other agencies include: regulations. Actual preparation of the plans is � Marine ecological analyses, which are conducted the responsibility of the eight Regional Fishery by the Environmental Protection Agency as a Management Councils established by the Act. means of protecting fishery resources and fish- The Department of Commerce also has estab- ery habitats in the issuance of discharge permits. lished a Federal-State fishery management pro- � Assessments of the impact on fishereies of off- gram to ensure that State management measures shore oil and gas development, which are con- within the 3-mile territorial sea are consistent ducted by the Department of the Interior's with each other and with measures adopted for Bureau of Land Management. the conservation zone. � Sponsorship by the National Science Founda- The international fisheries program, is ad- tion of basic research in marine and oceano- ministered principally by the Department of graphic affairs, including assessments of the im- State. The international program involves nego- pacts of ocean dumping on fish habitats. tiating international fishery agreements under � Research, by the Departments of Agriculture, the 200-mile law, negotiating special bilateral Commerce, Interior, and others, to aid the de- and multilateral fishing agreements with other velopment of aquaculture. countries, and allocating the total allowable � Research and information related to the protec- level of foreign fishing in the U.S. zone among tion and preservation of threatened and endan- the countries wishing to fish there. gered marine species, and all marine mammals, The enforcement and surveillance program, is which are joint responsibilities of the Depart- administered principally by the U.S. Coast ments of the Interior and Commerce. Guard, and also by the Departments of Com- merce and Justice. The'main concern of Federal b. Fisheries management and conservation fisheries management enforcement efforts is the The highest priority efforts being directed to regulation and control of foreign fishing in the marine fisheries by the Federal Government are in U.S, zone. Domestic fishing is less regulated and the area of management and conservation. This is a less strictly enforced. At-sea enforcement is car- result of the enactment of the 200-mile law in 1976. ried out by the Coast Guard, with assistance The principal thrust of these efforts is to provide a from agents of the National Marine Fisheries comprehensive and 'scientifically sound system for Service. Shoreside enforcement is the responsi- managing fishery resources in the 3 to 200 mile zone. bility of the Fisheries Service. Aerial and surface Coastal States continue to maintain nearly full patrols-and dockside inspections of catches, authority over the 3-mile territorial sea. records, and gear-are the primary enforcement Federal policy under the new Act is to permit as tools used. The Department of Justice provides much U.S. fishing in the zone as is consistent with legal support for the enforcement program, sound principles of conservation, and to permit for- prosecutes violators, and represents the United eign fishing for any portion of the total allowable States in civil actions against seized fishing catch which cannot be harvested by U.S. fishermen. vessels. Implementation of this policy by the Federal Govern- Apart from implementation of the Fishery Conser- ment requires several types of programs and involves vation and Management Act, three other major pro- four agencies. grams are carried out to implement Federal fisheries The fishery planning and management program, management and conservation policies. These are: is administered principally by the Department of the endangered species program, the marine mam- Commerce. This program involves the develop- mals protection program, and several habitat protec- 8 tion and restoration efforts. Under.the Endangered -.assure the quality of seafoods available to the U.S. Species Act, the Secretaries of Jnterior -and Com- consumer. merce identify, and take actions to protect, species . Federal programs to increase the harvest and con- whose numbers are severely diminished and whose sumption of underused species are conducted by the populations are threatened.or endangered-. The Act Commerce Department's National Oceanic and At- applies to all species of threatened flora o,r fauna, in- mospheric Administration. The effort consists pri- cluding marine species. A similar statute, the Marine marily of resource surveys, although a prototype Mammal Protection Act of 1972, seeks. to protect the -regional program in New England runs the gamut dwindling numbers oFseals, whales, porpoises, wal- -from resource identification through harvesting and ruses, and other marine mammals. Responsibility for processing to distribution and marketing assistance. administering this program. is also shared jointly by -Development programs in vessel and gear technol- the Departments of Commerce and the Interior. ogy, and harvesting techniques, also are carried out Habitat protection,programs are operated by-several by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- agencies including the.. Departments, of Agriculture, tration * Generally, 4these programs are carried out to Commerce, and Interior; *the Environmental Protec- assist other missions-to protect marine mammals or tion Agency; and the U.S. Army Corps of,Engineers. increase the harvest of a underused species-and not There is no comprehensive or cohesive policy. Vari- as programs of general assistance to the fishing in- ous protection measures include regulation,; Federal dustry. A, major unresolved issue is the nature and acquisition, and financial assistance in the,restora- extent of the Federal role in developing new technol- tion of damaged areas. ogy as compared to@the role of private industry. Programs to improve handling, processing, and c. Development offishery resources and the fishing @storing of fishery products are administered by the industry. tDepartment of.. Agriculture and by the National The development of fishery, resources -and the Oceanicand Atmospheric Administration. The De- fishing industry is another area irf.which there are partment of Agriculture develops and promulgates many programs and activities, but,no, clear, overall standards for handling, processing, and storing food Federal policy. Arhong the functions in this area are: products. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric � Assessments and exploratoryfishing for species Administration sponsors research in these areas to that are underused but which exist, in commer- the,extent that they pertain to fishery products, and cially-harvestable quantities -in -U.S. waters; the handling, processing, and storing of those prod- � Development of newt or improved: vessel and ucts at sea. ' gear technologies and harvesting techniques; Assistance in.the distribution and marketing of � Improvement ofTroduct handling, processing, fishery pro "ducts is provided through the Depart- and storing techniques; - - - i , - ments of Commerce and Agriculture. Department of � Assistance in. the distribution- and marketing of Commerce programs seek to work cooperatively with fisheries products; . . .. 11 1 industry groups.to identify and open up new markets � Development of consumer education aids, for fisheries products., both at home and abroad. The product and quality safety standards, and in- Department of Agriculture's Cooperative Extension spection services; and - I . 1 1. .. . . Service,and programs in Commerce, fund marketing � Provision of financial assistance to the fishing researchand analysis studies that assist the fishing in- industry. dustry by projecting important trends in consump- Although all the functions are being carried. out, the "'tion and. utilization. policies, goals, and objectives, that 'govern their oper- Consumer education and protection programs in ations have not been -integrated into a cohesive policy !the fisheries area are the responsibility of three for providing Federal assistance to the fishing1ndus- Departments: Agriculture, Commerce, and Health, try. Furthermore, the policies and programs have not Education, and Welfare. The Department of Agri- been reviewed to determine what changes might be -culture's Extension Service provides information to necessary or desirable since passage of. theFishery the consumer.on the availability, best uses, and nutri- Conservation and Management Act in 1976.,Conse- tional'value of fisheries products. The Department of quently, Federal policy in this area isa patchwork of Commerce operates a voluntary seafood inspection functions and programs that have evolved over the and grading program, but it covers only about 30 years on a case-by-case basis. The intent of this percent of U.S. production and about 5 percent of patchwork system, however, is to develop and main- U.S. processing facilities. The main responsibility for tain a healthy commercial. fishing industry. and to consumer protection is in the Department of Health, 9 Education, and Welfare's Food and Drug Adminis- ment of the 200-mile law, indicating a new busi- tration, (FDA). Under the Food, Drug, and Cos- ness confidence in the U.S. fishing industry. metic Act, FDA must assure that a high standard is Other indicators of possible policy impact have not maintained for the sanitary quality, safety, and changed dramatically. The overall size of domestic wholesomeness of fish, shellfish, and related prod- fish catches remains at about the same size (25 mil- ucts that are shipped in interstate commerce. lion metric tons) as it has been for several years. In- The Departments of Commerce and Agriculture creases in U.S. fish consumption continue to exceed provide direct financial aid and incentives to the increases in domestic landings, further aggravating fishing industry, and several other agencies (such as an existing imbalance in trade in fisheries products. the Small Business Administration and the Depart- Also, the 1977 consumer price index for fish in- ment of Housing and Urban Development) operate creased 10.4 percent over 1976, while the price index programs that are or can be made available to for meat remained essentially unchanged and the fishing concerns as part of their broader purposes. price index for poultry declined 4.2 percent. Federal financial assistance in this area can be used While the passage of the Fishery Conservation and for a wide variety of purposes, including the con- Management Act represented a major change in U.S. struction, purchase, or renovation of vessels, and the policy, it did not resolve many of the Nation's fishery construction of private or public onshore facilities. policy issues. Issues that need to be faced by Federal The Department of Commerce is authorized to pro- policyrnakers over the next few years are described in vide direct loans, guaranteed loans, and tax deferrals the following paragraphs. to the fishing industry through its National Oceanic The needfor new or revisedfishery conservation and Atmospheric Administration. Through its Eco- and management policies so that the full intent nomic Development Administration, the Department and benefits of the Fishery Conservation and of Commerce also has available a loan program that Management Act can be realized. can be used to develop onshore facilities. Loans for Although overall policy goals and intentions are vessels and facilities also can be made by the Depart- set forth in the Act, some issues have not been re- ment of Agriculture through its Farmer's Home Ad- solved and new problems have evolved in the course ministration and Farm Credit System. of implementing the new law. 3. Results of U.S. Fisheries Policy (1) The adequacy of long-range policy toward for- and Current Fisheries Issues eign access to U.S. fisheries stocks, the man- agement of transnational fisheries stocks, and Because current federal fisheries policy is domi- the overall administration and enforcement of nated by the 200-mile law and the complexities in- the Act. volved in administering that law, the results of cur- Passage of the 200-mile bill, coupled with a high rent policy are difficult to assess. U.S. fisheries foreign dependence on U.S. fisheries stocks in certain policy is in a state of transition. Both this state of instances, have raised complex, technical issues re- transition and the passage of the 200-mile law can be lated to foreign access. These include questions re- attributed to the Nation's former laissez-faire fish- garding joint ventures between U.S. and foreign eries policies. Since the new approach the U.S. has companies in the areas of fish harvesting and proc- adopted is only about a year old, it is still too early to essing; the treatment of "neighboring" fishermen determine what its long-range effects will be. After (from Canada, for instance) desiring access to U.S. the first year of operating under the 200-mile zone, fishing waters on a reciprocal basis; and the status to there were signs of progress. be accorded to fisheries stocks harvested by U.S. � The 1977 foreign catch was about I million fishermen and sold to foreign processing vessels at metric tons less than the 1976 foreign catch, and sea. At stake here are questions involving restrictions approximately half that of the peak year. on foreign investment in the United States, evasion � The monthly average of foreign fishing vessels of foreign fishing quota restrictions, the success of off U.S. coasts declined by about one-third. efforts to build up the U.S. fish processing industry, � Domestic catches of several species that were in and the treatment to be accorded to U.S. fishermen decline (such as cod, haddock, and jack mack- who fish in foreign waters. erel) began to show encouraging increases in The management of transnational fisheries stocks 1977. is another matter of important policy concern. Valu- � Private investment in new fishing vessels and able fisheries stocks such as salmon, cod, and floun- gear increased at a rapid rate following enact- der frequently migrate beyond U.S. borders. Con- 10 sistent management approaches and procedures are avoid resource depletion and conflicts with commer- needed to safeguard the health of the resource and to cial interests. ensure equitable treatment for U.S. and foreign (3) The relative roles of Federal, State, and local fishermen off each others' shores. For example, there governments in the management of fishery re- are disputes between the United States and Canada sources in the future. over salmon fishing regulations, international The principal issue in this area is one of consisten- boundaries, and Atlantic groundfish management cy and the Federal role in ensuring that consistency is procedures. These must be resolved. Not only is a achieved. An effective overall fisheries management long tradition of good will and cooperation at stake, program for the United States requires that State but also the status of critical fishery resources and the management programs for fisheries resources within livelihoods of many fishermen in both nations. the 3-mile territorial sea be consistent and compati- Technical questions regarding the administration ble, both with each other and with Federal manage- and enforcement of the Act also exist. These have ment programs in the 3 to 200 mile zone. Since fish- potentially significant policy implications. They in- eries management in the 3-mile territorial sea is a clude the manner in which optimum yield is deter- responsibility of the States, the Federal role must be mine,d, the basis for estimating the harvesting capaci- limited. The issue remains, however, of exactly what ty of the U.S. fishing fleet, the extent to which U.S. the Federal role should be in development of: (a) observers will be placed on foreign fishing vessels, mechanisms for joint Federal-State management of the need to adopt limited entry principles for domes- common fishery resources; and (b) mechanisms for tic fishing, the charges to be levied against foreign interstate management of shared fish stocks in the vessels in the future for the privilege of fishing in territorial sea. U.S. waters, and the levels of enforcement to be The adequacy of current Federal policy toward mounted by the Government in the 200-mile zone. At the development of fishery resources and the stake here are such important matters as the extent to fish industry, and the need for new ap- which foreign governments continue to cooperate proaches. with the U.S. in implementing a fishing conservation There is no overall Federal policy regarding the and management program, the extent to which eco- promotion and development of fishery resources and nomic retaliation against the U.S. is sought by for- the fish industry. In part, this is due to the patch- eign governments in other fields of international work nature of existing Federal approaches, and trade and relations, and the economic health of the in part to the nature of the industry. The common U.S. fishing industry. property character of fishery resources, and the large (2) The adequacy and impact of alternative Feder- number of small or individual operators that charac- al policies and mechanisms for the manage- terize the fishing industry, have made it difficult to ment of marine recreational fishing. develop a comprehensive assistance policy that meets Recreational fishing in the United States today ac- the wide variety of needs and conditions which exist. counts for almost as much fish catch as commercial With the advent of comprehensive fisheries manage- fishing. Conflicts between commercial and recrea- ment, it is becoming more important to develop a tional fishermen over certain species exist in some Federal policy in this area. It is expected that com- areas, and more conflicts are inevitable if the growth prehensive management may eventually lead to sig- trend in recreational fishing continues. Under the nificant changes in the structure of the industry, 200-mile law, the Federal Government is responsible brought about by availability of additional resources for management of the recreational effort as well as and imposition of restrictions that did not previously the commercial effort. As a practical matter, how- exist. It also is expected that significant economic op- ever, first priority has been placed on commercial portunities for the U.S. fishing industry may go un- fishing because of its importance. Recreational fish- noticed or may be bypassed in the absence of Federal ing also is less susceptible to management because of assistance. What appears to be needed to many ob- its un predictability and its diffuse nature. Further- servers is an integrated fisheries policy that couples more, marine recreational fishing has, traditionally, resource allocation and management decisions with not been regulated or restricted in any way by either decisions regarding investment in vessels, equipment, the States or the Federal Government. Hence, resist- processing plants, marketing, and distribution. The ance to strong management controls can be expected. following specific issues will need to be resolved in The Federal Government and the Regional Fishery the developnient of An overall Federal policy: Management Councils will need to address the matter The appropriate Federal role in promoting and of recreational fishing policy in the near future to marketing fishery products, both at home and abroad, and in ensuring the quality and safety of owing to the inadequacy of stock assessment research fishery products available to the consumer. and to the absence of reliable socioeconomic data on � The appropriate Federal role in the promotion elements vital to fisheries management. At stake are and development of marine recreational fishing the adequacy of catch quotas, foreign allocations, and the recreational fishing industry. and other management measures embodied in Feder- � The appropriate Federal role in increasing the al regulations. The issue is the adequacy of the size supply of fishery products- through aquacul- and purpose of the current Federal role in obtaining ture, fish ranching, the development of under- the data and information needed for management, utilized species, and other means. the need for changes in that role, and the cost- There are two definite sides to each of these issues. effectiveness of alternatives. One side takes the position that promotion and de- 4. Conclusions velopment activities should be predominantly the responsibility of the industry. The other side holds The United States has recently entered what has ac- the view that Federal assistance is necessary and jus- curately been termed a "new era" in fisheries policy. tifiable to ensure the success of the management pro- Many traditional policies, concepts, and approaches gram and to preserve the economic health of a iradi- were radically altered with the establishment of the tional industry. 200-mile zone and the creation of a management sys- The need for a new or improved Federal ap- tem. Over the past 2 years, Federal fisheries policy proach to fisheries research and the provision of and administrative machinery has been geared almost data and information needed forfisheries man- solely to making the adjustments necessary to imple- agement. ment the new law. As a result, policy revisions have In the past, Federally supported fisheries research not been made in related areas and fisheries policy has been extensive, but has concentrated on develop- issues have proliferated. Over the next few years, ing basic biological information about individual significant efforts to develop and implement a com- species. A 1973 survey identified nearly 1,500 fish- prehensive and consistent set of new fisheries poli- ery-related research projects in eight departments cies, based on the foundation of the new manage- and agencies, not including research conducted by ment regime, need to be made. At stake is the future States and universities. Despite this effort, the data of an important national resource and the economic base is not sufficient for today's management needs, viability of the U.S. fishing industry. Coastal Resources 1. Background * A repository of oil, gas, and other commercially important minerals, and The coastal region of the United States includes 9 The nucleus of the Nation's marine transporta- over 100,000 miles of shoreline, a band of land sever- tion system. al miles wide behind that shoreline, the waters of the At the same time, intensive use of the coastal zone Great Lakes, ocean waters within the 3-mile Terri- has subjected its valuable resources to more envi- torial Sea, and the seabed which underlies those ronmental stresses than most other ocean or land- waters. Within this region are bays and estuaries, based resources. Among the activities contributing to tidal freshwater rivers, tidelands, wetlands, islands, these stresses are dredging and filling of wetlands, dunes, and coral reefs, and some of the Nation's dumping of wastes in biologically productive areas, most useful and productive resources. The region contamination of estuaries, destruction of dunes, serves as: and construction of residential and commercial facil- � The place of residence of more than 40 percent ities. To these manmade stresses must be added those of the population, of nature-erosion, floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, � The workplace of over 40 percent of the U.S. seismic sea waves, and other phenomena. As a conse- work force, quence, the Nation's coastal resources not only are � A nursery area for most of the Nation's impor- among our most valuable, but also our most fragile. tant commercial and recreational species of fish, Coastal resources differ from other marine re- � A recreational area for tens of millions of people sources in several respects. First, both their landward each year, and seaward dimensions must be fully considered in 12 providing for their use and protection. Second, many ing the coastal environment. They include the Fed- coastal resources are subject to private ownership, eral Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of whereas ocean resources are totally in the public do- 1972; the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctu- main. Third, coastal resources are local in nature, aries Act of 1972; and the estuarine sanctuary provi- whereas other ocean resources tend to be national, or sions of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. even international, in character. The Coastal Zone Management Act moved the These differences have weighed heavily in shaping Federal Government into its fourth area of interest: public policy in regard to the use and protection of helping the States develop processes for planning and coastal resources. Throughout our history, decisions managing the use of their coastal resources. The regarding the permissible uses of coastal areas have main purpose of the Act was to provide another been largely matters of local concern and local re- dimension- cooperation with the States-to Federal sponsibility. Only during the past decade has there efforts aimed at preserving and protecting the coastal been a broader public awareness of overriding na- environment. In return for Federal assistance, the tional interest in the use of U.S. coastal resources. Act encouraged the States to include in their planning And only during this same decade has the Federal process adequate provision for uses of the coastal Government begun to take an active part in the zone that were determined to be in the national in- development of comprehensive coastal management terest. Since the Act was passed in 1972, changes in policies. economic, social, and political conditions (such as the increased need for offshore oil and gas) have 2. Current Status of U.S. Coastal Policy caused the focus of the Federal approach to be al- Most policies regarding the use of U.S. coastal re- tered, both legislatively and administratively. The sources are still made at local levels, with occasional current Federal policy still seeks to develop com- involvement by State governments. Federal policies prehensive Statewide plans for coastal zone manage- have been developed to deal, however, with four ment, and provide for the protection of valuable coastal resources and the overall coastal environ- broad aspects of coastal resource use. ment. At the same time, today's Federal policy also � Encouragement or provision of adequate coastal gives the States more inducements to develop coastal development when national interests are at resources than were envisioned in 1972. As a result, stake. Federal policy today is changing: moving away from � Preservation of selected coastal resources. the strict environmental protection approach of the 9 Protection of environmental quality in coastal early 1970s and toward a more balanced approach in- areas. volving both protection and coastal resource use. � Development of processes by which States and localities can plan and manage the use of their a. Federal Coastal.Zone_Mq.