Amicus Curiae Brief — Massachusetts v. EPA

Supreme Court brief2007

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

Supra. : me

No. 05-1120

AUG 3 1 6535

OFFICE OF THE Gee

IN THE

Supreme Court of the United States

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, et ai.,

Petitioners,

Vv.

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY, ef ail.,

Respondents.

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the

United States Court of Appeals

for the District of Columbia

BRIEF OF AMIC! CURIAE OCEAN AND

COASTAL CONSERVATION INTERESTS

IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS

CO —

PATRICK A. PARENTEAU

ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL

RESOURCES LAW CLINIC

VERMONT LAW SCHOOL

P.O. Box 300

South Royalton, Vermont 05068

(802) 831-1305

Counsel of Record for Amici Curiae

WILSON-EPES PRINTING CO., INC. — (202) 789-0096 — WASHINGTON, D.C. 20001

Il.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF SECTION 202

OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT NOT ONLY

AUTHORIZES EPA TO REGULATE AIR

POLLUTANTS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO

CLIMATE CHANGE, BUT UPON THE

APPROPRIATE “ENDANGERMENT” FIND-

ING, REQUIRES THAT IT DO SO...................

A. EPA Has Authority to Regulate the Green-

house Gases at [sg0e ...........cccccserssssescessscecees

B. EPA May Not Decline Rulemaking For

Reasons Not Enumerated in Section 202 ....

THE WEIGHT OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE

SUPPORTS A FINDING THAT GREEN-

HOUSE GASES “MAY REASONABLY BE

ANTICIPATED TO ENDANGER PUBLIC

HEALTH OR WELFARE” ...2......cccvsseererscosers

A. The Continued Health and Vitality of

Oceans and Coasts is Crucial to Public

es Sree eve

B. Human Activities Are Increasing

Atmospheric Concentrations of Car-

bon Dioxide, Thereby Contributing to

Changes in Climate and the Marine

PE scssiscictsihncinicsensicctientinieetsiiainuipaidaabiaiils

(i)

TABLE OF CONTENTS—Continued

Increased carbon dioxide levels are

affecting atmospheric and ocean

ii isciciislinneniillncierinnesanbeiemeiinnnin

Increased carbon dioxide levels are

creating a fundamental and detrimental

shift in ocean chemistry ..................::0000

C. Changes to the Ocean Environment Will

Have Major Adverse Effects on Human

Safety, the Economy, and the Natural

IG scsiciciettinssataneteniitiiinbeiciitainaiiigpines

Sea-level rise will have negative

effects on the health and welfare of

U.S. populations in coastal areas...........

Warming and acidification of the

oceans pose grave threats to coral reefs

and will adversely affect all marine life..

Hurricane intensity will likely increase

because of warmer oceans ..............-.--+--

Increased storm damage endangers

U.S. coastal communities ......................

‘Erosion will increase in coastal areas....

GAUGED scsciccrvnciispstcisscimeonepsicnnnpeemieeseniecnnamnatans

APPENDIX

SOOO EEE OEE EEE EEE ETE EERE HEHEHE EEE EEEEEEEEEOEH EH EEEE

iil

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

CASES Page

Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def.

Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984).......cceceseeeee 4

Ethyl Corp. v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 541 F.2d 1

Ss as Se shiibtinisipetiitsSitarinciipiatocineneetecdpeutinds 3, 4,5

FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529

I dicate dncineicesijuliliniieaibinniiiabsastiesinneds 5

Massachusetts v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 415 F.3d

a Cas Sp ncienseintecncnsectniitichinstslesiienintbues 6, 7,8

PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin, 532 U.S. 661 (2001)... 5

STATUTES

42 U.S.C. § 7521....... iniciisicinihebliicapibiseianasiptebiatiaiocs 3

42 U.S.C. § 7521(a)(1)........... siinipcthiistieinlnelninidien 2

AN Ts iceniincidciesntinchnsinticndinasiamnnlesiones 3,5

Se Si ci sticereinticiedncsicisiiisliclppnsinciinpaatiipdiics 3

REGULATIONS

68 Fed. Reg. 52,922 (Sep. 8, 2003) ..............eeees 4, 5, 6,7

71 Fed. Reg. 26,852 (May 9, 2006).............cccee0000 16

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

H.R. Rep. No. 91-1146 (June 3, 1970), reprinted

bo LEE od on SE: SEO aan 3

H.R. Conf. Rep. 95-564 (Aug. 3, 1977), reprinted

tgs | oe SERN ene 4

COURT RULES

Ss ich iilnihceniideticibiiieudtiianenictisiicinapiedapisntion l

OTHER AUTHORITIES

Alley, R.B., P.U. Clark, P. Huybrechts and I.

Joughin, /ce-sheet and sea-level changes, 310

Science 456-460 (2005)..............cccscsscssrssesseseseees 13

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued

Page

Anthes, R.A., et al., Hurricanes and global

warming—potential linkages and _ conse-

quences, 87 Bulletin of the American

Meteorological Society 623-628 (2006)............ 17, 18

Caldeira, K. and M.E. Wickett, Anthropologic

carbon and ocean pH, 425 Nature 365 (2003)... ll

Cayan, D., et al., Projecting Future Sea Level

Rise: A Report for California Climate Change

Coretar QTE TAO OP sciccnvineinticinsszesltisimniiiinndiiasiinss 19

Costanza, R., et al., The Value of the World’s

Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital, 387

NSD SAD (BIW 8 Peicccccicsstscnctaniinniiaitetidinbediniamintiei 8

Crossett, K.M., et al., Population Trends Along

the Coastal United States: 1980-2008 (Nat?!

