10
Federal Action to Improve Implementation of Annex V

As the preceding chapters demonstrate, there are many opportunities for action to improve U.S. implementation of MARPOL Annex V. Although many specific actions need to be taken by mariners, ports, and private companies, there is also a critical need for sustained, directed, national leadership to establish nationwide information networks, standards, rules, and regulations. This chapter synthesizes the many components of the committee's analysis to draw overall conclusions and provide recommendations for federal action to improve implementation of Annex V across all fleets. Such action is needed because the U.S. government ratified Annex V without developing a detailed implementation plan.

The presentation is organized into six sections, based on themes drawn from Chapter 2, which identified scientific needs, and Chapter 9, which built on Chapters 3-8 to establish objectives and recommend specific tactics for each maritime sector. Chapter 2 demonstrated the need for improved scientific monitoring of the marine environment. Chapter 9 identified a number of topics requiring attention in many if not all maritime sectors: the vessel/shore interface; on-board technology; Annex V enforcement, education and training; and national leadership of Annex V implementation.

These six themes provide the framework for the committee's proposed Annex V implementation program. For each thematic area, the committee identified objectives (which are embedded in the conclusions) and the federal agencies that should lead the effort or provide support. The rationale for the selection of the designated agencies is provided. The committee also identified areas where the states, local governments, and private organizations should provide assistance.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea 10 Federal Action to Improve Implementation of Annex V As the preceding chapters demonstrate, there are many opportunities for action to improve U.S. implementation of MARPOL Annex V. Although many specific actions need to be taken by mariners, ports, and private companies, there is also a critical need for sustained, directed, national leadership to establish nationwide information networks, standards, rules, and regulations. This chapter synthesizes the many components of the committee's analysis to draw overall conclusions and provide recommendations for federal action to improve implementation of Annex V across all fleets. Such action is needed because the U.S. government ratified Annex V without developing a detailed implementation plan. The presentation is organized into six sections, based on themes drawn from Chapter 2, which identified scientific needs, and Chapter 9, which built on Chapters 3-8 to establish objectives and recommend specific tactics for each maritime sector. Chapter 2 demonstrated the need for improved scientific monitoring of the marine environment. Chapter 9 identified a number of topics requiring attention in many if not all maritime sectors: the vessel/shore interface; on-board technology; Annex V enforcement, education and training; and national leadership of Annex V implementation. These six themes provide the framework for the committee's proposed Annex V implementation program. For each thematic area, the committee identified objectives (which are embedded in the conclusions) and the federal agencies that should lead the effort or provide support. The rationale for the selection of the designated agencies is provided. The committee also identified areas where the states, local governments, and private organizations should provide assistance.

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea SCIENTIFIC MONITORING Environmental monitoring is a way of providing feedback for improving environmental management. A number of illuminating studies and surveys have been conducted on the fates and effects of marine debris, but there has not been any comprehensive, long-term research. Improved collection and analysis of data on marine debris not only would fill the numerous gaps in the existing scientific knowledge base but also would provide means for assessing Annex V and progress in its implementation. Reliable data would provide a rational basis for timely shifts in management programs to improve Annex V compliance. This type of monitoring is by nature long-term and demands organizational commitment. To expand understanding of the fates of marine debris, the committee concludes that statistically valid long-term programs are needed to monitor the flux of plastics in the oceans and assess the rates of accumulation of debris in the benthos. Research on the fate and transport of plastics in the global oceans would provide a basis for evaluating whether Annex V, as currently written and internationally implemented, is providing adequate protection. Plastic would be the logical target because it is the most prevalent and harmful type of debris and its overboard discharge is prohibited by Annex V. In addition, regular surveys to measure accumulation rates of plastic on beaches and the coastal sea floor would provide a measure of the current pollution problem and a benchmark for evaluating compliance with Annex V. It would be important to share the data with national and international agencies responsible for Annex V implementation. In addition, because it is difficult to obtain such data without a systematic, worldwide effort involving the cooperation of other maritime nations, it might be helpful to draw attention to the need for this type of monitoring through international forums, such as the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC). To expand understanding of the effects of marine debris, the committee concludes that statistically valid long-term programs are needed to monitor interactions of marine species with debris in the oceans and the impact of debris on pristine areas. Existing studies could be expanded and extended. New data on wildlife interactions (e.g., entanglements with and ingestion of debris) is needed to verify the ecological effects of debris that have been suggested by previous reports and surveys. Standardized reporting forms, centralized data analysis, and information exchange are essential. It may be feasible to adapt existing research on non-Annex V topics, such as analyses of fish stomach contents, to also record the incidence of plastics and other debris. Another approach would be to conduct regular necropsies on dead stranded marine mammals and other animals. Research on the impact of debris in areas minimally affected by land-based sources would help