@agernent Policy coastal resources. Today',xTederal coastal zon anagement policies The chronological development of this multifac- originate - ,Q]T the4a-w4 s. In its 1969 report__Q-ur- eted Federal interest provides insight into the empha- Nation and thfe-S@eat e 7Comm'ission on Marine Sci- sis currently given to each of the four areas, as well as ence, Engineering and Resources outlined the key an indication of the problems and issues that future elements of these policies. A major recommendation public policy may face. The earliest Federal interest of the Commission was the enactment of Federal leg- was aimed at developing the economic and social islation to provide policy objectives for the coastal values of coastal resources. This was the primary goal zone and authorize Federal grants-in-aid to facilitate of Federal coastal policy from the early 1800s to the the establishment of management authorities at the mid-1960s. This emphasis began to shift in the mid- State level. The Commission further recommended 1960s to the preservation of valuable coastal areas, that the Federal approach not concentrate on the and later to protection of the coastal environment. form of organization adopted by the States for the For example, before 1965 the Department of the In- management of their coastal zones, but rather em- terior (DOI) had established only two National Sea- phasize the need for States to provide adequate man- shores. Between 1965 and 1972, DOI established 13 agement authorities and program development proc- National Seashores, Lakeshores, and Gateways. in esses. 1969 the National Evironmental Policy Act became These recommendations became public policy with law, requiring Federal agencies to consider fully the enactment of the Coastal Zone Management Act of environmental aspects of their actions. This Act was 1972, which sets forth four major national policy ob- followed by a number of other laws aimed at protect- jectives. 13 � Preserve, protect, develop, and, where possible, would not receive high priority for funding under the restore or enhance the resources of the Nation's program, in part because a large number of other coastal zone for this and succeeding generations. Federal programs for research and technical assist- � Encourage and assist the States to exercise effec- ance are available to the States and in part because tively their responsibilities in the coastal zone the primary purpose of the Act is to initiate manage- through the development and implementation of ment processes. management programs to achieve wise use of the The Act has several novel Federal approaches to land and water resources of the coastal zone, resource management. One is the goal of creating a giving full consideration to ecological, cultural, comprehensive and consistent regional system of historic, and esthetic values, as well as needs for land and water management. Second is the attempt economic development. to involve large numbers of States in a management � Require all Federal agencies to cooperate and process that previously had been the primary respon- participate with State and local governments and sibility and function of local governments. A third is regional agencies in accomplishing the purposes the use of Federal consistency as an inducement to of the Act. the States to develop and implement programs of � Encourage the participation of the public, Fed- coastal zone management. A fourth is the lack of eral, State and local governments, and regional direct Federal acquisition and management elements agencies in the development of programs for in the program. A fifth is the voluntary nature of coastal zone management. State participation. All of these elements differ from The ultimate objective of the Act is to create a previous Federal approaches to resource management. comprehensive national system of coastal resource Although the thrust of the Federal effort has been management, with emphasis on protecting the envi- modified somewhat in recent years, these novel policy ronment. The Federal role in achieving this objective elements have been preserved and still serve as the is one of providing national leadership, financial nucleus of the Federal policy for coastal zone man- assistance, and active cooperation with the States. agement. Changes in Federal policy since passage of The primary responsibility and authority for coastal the original Coastal Zone Management Act in 1972 zone management resides with State governments, al- have resulted from: (1) practical experience in work- though broad participation from local governments ing with the States on the development of their and the general public was envisioned. State partici- coastal zone mangement plans, and (2) a more in- pation in the national effort is not required, and no tense national interest in developing the commercial sanctions are imposed if management plans are not uses of coastal resources, both on land and at sea. developed or implemented. Practical experience in working with the States has A total of 34 states and territories are eligible to led to the following changes in Federal policy. participate in the program. The mechanisms for en- 0 The total time allowed for developing State couraging State participation are: (1) Federal match- programs has been extended from 1977 to 1979. ing grants for the planning and development of State e The size of the Federal share of matching grants programs, (2) Federal matching grants for the admin- has been increased from 66 2/3 to 80 percent. istration of State programs following their approval * A new program of financial assistance has been by the Secretary of Commerce, (3) a general require- authorized for coastal States that have devel- ment that Federal agencies ensure that their activities oped management programs but do not yet qual- in the coastal zone are consistent with the provisions ify for Federal approval. of State programs that are approved, and (4) Federal e The Congress has granted its assent and has au- matching grants for State acquisition and operation thorized financial assistance for the formation of sanctuaries in estuarine areas. of interstate compacts and agreements to de- Grants of up to two-thirds the cost of State devel- velop and administer coordinated coastal zone opment and implementation programs are author- planning, policies, and programs. ized, with certain absolute limits specified, but 9 A program of research and training to support development grants to an individual State cannot be coastal zone management efforts has been authorized for more than 3 years. In general, Federal authorized. approval is given to management programs on a 0 The planning process required of the States prior Statewide basis, but the Act provides authority to to qualifying for Federal approval has been adopt State programs in segments when that is nec- broadened by adding new elements to the list of essary or desirable. Federal regulations implementing approval criteria. the Act further specify that long-term basic research These changes, which were authorized by amend- 14 ments to the Coastal Zone Management Act in 1976, authority for Federal funding of State program de- were not major departures from the policies estab- velopment activities scheduled to expire on Septem- lished in 1972. These same amendments, however, ber 30, 1979, the next few months will be critical for also contained provisions that increased significantly the overall Federal effort. Federal concern with the development and use of coastal resources. Whereas the previous policy em- b. Coastal Resource Development Policy phasis had been largely on the protection of coastal The vast economic value of U.S. coastal resources resources and the environment, the new provisions has been noted. Although their total worth is un- stressed the national importance of certain coastal quantified, the more important resources include: uses by: � Authorizing a new program of Federal matching 9 Land-for location of residences, vacation grants to enable coastal States to: (1) acquire homes, heavy industry, ports, and powerplants; access to public beaches and other public coastal e Water-for transportation of trade goods, cool- areas of value, and (2) preserve islands (a pro- 'ing of powerplants, recreational uses, and (per- gram intended to help meet the growing need for haps) conversion to freshwater or energy; more recreational outlets in coastal areas); * Fishery resources- including commercial stocks � Requiring the States to include, in the develop- worth $300 to $500 million a year, and sport fish ment of their programs, a planning process for catches of some 800,000 tons a year; energy facilities likely to be located in the coastal a Energy resources- including much of the re- zone or which might impact the coastal zone; maining reserves of domestic oil and gas; and and 9 Mineral resources- including sand and gravel � Providing a major new program of financial as- worth over $100 million annually. sistance to meet State and local needs resulting Because of this economic potential, resource from new or expanded coastal and offshore development was the focus of Federal coastal policy energy activity in order to permit development until the mid-1960s. Under the Swamp Land Acts of of new or expanded production of oil and nat- 1849, 1859, and 1860, for example, 65 million acres ural gas in an orderly manner from the Outer of wetlands were ceded to the States for reclamation. Continental Shelf. Until well into this century, the Federal Government It was not the intent of the 1976 Amendments to also encouraged the drainage of wetlands that deemphasize the resource conservation and protec- were suitable for agricultural use. Further, massive tion aspects of Federal coastal policy in favor of in- Federal public works projects and large amounts of creased development. Rather, the intent was to use Federal economic development assistance were con- an already-established Federal process to ensure the centrated in coastal areas, because of their large balanced consideration of both competing objec- populations and economic importance. tives. This goal is to be achieved by providing Federal Today's Federal policy seeks a more balanced ap- financial assistance to States and localities in dealing proach to the development of coastal resources. New with both the economic and the environmental im- emphasis on environmental protection and compre- pacts of offshore energy development (Coastal En- hensive coastal zone management has reduced, ergy Impact Program). Balancing development and somewhat, the priority given earlier to resource protection of the coastal region remain the objective development. At the same time, development re- of today's Federal policies for coastal zone manage- ains an important element of Federal coastal ment. policy, particularly in the area of energy resource The Federal program that carries out these policies development. Some of the other Federal policy goals is administered by the National Oceanic and Atmos- that have a major effect on coastal resource develop- pheric Administration, which is an agency in the ment are: Department of Commerce. From the program's in- 9 Increasing the domestic commercial fish catch, ception in March 1974, through September 1977, o Providing for the general expansion and im- Federal funds of $64.5 million have been provided to provement of marine waterways, the States. State matching funds of about $25.4 0 Develop ing offshore hard mineral resources, million also have been spent on coastal zone manage- romoting regional economic growth and de- ment. The program has 33 States participating. Four velopment in coastal areas, @ h s c d P( dt th m have received approval for all or part of their State * Increasing -recreational opportunities in the programs. The remaining 29 States are still in the pro- coastal-region, and gram development phase of their efforts. With the o Promoting domestic and international tourism. 15 One of the most important goals in recent years terminals, onshore electrical generating stations, and has,Xeen the development of U.S. coastal energy re- offshore nuclear powerplants has become an increas- s9drces. It has been estimated that as much as two- ingly controversial issue. Traditionally, the Federal /hirds of the Nation's remaining reserves of oil and Government seldom has been involved in such deci- V natural gas lie in the Outer Continental Shelf and sions. Its role was largely limited to a regulatory Alaska lands. The accelerated recovery of these review of industry's proposals after a site had been resources has been a major Federal goal since the chosen for development. Today, that situation is 1973 oil embargo. Both the recovery, and the trans- changing: there is a national need to provide more portation and storage of offshore oil and gas serious- energy, the Federal Government is playing an active ly affect certain coastal areas, and Federal energy role in meeting that need, and the public is seeking planners have become aware that State and local a greater involvement in the site selection for energy governments might block, or severely limit, the ex- facilities. As a result, the Federal Government is pansion of energy production. As a result, new Fed- becoming increasingly involved in new approaches eral policies were adopted in 1976 and 1977 to deal and public processes related to the siting of energy with the effects of energy development on the coastal facilities. Issues such as reactor safety, LNG safety, zone. and basic environmental safeguards, for example, One such policy, enacted as part of the 1976 are now being addressed by Federal agencies on other Amendments to the Coastal Zone Management Act, than a case-by-case basis. Further, new laws such as i d s"' ftimely Federal financial assistance to the Deepwater Ports Act, the Coastal Zone Manage- provi 39 or aid,2fate and local governments in dealing with the ment Act, and the Outer Continental Shelf Lands L'@?Pacts of Federal offshore energy development. Act Amendments of 1978 are requiring the use of At the same time, the Congress declared that the new processes to: States and localities, by virtue of being closer to * Facilitate public participation in Government and better able to deal with the problems, should proceedings, make the basic decisions as to the particular needs o Involve the Government in site selection proc- that result from new or expanded energy activity. esses at an earlier stage of development, and These policies were implemented by the establish- 9 improve interagency coordination of Federal ment of a Federal Coastal Energy Impact Program, permit and licensing procedures. which includes: � A Coastal Energy Impact Fund, authorized for However, a number of important energy facilities sit- 10 years at a total level of $800 million, to pro- ing issues remain to be resolved, which will be dis- vide loans, loan guarantees, repayment assist- cussed later. ance, and grants to States and localities. These Another important Federal role in the develop- funds are intended primarily for use in planning ment of coastal resources concerns the provision of and financing the new public facilities and serv- recreational opportunities and, collaterally, the pro- ices in the coastal zone that are required by motion of tourism to coastal areas. Recreation and energy development activities. tourism are the leading economic activities in many � Federal formula grants, authorized at $50 mil- parts of the coastal region. Americans are expected lion annually for 8 years, to enable State and to spend over $100 billion a year on travel and tour- local governments to retire bonds that were ism by 1980, much of it in the coastal region. In 1970, issued to provide new facilities and services the Bureau of the Census reported that about 9.5 mil- related to energy. lion people went saltwater fishing more than three The program also provides grants to protect or re- times a year, and the Coast Guard estimates that store coastal environmental and recreational re- there are 8.3 million recreational boats in the United sources that have been impacted by offshore energy States. The Federal role in this area includes: development when other funds are not available. 0 Providing financial and technical assistance to This program is administered by the Office of the States for outdoor recreation planning, for Coastal Zone Management of the National Oceanic the acquisition of land for recreation, and for and Atmospheric Administration. the development of facilities, A second dimension of Federal policy concerning 9 Providing public lands to State and local govern- the relation between energy development and coastal ments for use as parks, resource use concerns the siting of energy facilities. 9 Establishing national parks, seashores, or lake- The I Ation of offshore oil and gas projects, oil port shores in coastal areas through direct acquisition s, tank farms, liquefied natural gas (LNG) and development, 16 �Providing grants to States to enable them to ac- tional share of unemployment and other economic quire access to public beaches, and problems, a great deal of Federal economic develop- �Promoting both domestic and international ment assistance goes to entities in the coastal zone. travel to U.S. coastal and resort areas. Current Federal policy concentrates on the economic The bulk of this Federal role is the responsibility of needs and problems of individual cities, States and the Department of the Interior acting through the regions rather than on developing the full economic Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service (for- potential of coastal resources. At the same time, merly the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation) and the there is a growing Federal awareness of the need to National Park Service. Through the Land and Water consider other factors (such as State coastal zone Conservation Fund administered by the Heritage land use plans and national energy needs) in the pro- Conservation and Recreation Service, for example, vision of special types of economic aid to coastal the States have been able to acquire nearly $2.4 areas. Although no clear policy trend is yet apparent, billion worth of land in coastal counties since 1965. new directions will be taking shape in the next few Further, the National Park Service has set aside some years as States implement their coastal zone manage- 807,000 acres of land for national seashores and ment programs, as more offshore areas are leased for lakeshores. A major study of the Federal role in pro- energy production, and as other developments occur. viding recreational opportunities, including coastal recreation, is now in progress under the aegis of the c. Protection and Preservation of Coastal Resources Department of the Interior. and the Environment The Department of Commerce also plays a role in the development of marine recreation. A program of Some measure of Federal protection for coastal re- grants to enable States to provide greater public sources has been provided for many years. For exam- access to beaches and other recreational areas in the ple, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, which coastal zone has been authorized, although not im- was enacted in 1934, sought to provide ". . . that plemented. The U.S. Travel Service, another agency wildlife conservation shall receive equal considera- of the Department of Commerce, seeks to promote tion and be coordinated with other features of water travel to the United States from foreign countries and resource development programs." It was not until to develop travel within the United States by U.S. the late 1960s, however, that Federal coastal policy residents. The primary focus of this program, to began to emphasize the environmental protection as- date, has been on the promotion of foreign travel to pects of coastal resource use. This change in policy the U nited'States. emphasis coincided with a general trend throughout The development of nearshore hard minerals, in- the Nation toward greater protection of the environ- cluding sand, gravel, phosphorite, and coal, has been ment. a largely ignored area of Federal policy so far. How- In the past decade, a number of significant actions ever, both the Department of the Interior and the have been taken by the Federal Government to en- Department of Commerce are becoming concerned sure a greater degree of coastal resource protection with the economic potential of these resources and and preservation. These include: with the environmental effects that recovery of these A 1968 interpretation, by the U.S. Army Corps resources might cause. There has been little need for of Engineers, of the provisions of the Rivers and a definitive Federal policy in this area to date, Harbors Act of 1899. This interpretation broad- because most of these minerals lie within the 3-mile ened the Corps' review process for dredge and territorial sea and are owned and controlled by the fill permits to include the environmental effects coastal States, which have largely restricted their of approving an application. The previous pro- development. As mineral shortages increase and sea- cedure provided only for a review of how dredg- bed mining technology progresses, however, a reex- ing and filling affected navigation. amination of the Federal role will be required. This Enactment of the National Environmental Pol- will probably be needed within the next decade or icy Act in 1969, requiring all Federal agencies to two. consider the environmental impacts of their ac- An important Federal role in coastal resource tions, including those in the coastal zone. development concerns general national and regional Passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control economic development in the form of public works Act Amendments of 1972 and 1977, providing and'financial aid to States, localities, and regions. for Federal regulation of pollutants released into Because the coastal zone contains high concentra- the Nation's waters. This Act was also the basis tions of population, and has more than a propor- for an extension of the Corps of Engineers' 17 dredge and fill permit program to all U.S. Federal programs to preserve specific coastal waters, not just navigable waters. areas, i.e., those which are endangered or have � Enactment of the Coastal Zone Management unique environmental attributes, are carried on by Act of 1972, which was protectionist in its over- the Department of the Interior and the Department all objectives as well as in several of its specific of Commerce. Several programs of the Department provisions. of the Interior serve dual purposes. They provide for � A 1977 Presidential message to Congress on the the acquisition of land for recreational uses and for environment that addressed, both broadly and conservation purposes. These programs include those specifically, the need to provide further protec- of the National Park Service and the Heritage Con- tion for U.S. wetlands, coastal barrier islands, servation and Recreation Service, which have been and other estuarine and ocean resources. discussed earlier. The Department of Commerce pro- The end result of these and other Federal actions in vides grants of up to 50 percent to the States for the the last 10 years has been the creation of a broad base acquisition of estuarine sanctuary areas. The goal of of Federal statutory and administrative mechanisms this program is to establish sanctuaries, primarily for for protecting valuable, desirable, or threatened research purposes, that are representative of each coastal resources. Collectively, these Federal pro- major type of estuarine area in the United States. A grams have concentrated on the following aspects of total of 18 to 20 sanctuaries will be needed to ac- coastal environmental protection: complish this purpose, and 5 have been established to date. The Department of Commerce also administers � Control of coastal water pollution; a marine sanctuary program, which uses the Federal � Preservation of specific coastal areas; regulatory process to prohibit or restrict certain types � Mitigation of natural hazards; of activities in offshore areas to protect the marine � Protection of endangered species of fish and environment. wildlife; Special emphasis on protection of coastal re- � Reduction of the adverse environmental effects sources was included in President Carter's 1977 envi- of Federal, or Federally supported, activities in ronmental message to the Congress. Among other the coastal regions of the United States; and things, the President's message called for more � Creation of effective State mechanisms for plan- Federal action to: ning and managing the use of coastal resources * Protect U.S. wetlands from further destruction in an environmentally sound manner. (through direct acquisition and reduced Federal Control of coastal water pollution is the primary support for development in wetland areas), responsibility of two Federal agencies: The Environ- e Protect the 69 remaining unspoiled coastal bar- mental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of rier islands, and Engineers, although eight departments and nine in- e increase the number of marine sanctuaries des- dependent agencies are involved in some form of ignated by the Federal Government over the next marine pollution research and monitoring. The few years. thrust of Federal efforts in this area, as specified in Another important Federal role in the protection the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, is ". . . to of coastal resources is the mitigation of natural haz- restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and bio- ards. At least 10 hazardous