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,

DORAN BOOP scccccintsscctsistinisisnnatwapsiltiammanintinitdes 8

Emanuel, K., Jncreasing destructiveness of

tropical cyclones over the past 30 years, 436 -

Nature 686-688 (2005) .00........cscccsseseseesereeeseeeees 18

Griggs, G.B., Coastal Cliff Erosion in San Diego

County (2002) at http://repositories.cdlib.org/

cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1091 &context=cs

gc (last visited August 29, 2006) ...........sscseees 20

Harley, C.D.G., et al., The impacts of climate

change in coastal marine systems, 9 Ecology

Letters 228-241 (2006).........ssscesessseeseeseeneeses 16, 17

Hays, G.C., A.J. Richardson and C. Robinson,

Climate change and marine plankton, 20

Trends in Ecology and Evolution 337-344

CIID. <cxccssscesvsscensscntasiinetensiisuianmnseiiinasimniants 16, 17

H.J. Heinz III Center for Science, Economics

and the Environment, Evaluation of Erosion

Hazards, Report Brief (2000)...........:s00cceeeeeees 20

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued

Houghton, J.T., et al. (eds.), Climate Change -

2001: The Scientific Basis, Cambridge Uni-

versity Press, Cambridge, U.K. (2001)......9, 10,

Hoyos, C.D., P.A. Agudelo, P.J. Webster and

J.A. Curry, Deconvolution of the factors con-

tributing to the increase in global hurricane

intensity, 312 Science 94-97 (2006) ..................

Hughes, T.P., et al., Climate change, human

impacts, and the resilience of coral reefs, 301

Badass F2SFS3S (2OGS)....r.ccesrercceecescssecescseccecess

Joughin, 1, W. Abdalati and M. Fahnestock,

Large fluctuations in speed on Greenland’s

Jakobshavn Isbrae glacier, 432 Nature 608-

NEARER SS Se ee vee

Kildow, J. and C. Colgan, California’s Ocean

Economy Report to the Resources Agency,

State of California (July 2008) ................00.00000

King, P., The Fiscal Impact of Beaches in

California. Public Research Institute, San

Francisco State University (September 1999)...

Kleypas, J.A., R.A. Feely, V.J. Fabry, C. Lang-

don, C.L. Sabine and L.L. Robbins, Jmpacts of

Ocean Acidification on Coral Reefs and other

Marine Calcifiers: A Guide for Future Re-

TE ES

Knutson, T.R. and R.E. Tuleya, /mpact of CO2-

induced warming on simulated hurricane

intensity and precipitation: Sensitivity to the

choice of climate model and convection

Page

13,14

11,12

parameterization, 17 Journal of Climate 3477- -

Pe tiniicctenincnatnteciotecnniscernnmninnenenasimannats

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued

McFarlane, G.A., J.R. King and R.J. Beamish,

Have there been recent changes in climate?

Ask the fish, 47 Progress in Oceanography

SE Ge ctsncnnntccincisnccenesiieibiaianantiinnsine

National Research Council. Clean Coastal

Waters: Understahding and Reducing the

Effects of Nutrient Pollution. National Acad-

emy Press, Washington, D-C. (2000) ................

National Research Council. Climate Change

Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions.

National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

Petit, J.R., et al., Climate and atmospheric

history of the past 420,000 years from the

Vostok ice core, Antarctica. 399 Nature 429-

UT tin stietitinieadiiataatinnaibantindiictadacitshdiiacdidatiiten

Pew Oceans Commission, America’s Living

Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea Change

(June 2003) ............... PEEL Ee EOS ST

Sabine, C.L., et al., The oceanic sink for anthro-

pogenic CO2, 305 Science 367-371 (2004).......

Titus, J.G. and C. Richman, Maps of lands

vulnerable to sea level rise: Modeled eleva-

tions along the US Atlantic and Gulf Coasts,

18 Climate Research 205-228 (2001)................

Trenberth, K.E., Uncertainty in hurricanes and

global warming, 308 Science 1753-1754

Trenberth, K.E. and DJ. Shea, Aflantic

hurricanes and natural variability in 2005,

33 Geophysical Research Letters L12704,

doi: 10.1029/2006GL026894 (2006)..................

vil

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, An Ocean

Webster, P.J., G.J. Holland, J.A. Curry and H.-R.

Chang, Changes in tropical cyclone number,

duration, and intensity in a warming envir-

onment, 309 Science 1844-1846 (2005) ........... 18

Wilkinson, C. (ed.), Status of Coral Reefs of the

World: 2004, Australian Institute of Marine -

eI i iiintidinenidichiinstiiiiainaieliaanitatemipidiianeds 15, 16

Wu, S.-Y., R. Najjar and J. Siewert, Jmpact of

Sea-Level Rise on the Mid- and Upper-Atlantic

Coast (Consortium for Atlantic Regional

ee ee 19

Lay, “me a vty i. ee ‘ ‘ f ” hn “th, "

Stow shh , ae * c a nf = tel, ~ c h ‘ =e ees

cE i i at |

s 1

bana tw’ rs

INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ' -

Amici are organizations and individuals’ committed to

conservation of ocean and coastal ecosystems that provide a

wide variety of goods and services of tremendous value to

human society including food, commodities, recreation, clean

air, and a dazzling array of marine life that enriches the

quality of life for all Americans. Amici represent a diverse set

of interests and expertise in marine conservation. Some

organizations have been involved in comprehensive marine

conservation and: public education efforts for decades. Some

are scientists and explorers who have devoted their careers to

studying the oceans and improving our understanding of their

value and vulnerability. Others are organizations dedicated to

protecting marine life and rescuing endangered species. Col-

lectively, these organizations speak for millions of Americans

who share a common concern about the impacts of human-

induced climate change on these marine ecosystems, and a

strong desire to do something about it before it is too late.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

Climate change is real. For evidence of its impact, one

need only look to the oceans and coasts of the United States.

Ocean temperatures are increasing. Ocean chemistry is

changing and becoming more acidic. The polar caps are

melting and sea levels are rising. Coastlines are eroding and

estuaries are changing. Hurricanes are becoming more pow-

erful and destructive. Coral reefs are dying and the marine

foodweb is unraveling. Marine life is under increasing stress

as life zones diminish. Human communities closest to the

' All parties have consented to the filing of this brief. Pursuant to this

Court’s Rule 37.6, Amici state that no counsel for any party in this case

authored this brief in whole or in part, and no person other than Amici and

their counsel has made a monetary contribution to the preparation and

submission of this brief.

* A description of the Amici is included in the Appendix.

