When the
Clean Water Act was signed into law more than 30 years ago, the Federal
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) went to work writing regulations
articulating the permit system for different industries discharging
pollutants. After they wrote regulations for industrial plants discharging
chemicals into local waterways and they dealt with discharges from sewage
treatment plants, the EPA turned to ships and boats, deliberately excluding
“discharges incidental to normal operation of a vessel.”
This meant that boaters could go about their business, scrubbing their
boats after fishing, using automatic bulge pumps to keep their boats
afloat and cooling engines with sea water.
But a federal
court decision last fall, after a six-year legal battle, could overturn
this long-established exemption. And it could mean that starting in
late 2008, every boat owner in the United States would be required to
apply and pay for a federal permit for each of their boats.
In
a decision last September by the U.S. District Court for Northern California,
Northwest Environmental Advocates v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
the court held that EPA overstepped its authority three decades ago when
it established this permit exemption for vessels, as such an exemption
was not authorized by Congress. EPA had sought to limit the scope of the
case to ballast water discharges, explaining that other discharges are
“deminimus” sources of pollution. They also maintained that
the exemption had stood for the past 30 years, through several comprehensive
congressional reviews of the Clean Water Act. Both arguments were disallowed
by the Court, which ordered that as of Sept. 30, 2008 , all discharges
incidental to the normal operation of any vessel will require a permit.
The case was brought by Northwest
Environmental Advocates, Stanford and Lewis and Clark university
law schools, The Ocean Conservancy, and local environmental
groups. According to Tim Eichenberg of The Ocean Conservancy, “the
intended focus was on large commercial vessels discharging
vast quantities of ballast water with aquatic nuisance
species.”
However, the particular sections
of the law that were cited throughout the court battle
have a wider application than just ballast water, and the
law covers all types of vessels and the majority of discharges.
After the initial decision by the court in March 2005,
the Shipping Industry Ballast Water Coalition intervened
on behalf of its members, including tugs, barges, and tanker
companies. According to Brian
McCalmon, of K&L Gates, the firm representing the Coalition, “We
argued that the only subject properly before the court is
the discharge of aquatic nuisance species in ballast water.”
Ironically, several Great Lakes states joined in the court
battle too, on the side of the environmental groups. New
York , Michigan , Wisconsin , Minnesota , Illinois , and
Pennsylvania , all plagued with aquatic nuisance species,
apparently were seeking some type of national solution to
ballast water. However, the decision may well impact the
3.6 million registered recreational boats in their home states.
So what does all this mean?
The court required the EPA to develop
a compliance plan for all vessels, including millions of
recreational boats by September 2008. This could mean that
no matter whether you operate a tanker in the Great Lakes,
a bass boat in Tennessee, or a sailboat in Oregon, you
may be required to apply for and pay for a permit to operate
your boat. Additional restrictions could potentially be
mandated including the containment of your vessel’s
grey water and the use of your automatic bilge pump that
helps keep your boat afloat.
Meanwhile the case is under appeal, and may remain in the
courts for several years.
BoatU.S.
is currently working with the National Marine Manufacturers Association
to develop strategies to insure the owners of nearly 17 million registered
boats and millions of unregistered boats in the U.S. , don’t get
swept up in a tide of unnecessary permit paperwork and fees. A legislative
solution to allow recreational boats to continue to operate as they have
for the past 30 years is being crafted. For current information on this
effort, please visit boatblue.org. As this issue has major ramifications
for all boaters, BoatU.S. is asking all members to provide your current
email address to Membership@BoatUS.com
so we can quickly communicate on this important issue.
©
BoatUS Magazine March 2007
For
more information see Congress
Tackles Discharge Permits - BoatUS Magazine July 2007
|