natural events occur logical integrity of the Nation's waters," including often enough in coastal areas to be causes of concern. those in the coastal region. To that end, the Corps of These include hurricanes, tornadoes, and other se- Engineers administers the far-reaching dredge and vere storms; floods and storm surges; earthquakes; fill permit program already noted, and the Environ- tsunamis; and erosion. Most Federal policies in the mental Protection Agency is responsible for a broad- natural hazards area are aimed at protecting human based program of pollution abatement and control, life and property or providing disaster relief, not at research and development, and enforcement. Within protecting the physical environment. At the same this effort, the current emphasis is on the control of time, environmental protection may be provided as a pollution from "point sources:- municipal waste byproduct of the main goal. Programs to reconstruct systems, industrial plants, and the like. Emphasis is eroded beaches or to erect seawalls and artificial also placed on reducing pollution from "nonpoint dunes, for example, can benefit the environment. sources," such as the runoff from agricultural opera- Likewise, programs to restrict or regulate develop- tions. The subject of Federal pollution abatement ment in flood plains or hurricane-prone areas often policy is treated in greater detail in the'section on result in preserving more of the original environment "The Marine Environment." than would otherwise be the case. These Federal roles 18 are carried out by a variety of construction and man 3. Results of U.S. Policy and Current Issues agement agencies, including the Corps of Engineers, in Coastal Resource Policy Department of Housing and Urban Development, The cumulative effects of the fluctuations in Fed- and Department of Commerce. eral policy that have occurred in recent years are dif- Fish, wildlife, and plants are among the most im- ficult to assess. However, one result has been an in- portant environmental resources of the coastal zone. creasing public awareness of, and interest in, issues Federal policy in regard to these resources involves surrounding coastal resource use. This result is im- providing protection for them if their survival as portant, because, until recently, there was no public species becomes threatened or endangered. In these demand for a strict accounting of the uses of the cases, the Federal Government has assumed the re- coast as a distinct and important geographical entity. sponsibility for direct management of the species to Coordinated management of all of the various possi- preserve them. This responsibility includes perform- ble uses of coastal resources in the past was a matter ing research to determine the status of species of scientific, but not political, concern. This situation thought to be endangered, designating species to has changed in the past decade, and public awareness receive Federal protection, establishing appropriate of "the coast" as a unique region is likely to continue rules and regulations for protecting the species, en- for the foreseeable future. forcing those regulations, and monitoring continu- On a more measurable scale, some of the results of ously the threatened or endangered populations. Re- U.S. coastal policies have included: search, regulation, and monitoring are performed by 9 The initiation of coastal zone management plan- the Department of Commerce and the Department of ning processes in 33 States and territories; the Interior under the Federal Endangered Species 0 The approval and implementation of manage- Act and Marine Mammals Protection Act. Enforce- ment programs or program segments in 4 States; ment is carried out by these two departments along e The establishment of 10 national seashores, 3 with the Coast Guard, the U.S. Customs Service, and national lakeshores, and 2 gateway recreation the States. areas in the coastal zone; Direct Federal action to protect coastal and other * The acquisition of several million acres of coast- natural resources was taken in 1969 with enactment al lands by governmental entities- Federal, of the National Environmental Policy Act. Among State, and local-for conservation or recreation other things, this Act requires all Federal agencies to purposes; consider the environmental consequences of their ac- e The establishment of 5 estuarine sanctuaries; tivities before proceeding, including activities affect- and ing the coastal zone. This Act requires environmental e The establishment of 2 marine sanctuaries, with impact statements, which are made available for pub- several dozen more under active consideration. lic review and comment before final action is ap- These results indicate a much more active Federal in- proved. terest in the past decade in protecting and managing In the long run, the greatest potential for providing U.S. coastal resources. At the same time, coastal de- protection to coastal resources and the environment velopment continues, as it must if the United States is appears to be offered by effective State and local to meet its future energy needs and maintain ade- land use planning and management mechanisms. The quate economic growth. Inherent in this competition Federal Government has become increasingly in- for the use of coastal resources is potential conflict volved in encouraging this approach over the past over the nature and location of energy support facil- decade through such efforts as the coastal zone ities in the coastal zone, over whether resources are to management program. It also appears now as though be used for recreational or commercial purposes, and the States will assume greater responsibility for the over whether the resources are to be used at all or administration of dredging and filling activities, preserved for future generations. Further, these po- which is now a Federal responsibility. At the same tential conflicts are likely to intensify as time passes, time, the States have been moving to provide their because the resources available for use are limited own statutes for coastal environmental protection. and the demands for them are growing. Future Fed- Thirteen coastal States have laws which specifically eral coastal policies will need to consider this situa- protect wetlands, and an additional 17 States include tion and provide for the effective resolution of poten- some form of wetlands protection in their overall tial conflicts. land use or environmental programs. A definitive Several major issues of coastal resource policy that Federal policy and role in this area has yet to be will be facing the Federal Government over the next developed. few years further illustrate the potential for conflict. 19 Developing a stable, long-term Federal role in In addition to the Federal role in providing assist- encouraging State and local governments to ance to State and local governments in the develop- manage their coastal areas. ment of coastal zone management processes, there is The legal authority to provide Federal assistance to also an issue regarding the Federal role in determin- the States in planning and developing their coastal ing the substance of coastal resource use decisions. zone management programs expires in September The 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act requires 1979. A decision is needed before then as to whether that State programs must provide for "adequate con- additional Federal planning support is needed or sideration of the national interest involved in the warranted. Further, a decision is needed on the siting of facilities necessary to meet requirements length of time to be authorized for Federal assistance which are other than local in nature" in order to to the States in implementing their programs. Prog- qualify for Federal approval. In this case, the defini- ress to date has been slower than expected; only two tion of "national interest" is a matter of Federal complete plans and two plan segments have been regulation and is subject to wide interpretation. The fully approved for implementation. One issue will be issue is whether the Federal Government should use whether adequate time and Federal assistance has this provision, some other means, or no means at all been provided to permit the development of State to: (1) seek an overall balance between the develop- plans. Another will be whether the Federal emphasis ment and protection of coastal resources or (2) set should be on quality or quantity in approving State priorities for specific types of development to be programs. Implicit in both of these issues is a third allowed. Resolution of these questions in the near question: What will be the effect of terminating Fed- future is important because several States will be ap- eral planning assistance to States that have not devel- proaching the implementation phase of their coastal oped programs which meet the legal criteria for Fed- zone management efforts in the next I to 2 years. eral approval? Determining the ef tiveness of Federal con- ,.fec Beyond these near-term issues, there is also an sistency laws as a resource management tool. issue concerning what is to be the "permanent" Fed- The Coastal Zone Management Act requires that eral role in State and local coastal zone management. "each Federal agency conducting or supporting ac- At some future time (yet to be determined), all the tivities directly affecting the coastal zone shall con- States that are going to have coastal zone manage- duct or support those activities in a manner which is, ment programs will have received the maximum Fed- to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with eral assistance now envisioned. When this occurs, approved State management programs." This provi- which may be within 3 to 5 years, a decision will be sion could be a powerful incentive to the States, needed on whether the Federal Government should depending on the scope and importance of Federal play a continuing role in coastal zone management activities in a particular area, or it could prove to be and, if so, what that role should be. Consideration of a barrier in the Federal review and approval of State this question now is important, because decisions programs. Further, it if becomes an effective man- regarding the longer term Federal role will influence agement tool in the area of State and local coastal decisions on the issues to be resolved in 1979. zone management, it could be applied to other areas Further, the Federal Government must address the of natural resource management. The questions are issue of its relation with local governments in the whether Federal consistency is necessary and desir- management of coastal resources. The existing coast- able, and whether it can be made to work over the al zone management program was designed to assist long term and in the presence of competing mission the States in planning and implementing effective requirements. Legal exemptions from the consistency programs. For the most part, however, coastal zone requirement are already being proposed, although management is synonymous with land use manage- none has yet been approved. Should exemptions be ment, and this function is largely a prerogative of granted, alternative means to achieve balance be- local governments. Because of this situation, the tween State programs and Federal activities will need eventual success of the Federal program will depend to be considered. on how well local needs and interests are represented Determining the Federal role in energy facilities in State programs, and consideration of a more direct siting. Federal-local relationship may be warranted. In addition to questions of Federal involvement in Assessing the Federal role in determining what the substance of coastal resource use and of imple- should be the balance and priorities between menting the existing Federal consistency provisions coastal resource development and protection of of the law, there is already a major issue involving the coastal environment. the Federal role in the siting of energy facilities. This 20 issue is, in large measure, a coastal issue because of Determining the relation between coastal man- the heavy dependence of energy producers on coastal agement and the management of ocean-based resources. This issue centers on the question of the resources. extent to which the Federal Government will involve The Federal coastal zone management effort, to itself in a process that has, until now, been largely a date, has concentrated on land use. State coastal re- prerogative of the private sector and local govern- sources, however, extend to the limit of the 3-mile ments. Federal involvement may be necessary and territorial sea. Beyond that, Federal jurisdiction ex- desirable because (1) the need for new energy supplies tends, in some cases to a limit of 200 miles. Because is a critical national concern; (2) new forms and these boundaries are artificial, it is important that sources of energy (such as nuclear power and off- consideration be given to the development of a con- shore oil and gas) are controlled, at least in part, by sistent and coherent system of natural resource man- the Federal Government; and (3) the general public is agement that recognizes the natural relationships that beginning to raise questions that go well beyond the transcend legal boundaries. The issues in this area domain of private and local government concerns concern the Federal role in providing for such a sys- (such as the extent to which the United States should tem where State and local jurisdictions are involved. use nuclear power) and urge the use of alternative 4. Conclusions energy sources. Often, the issue of facilities siting is chosen as a forum for raising, and resolving, these Because of the importance of coastal resources to broader questions. To date, the Federal establish- the United States, concern has been shown in the past ment is not well equipped to deal with these problems 10 years for the way in which those resources are used in this context. An overall Federal policy may be and protected. The Federal Government has been a needed to permit such issues to be promptly and sat- major factor in developing an awareness of the im- isfactorily resolved in the national interest. portance of the coastal region through the establish- Determining the Federal role in increasing recre- ment of environmental policies, its encouragement of ational opportunities in the coastal zone. coastal zone management, and its emphasis on the There is some evidence that future demand for the development of new energy sources. Over the years, recreational use of coastal resources may outpace the Federal coastal policies have fluctuated widely in available opportunities, especially if population their emphasis between development and preserva- growth trends in coastal areas continue. The main tion. If the Nation's goals for both coastal resource issue in this area is the extent to which new oppor- use and protection of the coastal environment are to tunities should be provided through the support of be met, a coherent Federal policy must be developed the Federal Government instead of by the private sec- soon, and processes must be devised for ensuring a tor. or other governmental units. Another issue is balanced approach to meeting the goals. Further, a whether, in the interests of economic growth, the Federal policy must be developed which also provides Federal Government should promote recreation and for a consistent and coherent approach to the treat- tourism in the coastal areas of the United States. ment of resources that are closely related to coastal Should the Federal Government decide to foster and resources. Of particular importance are resources of develop recreational opportunities, other issues will the continental shelf and adjacent deep ocean, and need to be resolved, including the form and location related freshwater and inland resources that affect of recreational opportunities to be developed. the coastal environment. Marine Transportation 1. Background Throughout the Nation's history, this important use of ocean and coastal resources has received Marine transportation is one of the predominant prominent attention from Government. The earliest uses of the ocean. America has long depended on its Congresses recognized the importance of a reliable shipping and shipbuilding industries for trade, jobs, merchant marine to the economy and national securi- and security. Today the United States is the largest ty. In 1789, Congress enacted a law limiting U.S. ship trading Nation in the world, with almost all foreign registry to vessels built in American shipyards. The commerce transported by sea, and an economy that same year the U.S. Lighthouse Service was estab- depends more than ever before on ocean shipping. lished to help merchant vessels safely operate, and in 21 1790 the Revenue Marine was created. The Revenue Control and reduce the adverse impact of ma- Marine, a predecessor of today's Coast Guard, was a rine transportation on the environment. maritime law enforcement agency, but soon began The first two objectives have long been mainstays of making rescues at sea and providing aid to ships in Federal maritime policy, whereas the third is of more distress. At about that time, the United States im- recent origin. posed discriminatory duties on foreign ships engaged Federal policy toward port and harbor develop- in U.S. coastal trade. Later, in 1808, foreign vessels ment has been dominated by two basic principles: were totally excluded from participation in American avoiding preferential treatment of one state or region coastal commerce. So important were maritime con- over another and refraining from interference with cerns that 5 of the first I I laws enacted by the First State, local, and private functions. Consequently, Congress contained provisions to regulate shipping Federal activities have emphasized the general expan- and encourage the growth of the U.S. merchant sion and improvement of marine waterways marine. throughout the country, while leaving shoreside This governmental interest, which started as trade development to others. The result of the Federal ap- protection for a budding national industry, has proach has been a port system that is largely owned evolved over the years into a complex and sophisti- by private concerns and by State and local govern- cated Federal role in marine transportation. Al- ments. Today, about 60 percent of the 2,400 com- though various programs have been pursued over the mercial marine terminals in the United States are years, and many governmental entities have been in- privately owned. About 36 percent are operated by volved, the overall goal has remained to provide a State and local governments. The rest are operated safe and efficient marine transportation system in by nonprofit organizations and civilian Federal agen- support of U.S. commerce and adequate to meet cies. shipping needs during periods of national emergency. At the same time, the Federal Government has played a significant role in harbor expansion and 2. Current Status of U.S. Marine port access in recognition of the economic and stra- Transportation Policy tegic importance of ocean shipping. Since 1824, the In recent years this overall goal has been pursued Army Corps of Engineers has participated in the con- as an end in itself, not as an element of U.S. ocean struction of 25,000 miles of inland and intercoastal policy. Although this situation is beginning to change waterways, 107 commercial port facilities, 400 small- with the enactment of new laws governing ocean and boat harbors, and 261 locks, The Departments of coastal use management and marine environmental Transportation and Commerce also contribute to protection, today's Federal policy is still dominated port and harbor development. Both promote im- by interest in three traditional transportation ac- provement of intermodal (ship-to-rail and ship-to- tivities. These are: truck) transportation. The Department of Commerce � Provision of facilities and services that support also has programs to help port interests assess trade merchant shipping, opportunities, and the Department of Transporta- � Regulation of ocean shipping rates and competi- tion is in charge of the licensing and regulation of tive practices, and offshore deepwater ports. � Promotion and protection of U.S. shipping and The Federal Government has always played a role shipbuilding interests. in ensuring the safe and efficient conduct of marine transportation. Today's programs seek to accom- a. Provision of Facilities and Services plish this objective through: An adequate merchant shipping capacity requires 9 Conduct of search and rescue operations on and not only ships but ports, harbors, navigational aids, over the high seas and waters under U.S. juris- and a range of services to support ship operations. diction; Many facilities and services, collectively termed "in- 9 Development, deployment, and maintenance of frastructure," are provided by the private sector. aids to navigation, including buoys, lighthouses, However, the Federal Government also is involved, and radio navigation systems; especially where the safety of operations is at stake. e Regulation of marine operations in order to pre- Key Federal policies in this area seek to: vent maritime accidents and protect life and � Improve navigability through port, channel, and property at sea; and harbor improvements, * Enforcement of maritime laws and the provision � Ensure safe and efficient marine transportation of supporting services to other Federal ocean ac- operations, and tivities. 22 In the past, these Federal activities have been con- sory responsibilities for setting overall Federal ducted @y numerous specialized agencies, such as the environmental policy. In recent years, CEQ has U.S. Life Saving Service and the Steamboat Inspec- had an active role in developing policies toward tion Service. Now these functions are largely per- oil and hazardous materials pollution and to- formed by a single agency-the multimission U.S. ward deepwater port siting. Coast Guard within the Department of Transporta- The Environmental Protection Agency adminis- tion. In carrying out its civilian missions in 1976, the ters a permit program aimed at eliminating the Coast Guard: discharge of pollutants in navigable waters of � Responded to 74,714 search and rescue cases, the United States by 1985, and establishes over- preventing over 5,000 deaths and saving over all water quality standards. $318 million worth of property; The Coast Guard is charged with the prevention � Maintained nearly 26,000 buoys and over 22,000 of damage from shipping and with the improve- fixed aids to navigation (such as radiobeacons ment of the overall quality of the marine en- and light stations); vironment including the removal of oil spills. � Inspected 10,471 U.S. commercial vessels, proc- These environmental policies and programs have essed 16,400 vessel license applications, inves- placed new restrictions on both shipping and port tigated 7,200 marine casualties, and made operations. 