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea assess progress in implementation of Annex V and the overall effectiveness of the mandate. The committee further concludes that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is best equipped of all federal agencies to lead the monitoring effort, because its Marine Entanglement Research Program (MERP) has collected much of the existing knowledge on marine debris and its Status and Trends Program Could be expanded readily to monitor plastic debris. NOAA could obtain assistance from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which has considerable experience collecting data on land-based sources of debris and debris in urban waterfronts and has developed a beach monitoring program. NOAA also could obtain information from agencies such as the National Park Service, which routinely observes debris at national seashores, and coastal states that monitor beaches. The committee therefore recommends NOAA, with the assistance of EPA, should establish statistically valid, long-term monitoring programs to gather data on the flux of marine debris, the physical transport and fate of marine debris, accumulation of plastic on beaches and in the benthos, wildlife interactions with debris, and the impact of debris on pristine areas. NOAA also should assure that the results of its monitoring programs are communicated to other agencies responsible for Annex V implementation and enforcement. The U.S. government should draw attention to the need for an international data collection effort through IMO and the IOC. VESSEL/SHORE INTERFACE The most prevalent problem across the various maritime sectors is inadequate port reception facilities. This is a result of the lack of planning for Annex V implementation and is a major obstacle to full implementation; far-reaching changes and strong leadership and coordination will be required to overcome this problem. As a first step toward improving the vessel/shore interface, the committee concludes that vessel garbage management must be viewed as a system that includes port reception facilities, and this system needs to be combined with the integrated solid waste management system (ISWMS) for land-generated waste. The ISWMS recognizes the diverse needs for waste treatment to accommodate the many materials generated in the nation's homes and industries, and vessel garbage can be integrated into that system. For a system to function efficiently, there must be a coherent overall management scheme and technical standards. Vessel operators can do much more to reduce shipborne waste and to return the

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea residual to shore, but they need to be assured access to affordable reception facilities that meet their needs, and the garbage must be disposed of safely and efficiently. In addition, technical standards are needed to help operators of all types of ports, from large commercial ports to recreational marinas, satisfy the Annex V mandate for provision of "adequate" garbage reception facilities. To encourage use of port reception facilities, the question of who should pay for garbage services, and how, needs to be addressed. Because port management is decentralized in the United States, the federal government may have to initiate discussions on this topic. As part of the process, port operators may need to cooperate in finding a rational basis for setting disposal fees, which now vary regionally. One option would be to require that fees paid by ships be comparable to local charges for disposal of land-generated garbage. Alternatively, port tariffs or related user fees could be increased to cover garbage disposal. The committee also concludes that the handling of Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) waste needs to be integrated as fully as possible with the Annex V regime and the system for managing land-generated waste. The APHIS program, administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), historically has been separate from other waste management efforts, but the need for an efficient and effective overall system demands that the APHIS system be integrated into the ISWMS. The aim is to make compliance with both Annex V and APHIS regimes as easy as possible for vessel operators. The committee further concludes that there is a need to assure accountability of both vessel operators and port operators. This need will be addressed in part by the Coast Guard requirement that operators of ocean-going, U.S.-flag commercial vessels over 12.2 meters (about 40 feet) in length maintain logs of garbage disposal practices. However, it would be difficult and time consuming to verify the accuracy of the logs in any way other than through spot checks. Accountability could be strengthened if ports issued receipts for garbage discharged into their reception facilities. (Knowing the size of the crew and the duration of the voyage since the last port call, the Coast Guard could estimate the amount of garbage that should be discharged at a specific port.) In addition, to assure that ports meet vessel needs for handling of garbage (including APHIS waste), vessel operators could be required to report any inadequate reception facilities using the IMO forms. Such reports would need to be followed up by the Coast Guard, to assure that the necessary improvements were made. In keeping with trends in ISWMS, and based on the effectiveness of small-scale marina recycling projects, the committee also concludes that recycling of vessel garbage needs to be promoted. Materials that have been recycled include plastics, metal cans, and fishing nets. There are needs for infrastructure mechanisms for transporting the materials to processing centers, public awareness efforts to promote recycling, and widespread provision of port reception facilities for returned materials. There is a particular need to establish a recycling system for fishing nets, which are not now recycled but could be.