-—-—-——-—_

oceans and coasts are bearing the brunt of the profound

changes underway in the marine environment.

There is a strong and growing scientific consensus that all

of these effects are closely linked to the emission of so-called

greenhouse gases, including the four compounds at issue

here—carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and hydro-

fluorocarbons—that Petitioners seek to have regulated under

section 202 of Clean Air Act. EPA declines to act, claiming

that it lacks authority to regulate greenhouse gases, and that

even if it had authority, it would not use it, for policy reasons.

As Petitioners have ably demonstrated in their merits brief,

neither contention is tenable. Rather than belabor the legal

arguments, Amici will briefly review the statutory provisions

that plainly authorize EPA to regulate greenhouse gases, and

then turn to the scientific evidence that would support a

finding that the four pollutants at issue “may reasonably be

anticipated to endanger human health or welfare.” Indeed,

climate change presents a more profound threat to human

health and welfare than anything else regulated under the

Clean Air -ict.

ARGUMENT

I. THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF SECTION 202 OF

THE CLEAN AIR ACT NOT ONLY AUTHOR-

IZES EPA TO REGULATE AIR POLLUTANTS

THAT CONTRIBUTE TO CLIMATE CHANGE,

BUT UPON THE APPROPRIATE “ENDANGER-

MENT” FINDING, REQUIRES THAT IT DO SO.

Section 202 of the Clean Air Act provides:

The Administrator shall by regulation prescribe .. .

standards applicable to the emission of any air-pollutant

from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new

motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment cause, or

contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be

anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.

42 U.S.C. § 7521(a)(1).

In section 302(g) the Act defines “air pollutant[s]” as “any air

pollution agent or combination of such agents, including any

physical {or| chemical . . . substance or matter which is emitted

into or otherwise enters the ambient air... .” 42 U.S.C.

§ 7602(g) (emphasis added). In section 302(h) the Act defines

“welfare” to include “effects on soils, water, crops, vegetation,

manmade materials, animals, wildlife, weather, visibility, and

climate, damage to and deterioration of property, and hazards to

transportation, as well as effects on economic values and on

personal comfort and well-being, whether caused by trans-

formation, conversion, or combination with other air pollutants.”

42 U.S.C. § 7602(h) (emphasis added).

Under section 202, a two-part process is employed for

regulating potentially dangerous pollutants. The Adminis-

trator makes a threshold decision regarding whether a par-

ticular pollutant from new vehicles “cause|s], or contribute[s]

to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to

endanger public health or welfare.” 42 U.S.C. § 7521. If, in

the Administrator’s “judgment,” an air pollutant causes or

contributes to pollution that may be reasonably anticipated to

endanger public health or welfare, that pollutant must be

regulated pursuant to the provisions described in the remain-

der of section 202. /d. The Administrator is to take a broad,

proactive approach to this determination. Before the 1977

Amendments to the Clean Air Act, section 202(a)(1) re-

quired the Administrator to regulate air pollution from motor

vehicles which “endanger(s] the public health or welfare.”

H.R. Rep. No. 91-1146 (June 3, 1970), reprinted in 1970

U.S.C.C.A.N. 5356, 5359. In 1976, the D.C. Circuit inter-

preted the “endangers” language as permitting “regulatory

action to prevent harm, even if the regulator is less than

certain that harm is otherwise inevitable.” Ethyl Corp. v.

Envtl. Prot. Agency, 541 F.2d 1, 25 (D.C. Cir. 1976) (én

banc) (“Ethyl Corp.”). As the D.C Circuit explained:

A statute allowing for regulation in the face of danger is,

necessarily, a precautionary statute. Regulatory action

may be taken before the threatened harm occurs; indeed,

the very existence of such precautionary legislation

would seem to demand that regulatory action precede,

and, optimally, prevent, the perceived threat. As should

be apparent, the ‘will endanger’ language of Section

211(c)(1)(A) makes it such a precautionary statute.

541 F.2d at 13.

In 1977, Congress amended section 202(a)(1) and the other

standard-setting provisions in the Clean Air Act to require

regulation where endangerment “may reasonably be antic-

ipated.” H.R. Conf. Rep. 95-564 (Aug. 3, 1977), reprinted in

- 1977 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1502, 1564. This change reflects Con-

gress’s endorsement of the “precautionary approach” de-

scribed in Ethyl Corp., and indicates its intent that EPA be

diligent in identifying and regulating pollutants that may rea-

sonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare.

This requires the Administrator to consider the best available

scientific information, and not wait for conclusive proof, by

which time it may be too late to avoid the harm that the Act

was designed to prevent.

A. EPA Has Authority to Regulate the Green-

house Gases at Issue.

Scientists refer to the four compounds at issue—carbon

dioxide (CO), methane (CHy,), nitrous oxide (N,O), and

hydrofluorocarbons—as greenhouse gases. EPA argues that

it lacks authority to regulate greenhouse gases, claiming that

such substances are not “air pollutants” within the meaning of

the Clean Air Act. See 68 Fed. Reg. 52,922, 52,928 (Sep. 8,

2003). EPA’s argument defies the plain language of the

statute. Section 202 clearly establishes EPA’s authority to

regulate pollutants that affect the climate. See Chevron

U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837,

843 n.9 (1984) (“If a court, employing traditional tools of

statutory construction, ascertains that Congress had an inten-

tion on the precise question at issue, that intention is the law

and must be given effect.”’)

In fact, Congress left EPA little discretion in determining

what qualifies as “air pollutants.” Section 302(g) defines “air

pollutants” to “includ{[e] any physical [or] chemical . . .

substance or matter which is emitted into or otherwise enters

the ambient air.” 42 U.S.C. § 7602(g) (emphasis added).

Carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and hydrofluoro-

carbons—as physical and chemical substances that are

emitted into the air — plainly fall within this definition and are

thus within the Administrator’s regulatory authority.