325,000 courtesy motor boat examinations; and A closely related, but different, Federal concern- � Boarded nearly 34,000 cargo vessels in port, resolution of ocean and coastal use conflicts-is now conducted 7,659 hours of domestic icebreaking beginning to emerge. It is likely to have a major im- operations, and devoted over 78,000 hours of pact on marine transportation in the future. New cutter operations to fisheries enforcement. Federal emphasis on the development of planning In addition to these civil responsibilities, the Coast and management processes for ocean and coastal use Guard serves as one of the Armed Forces of the will almost certainly have an increasing effect on port United States and annually carries on military expansion, new facilities siting, harbor dredging, off- readiness operations. shore structure location, and other elements of the Other Federal agencies also provide important aids marine transportation system. To date, Federal pol- to the safety and efficiency of maritime operations icy in this field has concentrated on assisting the The Commerce Department's National Oceanic and States in planning and developing long-term pro- Atmospheric Administration produces maps and grams for coastal zone management. So far, only charts that are necessary for navigating U.S. coastal limite'd attention has been paid to the management of and offshore waters and provides marine weather the offshore ocean region, but this situation is begin- observations and forecasts that contribute both to ning to change. Future Federal policies increasingly the safety and efficiency of operations. The Depart- will seek to provide a means of balancing the interests ment of the Interior and the Corps of Engineers carry and needs of a wide variety of ocean and coastal re- out programs to license offshore structures, such as source uses. As a major competitor for the use of oil rigs, so that they do not interfere with marine ocean and coastal space, marine transportation will navigation. The task of ensuring the safety and effi- be greatly affected by whatever policies and pro- ciency of marine transportation is one of the largest cedures are developed. and most visible Federal ocean efforts. The newest Federal responsibilities in the area of b. Regulatory Policy marine transportation concern environmental protec- tion. Federal environmental laws and policies, which The second major element of Federal marine trans- have been developed largely over the past 10 years, portation policy is the economic regulation of ocean have had a major effect on marine transportation shipping. A 20th century development, extensive operations. Emphasis to date has been on reducing or Federal regulation was first authorized by the Ship- preventing damage to the marine environment from ping Act of 1916. Although intended mainly to con- shipping operations, particularly those involving the trol unacceptable competitive practices that were transportation of oil and hazardous substances. then prevalent, this Act established a key policy by Three Federal agencies have major environmental subjecting international common carrier shipping to protection responsibilities that affect marine trans- U.S. regulation. Despite objections from foreign na- portation. tions, whose vessels are subject to regulation when The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) engaged in U.S. commerce, this policy has continued which reports to the President, has broad advi- to the present day and makes the United States 23 unique among the major maritime nations of the The Federal Maritime Commission has primary world. Federal regulatory authority over ocean shipping, Today's Federal policies toward the economic reg- although the Interstate Commerce Commission also ulation of ocean shipping seek to provide equitable has a significant role. The current practice is to en- rates for both shippers and shipping companies, and sure that the Federal regulatory function is independ- to preserve competition within the shipping industry. ent from other Federal marine transportation activi- Like most Federal regulatory efforts, the regulation ties, although this practice is of relatively recent of ocean shipping is highly technical and replete with origin. From 1936 to 1961, regulatory responsibility complex laws, policies, rules, and exceptions, all of was vested in the same agency that had responsibility which have great significance to the shipping indus- for the promotion of merchant shipping and ship- try. From the standpoint of overall public policy, building. Under a 1961 Federal reorganization the however, a few basic tenets are most important. two functions were separated, and remain so today. First, regulatory policies differ according to the The Federal Maritime Commission, which has five origin and destination of goods being shipped. There members, carries out a full range of regulatory ac- are different rules for domestic shipping, which in- tivities to implement Federal policy. These activities cludes all trade between U.S. ports and its territories, include: approving agreements filed by liner confer- and for international shipping, which covers all trade ences, regulating the practices of common carriers of between the United States and foreign nations. Sec- waterborne commerce, accepting or rejecting tariff ond, regulatory policies differ according to the type rates, and promulgating rules and regulations to of service offered by the shipper. Broadly, there are assure compliance with specific statutes. three basic types of service. The Interstate Commerce Commission, which has � Private service, which involves the carriage of an general regulatory authority over domestic interstate individual company's goods on company-owned trade, is responsible for regulating several different vessels. Tankers that are owned and operated by aspects of domestic waterborne commerce. These in- oil companies are an example of a private ser- clude the common carriage of freight other than bulk vice. cargo, the common carriage of dry bulk cargo on the � Tramp service, which involves the provision of high seas and Great Lakes, and intercoastal contract shipping services on a contract, or charter, basis, carriage of dry bulk cargo when these ocean services No fixed schedule or service is offered, and ships compete with other common carrier services. Fur- may move freely from trade to trade in pursuit ther, the Commission regulates various common car- of bookings upon completion of a contract. riage support activities such as storage and transfer � Liner service, which involves the provision of services. common carrier services to the general public in C. Promotion of Shipping and Shipbuilding accordance with a fixed, published schedule. In- ternationally, rate structures for this type of The third major element of Federal marine trans- service are commonly set by "liner confer- portation policy is the promotion of U.S. merchant ences, " which are made up of shipping compan- shipping and shipbuilding. While the basis for Fed- ies that participate in the same trade. eral involvement in this function has varied over the The following approaches are used to regulate years, it has generally been justified in terms of one these trades and to achieve the Federal objective of or more of the following objectives: ensuring fair prices and a reasonable degree of com- * Fulfilling national security requirements, petition: 0 Providing support for the national economy, or � Private service is not regulated, because it is not * Promoting U.S. international political aims. offered to the general public. In recent years, primary attention usually has been � Tra mp service is not regulated in international given to meeting national security needs. This in- trade. Domestic tramp service is regulated only volves ensuring that adequate shipping capacity is to the extent necessary to protect other common available to meet defense requirements and to assure carriers from unfair competition. the continued operation of essential components of � Liner services are regulated, both in domestic the U.S. economy during periods of national emer- trade and in international trade. Because liner gency. At the same time, the ability of U.S. shipping conferences could act to restrain competition or and shipbuilding industries to support jobs for set rates at unreasonable levels, the Federal American workers and to provide an international Government has acted to impose strict require- political presence continue to be important reasons ments on this type of service. for Federal promotion of these industries. 24 Over the years, many kinds of aids have been used states of readiness for use in the event of na- to further U.S. shipping and shipbuilding objectives. tional emergencies; Early assistance was largely of the indirect variety, conducts general support activities in areas such including discriminatory tariffs on foreign shipping as research and development, maritime labor/ and restrictions on foreign participation in U.S. management relations and workforce develop- trade. Later, more direct forms of aid were insti- ment, market development, and environmental tuted, such as Federal insurance and limited sub- protection; and sidies. The mainstays of today's Federal promotional operates the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy at program are the direct subsidies and other forms of Kings Point, N.Y., and provides Federal assist- assistance that were inaugurated with enactment of ance to the six State maritime schools. Both of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936. This Act reaf- these activities are designed to encourage careers firmed the national policy of Federal support for a in merchant shipping. private merchant marine and set forth the broad Promotional and regulatory activities were carried goals of Federal support. These broad goals included out by the same organization until 1961. Since then, the development of a merchant marine that would be promotional functions have been the responsibility capable of carrying U.S. domestic waterborne com- of the Department of Commerce, and regulatory merce and a substantial portion of U.S. international functions have been performed by the independent trade, and which would also serve as a naval and Federal Maritime Commission. military auxiliary in time of war. In 1970, the 1936 3. Results of U.S. Policy and Current Act was amended to provide, among other things, a Issues in Marine Transportation more specific Federal goal: a 10-year, 300-ship con- struction program to revitalize the declining U.S. Of major concern has been the decline of the U.S. merchant marine. shipping industry since World War 11. It is a fact that A very broad program of Federal promotional as- the United States emerged from the war with 60 per- sistance has been provided since 1936. The types of cent of the total world shipping capacity. Today the aid which are or have been available include: U.S. ranks 10th in the world, having only 2.6 percent � Direct cash payments, in the form of ship con- of the world's total number of ships. These statistics struction and ship operating subsidies; do not tell the whole story, however, since: � Tax assistance, through special provisions allow- 9 The U.S. shipping and shipbuilding industries ing tax deferral on income set aside for new ship continue to provide substantial employment- construction; 21,000 seagoing personnel, 127,000 shipyard � Credit aid, in the form of direct government workers, and 57,000 longshore personnel. loans for ship construction and Federal loan e As of June 30, 1977, the U.S. shipyard order- guarantee programs; book ranked third in the world with nearly 6 � Benefit-in-kind subsidies, such as selling Feder- million deadweight tons on order or under con- ally owned vessels to private operators at bar- struction. gain prices after major wars; 9 Foreign trade carried by U.S. flag vessels has in- � Regulatory subsidies, such as restrictions on the creased since enactment of the Merchant Marine carriage of U.S. domestic waterborne com- Act of 1970. In 1969, the U.S. fleet carried 19.8 merce; and million tons of U.S. foreign trade. In 1976, the � Purchase subsidies, in the form of U.S. flag U.S. fleet carried 34.2 million tons, an increase preference requirements for the transportation of 73 percent. At the same time, total U.S. for- of Government- sponsored cargoes. eign trade was increasing. Consequently, the The principal Federal agency responsible for ad- U.S. share rose by only 0.2 percent, from 4.6 ministering programs to foster, promote, and devel- percent of the total to 4.8 percent. It is signifi- op the American merchant marine is the Maritime cant, however, that the U.S. fleet did not lose Administration, an operating unit of the Department further ground to its foreign competitors during of Commerce. In addition to administering the sub- this period, thus reversing a 25-year trend. sidy and loan guarantee programs, the Maritime Ad- The U.S. fleet has been substantially modern- ministration ized since passage of the Merchant Marine Act maintains, in cooperation with the Navy, a Na- of 1970. Under the Act, 62 new vessels have been tional Defense Reserve Fleet, which consists of built. Together, these new ships represent 45 government- owned merchant ships that have percent of the carrying capacity of the U.S. been deactivated, but which are kept in various fleet. Further, 22 conventional general cargo 25 ships have been converted to modern container projects and to assure a yield on water resource proj- ships under the Act. ects at least equal to the yield that could be expected The objective of the 1970 Act, 300 new ships by if the same resources were devoted to a secure long- 1980, probably will not be achieved. Nevertheless, term investment. While the discounting procedure is major gains in U.S. ocean shipping capacity will be technical, the discount rate issue is not simply a made, largely because of the construction of newer technical problem. Because the established discount types of ships (container ships, roll-on/roll-off van rate can influence significantly which water projects ships, and barge carriers). Construction of dry bulk will be approved, political considerations have ships, however, will fall considerably short of the played a significant role in its determination. goal. The issue of waterway user charges has also been a Over the next few years, Federal policyrnakers will major area of controversy with respect to waterway face a number of issues of major significance to the transportation system financing. In recent years, U.S. marine transportation system. These issues are pressure has grown for some form of Federal tax on summarized below. waterway users to help defray at least part of the cost Integrating the needs of the transportation sys- of these Federal water transportation programs and tem with emerging social objectives, such as en- to reflect more accurately the total cost of water vironmental protection and coastal zone man- transport services in the rates charged for water car- agement. riage. While recognizing that in some cases it may be A major challenge will be to assure that full and desirable, in support of other objectives, to provide systematic consideration is given to each of the com- certain transportation services and facilities 'free or peting, and often mutually exclusive, demands below cost, the Department of Transportation has placed on marine and coastal resources. Already, en- become a particularly strong proponent of the user vironmental protection requirements have increased charge concept for all transport modes including the cost of building and operating ships. Larger water transportation, Although water carriers have facilities are needed to accommodate today's larger vigorously opposed the concept of user charges in the vessels. These facilities will compete with other possi- past, it now appears that a limited Federal tax on ble uses of valuable coastal land and water resources. commercial waterway users is possible in the near New safety requirements (such as those for liquefied future. natural gas carriers and disposal requirements for Although some degree of reluctant agreement on new dredged materials) will add to the cost of port the waterway user charge concept now seems to have development. The Federal role must be reexamined, emerge d, much remains to be resolved with respect to and existing processes improved, to maintain a bal- the amount and nature of the charges. These issues ance between national and local interests, economic are likely to provide fertile ground for continuing needs and environmental concerns, and similar con- controversy in this area for some years to come. flicting or competing considerations. While deliberations continue on how most appro- Obtaining an equitable resolution of transporta- priately to fund traditional Federal water transporta- tion infrastructurefinancing issues. tion services, growing support has emerged for a Several specific issues exist in regard to financing larger Federal role in funding the cost of certain new port, harbor, and waterway development. These in- programs mandated by the Federal Government. In clude selecting appropriate discount rates for use in this area, port interests have expressed particular evaluating Federal water projects that affect naviga- concern for the high cost of complying with new Fed- tion, determining to what extent user charges should eral requirements associated with port security, en- offset the cost of Federal waterway programs, and vironmental protection, and safety. These interests evaluating the need for a greater Federal role in have urged that the Federal Government help sup- financing port development projects. port these increasingly expensive programs. Thus, The discount rate issue has been vigorously de- while there is growing support for more industry cost bated for the past several years and promises to re- sharing of traditional Federal assistance programs main a point of controversy in evaluating future nav- through user charges, there is simultaneously increas- igation and other water resource projects. Basically ing interest in an expanded Federal role in funding this controversy centers on the selection of an appro- new Government requirements imposed on State, lo- priate discount rate for determining the present value cal, and private waterway interests. of the future benefits expected from a particular Implementing Federal regulatory reforms. water project. The objectives of the associated cost/ The improvement of Federal regulatory ap- benefit assessment are to assure selection of the best proaches and processes is expected to be an impor- 26 tant effort of government as a whole over the next FMC expanded authority to deal more effectively several years. As a partially regulated industry, with such illegal practices as rebating. marine transportation will be affected by whatever Among proponents of the current regulated con- goals and programs are established. Specific issues ference system, growing support has emerged for that are expected to arise in marine transportation possibly allowing the use of some form of "closed regulation include the problem of unclear jurisdic- conference" system in the U.S. liner trades as a tion over intermodal shipping between the Federal means of fostering greater stability and controlling il- Maritime Commission and the Interstate Commerce legal practices. The closed conference system, which Commission and the overall adequacy and appropri- is common in most world trades and under which ateness of the existing U.S. ocean shipping regulatory shipping conferences are allowed to limit member- system. ship, is now illegal in the U.S. trades. Adoption of Jurisdictional problems relating to the authority of some form of regulated closed conference system the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Feder- would be contrary to the desires of those who seek a al Maritime Commission (FMC) are likely to grow as more competitive system, and as a consequence, con- containerization and other unitized cargo handling sideration of this issue is likely to be highly con- operations continue to expand. The increasing use of troversial. through bills of lading and single rates for move- Providing for expansion of the U.S. dry bulk ments having both international and domestic com- fileet. ponents will continue to tax the traditional domestic- Existing U.S. dry bulk shipping capacity falls con- trade/ foreign- trade division of responsibility be- siderably short of what would be needed to maintain tween these agencies. the American economy during war. Further, the Another major regulatory issue that will continue Merchant Marine Act of 1970 has not provided much to receive close consideration relates to the problem stimulus to this sector of the industry (only two ore/ of controlling the competitive practices of State- bulk/oil carriers have been built under the program). owned shipping companies that, in recent years, have Consequently, special policies and programs must be been aggressively seeking a larger role in the carriage considered if the United States is to expand its dry of U.S. foreign commerce. Such carriers, primarily bulk shipping capability. Now under consideration of Soviet registry, have been charged by their com- are a number of legislative initiatives that would alter petitors with cutting rates to levels that are not fully various provisions of existing subsidy programs in an compensatory in order to achieve rapid trade pene- effort to make them more responsive to the special tration gains which, it is suggested, are motivated needs of the dry bulk carriage industry. more by political objectives than by commercial con- Determining the future of liquefied natural gas siderations. Proposals for resolving this problem (LNG) ship construction. have focused on providing the FMC with greater reg- The United States is now a world leader in the de- ulatory authority to police minimum rates filed by velopment and construction of LNG vessels-U.S. State-owned shipping firms. shipyards now have contracts for half of the LNG Even more fundamental regulatory concerns are ships now being built worldwide. Commercial pros- emerging which strike at the philosophical founda- pects are excellent for further LNG construction and tions of the current U.S. regulatory system. The use, depending on the outcome of two major policy Justice Department and others have frequently crit- issues. One is the extent to which the United States is icized the policy of granting antitrust immunity to willing to permit itself to rely on imported LNG as a regulated shipping conferences and have suggested source of energy. The other is the widespread con- that conference abuses have not been controlled cern over the safety of LNG transportation and han- effectively by either market forces or Government dling procedures. regulation. Such critics have urged major changes to Resolving longer term questions about Federal current shipping legislation with the aim of increas- programs and policies for promoting the U.S. ing competition in the shipping industry. merchant marine. Supporters of the present regulatory philosophy, Over the next few years, a number of specific mat- on the other hand, have identified shortcomings in ters are expected to be debated which, in aggregate, existing law which limit the ability of the United could alter significantly the overall Federal policies States to enforce effectively U.S. laws on foreign-flag toward the U.S. maritime industries. Included operations. These proponents of the present system among these are matters such as: the sanctions and have urged a basic strengthening of the system to give assistance provided in support of U.S.-owned 27 foreign-flag shipping and the utility of U.S.-owned trol over the maritime resources being supported. foreign vessels in meeting national security require- While the Government may accept or reject individ- ments, the need to renew the National Defense Re- ual subsidy requests, the private sector is offered no serve Fleet or develop a suitable alternative to this specific incentives to seek aid for projects with high important emergency surge capacity, the future out- public value. As a consequence, two projects yielding look for U.S. shipyards in view of the recent decline markedly different public benefits may receive equal in new orders, and the appropriateness of certain re- Federal support simply because each makes some strictive provisions in current contracts for Federal contribution to broad national maritime objectives. operating subsidies in light of contemporary trends in Because of these concerns, it has been suggested the liner industry toward greater operating flexibility. that new assistance options need to be considered At a much broader level, there is likely to be re- that incorporate clear incentives to the private sector newed debate over the fundamental adequacy of ex- to build and maintain shipping and shipbuilding re- isting Federal maritime programs to achieve national sources that maximize specifically identified public maritime objectives, particularly in light of the mixed objectives. Currently the White House Domestic Pol- results attained to date under the Merchant Marine icy Staff is sponsoring a thorough interagency reas- Act of 1970. One manifestation of this emerging sessment of national maritime policy, both regula- search for new approaches is seen in recent efforts to tory and promotional. It is likely that the issue of enact cargo preference legislation that would reserve public responsiveness will receive attention in the for U.S. flag vessels a specific share of U.S. commer- course of this maritime policy review. cial oil imports. 