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea Finally, the committee concludes that EPA is the logical agency to establish the overall framework for improving the vessel/shore facility interface, due to its expertise in and authority for national management of land- generated waste. The EPA has the expertise to set minimum technical standards appropriate for reception facilities at each type of port. The EPA also has the authority to assure, through the states, that reception facilities meet the standards. The EPA can require that garbage from vessels docked at any port be included in the states' solid waste management plans, which are authorized by the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. A congressional directive may be required, however, because the EPA has taken the position that this function is outside its purview. Ultimately, this approach may obviate the need for the Certificate of Adequacy (COA) program run by the Coast Guard, which, realistically, has neither the expertise nor the resources to assess and monitor garbage reception facilities and, moreover, monitors only a limited number of ports. Unless and until the new system is in place, however, the COA program must continue to provide a check on the adequacy of port reception facilities. The EPA can be assisted in improving the vessel/shore interface by the Coast Guard, which runs the COA program and enforces Annex V; the states, which develop solid waste management plans and issue permits to ports, docks, and piers; port and terminal operators, which could assume an expanded role in overseeing the adequacy of reception facilities and assuring customer satisfaction with services; the private sector (e.g., the Solid Waste Association of North America, the Center for Marine Conservation [CMC], professional societies, and industry trade associations), which can help promote recycling and Annex V compliance; and the various maritime sectors, which can communicate their needs and suggest solutions. The EPA also can make use of the forthcoming IMO manual on reception facilities. The committee therefore recommends To improve management of vessel garbage and meet U.S. national and international commitments to implement Annex V, the Congress should direct EPA to use its current resources to establish an overall framework that (1) incorporates the vessel garbage management system into the ISWMS for land-generated waste, (2) requires states to include in their solid waste management plans the disposal of garbage from vessels docked at their ports, (3) establishes technical standards for reception facilities appropriate to each type of port, (4) provides for accountability by requiring commercial ports to issue receipts for garbage discharged at their facilities, and by assuring that states follow up reports of inadequate port reception facilities, and (5) promotes recycling of vessel garbage. The EPA should obtain assistance from the Coast Guard, the states, port and terminal operators, the private sector, and the maritime

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea sectors and should make use of the forthcoming IMO manual on reception facilities. In developing their solid waste management plans, states should assure that vessel garbage disposal fees are set on some rational basis, and that a mechanism for collecting the fees is established. Port operators should consider cooperating in setting fees, which should be comparable to local fees for disposal of land-generated garbage. The USDA should make any changes necessary to integrate the APHIS regime into the Annex V compliance program and the ISWMS as fully as possible. The Coast Guard should require vessel operators to report inadequate reception facilities using the IMO forms and should follow up these reports. And, if ports are required to issue receipts for garbage discharged into their reception facilities, then the Coast Guard should examine these receipts when reviewing vessel garbage logs. Unless and until the COA program is merged with the EPA program, the Coast Guard should incorporate into the program requirements that port reception facilities meet EPA technical standards and have any requisite state and EPA approvals. ON-BOARD TECHNOLOGIES At least some vessels in all fleets will require installation of appropriately sized and reliable compactors, pulpers, shredders, incinerators, or other technologies in order to minimize garbage for disposal in port. Although some equipment is available, it does not meet all the needs of all fleets, even the U.S. Navy, which has an extensive research and development (R&D) program dedicated to developing and demonstrating on-board garbage handling and treatment technologies. The cruise ship industry works with equipment vendors and engineers to meet individual needs, but the potential markets for many technologies; such as those needed for fisheries fleets, have not attracted commercial developers. The committee concludes that new and improved on-board garbage handling and treatment technologies are needed, a problem that may be resolved in part by adapting commercial equipment used in homes, retail establishments, and industry. The difficulty of developing appropriate on-board equipment is illustrated by the experience of the Navy, which has been working on this problem since the early 1980s and does not expect to bring its surface fleets into compliance until the turn of the century. Other fleets do not have direct access to