In denying the petition, however, EPA claims that these

four substances are “not air pollutants,” and that it must be

cautious about “using broadly worded statutory authority to

regulate in areas raising unusually significant economic and

political issues when Congress has specifically addressed

those areas in other statutes.” 68 Fed. Reg. at 52,925 (citing

FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120

(2000)). EPA explains that the only provisions of the Clean

Air Act that specifically mention carbon dioxide or global

warming are non-regulatory. Further, EPA points to Con-

gress’s decision to regulate separately stratospheric ozone

depletion as evidence that when Congress intends to address

climate change, it will do so in separate legislation.

EPA’s arguments simply do not overcome the plain lan-

guage of the Act. Regardless of whether Congress was

contemplating pollutants associated with climate change

when it enacted or amended the Clean Air Act, the definition

of “pollutant” enables EPA to reach new pollution, as well as

old. See Ethyl Corp., 541 F.2d at 13; see also, PGA Tour.

Inc. v. Martin, 532 U.S. 661, 689 (2001) (explaining that

Statutes can be applied to situations not expressly anticipated

by Congress). The Administrator is not entitled to turn a

blind eye to advancements in scientific knowledge that reveal

new dangers from substances once considered benign or even

beneficial. For example, nitrogen and phosphorous are nutri-

ents necessary for plants and animals to grow and flourish.

But excessive concentrations of these nutrients cause serious

environmental problems and threats to public health. See

National Research Council, Clean Coastal Waters: Under-

standing and Reducing the Effects of Nutrient Pollution.

National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 15 (2000) (Ex-

cess nutrients linked to red tides, fish kills, marine mam-

mal deaths, outbreaks of shellfish poisonings, loss of seagrass

habitats, coral reef destruction, and the Gulf of Mexico’s

“dead zone.”).

B. EPA May Not Decline Rulemaking For Rea-

sons Not Enumerated in Section 202.

Alternatively, EPA argues that even if it has authority to

regulate greenhouse gases it is not inclined to do so for

various reasons including, inter alia: the multiple sources of

pollutants that contribute to climate change; the effect of

unilateral regulation of car emissions on international efforts

to reduce emissions; and the Administration’s efforts to

address climate change through other programs. See 68 Fed.

Reg. at 52,931-33. As Petitioners have pointed out, however,

several of these considerations fall well outside the factors

which Congress authorized EPA to consider in implementing

its section 202 authority. See Petition for Certiorari, 14-16.

Section 202(a)(1) assigns the Administrator the responsibility

to determine whether-a-pollutant may reasonably be antici-

pated to constitute an endangerment, but not broad authority

to decline to make an endangerment finding on the basis of a

wide range of policy considerations. As Judge Tatel explains

in his dissenting opinion:

EPA has transformed the limited discretion given to the

Administrator under section 202—the discretion to

determine whether or not an air pollutant causes or con-

tributes to pollution which may reasonably be antici-

pated to endanger public health or welfare—into the

discretion to withhold regulation because it thinks such

regulation bad policy. But Congress did not give EPA

this broader authority, and the agency may not usurp it.

Massachusetts v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 415 F.3d 50, 74 (D.C.

Cir. 2005).

' The only decision the Administrator is authorized to make

pursuant to section 202(a)(1) is the decision whether a pol-

lutant causes or contributes to air pollution which may

reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or wel-

fare. The Administrator does not have the discretion to

ignore the standard set forth in section 202 in declining to

regulate. Here, EPA acted outside of its statutory authority in

denying the petition.

ll. THE WEIGHT OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE

SUPPORTS A FINDING THAT GREENHOUSE

GASES “MAY REASONABLY BE ANTICI-

PATED TO ENDANGER PUBLIC HEALTH OR

WELFARE.”

One of the reasons EPA cites for not regulating greenhouse

gas emissions under section 202 is “scientific uncertainty.”

68 Fed. Reg. at 52,931-33. However, as pointed out by the

distinguished group of climate scientists who filed an amicus

curiae brief in support of granting the Petition for Certiorari

and who will be submitting a brief on the merits, both EPA

and the panel majority below misrepresent the key findings of

the National Academy of Sciences and National Research

Council in the 2001 report to Congress, Climate Change

Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions. See Brief

Amicus Curiae of Climate Scientists in Support of Petitioners,

17-22. :

In fact, contrary to EPA’s view, there is a strong scientific

consensus that increasing levels of greenhouse gases, particu-

larly carbon dioxide, are already having a dramatic impact on

ocean systems and all life, including humanity, that depend

upon them. To be sure, there is still considerable uncertainty

regarding the magnitude and timing of the changes that are

likely to occur. But these very uncertainties carry significant

risks of potentially irreversible and catastrophic consequences

that argue for prudent action now.

A. The Continued Health and Vitality of Oceans

and Coasts is Crucial to Public Health and

Welfare.

In 2003, it was estimated that 153 million Americans, or

53% of the United States population, lived in U.S. coastal

counties. Kristen M. Crossett et al., Population Trends Along

the Coastal United States: 1980-2008, 1 (Nat’| Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration, September 2004). See also,

Massachusetts v. F.’A, 415 F.3d at 79. The estimated socio-

economic value of global ocean and coastal ecosystems is $21

trillion per year through food production, recreation, nutrient

recycling, climate regulation, and the oceans’ influence over

the chemical composition of the atmosphere. R. Costanza et

al., The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural

Capital, 387 Nature 253 (1997). In the United States, coastal

watershed counties contribute over $4.5 trillion per year, half

of the nation’s gross domestic product, involving about 60

million jobs—many of which are tied to industries directly

dependent on healthy coastal and ocean ecosystems and living

resources, such as recreation, tourism, and fisheries US.

Commission on Ocean Policy, An Ocean Blueprint for the 2]st

Century Final Report, 32-33 (2004). The United States has an

extraordinary interest in preserving and protecting the popu-

lation and industries of the coastal areas.

Coastal fisheries and coastal dependant industries in the

United States are large economic contributors. The total

value of U.S. commercial fisheries was over $3 billion in

2001. J. Kildow and C. Colgan, California’s Ocean Economy

Report to the Resources Agency, State of California, 35 (July

2005). California beaches alone generate $14 billion in direct

revenues, contribute $73 billion to the national economy,

generate $2.6 billion in direct federal taxes, generate $14

billion in indirect taxes, and provide over 883,000 jobs.