4. Conclusions In reassessing Federal maritime aid programs, it can be expected that a central focus will be on the Because overall Federal policy toward marine ability of existing or proposed programs to meet spe- transportation was revised in a fairly comprehensive cific public maritime objectives. While public bene- way in 1970, few major Federal policy issues in this fits have long been cited as justification for these aid area have emerged in the past few years. However, programs, the programs themselves have been criti- this situation is now beginning to change because of cized for their imprecision in attaining specific public new environmental laws, new energy requirements, a goals. Fleet and shipyard adequacy has been assessed new Federal emphasis on regulatory reform, changes thoroughly from time to time, and specific deficien- in the general economic situation, and the failure of cies have been identified. For the most part, how- maritime promotional programs to live up to expec- ever, these assessments have not led to spec@fic reme- tations. New issues of major significance are begin- dial action. ning to arise. At least in part, these issues will have to The source of this problem has been traced to the be resolved in the context of an overall U.S. ocean basic nature of current Federal assistance programs policy. In addition to marine transportation consid- that are responsive primarily to private commercial erations, this larger policy context will require con- demands rather than to public shipping and ship- sideration of marine environmental objectives; State building objectives. The terms under which operating coastal zone management plans; competing uses for and construction subsidies are offered, for example, ocean space; and local, regional, and national eco- provide limited opportunity for precise Federal con- nomic development objectives. The Marine Environment 1. Background degradation from coastal pollutants that are carried seaward by the currents as well as by waste dumping, The highly developed state of American industry, oil and gas drilling, and shipping operations. agriculture, and trade subjects the U.S. coastal en- Until well into the 20th century, the United States vironment to pollution from contaminated rivers and pursued a relatively simple policy toward marine en- streams, shipping operations, vessel casualties, land vironmental pollution. That policy, which originated runoff, sewage, power-plant discharge, and even acid with the "Refuse Acts" of 1888 and 1899, was aimed precipitation from the atmosphere. Open ocean at preventing impediments to navigation. The need areas, while more insulated, are also subject to for these measures arose in the 1870s and 1880s, 28 when urban growth produced visible, and hazardous, In addition to this overall goal, several specific pollution in the harbors of many northeastern cities. Federal marine environmental policies have been es- Today's needs, and today's policies, are radically tablished through the enactment of separate laws different. Over the past three decades, there has been governing various sources of pollutants. These in- increasing recognition that the oceans do not have an clude: infinite capacity to absorb wastes; that marine pollu- e Eliminating or regulating discharge into the tion results largely from economic development, ocean of untreated wastes, dredged material, technological progress, and demographic changes; harmful amounts of toxic pollutants, and other and that the real cause for concern is not only the nondredged materials; amount of pollution in the environment, but also the 9 Preventing or limiting the open dumping of nature and behavior of pollutants. As a result, new materials into the ocean which would adversely laws have been enacted over the past 30 years that affect human health, the marine environment, provide a more comprehensive approach to the re- or the oceans' economic potential; duction of marine environmental pollution. Among 9 Protecting U.S. navigable waters, and their re- other things, these new laws recognize the many dif- sources, from pollution by the discharge of oil ferent forms that pollution can take, seek to reduce or oily mixtures from ships, accidental damage pollution through the control or elimination of its to vessels or structures, construction or opera- sources, and seek to mitigate the effects of pollutants tion of a U.S. deepwater port, or collisions or through the treatment of effluents before their dis- other navigational incidents on the high seas; charge into ocean waters. and Even with these new laws, however, marine pollu- Preserving, protecting, developing, and, where tion problems are likely to continue because of: possible, restoring or enhancing the resources of � Difficulty in locating acceptable and economical the coastal zone. land sites for waste disposal, and the attrac- These policies are embodied in 10 different U.S. tiveness of ocean dumping as an alternative; laws and about a dozen international agreements and � Continued use of new, and often toxic, materials conventions. No comprehensive marine environmen- in industrial processes and in consumer prod- tal quality statute exists. With several exceptions, ucts; these policies and authorities have been enacted � Growth of oceanborne petroleum transport, in- within the past decade. cluding very large single shipments, which in- Federal activities that carry out these policies fall creases the potential for acute pollution from oil into three broad categories: spills and adds to the chronic effects of accum- 0 Environmental research and monitoring, mulated oil in the marine environment; and 0 Prevention and regulation of marine pollution, � The increasing amount of heat energy dis- and charged into the marine environment from pro- 0 Provision of remedial action or assistance. duction of electricity and the growing number of industrial processing plants in coastal areas. a. Environmental Research and Monitoring The Federal Government has the primary respon- sibility for controlling and preventing pollution of While the distinction between marine environmen- the marine environment. This is because all offshore tal research and marine environmental monitoring is waters are common property resources, owned and not always clear, research is generally intended to controlled by governmental entities, and because en- gain knowledge about the form, fate, or effect of an vironmental degradation in one region can profound- agent in the environment, whereas monitoring seeks ly affect the waters of another region. to observe, trace, or measure the environment over a period of time. Taken together, these two types of ac- 2. Current Status of U.S. Policy tiVitieS constitute a significant portion of the total Federal effort in the area of marine environmental The overall goal of Federal water quality policy, as quality. In fact, of the $957 million total Federal contained in the Federal Water Pollution Control ocean program identified by the Federal Council for Act of 1972, is "to restore and maintain the chemi- Science and Technology in 1976, $248 million, or 26 cal, physical and biological integrity of the Nation's percent, could be classified as marine environmental waters." In the marine area, a more specific goal is to research and monitoring activities. Further, at least eliminate the discharge of pollutants into the naviga- eight departments and eight independent agencies are ble waters of the United States by 1987. involved in research and monitoring work. 29 To date, Federal ocean pollution research and sistance to any appropriate institution for proj- monitoring has been carried out in accordance with ects or activities which are needed to meet prior- individual agency missions on an ad hoc basis, often ities set forth in the plan if such priorities are not without extensive coordination among agencies. Un- being adequately addressed by the Federal Gov- der the National Environmental Policy Act, for ex- ernment. ample, individual agencies -have had to assess the The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- environmental impacts of all Federal activities signif- tration of the Department of Commerce has primary icantly affecting the quality of the environment. responsibility for administering this new law in col- Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the laboration with the Office of Science and Technology Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsi- Policy in the Executive Office of the President. ble for promulgating guidelines and issuing permits Until the first plan is prepared under the new Act, for the discharge of nondredged pollutants into the however, Federal marine environmental research and marine environment. Under the same Act, the Corps monitoring policy will continue to be dominated by of Engineers is responsible for issuing permits for the ongoing program priorities. In the research area, disposal of dredged or fill material into U.S. naviga- Federal efforts have been focused on petroleum hy- ble waters. The Marine Protection, Research and drocarbons, heavy metals, and manmade hydTocar- Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (The "Ocean Dumping" act) bons (such as insecticides and herbicides). Petroleum further requires EPA to regulate ocean dumping of hydrocarbons are an important problem, and it has nondredged wastes and the Corps to regulate the been estimated that 5.5 million metric tons of these dumping of dredged wastes. The Act also requires pollutants enter the ocean annually as a result of the Department of Commerce to carry out compre- man's activities. Accordingly, intensive Federal hensive and continuing programs of research and research is aimed at determining the sources and monitoring on the short-term ecological effects of amounts, and fates and effects, of oil in the marine marine pollution, overfishing, offshore development environment. Departments and agencies involved in and other ocean-based activities. Federal responsibil- this effort include: the National Science Foundation, ities for research and monitoring associated with the Environmental Protection Agency, the Depart- outer continental shelf oil and gas development are ment of Commerce, the Department of the interior, vested in no less than four agencies: EPA and the the Department of Transportation, the Department departments of Commerce, Interior, and Transpor- of Energy, and the U.S. Navy. tation. Research, monitoring, and other functions Heavy metals in the marine environment- includ- related to vessel source pollution are largely the ing arsenic, cadmium, copper, mercury, nickel, responsibility of the Department of Transportation silver, and zinc-are also an important subject of under several different statutes. Because of this situa- Federal research. Heavy metals can kill marine orga- tion, there has been no dominant policy thrust or nisms or so contaminate them that they become a theme governing Federal marine environmental re- hazard to human health. Research in this area, there- search and monitoring activities. Instead, these ef- fore, focuses on the physiological and biochemical forts have been conducted as needed to support other effects of heavy metals, the identification of metals (and mostly regulatory) agency missions. A recent in seafoods and sediments, and studies of the transfer development could, eventually, change this situation. and cycling of metals in the marine environment. The Ocean Pollution Research and Development and This research is performed by the Department of Monitoring Act, which was approved in 1978, is in- Commerce, Department of Health, Education, and tended to coordinate Federal efforts through: Welfare, and Environmental Protection Agency. � The preparation, every 2 years, of a comprehen- Synthetic hydrocarbons are receiving attention in sive 5-year plan for Federal ocean pollution, the Federal research program, because they tend to research, and development and monitoring pro- persist in the marine environment and are toxic at grams. Among other things, the plan is intended low levels of concentration. These chemicals accum- to improve Federal program planning and coor- mulate in aquatic food webs and can adversely affect dination in this area, reduce duplication, and in- fish, fish-eating birds, and humans. A well-known crease the dissemination of marine environmen- example of this type of problem is the contamination tal information. of Virginia's lower James River by Kepone, an insec- � The establishment of a comprehensive, coordi- ticide. Federal research in this field is being carried nated, and effective ocean pollution research, out by the Department of Commerce, Department of development, and monitoring program. the Interior, Environmental Protection Agency, and � The authorization of a program of financial as- National Science Foundation. 30 On a comprehensive scale, Federal marine envi- ing. NOAA and the Department of the Interior are ronmental research is also being carried out in the also performing research on the environmental ef- form of major regional studies of ocean pollution, fects of nearshore mining, which would provide new international marine pollution projects, and studies sources of minerals such as sand, gravel, and phos- of the environmental effects of offshore develop- phates. ment. Major regional studies by the National Ocean- Protecting the coastal environment from the po- ic and Atmospheric Administration of the Depart- tential adverse effects of deepwater ports and coastal ment of Commerce include in-depth investigations of and offshore nuclear powerplant development is also the New York Bight area, the Great Lakes, and Puget receiving Federal attention. The Department of Sound. Major international studies include the Na- Commerce, the Department of Transportation, and tional Science Foundation's International Decade of the Environmental Protection Agency are making en- Ocean Exploration (which includes a significant envi- vironmental assessments related to deepwater port ronmental research component), the multi-agency In- construction. Research on the environmental effects tegrated Global Ocean Station System, and a planned of floating nuclear powerplants involves decisions on project entitled Global Investigation of Pollution in sites as well as the determination of how chemical the Marine Environment. effluents and waste heat affect the marine environ- Four major categories of offshore development are ment. This research is being carried out by a variety also the subject of Federal environmental research of agencies, including the Nuclear Regulatory Com- programs: offshore drilling, ocean mining, deep- mission, Corps of Engineers, Coast Guard, Envi- water ports, and nuclear powerplants. The environ- ronmental Protection Agency, Department of Ener- mental effects associated with accelerated OCS oil gy, and Department of Commerce. and gas development are receiving the highest priori- Much of the marine environmental monitoring be- ty attention. The research program in this area, ing done by the Federal Government is associated which is under the general direction of the Depart- with the same problems noted in the research area. ment of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management, Monitoring, however, is usually done in conjunction seeks to provide scientific information as a basis for: with the Federal regulatory process, both before per- 0 Management and leasing decisions, mits are issued (baseline studies) and after the permit- 0 Predicting how oil and gas exploration and de- ted activities begin. Monitoring programs of major velopment affect the marine environment, and importance are associated with: 0 Predicting how oil and gas activities affect fron- * The Environmental Protection Agency's sewage tier areas. treatment and nondredged materials discharge The program, carried out jointly by the Department permit program under the Federal Water Pollu- of the Interior and the Department of Commerce, in- tion Control Act and the Ocean Dumping Act; volves establishing environmental baselines prior to e The Corps of Engineers' dredge and fill permit exploration, monitoring the environment during ex- program, conducted under the same statute; and ploration to detect changes, and making special stud- 9 The Department of the Interior's OCS oil and ies as needed. gas development program, conducted under the The Federal Government has a special ocean min- Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953. ing environmental research program. Its objective is Much of the actual monitoring under these pro- to identify and satisfy environmental concerns before grams is performed by the National Oceanic and At- beginning commercial mining operations in the mospheric Administration, because it has a fleet of 1980s. U.S. industry has already spent millions of research vessels. dollars to identify possible mining sites, develop deep b. Prevention and Regulation of Marine Pollution ocean mining technology, and design processing plants. At stake is the recovery of significant quan- The principal Federal statutes pertaining to marine tities of manganese nodules, which lie on the deep pollution prevention and regulation have already seabed and which contain cobalt, copper, nickel, and been noted. They are the Federal Water Pollution manganese. The economic and strategic importance Control Act, as amended, the Marine Protection, of these metals has made the legal regime for their Research and Sanctuaries Act, and the Oil Pollution recovery a major unresolved issue of international Act of 1961. Together, these acts authorize the politics. In the meantime, the National Oceanic and Federal Government to control, through regulation, Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is conducting the nature and amounts of almost any conceivable a research program to determine the environmental harmful material which might be released into the effects and hazards of nodule recovery and process- marine environment. Further, these statutes contain 31 requirements (such as those for the treatment of sew- acceptable adverse impact on municipal water sup- age and those establishing tanker construction stand- plies, shellfish beds, wildlife, fisheries (including ards) which are designed to prevent the accidental spawning and breeding areas), or recreational discharge of environmentally harmful materials. The areas." Recent amendments to the Federal Water policy of these national requirements is clear: to Pollution Control Act exempt Federal projects from reduce the threat of damage to the marine environ- the permit requirements, subject to procedural lim- ment to the absolute minimum level consistent with itations (such as direct Congressional authorization other social and economic goals. for the project and the preparation of an environ- The principal Federal agency responsible for ad- mental impact statement). This is an important pol- ministering programs of marine pollution prevention icy, because over 90 percent of the dredged materials and regulation is the Environmental Protection dumped into the ocean result from projects under- Agency (EPA). EPA sets guidelines and standards, taken by the Corps of Engineers. Another important issues permits, and enforces regulations for the policy in this area concerns the extent of coverage of discharge of all nondredged materials (except oil) the Corps permit program. After a 1975 court deci- into the navigable waters of the United States. This sion, several interim administrative decisions, and includes effluents from both fixed point sources (such Congressional hearings, regulations were published as land-based sewage outfalls), mobile point sources in 1977 which extended the coverage of the permit (such as vessels and ocean dumping), and nonpoint program from navigable ocean waters to include all sources (such as agricultural runoff). Under the waters of the United States. The significance of this Clean Water Act of 1977, EPA jurisdiction in this policy to marine environmental quality is that it area now extends as far as 200 miles offshore in some brought coastal waters, wetlands, and mudflats cases. under the permit program. These fragile areas were To date, EPA activities and, therefore, Federal previously subject to use as disposal sites for dredge policy, have focused on the reduction of pollution spoil without regulation. from point sources. Federal regulations and criteria Preventing and regulating marine oil pollution is a promulgated by the Agency establish four classifica- primary responsibility of the Coast Guard under the tions for the disposal of nondredged waste material: Oil Pollution Act of 1961, the Ports and.Waterways absolutely prohibited, prohibited in excess of trace Safety Act of 1972, and other statutes. Ship and contaminants, strictly regulated, and less strictly tanker operations, together with river and urban regulated. Further, several classes of permits (such as runoff, account for nearly two-thirds of the petro- general permits, emergency permits, and interim per- leum hydrocarbons entering the marine environment. mits) have been established. For open ocean dump- Federal policy in regard to oil pollution focuses on ing, deepwater dumpsites have been designated and preventing the release of oil, oily wastes, and oily are being assessed. Through these procedures, two mixtures from shipping operations. For example: broad classes of ocean pollution are now being o Regulations promulgated by the Coast Guard brought under control: industrial waste disposal, and under the Water Quality Improvement Act of pollution from sewage sludge and ocean outfalls. The 1970 seek to reduce the probability of an ac- objective is to meet the 1978 deadline for eliminating cidental discharge of oil during normal vessel harmful pollution from these sources. Current plans operations, transfer operations, and certain ac- also call for placing greater emphasis on nonpoint cidents. These regulations contain standards for sources of marine pollution in the near future. such items as bilge and ballast piping, and oil By weight, dredged materials account for over 90 transfer hoses. The regulations apply primarily percent of the total waste disposed of in the marine to tank ships and barges, but also include provi- environment. The disposal of dredged materials in sions for merchant ships, fishing vessels, and general, and polluted dredged materials in particular, recreational boats. into the ocean has been increasing over the years as The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of available land disposal sites have dwindled. Under 1972 prohibits the discharge of a harmful quan- the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and the tity of oil or hazardous substances, in any form, Ocean Dumping Act, the Army Corps of Engineers is into or upon U.S. navigable waters, shorelines, responsible for the regulation of dredged materials and contiguous zone.. Further, the Coast Guard disposal. The Federal policy on dredged materials, as must be notified in the event a harmful discharge contained in these acts, is that the dumping of occurs. dredged materials will be permitted unless "there is 0 The Coast Guard has also promulgated regula- evidence that the proposed disposal will have an un- tions under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act 32 that govern the design, equipment, and opera- The objective of Federal enforcement and surveil- tion of U.S. tank vessels. Additionally, regula- lance activities varies from year to year in accordance tions have been published that extend the rules with existing conditions and available resources to U.S. vessels carrying oil in foreign trade and (budget, personnel, and equipment). While total sur- to foreign tank vessels entering U.S. navigable veillance and enforcement is not possible, high goals waters. have been set, if not achieved, in most areas. In the Under the same Act, the Coast Guard has estab- ocean dumping area, for example, the Coast Guard's lished advanced vessel traffic services in five ma- objective is to monitor 75 percent of dumping activ- jor port areas to improve navigation safety and ities at mixed industrial waste sites and 10 percent of reduce the chance of spills resulting from ac- all remaining operations. These objectives are largely cidents. being acheived. Although research into advanced With major exceptions (such as the blowout from surveillance techniques is being performed, the cur- offshore oil wells in the Santa Barbara channel in rent ocean dumping enforcement policy is to rely on 1969), oil pollution of the marine environment from validating permits, examining records and logs, and sources other than vessel operations has not yet been investigating incidences in which dumping vessels a significant problem for the United States. Most failed to notify the Coast Guard in advance of their spills from these sources are small. The problem is departure. In the oil pollution area, direct physical that one or two large incidents can discharge enor- inspection and surveillance techniques are more com- mous quantities of oil into the marine environment monly used. In 1976, for example, the Coast Guard before the spill can be brought under control. Ex- boarded and inspected 33,500 cargo vessels, 7,400 panded offshore drilling in the future is expected to tank vessels, and 11,600 barges. In addition, it moni- increase the probability of oil spills from these tored over 17,000 cargo transfer operations. sources. Regulations covering prevention of this type Pollution containment and removal, an activity of pollution are the responsibility of the Department pertaining primarily to oil spills, is also a Coast of the Interior as well as the Coast Guard. Guard responsibility. Over 3,500 oil pollution re- moval operations were made in 1976, aided by a c. Provision of Remedial Action or Assistance "pollution information response system" which was The third major category of Federal policies per- placed in operation in 1973. In addition, the Coast taining to marine environmental quality provides for Guard has developed a "national strike force," con- remedial action or Federal assistance in the event of a sisting of highly trained personnel, to respond to ma- pollution incident. Specific activities encompassed by jor or unusual discharges. The general policy in this this category include: area is to respond to as many hazardous pollution in- � Enforcement and surveillance, cidents as occur. A special "pollution fund" has � Containment and removal, been established within the Coast Guard budget to � Liability and compensation, and provide for immediate cleanup of spills of oil or � Restoration. other hazardous substances. Expenditures from the The enforcement and surveillance of marine envi- fund are later to be reimbursed by the responsible ronmental pollution laws and regulations is, almost owner or operator. without exception, a responsibility of the Coast Oil spill liability and compensation is currently Guard. A recent report of Coast Guard workload covered by a number of different statutes, including data indicates significant increases are being achieved the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Amendments in marine environmental protection enforcement and of 1978, the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Act, the Deep- surveillance activities. For fiscal year 1978, for exam- water Port Act, and the Federal Water Pollution ple, the Coast Guard estimated that it would: Control Act Amendments. While there are differ- � Conduct 1,300 aerial oil pollution patrols (up ences in the approaches taken under these individual from 340 in 1976). laws, they generally establish some liability for dam- � Conduct 9,500 pollution investigations (up from ages due to spills. At the same time, many State stat- 8,600 in 1976). utes establish different types or limits of liability for � Assess 5,100 civil penalties for pollution viola- damage. Accordingly, there have been frequent calls tions (up from 4,500 in 1976). for a comprehensive, national system of liability and � Perform 800 ocean dumping surveillance mis- compensation for oil pollution. While no compre- sions (up from 687 in 1976). hensive policy or system has yet been enacted, the � Receive 14,500 reports of oil and hazardous sub- Congress is giving serious consideration to various stance spills (up from 12,000 in 1976). bills. 33 Restoration of the environment subsequent to Needfor a comprehensive Federal strategy and a damage by pollution is an objective of the Coastal clear Federal role for maintaining and improv- Zone Management Act. The original intent of the ing ocean and coastal water quality. Act was further strengthened in 1976 with the enact- Firm goals and effective strategies for protecting ment of amendments providing financial assistance, the quality of the oceanic environment-which in- including grants, to States which suffer (or which cludes not only the water, but also related air and have already suffered) environmental damage due to land resources-must be an integral part of the Na- OCS oil and gas activities. Additional information tion's overall ocean policy. Although the many re- on policies and programs in this -area is contained in cent laws noted above have addressed the need for the section on "coastal resources." marine environmental protection, and numerous Federal agencies now carry out programs to imple- 3. Results of Existing Policies and Current ment these laws, the United States still lacks a com- Issues in Marine Environmental prehensive and coherent approach to long-term pro- Protection tection of the marine environment. As a result, there As a result of the numerous environmental protec- have been repeated conflicts between environmental tion laws enacted by the Congress since 1972, there is goals and developmental pressures, and these have now a very broad base of legal authority that can be been resolved on a case-by-case basis instead of in ac- used in dealing with marine pollution. However, cordance with an overall goal and strategy. Specific progress under these authorities has not been dra- subissues in this area include: matic. For example: (1) Nature of long-term Federal policy toward the disposal of chemical, municipal, nuclear, and � Oil spillage from vessels increased from 9,600 other potentially hazardous wastes in ocean metric tons in 1973 to 27,500 metric tons in waters. 