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea the Navy's expertise, in some cases, they can purchase commercial equipment off the shelf, but more often individual alterations or entirely new technology is needed. This is an opportunity for the federal government to work toward two of its goals: development of dual-use technology and protection of the environment. Development, testing, and evaluation are needed to make available a suite of appropriately sized and configured equipment for all maritime sectors. To support and foster the wide use of new and improved on-board technologies, the committee concludes that demonstration projects, research on operations and maintenance issues, and information exchange are needed . Demonstration projects are important not only to gain experience with equipment but also to display it to the wider community and gain acceptance. The diverse equipment requirements of the various fleets could be met through small projects carried out through government grants or contracts with the private sector. New equipment could be demonstrated on various types of vessels in different fleets. Research also is needed to address operations and maintenance issues, such as human factors, safety, and reliability. Finally, exchange of technical information among the various maritime sectors is essential to maximize the return on R&D investments and avoid duplication of effort. Information about the Navy's equipment developments, for example, still needs to be shared with other government fleets and the private sector. The committee also concludes that steps must be taken to resolve issues that may be impeding safe and efficient garbage storage and expanded use of compactors and incinerators. Guidelines on shipboard sanitation may need to be developed for fleets other than cruise ships and these fleets offered technical assistance to ensure that on-board storage procedures are safe and efficient. To foster expanded use of compactors, APHIS could develop standards based on compacted garbage. U.S. standards for on-board incinerators also are needed if use of this technology is to be expanded. Finally, the committee concludes that economic issues—including the Cost of technologies to vessel operators and the tradeoffs with garbage disposal fees—need to be addressed. Economic considerations will determine whether on-board garbage handling and treatment technologies actually are used. Vessel operators will weigh the costs of these technologies against port fees for disposal of waste ''as is'' and, perhaps, the possibility of being fined or losing business for violating Annex V. Therefore, technologies must be not only affordable but also cost-competitive with other garbage handling options. Operators of fisheries fleets may need a source of capital to enable the development, purchase, and installation of technology. One resource may be the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) financial assistance programs for improvements in fisheries fleets. The Capital Construction Fund Program may be an appropriate source if the NMFS is willing to provide the funds for pollution-abatement equipment and waive the minimum cost requirements. To accomplish all the activities necessary to develop and deploy on-board