Philip King, The Fiscal Impact of Beaches in California, 3.

Public Research Institute, San Francisco State University

(September 1999). On average, a 12-inch rise in sea level

would inundate 100 feet of dry beach, greatly reducing the

area and recreational amenities of many beaches. Increased

storminess combined with the direct inundation from sea

level would reduce many of the southern California recrea-

tional beaches to narrow, hazardous strips of sand with ocean

waves on the seaward side and urban development on the

inland side. Shore protection would escalate while beach

recreation, tourism revenues, taxes and jobs would plummet.

B. Human Activities Are Increasing Atmospheric

Concentrations of Carbon Dioxide, Thereby

Contributing to Changes in Climate and the

Marine Environment.

Most of this discussion focuses on the effects of higher

carbon dioxide levels on the ocean environment. Carbon

dioxide is the primary contributor among a suite of

atmospheric gases that contribute to climate change. Present-

day levels of about 370-380 parts per million by volume

(ppmv) are unprecedented over the past 420,000 years.

Based on historic data (derived from Greenland and Antarctic

ice cores,) concentrations of carbon dioxide did not rise much

above 280 ppmv prior to the industrial revolution. Today,

carbon dioxide levels are increasing at a rate of 1.5 ppmv per

year, with the primary sources being fossil fuel burning and

tropical deforestation. Depending on the level of future

emissions, concentrations could reach 800-900 ppmv by the

year 2100. See J.T. Houghton et al. (eds.), Climate Change

2001: The Scientific Basis, Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, U.K. (2001) (“Houghton et al.”); National Re-

search Council, Climate Change Science: An Analysis of

Some Key Questions, National Academy Press, Washington,

D.C., 3 (2001) (“Climate Change Science”); J.R. Petit et al.,

Climate and atmospheric history of the past 420,000 years

from the Vostok ice core, Antarctica, 399 Nature 429-436,

433 (1999).

1. Increased carbon dioxide levels are affect-

ing atmospheric and ocean temperatures.

The world’s climate is warming; it is going to get much

warmer; and humans are significantly responsible. There is

scientific consensus that the observed global warming over

the past century—of 0.4 to 0.8°C (0.7 to 1.5°F)—is due to

increases in greenhouse gas concentrations and that this

warming has been particularly strong over the past 20 years.

In confirming this finding by the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change (IPCC), the United States National Research

Council also affirmed the scientific validity of the IPCC’s

prediction that warming would increase by the end of the

century by 1.4 to 5.8°C (2.5 to 10.4°F).’ This warming will

be greater over higher latitudes. Houghton et al. at 26;

Climate Change Science at 3.

2. Increased carbon dioxide levels are creating

a fundamental and detrimental shift in ocean

chemistry.

Through the absorption of a substantial portion of the

carbon dioxide emitted by human activities, the oceans are

becoming more acidic, with dramatic consequences for

organisms from corals to the planktonic foundation of marine

food webs. |

* The National Research Council’s review of the state of climate sci-

ence at the White House’s request reaffirmed the scientific soundness of

the IPCC’s projections of greenhouse gas loadings in the atmosphere,

global warming, ocean warming, and sea-level rise. See Climate Change

Science at 22-23.

On timescales of several thousands of years, the oceans

will ultimately absorb about 90 percent of the carbon dioxide

in the atmosphere. However, because of slow mixing time,

the ocean has only taken up about 30 percent of the carbon

dioxide emitted in the past twenty years or so. From 1800 to

1994, the ocean has absorbed about 48 percent of fossil-fuel

and cement-manufacturing emissions. C.L. Sabine et al.,

The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO2, 305 Science 367-

371 (2004).

While this “ocean sponge” effect has certainly forestalled

more pronounced climate change above the surface, it is

substantially lowering pH and saturation states of the car-

bonate minerals, making it increasingly difficult for the many

major groups of marine organisms that use these minerals to

build skeletons and shells. Assuming carbon dioxide emis-

sions continue at the current pace, surface water pH levels

will decrease by 0.4 pH units relative to the preindustrial

level by 2100, lower than it has been in millions of years.

J.A. Kleypas, R.A. Feely, V.J. Fabry, C. Langdon, C.L.

Sabine and L.L. Robbins, /mpacts of Ocean Acidification on

Coral Reefs and other Marine Calcifiers: A Guide for Future

Research, Report of a workshop held 18-20 April 2005 in St.

Petersburg, Fla., sponsored by NSF, NOAA, and the U.S.

Geological Survey, 69 (2006) (“Kleypas et al.””); see also, K.

Caldeira and M.E. Wickett, Anthropologic carbon and ocean

PH, 425 Nature 365 (2003).

Calcifying organisms are sensitive to changes in ocean

chemistry; even small changes will have large impacts, and it

is clear that their ability to grow calcium carbonate shells and

skeletons will decrease with increasing acidification. Extrap-

olations of laboratory experiments indicate that calcification

rates will decrease up to 60 percent during the 21st century.

This reduction will affect individual corals and the ability of

reefs to maintain a positive balance between reef building and

reef erosion, which is the process by which corals’ calcium

carbonate skeletons are rubbed, scraped, and chewed away by

a combination of physical forces and reef fish. Kleypas et al.

at 1, 5.

Basic chemistry dictates that as carbon dioxide levels in

seawater increase, not only will calcification decrease, but, at

some point, calcium carbonate skeletons will also dissolve.

Although there are many questions about the particulars of

organism survival and ecosystem effects, it is clear that at

some threshold level of carbon dioxide, reef dissolution will

exceed calcification—the reef equivalent of osteoporosis.

Although that may occur at different times and in different

ways from reef to reef, it will be yet another substantial blow

to the prospects for reef survival. /d. at 26-27.

There are also a variety of planktonic calcifying organisms,

many of which form an important foundation of marine food

webs. As with corals, there is clear evidence that elevated

carbon dioxide levels reduce calcification in these species. In

fact, data suggest that in some plankton species, this is not a

linear relationship as it is among corals, but rather that there

may be a threshold value below which there will be sudden

and large decreases in calcification rates. /d at 30. And, as

with corals, it is not yet known whether or how planktonic

calcifiers can adapt to reduced calcification rates. /d. at 31.