1976. At question here is whether all ocean dumping is to � The amount of dredged materials dumped in the be terminated, and if so when, or whether it is to be ocean has remained fairly constant over the past allowed to continue under adequate regulation and 4 years. supervision. Current policy favors discontinuing � The dumping of untreated sewage, sewage ocean dumping within the next several years. While sludge and industrial wastes into the ocean con- this would unquestionably benefit the marine envi- tinues, with particularly severe environmental ronment in several geographical areas, this approach effects in some areas (such as the New York is not without its problems. One problem concerns Bight region). At the same time, the amount of the availability of economical and politically accept- industrial waste dumped declined by about I able alternatives to ocean dumping. Disposal sites on million tons between 1975 and 1976. land are becoming increasingly scarce and expensive. There are many possible reasons why more has not Proper Lreatment of wastes followed by their disposal been achieved: not enough time has passed since en- at sea may well prove to be the best all around solu- actment of the legislation; the problems (and re- tion to an ever increasing problem. Resolution of this quired actions) are scientifically, legally, and eco- issue will center not only on the environmental im- nomically complex; Government programs to deal pacts of alternatives, but also on their economic and with the problems are fragmented among too many social impacts. different agencies; resources, budget, and personnel (2) Need for a comprehensive Federal policy, and available for program implemention have often been the appropriate Federal role, in dealing with less than required; and there are limitations on the hazardous materials (such as oil and insecti- control that can be exercised over foreign flag ves- cides) in the marine environment. sels. Overall, however, there appear to be reasons for One major problem in regard to hazardous materi- optimism that the national goal of cleaning up the als is that research investigations have not yet yielded marine environment will be acheived eventually: sig- enough information to permit the development of nificant sums are now being spent, Federal regula- reasonable goals and policies. For example, adequate tions are in place and are beginning to be enforced, information is still lacking on such basic problems as and plans are now being made for the coordination how much oil enters the marine environment and of Federal pollution research and monitoring efforts. from what sources, how to assess oil spills in an ade- The ultimate achievement of these goals could be quate manner, and how much hazardous materials facilitated by resolution of the following outstanding can be absorbed by the ocean without undue damage issues. to the environment. Lacking the answers to these 34 questions, the Federal approach has been one of stood, nor is the effect on climate of both oceanic overprotection of the environment. This can be ex- and atmospheric pollution well known. There has pensive, for instance requiring double bottoms in been increasing concern about the possible effects of tankers, without actually providing much extra pro- the growing level of atmospheric carbon dioxide and tection. Further, the question of discharges, of the corresponding capacity of the ocean to absorb hazardous materials, their prevention, and their greater amounts in its role as a carbon dioxide sink. cleanup is subject to different regulations promul- There is also concern about how acid precipitation gated by different agencies under different laws. Ac- caused by inland air pollution affects the marine en- cordingly, consideration needs to be given to the vironment, including the water in the Great Lakes. development of a comprehensive and coherent policy Although research into this problem is at a relatively in this field that will provide the necessary levels of rudimentary stage, it may already be time to consider protection at the least cost to the economy as a an interim Federal policy which would provide a whole. greater measure of air pollution control than now ex- (3) Need for a Federal policy on comprehensive ists in order to protect ocean resources beyond the 3- liability and compensation for damage from mile territorial sea. Resolution of this issue will de- spills of hazardous materials. pend on the extent to which a need can be demon- The existence of several overlapping Federal stat- strated, specific sources of pollution identified, and utes pertaining to liability and compensation, differ- technological solutions made available at an accept- ences in standards and liability limits among the dif- able cost. ferent acts, and a multiplicity of widely varying state 4. Conclusions laws in this field have given rise to an urgent need for a comprehensive and consistent Federal liability and While marine environmental quality goals and compensation policy. Several bills have been intro- statutes abound in the United States, the govern- duced in the Congress during the past few years ment's overall efforts to prevent, control, and reduce which would provide a comprehensive system, but ocean and coastal pollution suffer from a fragmenta- none has yet been enacted, Resolution of this issue tion of responsibilities and activities. There is no centers on several provisions, including liability comprehensive marine pollution control statute, no limits, types of vessels and facilities to be covered, coherent Federal strategy for achieving the various establishment of a compensation fund, demonstra- goals, and no coordinated Federal program for car- tion of financial responsibility, and designation of a rying out the required activities in order of their responsible Federal agency for administering the Act. priority. Because of this situation, progress toward Needfor a Federal polic@y on controlling air pol- achieving the goals has been slow and is becoming in- lution, including acid precipitation,, be.vond the creasingly expensive. For the most part, the legisla- territorial sea. tive authorities required to improve marine environ- There is a growing awareness of the relation be- mental quality have been provided. The greatest need tween the ocean and the world's weather and climate now is for a unified Federal strategy and program patterns and of the relation of both to critical eco- that will ensure the timely achievement of legislative- nomic factors. Yet the natural interaction among the ly mandated goals in an effective, economical, and oceans, atmosphere, and climate are not well under- consistent manner. Marine Science and Technology 1. Background rine R&D efforts did not begin until the mid-1950s. In fact, except for military research projects, Federal The relatively unknown character of the seas and oceanographic work during this period was limited the difficulty of working in a hostile marine environ- largely to fishery investigations and coastal mapping ment have made scientific and technological activities surveys. an important part of the overall national ocean effort Major Federal interest in marine science and tech- for many years. Modern marine science began to de- nology began in 1957, with the occurrence of the In- velop in the United States in the 1930s, under the ternational Geophysical year and the launching of leadership of universities and private oceanographic Sputnik I by the Soviet Union. Over the next 10 to 15 institutions. Substantial Federal involvement in ma- years, the Federal Government, gave high priority to 35 research and development in general and marine sci- budget process. As a result of this overall situation, ence and technology was no exception. In fact, ma- there have frequently been calls for a restatement of rine science and technology was so emphasized dur- Federal ocean science policy and the establishment of ing these years that it became nearly synonymous new mechanisms to improve coordination and con- with the term "ocean policy." sistency among the various and diverse programs that The prevailing view in this era was that the oceans exist. were a last frontier-a region where vast resources At the same time, the overall level of Federal sup- went unused owing to a lack of adequate scientific port for marine science and technology has remained knowledge and technological capability. A basic firm despite the change in ocean policy emphasis and tenet of the Federal approach to this situation was the lack of a cohesive marine R&D policy. From 1968 that stimulating advances in marine science and tech- to 1977, for example, expenditures for ocean-related nology would lead to a greater realization of the R&D increased, in terms of constant dollars, while oceans' economic-and social- potential. Accord- overall national R&D expenditures declined. Total ingly, Federal ocean programs during the 1960s con- Federal expenditures for oceanographic research and centrated on acquiring scientific knowledge and ex- for general purpose ocean engineering now exceed ploring the ocean's unknown aspects. $200 million a year. Further, a significant fraction of The 1970s have seen major changes in this basic the total Federal ocean program of over $1 billion a Federal policy approach to ocean resources. The lim- year is spent on supporting R&D work. Eleven major its of the world's ocean resources, once thought to be Federal departments and agencies support marine inexhaustible, have been recognized, and the fragile R&D activities. nature of many ocean and coastal areas has been Since most R&D activities, including marine R&D acknowledged. New laws and policies have been es- activities, are generally thought of as multipurpose, it tablished which seek to achieve such goals as conserv- is difficult to define an overall policy for marine sci- ing and managing fishery resources, reducing the ence and technology in terms of mutually exclusive adverse effects of marine pollution, and providing categories. For descriptive purposes, however, it ap- active management of coastal areas. Occurrences pears most useful to view the Federal marine R&D ef- such as the increased recovery of offshore oil and gas fort in terms of the following three purposes. and the discovery of seabed mineral resources have oActivities which provide scientific and techno- also shown that, for the most part, industry will logical support for individual agency missions make the technological advances needed to recover and operations. ocean resources once sufficient commercial potential oActivities which seek to advance basic knowl- has been established. edge and understanding of the oceans and the These changes have profoundly effected marine marine environment. science and technology. U.S. ocean policy no longer oActivities which aim to improve the state-of- is dominated by scientific and technological con- the-art of marine technology or ocean engineer- cerns. Especially in the Federal sector, these activities ing techniques. are viewed as supporting programs- efforts that pro- As a practical matter, however, it should also be vide new and improved tools to be applied to the recognized that the boundaries between these cate- achievement of other ocean policy goals and objec- gories are often indistinct and that an individual pro- tives. gram or laboratory may be engaged in all three types of work simultaneously. 2. Current Status of U.S. Marine a. Mission- Oriented R&D Science and Technology Policy Throughout the 1970s, Federal emphasis has been The rapid change of emphasis in overall U.S. on the support of marine science and technology that ocean policy during the 1970s has left the Federal is necessary for the achievement of agency goals or Government without a policy for marine science and the conduct of agency operations. Activities in this technology. No long-term goals, strategies, or priori- category tend to have the following characteristics. ties have been established to define a Federal role in 9The work is short term in duration, problem- marine R&D or guide Federal support for it. Instead, oriented in scope, and highly applied in terms of a wide range of separate Federal agencies, academic its scientific content. institutions, and industries pursue individual goals oActivities of a seemingly similar nature vary and strategies. The direction, priority, and length of widely from one agency to another and from one commitment of Federal marine science and technol- year to another owing to changes in objectives ogy efforts are determined largely by the annual and priorities of the programs. 36 �The actual work is largely by Government per- mission- oriented programs. The following are typical sonnel using Government facilities, because of of this class. the need to maintain a high degree of control Activities tend to be longer term in duration and over the work and flexibility in its direction. seek to correct a lack of elemental knowledge �Activities tend to focus on problems of broad about some aspect of the oceans. Most work of national interest rather than on local or regional this type is directed toward the understanding of concerns. physical and biological phenomena rather than Atotal of nine Federal departments and agencies toward defined social or economic goals. funded activities in this category amounting to an Projects tend to be concerned more with a spe- estimated $279 million in fiscal year 1977. This cific field of oceanographic research than with amount represented 29 percent of the total Federal multidisciplinary investigations. Further, efforts ocean program budget for that year as identified by tend to focus on individual or local marine eco- the Federal Interagency Committee on Marine Sci- systems and their characteristics rather than on ence and Engineering. A detailed breakdown of sup- regional or national ocean areas. port activities by purpose and agency is shown in The actual work program is more often carried Table 1. Among the major Federal activities included out by academic institutions than by in-house in this category are: Federal laboratories. Department of Defense (DOD) marine research Federal expenditures for basic oceanographic re- support programs-Since 1970, when the Mans- search in fiscal year 1977 were an estimated $145 field Amendment to the Appropriation Act was million. Four Federal agencies fund most of this passed, most DOD research has been mission- work: Department of Commerce, Department of oriented. Most ocean research within DOD is by Energy, National Science Foundation, and the Navy. the Navy and is aimed at contributing to the The basic ocean research program of the National Navy's primary mission. Current emphasis is on Science Foundation (NSF) provides the broadest such topics as ocean dynamics and energy trans- Federal support for basic marine science, particularly fer processes, studies of chemical and biological that conducted by universities. Over 100 academic in- relationships, acoustic and seismic studies of the stitutions participate in NSF ocean research pro- ocean's seabed and the dynamics of sediment grams, although 15 major laboratories do most of transport. the work. NSF supports over 300 grants for indi- �Department of Commerce fishery research pro- vidual research projects each year. In addition, NSF grams-Programs identify and predict the dis- funds a limited number of large, multi- institutional tribution and abundance of commercially im- projects, such as the International Decade of Ocean portant fishery stocks and determine how envi- Exploration and the Deep-Sea Drilling Project. It ronmental changes affect fishery habitats. The also provides funds for the acquisition and operation results are used in managing fishery resources in of ships and other facilities needed for academic the 200-mile zone, including the establishment research programs. of optimum yield and total allowable catch The Navy's ocean science program supports basic levels. oceanographic research as part of its mission- �The Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Environ- oriented efforts, and is the oldest Federal program of mental Assessment Program-This program un iversi ty- based marine research. The program is seeks to identify baseline environmental condi- organized according to scientific disciplines and en- tions in OCS lease areas and to predict and compasses marine geology and geophysics, oceanic monitor the environmental effects of oil and gas biology, ocean technology, physical and chemical production.The Department of the Interior oceanography, and underwater acoustics. Although manages the program which is carried out by a the work is basic and longer term, priorities within number of institutions, including the Commerce the program are changed from time to time to keep Department's Nati 'onal Oceanic and Atmospher- pace with the changing needs of Navy missions. ic Administration. The marine science program of the Department of Energy (DOE) supports long-range studies and in- b. Basic Oceanographic Research vestigations of marine ecosystems and processes in Federal research programs which have as their ob- order to facilitate the development of new energy jective the advancement of fundamental knowledge systems and predict their environmental effects. Sub- and understanding of the oceanic environment usual- jects of DOE research include the fate and effects of ly exhibit a different set of characteristics than radioactive- materials in the marine environment, 37 hydrocarbon cycling, marine damage and recovery tion. This program includes critical ocean engineer- rates, and the effects of powerplant discharges on the ing development for the Department of Energy's ecosystem. ocean thermal energy conversion program described The Commerce Department, through its National below. Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, (NOAA), The Department of Energy has initiated, with conducts basic oceanographic research programs in strong Congressional support, a major effort to its own laboratories as well as through grants to develop the technology for ocean thermal energy academic institutions. Projects at NOAA labora- conversion. This program is already authorized at tories include a variety of investigations of coastal $33 million a year (1979), and could involve hundreds and deep-ocean biological, chemical, geological, and of millions of dollars to demonstrate commercial physical subjects. The principal academic research potential which is the Federal objective. Several effort sponsored by NOAA is the Sea Grant pro- Federal agencies, in addition to universities and gram, which provides matching grants to universities private companies, are already involved in this proj- for research related to the development of marine ect. Present plans call for the demonstration of a pro- resources, advancement of marine technology, and totype electrical power generation plant by 1984. understanding of the marine environment. The Sea The Department of Commerce and Department of Grant program also provides for marine educational Defense also develop and operate major ocean tech- development, socioeconomic and legal research, and nology facilities, including submersibles, deep ocean advisory (extension) services. simulation, pressure test chambers, and test facilities. Further, NOAA has an ongoing program to develop C. Marine Technology Development and operate environmental data buoys. In most areas of marine science and technology, 3. Re suits of U.S. Marine Science and the relative roles of Government, industry, and aca- Technology Policy and Current Issues demic institutions overlap and are indistinct. In the area of technology development and ocean engineer- The current Federal policy, or the lack of one, in ing, however, a policy has evolved over the years regard to marine science and technology makes it dif- which defines, at least in part, a Federal role. The ficult to assess either problems or progress in this policy is to avoid Federal involvement except where: area. In fact, inconsistencies in the definition of � Disaggregated industry structures discourage the Federal marine science and engineering programs application and development of research and and in agency budgeting procedures make it difficult technology; even to identify and categorize marine R&D activi- � The Government is the consumer of the technol- ties. Several broad trends, however, appear to be ogy; or clear. � Federal support is required, because of national More Federal agencies perform or sponsor interest and because the work is costly and long- marine R&D work today than ever before. This term and involves high risks. situation is a natural outgrowth of the increase This policy has tended to keep Federal funding for in offshore activities and the development of general purpose ocean engineering and marine tech- new Federal programs to deal with that increase. nology development at a relatively low level (an Individual marine R&D projects have prolifer- estimated $64 million in 1977). Four agencies cur- ated, the current number is estimated at over rently sponsor major marine technology efforts: the 4,000. This growth has increased the concern National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the about overlap and duplication, and has magni- Department of Energy, the Department of Defense fied the need for overall policy direction and im- and the Department of Commerce. proved coordination. Both Commerce and NASA are developing tech- Over the past decade, the trend has been toward nology for remote observation of ocean environ- the support of mission- oriented marine R&D ments. The present major effort in this area is the and away from basic oceanographic research. development of an oceanographic observation satel- This trend has placed stress on the capabilities of lite named SEASAT. Federal laboratories and has resulted in the un- Additionally the National Oceanic and Atmos- deruse of academic capabilities in some in- pheric Administration of the Department of Com- stances. merce has undertaken under all three aspects of the Policy and budgetary constraints have limited overall policy, a program to foster and develop ad- the level of Federal investment in new general vanced ocean technology and marine instrumenta- purpose ocean engineering and technology. As a 38 result, questions have been raised about the ade- Federal programs in this area tend to be narrowly quacy of the supporting technology and engi- focused and relatively expensive. There is some in- neering capability likely to be available for dication that a broader policy is necessary and would future work in the oceans. be beneficial. This broader policy would address: Some key issues in marine science and technology (1) Long-term national needs for increased marine that reflect broad trends and the lack of adequate technology development and for the improve- policies to deal with these trends are discussed. ment of fundamental ocean engineering capa- Adequacy of overall Federal marine science bilities; policy. (2) Relative role and goals of the Federal Govern- Federal marine science activities have grown and ment, industry, and academic institutions in changed in an unguided way owing to the lack of a meeting the national needs; and well-defined golicy. As a result, the Federal marine (3) Federal strategy for carrying out its role, in- scieric-F! effort appears to be unfocused, and there is cluding: no adequate way of judging whether there is enough -Criteria for Federal involvement, including marine science effort of the right type to meet na- benefits and payback periods; tional needs. A marine science policy will need to be -Extent and duration of Federal involvement formulated if future U.S. ocean policy goals are to be and criteria for termination of Federal par- met in a timely and effective way. This policy should ticipation; and address the following specific concerns: -Desired mix and relative priorities among gen- (1) Long-term goals for the national marine research eral long-term development efforts and effort in the context of overall national ocean in- short-term agency mission activities. terests and goals; Need fior improved coordination of Federal (2) The broad Federal role in marine science in rela- marine science and technology activities. tionship to the roles of academic institutions and The number of departments, agencies, programs, industry; and projects currently involved in the conduct or sup- (3) The extent to which Federally supported research port of Federal marine science and technology argues should be directed toward the accomplishment strongly for the development of an effective process of specific goals and objectives; and of coordination. Interagency coordination now de- (4) The strategy to be adopted by the Federal Gov- pends largely on an informal communication system ernment for carrying out its role in marine and the Federal budget process. Better coordination science and for accomplishing its own marine has frequently been called for by, among others, research goals, including consideration of : Cabinet Secretaries and the General Accounting Of- -The desired balance between basic research fice. At the same time, recognition must be given to and mission- oriented research; the fact that too rigid a system of coordination can -The relative priorities among research fields impede program development and can be expensive (e.g., marine geology and geophysics versus to administer. In resolving the coordination issue, the marine biology) and the basis for setting those following should be taken into account: priorities; (1) Current policy in regard to shared or common -The relative priority of marine research in re- use of unique or special oceanographic facilities lation to other Federal research programs; (such as research vessels and submersibles) and and the need for changes; -The organization and administration of Fed- (2) Adequacy of Federal marine research labora- eral marine science, including program coor- tories and the need for a coherent policy in dination and facility sharing. regard to consolidating, closing, or expanding Adequacy of current policy in regard to marine laboratory facilities; technology and ocean engineering (3) Adequacy of current Federal policies regarding Neither the current policy nor its practical applica- the transfer of research results and technology tion addresses the need for a Federal role in support- from the producer to the user and from the ing the development of marine technology and gen- military to the civilian sector; and eral purpose ocean engineering. Further, the existing (4) Adequacy of existing and previous coordination policy tends to be proj ect- oriented and problem- mechanisms, and the need for new mechanisms oriented rather than goal-oriented. As a result, or processes in the future. 