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea technologies to enable Annex V compliance, the committee concludes that the Maritime Administration (MARAD) is the logical lead agency, due to its ongoing, broad-based marine technology assessment and development efforts. MARAD could obtain technical assistance from the Navy and maintain contact with the various fleets through NOAA's Sea Grant Marine Advisory Service. To help execute narrow projects to meet the needs of small fleets, federal agencies could award grants and contracts to private companies. The R&D effort needs to be responsive to the needs of the Coast Guard, NOAA, and other government fleets, as well as the private sector. The committee therefore recommends MARAD should develop and execute an on-board garbage treatment technology R&D program that addresses the needs for new equipment; alteration of commercial equipment; technology demonstration and Information exchange; and operational, maintenance, and cost issues. MARAD should obtain technical support from the Navy and maintain contact with the various fleets through NOAA's Sea Grant Marine Advisory Service and the NMFS. The program should be responsive to the needs of the Coast Guard, NOAA, and other government fleets, as well as the private sector. The federal government should take steps to resolve issues that may be impeding safe garbage storage and expanded use of compactors and incinerators. To ensure that on-board storage procedures are safe and efficient, the government should examine the need for sanitation guidelines and related technical assistance for fleets other than cruise ships. APHIS should consider developing standards based on compacted garbage. The EPA should adopt IMO standards for shipboard incinerators. The NMFS should offer Financial assistance to fisheries fleets investing in on-board garbage handling and treatment technology. The NMFS should waive policy conditions, such as minimum cost requirements, that limit access to these programs. ENFORCEMENT This section addresses enforcement of Annex V standards at sea only (enforcement in ports is addressed in the previous section on the Vessel/Shore Interface). Although voluntary compliance by seafarers is the linchpin of Annex V implementation, effective enforcement provides an extra impetus for compliance, an additional means of control over certain fleets, and some confidence that violators, once prosecuted, will not repeat their actions. At the same time, it is

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea important to make enforcement as efficient as possible by targeting problem fleets, because limited resources and the vast expanse of the oceans combine to preclude comprehensive enforcement. As a fundamental step toward strengthening Annex V enforcement among seafarers, the committee concludes that enforcement action must be taken and followed up in every case where the United States can assert jurisdiction, even when the violator is a foreign-flag vessel. The Coast Guard is making progress in this area by pursuing direct action against foreign-flag vessels that violate Annex V within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. It will be important to work through IMO to establish clear procedures for exercising port state enforcement authorities. In addition, fines or penalties for violating Annex V need to be sufficiently high to serve as deterrents. The committee also concludes that the Coast Guard needs to take additional steps to enhance enforcement where it is most needed. To provide additional means for enforcing Annex V among foreign-flag cargo and cruise ships particularly, the requirement for garbage logs could be extended to foreign-flag vessels. Recreational boaters, fishing fleets, and the offshore oil and gas industry also pose special challenges in implementation of Annex V. The Coast Guard could issue "tickets" in civil cases involving Annex V violations, particularly in the fisheries and recreational boating sectors, if the pilot projects using this type of streamlined approach to enforcing other laws are shown to be successful. The Coast Guard also could encourage violation reports by other federal officials engaged in surveillance of fisheries fleets and the offshore industry, as well as state marine police, who routinely come into contact with boaters. These agencies could provide additional eyes for enforcement at no extra cost. The Coast Guard also could pursue vigorously its planned public awareness campaign urging citizens to report illegal garbage disposal. The committee concludes that, to make the best use of existing information and enforcement assets, systematic government record keeping and analysis is needed. While a comprehensive Annex V record-keeping system involving all relevant federal agencies is probably not feasible, the Coast Guard and APHIS could collaborate to develop and maintain a computerized database on vessel garbage handling. APHIS records of vessel boardings and garbage off-loading could be converted to electronic form and logged into the shared database. The Coast Guard could input information from vessel logs and enforcement reports. Data analyses could be used as a basis for determining where the two agencies' enforcement resources should be directed. The data bank would be most meaningful if cargo and cruise ships were required to off-load all garbage at every U.S. port call, and if ports issued receipts for all garbage discharged into their facilities. The committee concludes that the Coast Guard, which already is legally responsible for Annex V enforcement, is the appropriate agency to lead the expanded enforcement effort. Support could be obtained from the NMFS, Miner-