However, since calcification does confer advantages to these

species, decreased calcification is likely to compromise their

fitness and thus impact marine food webs, which would

substantially alter the biodiversity and productivity of the

ocean. /d. at 69.

C. Changes to the Ocean Environment Will Have

Major Adverse Effects on Human Safety, the

Economy, and the Natural Environment.

Although a relatively slow process compared to the warm-

ing of the atmosphere, the warming of oceans is occurring by

virtue of their interaction with the air above them. Since the

1950s, the top 10,000 feet of the oceans have warmed by an

average of 0.05°C (0.09°F), Climate Change Science at 16.

Temperatures at the sea surface, where hurricanes are

spawned and corals live, have warmed 0.4 to 0.8°C since the

late 1800s. Houghton et al. at 35. The implications of this

warming are numerous and serious from a public health and

welfare perspective. Among these implications are:

1. Sea-level rise will have negative effects on the

health and welfare of U.S. populations in

coastal areas.

The changing climate causes sea level to rise in two basic

ways: warmer Ocean waters take up greater volume and melt-

ing glaciers and ice fields increase water supply to the oceans.

Estimates of sea-level rise over the past century range from

0.10 to 0.20 meters, with average rates of 1.0 to 2.0 mm per

year. Scientists consider it very likely that global warming

during this period contributed substantially to these increases.

There is a great deal of historical support for this conclu-

sion; the correlation among past changes in atmospheric

carbon dioxide, global warming, and changes in global sea

level is well represented in the geologic record. Houghton

et al. at 641, 643; see also, R.B. Alley, P.U. Clark, P.

‘Huybrechts and I. Joughin, /ce-sheet and sea-level changes,

310 Science 456-460 (2005).

Based on climate change projections, scientists consider it

highly likely that sea levels will increase between 0.09 and

0.88 meters for 1990 to 2100, with a central value of 0.48

meters. This represents an increase of 2.2 to 4.4 times the

20th century rate. Houghton et al. at 642.

Although this steady increase is documented, there is

concern by scientists that the ice caps in Greenland and

Antarctica could melt, causing even greater sea level rise.

Recent reports point to startling changes at the margins of the

Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets which indicate that projec-

tions of sea-level rise need to be revised upward. The

collapse of the Larsen B Ice Shelf in 2002 was followed by an

acceleration of its major tributary glaciers by two- to eight-

fold, contributing about 0.07 mm per year to sea-level rise.’

Alley et al. at 458. This process is also playing out along the

Amundsen Coast of the Antarctic Peninsula. /d

Similar warming-caused losses of glacier-restricting ice

shelves along the coast of Greenland have led to increased

contributions to sea-level rise of up to 0.09 mm per year. I.

Joughin, W. Abdalati and M. Fahnestock, Large fluctuations

in speed on Greenland’s Jakobshavn Isbrae glacier, 432

Nature 608-610 (2004). For some time, the West Antarctic

ice sheet (WAIS) has been the subject of great scientific focus

because it contains enough ice to raise sea levels by 6 meters

and is relatively unstable. Houghton et al. at 642.

2. Warming and acidification of the oceans pose

| grave threats to coral reefs and will adversely

affect all marine life.

Immersed in warming oceans, sensitive marine organisms

must adapt, alter their geographic distribution (i.e., shift

poleward), or face extinction. There is scientific evidence for

all of these responses. Degradation of marine life will

negatively affect U.S. population by affecting food suppli-

ers, coastal fisheries, marine biological diversity, and the

economy.

Coral reefs are among the most sensitive ecosystems to

climate change, and the most conservative estimates suggest

“It is the melting of land-based glaciers and ice caps that increases sea

levels, just as pouring water in a bucket causes the level to rise. On the

other hand, ice shelves, which float on the water surface, do not add

directly to sea-level rise as they melt (just as ice melting in a drink does

not cause the level of liquid to rise). But, ice shelves do block the flow of

glaciers like dams, and when the shelves break apart, land-based ice flows

more rapidly to the sea, increasing the rate of sea-level rise.

that half of all reefs will be destroyed by 2030-2050. C.

Wilkinson ed. Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2004, 25.

Australian Institute of Marine Science (2004) (“Wilkinson”).

Much more than their beauty and recreational value will be

lost. Coral reefs buffer shorelines from storms and erosion

and provide home, food, and nursery for tens of thousands of

marine species. They provide an estimated $375 billion per

year in goods and services worldwide, with approximately

500 million people dependent upon them for food, materials,

or income. The U.S. has a significant stake in the fate of reef

systems worldwide. Approximately half of all U.S.-managed

commercial fish species depend on coral reefs for at least a

portion of their life cycle. U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy

at 321-22.

Extinction due to increases in sea-surface temperatures is a

real prospect for shallow-water, tropical corals. It is clear that

many corals are operating within very close margins of their

thermal tolerance, with bleaching occurring for many species

at about 1°C above mean summer maximum temperatures,

and causing widespread concern as this threshold will be

chronically exceeded as temperatures rise over the next 50

years. T.P. Hughes et al., Climate change, human impacts,

and the resilience of coral reefs, 301 Science 929-933, 930

(2003). There is evidence that at least some corals and their

algal symbionts (called zooxanthellae, which provide nour-

ishment and lend color to corals) may be able to adapt to

increasing temperatures, but it is not clear that they will be

able to adapt quickly enough to keep pace with the accel-

erating rate of environmental change. /d

Evidence from the field is not encouraging. About 20

percent of the world’s coral reefs have been effectively

destroyed as a result of increasing sea-surface temperatures and

show no immediate prospects for recovery. Another 24

percent of them are under imminent risk of collapse, and a

further 26 percent are under a longer-term threat of collapse.

Wilkinson at 7. Caribbean reefs are in catastrophic decline,

with two of the major reef-building coral species in this area—

staghorn and elkhorn—tecently listed as endangered under the

U.S. Endangered Species Act. /d. at 14; 71 Fed. Reg. 26,852

(May 9, 2006) (to be codified at 50 C.F.R. pt. 223).