39 4. Conclusions Science and technology are common elements of On the whole, marine science and technology has nearly all Federal ocean endeavors and will continue fared somewhat better over the past decade, in terms to play a significant part in the evolution of U.S. of national investment, than has science and tech- ocean policies. To ensure the maximum benefit from nology as a whole. At the same time, marine science Federal marine science and technology, a reformula- and technology has undergone important changes, tion of marine R&D policy will be needed. This including a deemphasis of its heretofore dominant policy must define and clarify the Federal role and role in ocean policy and a shift in focus from un- objectives in this area in the context of overall na- directed research to mission- oriented research. tional ocean interests and goals. Table L-Federal mission-oriented R&D by purpose and agency Estimated FY Purpose and agency 1977 budget (in millions of dollars) National Security Marine science support for defense systems (DOD) .................................................... 50.8 Ocean engineering for defense purposes (DOD) ....................................................... 21.5 SUBTOTAL .......................................................................... 72.3 Living Resources Fishery resources research (Commerce) ............................................................. 33.9 Endangered species and marine mammals research (Commerce) ........................................... 5.3 Contaminants research (Commerce) ............................................ ............ 1.0 Use of marine life in biomedical research (HEW) ...................................................... 6.0 SUBTOTAL .......................................................................... 46.2 Transportation Advanced ship engineering development (Commerce) .................................................. 9.7 Development and Conservation of the Coastal Zone Marine pollution abatement and control-Water Quality Standards (Commerce, DOD, Energy, EPA, Interior) ...... 19.5 Regional environmental systems research (Commerce, DOD, NSF, Smithsonian) ............................. 37.7 SUBTOTAL .......................................................................... 57.2 Nonliving Marine Resources OCS environmental assessment (Commerce, Interior) .................................................. 36.8 Environmental impact of mining (Commerce) ........................................................ 1.5 SUBTOTAL .......................................................................... 38.3 Environmental Observation and Prediction Data acquisition, processing and dissemination (Commerce, DOD, Transportation) ........................... 37.3 Model studies and development (Commerce, Energy) ................................................... 4.3 SUBTOTAL .......................................................................... 41.6 Ocean Exploration, Mapping, Charting and Geodesy Nautical charts, coastal mapping, and marine geodesy (Commerce) ........................................ 6.2 National Centers and Facilities Oceanographic data and instrument centers, sorting centers (Commerce, Smithsonian) ......................... 7.6 TOTAL .............................................................................. 279.1 40 Marine Employment, Education, and Training 1. Background 2. Current Status of U.S. Marine Employ- Today over 2 million people work in the marine ment, Education, and Training Policy and maritime fields, including commercial fishing The current policy is, as it has been in the past, for and seafood processing (372,000), marine recreation State and local governments and private organiza- occupations (585,000), commercial shipbuilding tions to have the primary responsibility for marine (246,000), marine construction and engineering employment, education, and training. The Federal trades (272,000), and other occupations (592,000). In role, which is one of limited involvement, concen_@- addition, the Federal Government employs some trates on: 587,000 uniformed Navy and Coast Guard person- a Providing assistance to higher education and the nel. The education and training these people receive training of marine professionals; varies widely, but, for the most part, Federal involve- 9 Educating merchant marine officers; ment is minimal. 9 Assisting in the provision of marine and mari- The dominant theme of education policies in the time vocational training; and United States is that public education should be the 9 Providing for general public education, public primary responsibility of States and localities, not the information, and public participation in marine Federal Government. This overall philosophy has policy making. prevailed in marine education and training as well as in other fields. The Federal Government, however, a. Education and Training of Marine Professionals has played a role The education and training of marine profes- � as an employer and trainer of marine profes- sionals in the United States is performed primarily by sionals, the universities. Over 160 colleges and universities � in meeting national needs for trained military of- offer programs in marine science, ocean engineering, ficers, and related fields. More than 1,000 students are � in providing limited assistance to States and enrolled in marine graduate programs at these in- localities where resources are lacking, and stitutions every year, including students from � in providing limited assistance to vocational in- abroad. stitutions. The Federal role, while minimal, is very important, This role has developed gradually. Direct Federal because of the need for financial support. Thus, employment and training of marine professionals Federal policies in this area have three broad objec- began in the mid-1800s, first with the establishment tives: of the Coast and Geodetic Survey and later with the creation of an Office of Fish and Fisheries. Both of e Ensuring an adequate supply of marine profes- these organizations, now part of the Department of sionals, particularly scientists and engineers, to Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- conduct programs important to national defense ministration, continue to hire and help train marine and economic development; scientists and other professionals. The direct educa- 9 Supplementing the capabilities of the existing tion and training of military officers also dates from decentralized system of marine education and the 19th century. The Naval Academy was estab- training; and lished in 1845, and the Coast Guard Academy in 0 Increasing the supply of trained marine public 1876. Eventually, the armed forces and their acad- policy specialists, including economists, lawyers, emies became important centers for research and and planners. training related to civilian as well as military needs. The objective of ensuring adequate numbers of Limited Federal assistance to States and localities in scientific and technical personnel dates from the Na- marine education began in 1874, with provision of tional Science Foundation Act of 1950. It is aug- Federally owned ships to State maritime academies. mented by the Sea Grant College and Program Act of World Wars I and 11 led to major growth in this 1966. Under these two statutes, the education and Federal role, including the establishment of the U.S. training of marine professionals has generally been Merchant Marine Academy. Later the National Sci- linked to Federal support of university- based re- ence Foundation, the Office of Naval Research, and search. Most, but not all, Federal assistance to the Sea Grant College program significantly in- graduate students is in the form of research assistant- creased Federal aid to marine education. ships rather than direct fellowships or loans. 41 Three of the Federal agencies involved in the sup.- engineering officers for the U.S. merchant marine. port of higher education programs in the United Today's policy concentrates on ensuring sufficient States have traditionally supported efforts in marine numbers of trained officers to meet national defense areas: the U.S. Navy's Office of Naval Research and commercial requirements. This goal is achieved (ONR), National Science Foundation, and the Na- through tional Sea Grant Program operated by the Depart- 0 the direct education of about 1,000 students ment of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmos- each year, and pheric Administration. As the first Federal research a the provision of financial assistance to several organization established after World War 11, the Of- thousand more students in State-operated mari- fice of Naval Research has had a major effect on time academies. marine science. Through its support of basic marine The Federal Government also provides some basic research, both at universities and at the Navy's own safety training for merchant marine officers and is laboratories, the Office has played a major role in the responsible for the licensing of U.S. merchant education and training of marine professionals. mariners. The Federal role in this field does not ex- Although the 1970 Mansfield Amendment altered tend to decisions concerning the total number or ac- ONR's role in university research by terminating ef- tual employment of officers in the U.S. merchant forts not closely related to military functions or marine. These decisions are governed by other fac- operations, about $26 million of applied research tors, including the enrollment policies set by the projects are still funded each year. In addition, ONR States, union contracts and agreements, and other spends about $5 million each year for research private sector considerations. assistantships related to its contracts with univer- The four sources of new merchant marine officers sities. in the United States are: Since 1970, the National Science Foundation has 0 The U.S. Merchant Marine Academy, at Kings been the major source of basic research support for Point, New York, operated by the Department U.S. universities. The Foundation now spends about of Commerce's Maritime Administration; $1 million a year for fellowships and training grants 0 Six State-operated maritime academies in to students in the marine sciences, another $15 Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Michigan, million a year to support about 1,800 graduate and Texas, and California; postdoctoral students, and about $60 million a year e The Calhoon Engineering School, in Baltimore, for basic oceanographic research at universities. The Maryland, operated by the Marine Engineers National Science Foundation also operates a number Beneficial Association; and of undergraduate and teacher- training programs 0 The "hawsepipe," which consists of individual which include coverage of marine science and self-help study and on-the-job training. engineering topics. The Federal Government is involved with educa- The Sea Grant program provides funds to institu- tion and training which occurs at the first two types tions, rather than directly to individual researchers, of institutions, and spends about $18 million annual- on a matching fund basis. Grants are provided for in- ly for their support. The primary basis for this stitutional capacity- building purposes, for the opera- Federal involvement is the assumption that national tion of marine advisory services, and for a wide defense needs require an adequate supply of trained variety of basic and applied research projects in officers at all times to meet possible emergencies. ocean-related fields. Funds to develop marine educa- The largest single source of new officers is the U.S. tion and training curricula are also provided. In re- Merchant Marine Academy, with an average annual cent years, the Sea Grant program has funded par- enrollment of about 1,000 students. All student costs ticipation in its work by about 1,800 faculty members are Federally funded. The Academy offers a 4-year and professionals, 800 graduate students, and 400 undergraduate program leading to a Bachelor of Sci- undergraduate students each year. To date, 12 ence degree and to a merchant marine license as a schools have been designated as "Sea Grant Col- Third Mate or Third Assistant Engineer. In addition, leges, " a formal recognition of their status as centers the students are enrolled as midshipmen in the U.S. of excellence in marine research, engineering, and Naval Reserve and, if eligible, are commissioned education. The annual budget for the Sea Grant pro- upon graduation as ensigns in the U.S. Navy gram is about $28 million. Reserve. b. Merchant Marine Officer Training In addition to operating the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy, the Maritime Administration provides The Federal Government has long played a signifi- assistance to the six State-operated merchant marine cant role in the education and training of deck and academies, which have a combined average annual 42 enrollment of about 2,600 students. Payments of more specifically, to reduce unemployment and un- $1,200 per year to each student (up to a limit of 673 deremployment. While these programs do not seek to students per entering class) are provided by the meet specific marine employment needs or goals, Federal Government to defray the costs of uniforms, they do provide support for vocational schools that books, and subsistence. Further, grants of $75,000 a supply many skilled workers to ocean-related in- year are made to each of the academies for operation dustries. and maintenance, and Federally owned training Programs that deal specifically with marine voca- vessels are provided to five of the schools. The State tional education and training include the Sea Grant academies, through their own admission and enroll- program and the Maritime Administration's training ment policies, largely determine how many new of- schools and maritime academy support programs. ficers will be entering the job market each year. Sea Grant operates two programs related to -voca- Likewise the unions and the shipping companies, tional education and training. One has provided through their formal agreements, largely determine $400,000 a year for the support of 23 technician how many of the new officers are actually em- training projects at community colleges. This pro- ployed as seagoing deck and engineering officers. gram trains individuals for work in such fields as The Maritime Administration also provides sup- commercial fishing, commercial diving, marine elec- plemental training of both officers and other mer- tronics, and engine maintenance and repair. Another chant mariners. This Federal activity stems from Sea Grant program, the marine advisory services pro- safety requirements and the need for retraining of gram, provides for the transfer of research results shipboard personnel to keep pace with technological and engineering developments from the laboratory to advancements. Short courses are now provided on the ultimate users. This program is patterned after firefighting and on the use of radar, gyrocompass, the agricultural extension program, and provides for and loran navigation equipment. A fee is charged for the support of approximately 225 "field agents" most courses. Federal emphasis on crew standards, around the country who supply technical advice and safety training, and licensing requirements is ex- information to working fishermen, ocean engineer- pected to increase in the future under orders issued ing firms, and other marine businesses. The Maritime by President Carter in 1977 following a series of Administration's vocational, educational, and train- tanker accidents off the U.S. coast. ing programs have already been summarized under c. Marine and Maritime Vocational Training I' merchant marine officer training." Traditionally, the vocational training system in the d. Public Education United States has been decentralized and the Federal The newest area of Federal involvement in marine role has been minimal. Most vocational training oc- education and training is generally termed "public curs outside the regular educational system, through education." This field includes: on-the-job training, apprenticeship programs, and *Precollege education for students who may industry and labor schools. Some training, however, become specialists in marine science, marine af- is provided through high schools, private vocational fairs, or related fields; schools, community colleges, and a few programs of- 9General precollege, college, and adult education fered by colleges and universities. The armed services for people interested in marine topics, but not in also operate large vocational training programs. The becoming marine specialists; and Federal role in this system is largely limited to the 0Public information programs intended to im- provision of financial assistance, and has been aimed prove citizen awareness and aid public participa- at helping to ensure sufficient supplies of trained per- tion in the formulation of marine policy. sonnel in various fields. Federal involvement in public education programs Two types of Federal activities affect marine and is even more limited than its involvement in other maritime vocational training: general Federal voca- areas. This is because the field is quite new, because tional programs, and vocational programs specifical- there is a fine line between public information and ly targeted on marine and maritime employment government "propaganda," and because both the training. General Federal vocational programs in- public and the Congress are quite wary of greater clude the efforts of the Office of Education in the Federal involvement in public education. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and Precollege public education is the responsibility of the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act the National Science Foundation. The foundation programs of the Department of Labor. These two ef- spends about $4 million a year on precollege science forts seek to provide ready access to high-quality education. For the most part, the courses and mate- vocational training and retraining in general and, rials developed by the Foundation through its pre- 43 college programs do not focus specifically on marine Because of this situation, no major policy issues science subjects. Rather, the programs focus on the need to be addressed now in the area of marine traditional science and social science disciplines (such employment, education, and training. However, a as physics, biology, and chemistry) that have general number of current concerns may warrant further applicability. Under its Secondary School Student observation and study. These include: Science Training Program, however, the National A concern that Federal financial support to Science Foundation has offered several marine- university-based marine research is dwindling, related summer courses to high school students. or at least not keeping pace with inflation. This General marine education (precollege, college, and type of erosion, it is felt, causes long-term prob- adult) is now being assisted by several Federal agen- lems in the maintenance of basic facilities such cies, including the National Science Foundation, the as laboratories, research vessels, and scientific Office of Education, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the equipment. As noted in the marine science and Office of Sea Grant. The principal programs in this technology area, there is also a concern that field are those operated by the Sea Grant program, Federal support for university- based marine which provides about $2 million a year in matching research tends to emphasize applied research at grants for the development of new marine courses the expense of basic research. and curricula. A concern that the number and type of assistant- Public information on marine programs is pro- ships supported by Federal research programs vided by nearly all agencies that have ocean-related may result in students being trained in dis- functions. The dominant Federal policy in this area ciplines or specialities for which the future de- has been to provide the information to intermediate mand is not great. This situation results from the institutions, such as the press, rather than to inform relatively easy availability of funding for short- the public directly. However, a new trend is develop- term work on today's problems at the expense of ing, which involves increased Government efforts to research on broader, long-term problems. aid public participation in the Federal decisionmak- A concern that adequate data to project future ing process. The objective is to increase public access marine employment needs do not exist; there- to Government information and to structure Federal fore, there is no firm basis for educational plan- processes so that citizens can have a greater effect on ning or training curriculum development. decisions. In the marine area, citizen participation is A concern over the nature and extent of the being actively encouraged in the administration of Government's role in the training of officers for the Coastal Zone Management Program, the imple- the deep-sea merchant marine. This concern mentation of the Fishery Conservation and Manage- arises from the fact that the Federal Govern- ment Act of 1976, and in outer continental shelf oil ment, the States, and the unions all train mer- and gas development. chant marine officers. This occasionally pro- 3. Results of Existing Policies and Current duces more officers than industry needs. The Issues in Marine Employment, Educa- key question is whether the Government can or should play more of a role in balancing the sup- tion, and Training ply with the demand. The current view appears to be that the existing 4. Conclusions educational system, and the limited Federal role in it, works well in terms of meeting the need for educated Federal policy toward marine employment, educa- and trained workers in marine fields. The inter- tion, and training is one of strictly limited involve- changeability of marine professional occupations ment in a highly decentralized system. The main Fed- with those in other, more traditional, disciplines, for eral role involves the provision of financial assistance example, has resulted in there being neither shortages to educational institutions, sometimes for specific nor surpluses of marine professionals over the years. purposes, but often not targeted in any way. This Likewise, the supply of merchant marine officers has policy approach is consistent with Federal policy in occasionally been more than needed, but never less other fields of employment, education, and training. than needed, over the past two decades. Even in the Further, this policy approach appears to be effective absence of rigorous forecasting and planning, the in that there are no major shortages or surpluses of need for workers in marine fields has been adequate- trained individuals in marine occupations, and no ly met by the "free market" without extensive major policy issues to be resolved in the immediate Government involvement. future. 44 Organizing The National Ocean Effort 1. Background achieving these ends through reorganization, how- For many years members of the ocean 'community ever, has been mixed and it has become increasingly have been critical of the absence of a single ocean clear that organization alone is not the key to sound focus within the organizational structure of the Fed- policy and effective program execution. While good eral Government. These critics have cited the failure organization can enhance the prospects for successful of the United States to adopt an explicit "national government programs, it does not assure them. In addition, while many proposals for restructur- ocean policy," the alleged lack of coordination ing the Executive Branch have been made, few have among agencies administering ocean programs, and been fully implemented. Because government re- the absence of what advocates term an "ocean com- organization is not without substantial cost, pro- mitment" as evidence of the critical need for such an posals involving major change are seldom imple- drganizational focus. Despite the establishment of mented except in the face of a clear deficiency in at- the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- taining a primary national goal. tion (NOAA) in 1970 in response to the recommenda- To date virtually all of the major reorganization tions for consolidation contained in the 1969 Stratton proposals to emerge from the various special com- Commission Report, critics point to the multitude of mittees, commissions, and councils, which have con- agencies still involved to varying degrees in carrying sidered the subject of Government reorganization in out Federal ocean-related activities. depth, have been predicated on three broad basic In 1969, the year that Our Nation and the Sea was assumptions. First, it has been assumed that or- issued by the Stratton Commission, Federal ocean ganizations should be structured by like function and programs were located in 6 departments, 4 indepen- purpose. Second, it has been assumed that overlap- dent agencies, and'17 agencies or subagencies within ping functions should be minimized. And finally, it the departments. Ocean programs today are admin- has been assumed that control should be unified. istered by 10 departments, 8 independent agencies, Inevitably these underlying assumptions have led to and 38 agencies or subagencies (fig. 1). proposals for larger Cabinet-level departments as a Although it is clear that Federal ocean programs means to unify control and consolidate authority. are widely scattered, evidence of dispersion alone is In spite of the general trend toward recommending not enough to warrant a major' restructuring. The consolidation, a small number of public administra- basic issues with regard to possible reorganization of tion scholars have emphasized that the consolidation ocean programs center less on the fragmented nature and unity achieved through larger departments may of ocean responsibilities among the Federal agencies not be without significant cost. Gains in unified con- than upon pragmatic questions such as: Is the ocean trol, consolidated authority, and broad-based pol- a sensible integrating theme around which to icy-making may be achieved at the expense of clearly organize? Is the ocean important enough to justify focused program management aimed at specifically reorganization? Are the deficiencies perceived in the identified program objectives. The goal, of course, is administration of ocean-related programs best cured to coalesce related functions into a unit of govern- by reorganization or other means? And finally, are ment of sufficient critical mass to influence high-level the benefits of reorganization sufficient to outweigh policy but which is small enough to pursue iden- the very real, often under-estimated costs of disrup- tifiable goals and flexible enough to adapt to'chang- tion inevitably associated with restructuring the Federal Government? ing requirements. In assessing the organization of any governmental 2. General Trends in Government activity, there are three distinct executive functions to Organization be considered. The first is policy formulation which, in the Executive Branch, is centered in the White Reorganization of the Executive Branch of the House. The second, program implementation, in- Federal Government has often been seen as an attrac- volves execution by the agencies. The third, priority tive means of solving an array of problems associated establishment, is the function of the budget process. with the management and implementation of Federal Each of these three government functions must be programs. Through reorganization, proponents of considered separately and jointly in assessing the ef- new structural arrangements have sought to empha- fectiveness of existing or proposed organizational ar- size specific problem areas, improve efficiency, rangements for discharging Federal ocean and reduce waste, and realign political power. Success in coastal responsibilities. 