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea als Management Service (MMS), and state marine police. The committee therefore recommends The Coast Guard, together with the Department of State and Department of Justice, should continue to enforce Annex V aggressively against foreign-flag violators, consistent with the nation's International obligations, and should work through IMO to resolve ambiguities concerning the extent of port state authority in this regard. The requirement for garbage logs should be extended to foreign-flag vessels. The Coast Guard also should adopt a policy of issuing tickets in civil cases pilot projects show this streamlined enforcement approach to be successful. In addition, the Coast Guard should request the assistance of the NMFS, MMS, and state marine police in reporting Annex V violations. Finally, the agency should pursue vigorously its campaign to encourage public reports of violations. The Coast Guard and APHIS should collaborate to develop, maintain, and use for enforcement purposes an Annex V record-keeping system incorporating information from vessel boardings, garbage logs, enforcement reports, and, if a receipt system is instituted, port receipts for offloaded garbage. The Coast Guard should issue a periodic report listing Annex V enforcement actions and the assistance provided by other federal agencies and marine police units in the states. Analyses of data from the Coast Guard/ APHIS record-keeping system should be included. Such reports would allow the Congress to evaluate the adequacy of appropriations for Annex V implementation projects and enforcement. EDUCATION AND TRAINING Education and training efforts targeting all levels of seafaring and management personnel as well as the general public are critical in establishing a sense of personal responsibility on the part of individuals and a high level of voluntary Annex V compliance. Therefore, the committee concludes that a sustained national program of Annex V education and training is needed that reaches all levels of all maritime sectors as well as non-traditional target groups, Such as the packaging industry and government officials, and provides for information exchange, both domestically and internationally. The program must include research, to develop a solid base of knowledge concerning how to package the message; execution, to carry the message to all levels of personnel and management in all sectors; and evalu-

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea ation, to gather evidence to justify program expenditures. The program must make use of existing knowledge about effective teaching methods and build on successful past or ongoing educational efforts, notably those carded out by NOAA's MERP and Sea Grant programs and the CMC. Innovative strategies must be sought to reach and persuade mariners known to have poor records of compliance. Also essential is development of national and international channels, such as newsletters, for exchange of information across fleets about Annex V compliance strategies, including education and training programs and on-board garbage treatment equipment. To assure leadership, stable funding, and innovation, the committee concludes that a publicly chartered, independent foundation offers the most promise for coordinating and enhancing a successful education and training program over the long-term. There is considerable precedent for this approach to coordinating national programs. The National Boating Safety Advisory Council is an example. The Annex V foundation would award grants to private industry and associations, academic institutions, and public agencies to develop, test, and carry out education and training projects, with an emphasis on innovative concepts. The foundation also would develop information exchange strategies. Funding could be provided through modest congressional appropriations and industry support; oversight could be provided by a national commission (described and recommended in the following section on national leadership). The committee therefore recommends The Congress should charter and endow a foundation to coordinate a sustained, long-term, national program that would assure development and execution of Annex V education and training programs for all mart-time sectors as well as non-traditional target groups and provide for domestic and international exchange of information on Annex V compliance strategies. The program should include research, execution, and evaluation components and should promote innovation. To develop and carry out projects, the foundation should award grants to private industry and associations, academic institutions, public agencies, and nonprofit organizations. NATIONAL LEADERSHIP Because many federal agencies are involved in implementing Annex V and the Marine Plastics Pollution Research and Control Act (MPPRCA), there is no clear leader or centralized coordination of all aspects of this complex effort. Yet the inherent scope and importance of this task demands leadership. As a first step toward providing leadership, the committee concludes that U.S. government and government-supported fleets, to set an example, need to