A major global bleaching event in 1998 destroyed 16

percent of the world’s coral reefs, with most of the damage in

the Indian Ocean (50 percent destroyed) and the western

Pacific. Unfortunately, what was then a once-in-a-thousand-

years event will become a regular occurrence within 50 years

based on projections of tropical sea-surface temperature

increases in the range of | to 3°C by 2100. Wilkinson at 21.

Ocean warming is having an impact on the distributions of

other important species. For example, warm-water popula-

tions of copepods, small marine organisms that form a vital

link in the food web as a food source for the larvae of many

commercial and non-commercial marine fish, have moved

1,000 km northward in the northeast Atlantic over the past 40

years, accompanied by retraction in the range of their cold-

water cousins. G.C. Hays, A.J. Richardson and C. Robinson,

Climate change and marine plankton, 20 Trends in Ecology

and Evolution 337-344, 339 (2005) (“Hays et al.”). Similar

shifts have been shown among marine snails, corals and fish.

C.D.G. Harley et al.. The impacts of climate change in

coastal marine systems, 9 Ecology Letters 228-241, 234

(2006) (“Harley et al.”). Some of these adjustments can be

abrupt, affecting the survival of not only the adjusting spe-

cies, but also many others, with huge implications for

commercial fisheries and the basic functioning of marine

ecosystems. Hays et al. at 340; G.A. McFarlane, J.R. King

and RJ. Beamish, Have there been recent changes in

climate? Ask the fish, 47 Progress in Oceanography 147-69

(2000).

If species that otherwise depend on one another, for

instance as predator and prey, respond differently to ocean

warming, the consequences can be significant. There is

evidence of warming-induced mismatches in the timing of the

spawning of certain zooplankton, the arrival of fish larvae,

and blooms of the phytoplankton they eat, thus jeopardizing

the survival of fish species and potentially affecting com-

mercial fisheries. Harley et al. at 232; Hays et al. at 342.

Alteration of aquatic habitats and species distributions by

warming temperatures also exacerbates problems with inva-

sive species, making native populations more susceptible to

invasion. U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy at 253.

3. Hurricane intensity will likely increase

because of warmer oceans.

There is growing evidence that the theoretical link between

warming seas and hurricane intensity exists in fact, based on

broad confluence of theory, modeling and observations. R.A.

Anthes et al., Hurricanes and global warming—poteniial

linkages and consequences, 87 Bulletin of the American

Meteorological Society 623-628 (2006) (“Anthes et al.”); see

also T.R. Knutson and R.E. Tuleya, Jmpact of CO2-induced

warming on simulated hurricane intensity and precipitation:

Sensitivity to the choice of climate model and convection

parameterization, 17 Journal of Climate 3477-3495 (2004);

K. Trenberth, Uncertainty in hurricanes and global warming,

308 Science 1753-1754 (2005). Nonetheless, this assertion

remains controversial.’ Tropical sea-surface temperatures

have risen by about 0.6°C since measurements began and

about 0.5°C of that increase has occurred since 1970. Anthes

et al. at 624. Record sea-surface temperatures (0.9°C above

* The debate involves questions about the possible underestimation of

the intensity of historic tropical cyclones, thus making more recent storms

- appear stronger by comparison. In addition, accurate assessments of

tropical cyclone intensity, based on satellite data, are relatively recent.

Thus, there is a need for additional data to allow formal statistical con-

firmation of conclusions based on this evidence.

the norm) in the area critical for hurricanes contributed to the

most active North Atlantic hurricane season on record in

2005; about half of that temperature anomaly can be attrib-

uted to global warming. K.E. Trenberth and D.J. Shea,

Atlantic hurricanes and natural variability in 2005, 33

Geophysical Research Letters L12704, doi:10.1029/2006GL

026894 (2006).

A careful review of global data confirms a trend toward

more frequent intense (category 4 and 5) storms over the past

30 years, a trend directly linked to increases in sea-surface

temperatures. P.J. Webster, G.J. Holland, J.A. Curry and H.-

R. Chang, Changes in tropical cyclone number, duration, and

intensity in a warming environment, 309 Science 1844-1846

(2005); C.D. Hoyos, P.A. Agudelo, P.J. Webster and J.A.

Curry, Deconvolution of the factors contributing to the in-

crease in global hurricane intensity, 312 Science 94-97

(2006); K. Emanuel, /ncreasing destructiveness of tropical

cyclones over the past 30 years, 436 Nature 686-588 (2005)

(“Emanuel”). ,

Even if tropical storms do not change markedly in intens-

ity, rising sea levels, beach and wetland erosion, and storm

surges will ensure increased damage along increasingly de-

veloped shorelines. Climate Change Science at 4; Anthes et

al. at 624. Hurricanes are already the costliest natural events

in the United States, accounting for a significant fraction

of damage, injury and loss of life from natural hazards.

Emanuel at 686. .

4. Increased storm damage endangers U.S.

coastal communities.

Large swaths of low-lying coastal lands around the United

States are extremely vulnerable to any increase in sea level.

As Hurricane Katrina demonstrated, such areas are already

vulnerable to erosion, flooding, storm surges, and tsunamis;

and poor development planning has placed trillions of dollars -

worth of buildings and infrastructure directly in the path of

these threats. Further, higher sea levels interact with tides

and storms to create more destructive impacts, as extreme

high water levels occur with more frequency. Dan Cayan et

al., Projecting Future Sea Level Rise: A Report for California

Climate Change Center, 18 (March 2006) (“Cayan et al.”).

Approximately 58,000 square kilometers of land along the

Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts of the United States lie

below 1.5 meters above sea level. Louisiana, Florida, Texas,

and North Carolina account for more than 80 percent of these

low-lying areas. In fact, North Carolina alone has as much

land within one meter of sea level as the Netherlands. J.G.

Titus and C. Richman, Maps of lands vulnerable to sea level

rise: Modeled elevations along the US Atlantic and Gulf

Coasts, 18 Climate Research 205-228 (2001).