45 -2VI !DRY ORGANIZATIONS @ ATIONAL RESEARCH NATIONAL ADVISORY @OUNCIL NASINAE COMMITTEE ON OCEANS AND ATMOSPHERE HEALTH, AGRICULTURE COMMERCE DEFENSE EDUCATION INTERIOR JUSTICE I I AND WELFARE SOIL NATIONAL OCEANIC Fl-oOT----l GEOLOGICAL CONSERVATION AND ATMOSPHERIC A 0 DRUG SERVICE ADMINISTR TION ANDMINISTRATION SURVEY AGRICULTURAL NATIONAL FISH AND RESEARCH INSTITUTES WILDLIFE SERV ICE OF HEALTH SERVICE COOPERATIVE ECONOMIC DEFENSE DEVELOPMENT BUREAU STATE RESEARCH MAPPING OF MINES SERVICE ADMINISTRATION AGENCY REGIONAL FnK FEDERAL BUREAU PLANNING ED DISASTER OF LAND COMMISSIONS H ASSISTANCE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS ADMINISTRATION AGENCY HERITAGE CONSERVATION AND RECREATION SERVICE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE OFFICE OF WATER RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS IS OFFICE OF TERRITORIAL AFFAIRS WATER RESOURCES COUNCIL 46 PRESIDENT EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT DOMESTIC POLICY OFFICE OF SCIENCE NATIONAL SECURITY AND BUDGET STAFF AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY COUNCIL I QUALITY] [ ..'TTEE ON 'H R A-TM.TE E AND OCEA ENVIRONMENTAL NUCLEAR NATIONAL LABOR STATE TRANSPORTATION PROTECTION REGULATORY SCIENCE SMITHSONIAN AGENCY COMMISSION FOUNDATION OCCUPATIONAL REAL OF DIRECTORATE FOR SAFETY OCEANS AND ASTRONOMICAL, AND HEALTH INTERNATIONAL ATMOSPHERIC, ENVIRONMENTAL RTH AND ADMINISTRATION I EA AND SCIENTIFIC OCEAN SCIENCES AFFAIRS OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY DIRECTORATE BUREAU OF FOR SCIENCE INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION ORGANIZATION OFFICE OF AFFAIRS DEEPWATER PORTS DIRECTORATE AGENCY FOR FOR RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT Figure 1. - Departments and agencies administering ocean programs in 1977. 47 3. Formulation of Ocean Policy Technology Policy in 1976, the Executive Office of the President was without in-house counsel for By definition, policy includes the goals, plans, and marine science and ocean affairs. processes of a government body and therefore en- With enactment of the National Science and Tech- compasses both substantive and procedural matters. nology Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of While Federal governmental policy is frequently con- 1976, a science policy mechanism was reinstated sidered to be based on broad national goals, the within the Executive Office of the President. The Of- translation of these goals into specific policies is fice of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) was often frought with conflict. The weighing and balan- established and assigned responsibility for providing cing of these conflicts is the essence of the U.S. input to the Presidential decision-making process for political process. Because the U.S. is a pluralistic science policy and budget decisions. In light of the society operating through a representative govern- - ment, it is not surprising that, at times, simultaneous active role that the science advisory structure has pursuit of conflicting goals may occur. played in the development and articulation of ocean The Federal policy formulation machinery with policy in the past, it is anticipated that OSTP will respect to ocean affairs is diffused in both the Ex- assume a major role in this area as well. ecutive Branch and in the Congress. While ocean The policy formulation system within the White programs are scattered through more than 50 agen- House generally reflects the style and character of the cies, jurisdiction over ocean-related legislation is President. However, each modern President has in- shared by 39 subcommittees in 12 standing commit- herited a number of special policy councils that have been established in the Executive Office of the Presi- tees of the House of Representatives and 36 subcom- mittees in 10 standing committees of the Senate. dent by statute, reorganization plan, Presidential This diversity in the policy formulation process has memorandum, and executive order. Before Reorga- led many observers in the ocean community to con-. nization Plan I of 1977, under which the Executive clude that a more active role needs to be played by Office of the President was restructured, 19 policy the White House in the development and oversight of units dealt with general and specialized issue areas. a consolidated ocean policy. This conclusion is based Before reorganization, various aspects of ocean pol- in part on the important role that the Executive Of- icy were considered by four Cabinet-level councils fice of the President has played in ocean affairs from that were responsible for formulating general policy: time to time in the past and in part on the concern (1) Domestic Council, (2) National Security Council, that ocean matters today do not receive sufficient (3) Energy Resources Council, and (4) Council on I n- high-level attention on a consistent and continuing ternational Economic Policy. basis. Reorganization Plan No. I eliminated both the Historically, 1966 through 1971 was the period in Energy Resources Council and the Council on Inter- which ocean policy received the most focused aitten- national Economic Policy. The functions of the tion at the White House level. With creation of the Domestic Council were assumed by a Domestic Pol- National Council on Marine Resources and Engi- icy Staff within the White House Office which was neering Development (the Marine Science Council) given responsibility for managing the processes that by the Congress in 1966, a Cabinet-level interagency coordinate. the development of domestic and body was established in the Executive Office of the economic policy. President with responsibility for the development This new system of policy integration within the and advancement of a comprehensive program deal- W 'hite House places the responsibility for coor- ing with all aspects of marine science activity. Under dinating ocean policy with the Domestic Policy Staff the chairmanship of Vice President Humphrey, the and the National Security Council. Additional input Council was visible, and according to observers, at to policy formulation comes from the Office of Sci- least partially successful and active in exercising ence and Technology Policy and the Council on En- leadership in ocean science and technology policy. In vironmental Quality, both of which reside in the Ex- 1971 the Council was terminated allegedly for "lack ecutive Office of the President. of interest" within the Administration at that time. In addition to internal Federal policyrnaking With the termination of the Marine Science Coun- bodies, the use of Federal advisory committees has cil, the responsibility for marine science oversight expanded greatly in recent years. In the quest for within the Executive Office of the President was public participation in the governmental decision shifted to the Office of Science and Technology process, departments and agencies have created (OST) until its elimination in 1973. Since that time, many general and specialized advisory groups to and until the creation of the Office of Science and counsel administrators on the execution of govern- 48 ment programs. In 1976, some 75 advisory commit- 4. Organization of Federal Ocean Programs tees, councils, and commissions dealt with ocean- Although establishment of the National Oceanic related matters. The National Advisory Committee and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) was in- on Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA) and the quasi- tended by proponents to provide a central focus for governmental committees operating under the Na- development of civil ocean-related affairs within the tional Academies of Science (NAS) and Engineering Federal Government, its establishment in 1970 under (NAE) through the National Research Council Reorganization Plan No. 4 fell far short of the Strat- (NRC) are particularly important in the development ton commission recommendations for an indepen- of national ocean policy because of their role in the dent ocean agency. In placing the agency within the formulation and assessment of broad policy options. Department of Commerce and limiting its functions Inevitably, the quest for an improved process for primarily to research and development, the plan was developing and assessing national ocean policy leads essentially a compromise between Congressional back to proposals for reestablishing a Cabinet-level supporters of a strong independent NOAA and a White House policy unit with exclusive responsibility reluctant Administration. to oversee ocean affairs. The Marine Science Council In the years since its establishment, however, the was as much a symbol of national commitment to the character of NOAA's mission has slowly changed oceans as it was an effective policy mechanism. Since with the addition of new responsibilities assigned termination of the Council in 1971, ocean policy, in- under the provisions of the Coastal Zone Manage- cluding marine science, has been determined in the ment Act of 1972 (and 1976 amendments), the Deep- context of functional problems within the framework water Ports Act of 1972, the ocean dumping research of the domestic and foreign policy councils remain- and sanctuaries provisions of the Marine Protection, ing in the White House. Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, the Marine The need seen by some for policy direction at the Mammals Protection Act of 1972, and the Marine Presidential level has prompted a number of sugges- Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976. tions that an institution similar to the former Marine All of these new missions, with the exception of Science Council is again needed within the Executive ocean dumping, have been regulatory or devel- Office of the President. To succeed, it is clear that opmental rather than research in nature and reflect proponents of this position must demonstrate that the growing public concern for resource protection there are significant issues requiring the attention of and management which emerged in the early 1970s. the President that are not adequately handled now. In spite of this expanded role in ocean and coastal Whether a White House council would meet the regulation and development, NOAA today remains a expectations of its supporters depends on a number small part of the total Federal civilian ocean pro- of considerations. First, there is little chance that gram. As a consequence, proponents of consolida- such a council could be ordained by the Congress and tion have continued to press for additional re- be influential unless the President fully concurred in organization, citing the continued absence of coor- its creation, or unless it was formed at his initiative. dination among ocean programs as evidence of the Second, the relative success of the Marine Science failure of the present dispersed and fragmented Council, which has been used as a model for many of organizational scheme. The absence of close coor- the new organizations that have been proposed, must dination, they contend, impedes the development of be reexamined carefully to determine its actual effec- needed national ocean policies, reduces administra- tiveness. It must be remembered that the Council and tive efficiency, and promotes lack of accountability. its counterpart, the Stratton Commission, were In rebuttal, opponents of broadscale reorganization riding the crest of a wave during a period of expand- have suggested a need only for limited consolidation ing science activity; thus, the cause and effect of of some programs and the establishment of an inter- what transpired in Government during that period is agency coordinating mechanism to facilitate the for- difficult to assess objectively. Finally, it must be em- mulation of high-level policy and to ensure better phasized that trends in the Carter Administration are interagency collaboration. contrary to the concept of centralizing power in the One group of ocean programs presents unique Executive Office of the President. The abolition of organizational problems that stand above the general all Cabinet-level policy councils save the National concern for overall program coordination. These are Security Council (NSC), would suggest that propos- the programs that split responsibility for implemen- als for a White House policy council to oversee ocean tation among two or more agencies in different affairs are not in keeping with present reorganiza- departments. Several ocean programs are of this tional trends. character- marine mammal protection, various re- 49 sponsibilities under the Endangered Species Act, 9 Ocean resources are common property resources ocean dumping regulation, management of anadro- and are therefore wholly in the public domain. mous fish, and the regulation of the placement of 9 Ocean activities interact and impact one another Structures in navigable waters. Such jointly adminis- in a more direct way than comparable land- tered programs clearly need special attention, whe- based activities. ther considered in the context of overall ocean re- 9 Technology needed for development of marine organization or as incremental measures to consol- resources is significantly different from that idate the most troublesome coordination problems. associated with similar land-based resource While some of these programs are characterized by a development. complementary division of responsibility, all too e Because the ocean constitutes an area in which often the division has been artificially drawn-lead- U.S. interests butt up against the interests of ing to program overlaps and omissions. other countries, there is an important interna- If large-scale reorganization of Federal ocean af- tional ingredient involved in resolving ocean fairs is ultimately determined to be warranted based problems. on a thorough consideration of all costs and benefits, In pursuing reorganization based on the ocean as several questions relating to form and level will re- an integrating theme, proponents of this approach main to be solved: (1) Should the entity be inde- must be able to argue successfully that these distinc- pendent, or part of an existing department? (2) If in- tions are important enough to the Nation to warrant dependent, should the organization be an agency, ad- a consolidated resource focus in this area of govern- ministration, or a Cabinet-level department? (3) mental affairs and that the benefits of this improved Should the organization be based upon functional focus outweigh the costs of change. responsibilities, resource objectives, disciplines, or Finally, in addressing the question of organization regional services? (4) How should responsibility for form, specific attention must be directed to the issue development and regulation be allocated to the new of appropriately separating developmental and regu- entity? latory activities in order to avoid conflict of interest The Stratton commission strongly recommended problems. While ocean reorganization proposals the creation of an independent agency to manage the have generally urged the separation of these func- Nation's ocean affairs. Others, however, have urged tions, there is an emerging acceptance (notable in the other organizational forms. Often the debate on case of the recently established Department of Ener- form turns on how much influence or "clout" an in- gy) of the coexistence of these two functions under dependent agency could muster as compared to a some circumstances. This acceptance is based on a Cabinet-level department. Frequently, however, in- distinction which has been drawn between two types fluence depends less on the rank of the administrator of regulatory activity: (1) that which is intended to than on his personal influence in the Administration. control the economics, production, and competition Nonetheless, it is generally believed that Cabinet- within an industry, and (2) that which is designed to level officers have greater access to and are more in- protect other values such as the environment, public fluential with the President and other Cabinet of- health, and safety. It has been suggested that the ficers than are administrators of independent agen- former can safely be integrated with promotion, cies or sub-Cabinet-level administrations. while the latter should remain separate. In this view, Whether Government organizations should be it is the quality of the regulatory activity that deter- based on functional responsibilities (e.g., energy, mines the compatibility rather than the mere regu- food, transportation, and labor), or whether they latory label. should be organized on the basis of resources (e.g., In recent years, a number of recommendations for land, water, people, and oceans), is a fundamental executive reorganization have been made which, if question. While most Government activities today adopted, would significantly affect various Federal are functionally organized, many ocean programs ocean activities. Those of the Stratton Commission have been organized on a resource basis. and NACOA, for example, concentrated exclusively It is clear that by singling out the ocean as an in- on Federal ocean programs. The Ash Council, with a tegrating theme for a resource- oriented organization, mandate to look broadly at programs related to there is a tacit implication that there are characteris- natural resources, on the other hand, proffered tics and factors that sharply distinguish ocean re- recommendations that would encompass all natural sources from land and other resources. Four charac- resource, ocean, atmosphere, and earth sciences. teristics that set ocean activities and resources apart Professor John Norton Moore addressed not only have been identified. the problems of organizing Federal ocean programs 50 within the Federal agencies, but also suggested more analogous then ever to the budget process changes in the organization of the Department of within the Executive Branch. State's Bureau of Oceans and International Envi- The organization of OMB for budget purposes re- ronmental and Scientific Affairs, and urged creation flects a modified functional breakdown of govern- of a Cabinet-level Marine Affairs Council in the ment activities. Ocean programs are fragmented White House. Senator Ernest F. Hollings introduced among eight divisions: International Affairs; Energy S. 3889 in the Second Session of the 94th Congress in and Food; Economics and Government; Natural Re- which he proposed the creation of a Department of sources; National Security; Human Resources; Sci- Environment and Oceans (DEO). Together these ef- ence, Space, and Energy Technology; and Communi- forts represent the conventional wisdom on reorga- ty and Veterans Affairs. On the surface of the OMB nizing the Government to execute the Nation's ocean budget organization there is even less consolidation policy. in dealing with ocean-related budget items than there 5. Setting Priorities-The Budget Process is in the overall organization of ocean programs in the agencies. The OMB budget organization is, in While congressional authorizations, in a sense, de- part, dictated by the organization of the President's termine the "qualitative" characteristics and content budget document and, in part, by the jurisdictions of of Federal programs, it is the budget process and ap- the appropriations subcommittee in the Congress. propriations that determine the "quantitative" Although it would be difficult, it is possible to aspects of such programs. Priorities of Government reassign budget responsibilities among the functional are set by the budget process. In a real sense, the divisions of OMB to improve the comprehensiveness budget process is also a major determinant in estab- of the "ocean budget" review. This could be lishing ocean policy. Budget decisions not only serve achieved even in the absence of general governmental to allocate funds among major governmental activi- reorganization. The question obviously is whether ties, but decisions also must be made among alter- the improved examination would be worth the diffi- native programs within each major budget category. culty in bringing about the reorganization, and These decisions influence the magnitude and direc- whether it could be done without disruptive effects tion of the Federal programs. In addition, the budget on other review requirements. process plays a significant role in resolving key issues that filter through the agencies and into the Office of 6. The Reorganization Issue Management and Budget (OMB) via the budget The Carter Admihistration has placed high priority process. on reorganizing the executive departments in order to The budget process is, of course, not wholly inter- streamline government by reducing the number of nal to OMB. Departmental review of agency budget operational units. The President's Reorganization proposals during the budget process involves a series Project (PRP) within the Office of Management and of budgetary decisions on programs and directions as Budget has undertaken a broad review of Govern- the proposals pass from agency submission to final ment organization from which proposals for reorga- secretarial approval. In this process offices compete nization will emerge. actively in support of their respective programs. The Environment and Natural Resources Task Whether policy decisions are consciously part of the Group has responsibility for appraising ocean-related departmental review process largely depends on programs in the context of other natural resource and operating procedures. Nevertheless, policy decisions environmental programs. At the date of this printing, are made at every stage of the review process from three organizational options have been identified by initial proposal to final submission of the President's PRP: budget to the Congress. And, the process does not 9 A Department of Natural Resources in which stop there. Congress imposes its own set of priorities ocean responsibilities would be merged with through the budget resolution-authorization-appro- other natural resource activities, priation process. a An independent ocean agency, and The politics of the budget in the Executive Branch * A Marine Affairs Council that would coordinate are similar to the politics of appropriations in the ocean functions which remain in the depart- Legislative Branch. Enactment of the Congressional ments. Budget Control and Impoundment Act of 1974, These options are similar to earlier proposals made which requires the Congress to set a Congressional by others, with possible minor modifications, and ceiling on Government spending just as the President therefore are consistent with the conventional ap- must do, has made the Congressional budget process proaches prescribed for ocean organization. 51 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1978 0-274-224 @14'r OF % ".rE DATE DUE 13 R 7 13 IdO w 7 5 16 131 SP, 876 4 B A 8 1 6 15 5 1 29 29 pipe. 5 6 6 775 63-IS 1872 5 % 28 26 If, G14ft '3'?6 FEET L/9 144 Fl R FR 23 S 22 Af T4 Fl G 29 Rep (1974) 21 F1 G 2sec 14ft - 1Sta 26 PA PICTED AREA 207640 29 7,&'N 8 22 22 (see note A) *A 5 26 24 7 28 @6 2 91 22 '1977) 5 3 25 GAYLORD Xo. 2333 PRIXTED 1,U S A 5 4 20 33 3 21 SF 7 7 2 2 10 7 4 20 43 5 3 30 Treasure 30' Pile 3 a3, 35 33 10 Island - 5 TR I'C' ENO TNVAW 3 .7 (Koo v., 4 Pill Ina OROHIBITED AHtA 31 32 3 5 1 1 13 Dal Si,,v 207.640 10 3 J) 4 1 40 33 23 4 at,,e a@ol Ppelpe A,e,? 7 0Radio 32 13 f,lied 53 T 35 38 ), @9- -B ,.Ag 01. u P.. M t pl.tjpq@q-- 8 E"tG6-.354 A 6 C@ 20 266 1 Q Ilk 22 5C TANK 49 10 4 @--15 6 W Fl G jj;:0,' jjj@j jjjj@j J@fj @Jjjj @ 25 5 ft. k I R 0AWLA1 ND 4 77 12 36668 141069502 HARBOR -pi"y Verb& a- u 7 7 7 6 13 13 \13 @12 -y 8 14 @2 5 1 .P. 5 d L 8k\ 2 13 1 11 TR (TA It OF @4") 2@7 105 N, FR t- 15 I,- 123 bill, -,g-2 Sth Stroot 84 occ zr-- - IrA Marko Tarr CCP Inal 2 65 3- 3 0 A-e 44 RESTRICTED ARECA Tr 6 InDLF 207640