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea work systematically to comply with Annex V, upgrade crew training and provisioning practices, and encourage transfer of successful experiences to other fleets. Clearly, it would be difficult for the federal government to justify enforcing rules that its own fleets do not make every effort to observe. Zero discharge is required by law for vessels operating in special areas where the discharge rules are in force, and it is also an appropriate objective for vessels making day trips. The committee wishes to emphasize that an objective is something to strive for, rather than an absolute requirement as established by law. The committee recognizes that government fleets face serious and continuing difficulties in obtaining funds for Annex V implementation projects. The proposed Annex V foundation could be the mechanism for development of education and training materials and transfer of technologies and strategies among maritime sectors. Furthermore, the committee concludes that centralized oversight, direction, and coordination of Annex V implementation is needed. Evidence of the need is documented throughout this report. In absence of such leadership, important data on debris accumulation and garbage disposal practices have not been gathered, the adequacy of port reception facilities has been given only cursory consideration, key educational and technology development projects have not been pursued, and information about successful programs and technologies have not been disseminated widely. Leadership is needed if comprehensive national implementation of Annex V is to be achieved. The committee concludes that the United States needs to continue to take a leadership role in the international community with respect to Annex V implementation. Because U.S. implementation of Annex V is affected by the compliance levels of foreign-flag vessels, the United States needs to push for increased standards of performance worldwide. The nation could assist in the dissemination of Annex V information and technology to foreign maritime users through a variety of regional forums, including the United Nations Environment Programme's Regional Seas program, regional and bilateral fisheries agreements, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, international oceanographic organizations, and tourism and yachting associations. The United States also needs to find ways to help assure the adequacy of port reception facilities in the Wider Caribbean special area, perhaps through the development of memoranda of understanding (MOUs) for the sharing of enforcement assets and other resources. The United States could assist in identifying and overcoming obstacles hindering Caribbean nations from adopting the provisions of MARPOL, either through ratification of the convention or national legislation. To provide consistent, independent, expert oversight and coordination of Annex V and MPPRCA implementation, as well as international leadership, the committee concludes that a permanent national commission is needed. There is considerable precedent for the commission approach. The Congress has established a number of commissions to focus on specific, narrow issues and problems of major domestic and international concern. A commission would have greater

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea flexibility than would federal agencies in working with the private sector to promote Annex V implementation and would be well positioned to promote U.S. leadership in the global maritime community. Furthermore, no single agency has all the requisite expertise and authority to fill a comprehensive leadership role. To be effective, a national commission addressing Annex V implementation would require a clear legislative mandate establishing its overview authority and outlining its responsibilities, which could include (1) reviewing information on the sources, amounts, effects, and control of vessel garbage, (2) working with federal agencies to assure they carry out their roles and responsibilities and exchange relevant information, (3) making recommendations to agencies on actions or policies related to identification and control of sources of vessel garbage, (4) providing support for research, regulatory, and policy analyses, (5) providing the Congress with periodic reports on the state of the problem, progress in research and management measures, and factors limiting the success of implementation, (6) overseeing the Annex V educational foundation, and (7) overseeing international aspects of Annex V implementation. The legislation also would need to authorize funding sufficient for the commission to carry out its duties. Finally, to carry out Annex V implementation efforts requiring the expertise and resources of multiple agencies, the committee concludes that MOUs between relevant agencies need to be negotiated and observed. These agreements would spell out specific roles and responsibilities and help assure that the work is accomplished. The committee therefore recommends The Congress should require that federal and federally supported fleets, to set an example, work systematically toward full Annex V compliance, upgrade crew training and provisioning practices, and encourage transfer of successful experiences to commercial fleets. The Congress should establish a permanent national commission with a clear legislative mandate establishing its authority to oversee the national Annex V and MPPRCA implementation effort. The panel should be modeled on other national commissions, such as the Marine Mammal Commission, established to address major issues of concern. The legislation should outline the commission's responsibilities and authorize funding sufficient for execution of its duties. The commission should (1) review information on the sources, amounts, effects, and control of vessel garbage, (2) work with federal agencies to assure they carry out their roles and responsibilities and share relevant information, (3) assure that MOUs for Annex V implementation are negotiated and observed, (4) make recommendations to federal agencies

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea on actions or policies related to identification and control of sources of vessel garbage, (5) provide support for research, regulatory, and policy analyses, (6) provide the Congress with periodic reports on the state of the problem, progress in research and management measures, and factors limiting the effectiveness of implementation, (7) oversee the Annex V educational foundation, and (8) oversee international aspects of Annex V implementation. In closing, the committee observes that many of its conclusions and recommendations may be applicable to the problem of marine debris in general as well as the more specific problem of vessel garbage, and that the Annex V educational foundation and national commission may be useful mechanisms for implementing all components of MARPOL. The broad utility of the committee's recommendations may provide additional justification for implementing them.

OCR for page 240
Clean Ships Clean Ports Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea This page in the original is blank.