In California, a 30 cm (12 inch) rise in sea level would

shift the 100-year storm surge-induced flood event to once

every 10 years. Cayan et al. at 18. Even a small rise in sea

level would be accompanied by large amounts of coastal

flooding, inundation and storm damage. Along the San

Diego coast, model results demonstrate approximately 10

extreme water level events between 2070 and 2100 if there is

no increase in sea level. Over the same time period there

would be approximately 330 extreme events with a rise in sea -

level of 20 cm, 2,300 extreme events with a rise of 40 cm,

and almost 19,000 events with a rise of 80 cm. /d. at 23-29.

For the 85 coastal counties from Massachusetts to Virginia,

approximately one thousand square miles of land area lies

below 3 feet, which includes about 70 square miles of

developed land, 3,000 miles of roads, and about 388,000

people. S.-Y. Wu, R. Najjar and J. Siewert, /mpact of Sea-

Level Rise on the Mid- and Upper-Atlantic Coast (Con-

sortium for Atlantic Regional Assessment, 2005).

5. Erosion will increase in coastal areas.

Each year, erosion along U.S. shorelines will claim about

1,500 homes and the property they occupy at a cost of about

$530 million annually. The H. John Heinz III Center for

Science, Economics and the Environment, Evaluation of

Erosion Hazards, Report Brief, 2 (2000). According to the

Federal Emergency Management Agency, by 2060, coastal

erosion will have threatened nearly 87,000 homes in U.S.

coastal areas. G.B. Griggs, Coastal Cliff Erosion in San

Diego County (2002) at http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/view

content.cgi?article=1091&context=csge (last visited August

29, 2006).

The nature and extent of human development has severely

- undermined the ability of natural coastal features, such as

wetlands and mangrove forests, to survive increasing seas.

Under normal circumstances, they can accrete sediment to

keep pace with, and retreat in the face of, rising sea levels.

However, dams and levees impede the flow and deposition of

sediments, a situation played out with devastating conse-

quences in the Mississippi delta in Louisiana. The delta has

lost more than |,000_square miles since 1950, and continues

to lose 25-35 square miles per year through the combination

of sea-level rise, land subsidence, and erosion. At this pace,

more that 630,000 acres of Louisiana wetlands will disap-

pear by 2050. Pew Oceans Commission, America’s Living

Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea Change, 54 (June 2003).

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Amici respectfully urge the

Court to reverse the Court of Appeals and direct that the case

be remanded to EPA with instructions for making a proper

determination under section 202 of the Clean Air Act.

Respectfully submitted,

PATRICK A. PARENTEAU

ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL

RESOURCES LAW CLINIC

VERMONT LAW SCHOOL

P.O. Box 300

South Royalton, Vermont 05068

(802) 831-1305

Counsel of Record for Amici Curiae

* Counsel wishes to acknowledge Christophe A. G. Tulou of Christophe

Tulou Associates for his substantial contributions to this brief.

APPENDIX

LIST OF AMICI CURIAE

American Littoral Society (ALS). Currently comprised

of over 6,000 professional and amateur naturalists, ALS seeks

to encourage a better scientific and public understanding of

the marine environment and provide a unified voice advo-

cating protection of the delicate fabric of life along the shore.

Cetacean Society International (CSI). CSI advocates for

laws and treaties that prevent habitat destruction and mini-

mize cetacean killing and captures, while maximizing human

activities that neither harm nor harass, but instead enhance

public awareness of and concern for cetaceans and the marine

environment.

Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). With

nearly ten million members and constituents, The HSUS is

the nation’s largest animal protection organization. The

HSUS strives to protect, conserve, and enhance the nation’s

wildlife and wildlands while also promoting the humane

treatment of all animals, including marine life. In particular,

The HSUS, together with its international arm, The Humane

Society International, has an extensive array of domestic and

international programs that focus specifically on concerns

facing marine environment and encourages its members to

weigh in on these issues by contacting leaders and decision-

makers. Additionally, HSUS submits comments on a wide

range of issues pertaining to marine mammals and their envir-

onment and litigates complex cases to preserve marine life.

International Wildlife Coalition Inc. (IWC). Founded in

1984, the Coalition is dedicated to public education, research,

rescue, rehabilitation, litigation, legislation and international

treaty negotiations concerning global wildlife and natural

habitat protection issues.

Jean-Michel Cousteau. The president of Ocean Futures,

Jean-Michel Cousteau has been a voice of concern for oceans

in countries across the world for decades. He served as a

spokesman on water issues at the United Nations World

Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, at the

3rd World Water Forum in Kyoto, and at the Dialogues on

Water for Life and Security in Barcelona.

Marine Conservation Biology Institute (MCBI). Our

mission is to advance the science of marine conservation

biology and secure protection for ocean ecosystems.

Nantucket Soundkeeper/Alliance to Protect Nantucket

Sound (APNS). Our goal is to protect Nantucket Sound in

perpetuity through conservation, environmental action, and

Opposition to inappropriate industrial or commercial develop-

ment that would threaten or negatively alter the coastal

ecosystem.

The Ocean Conservancy. The oldest and largest organi-

zation solely dedicated to ocean conservation, we represent

150,000 members on ocean conservation issues. We promote

healthy and diverse ocean ecosystems and oppose practices

that threaten ocean life and human life.

Ocean Futures Society. Ocean Futures Society, a non-

profit marine conservation and education organization, serves

as a voice for the ocean by communicating in all media the

critical bond between people and the sea and the importance

of wise environmental policy.

Oceans Public Trust Initiative (OPTI). OPTI is a project

of the Earth Island Institute’s International Marine Mammal

Project and our mission is to ensure that the public trust

interest in ocean and coastal areas is fully protected by state

and federal governments.

Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies (PCCS).

PCCS conducts scientific research with emphasis on marine

mammals of the western North Atlantic and on the coastal

and marine habitats and resources of the Gulf of Maine. Our

mission includes promoting stewardship of coastal and

marine ecosystems and working on issues of habitat protec-

tion, ecosystem management, marine mammal and marine

wildlife conservation.

SeaWeb. SeaWeb is a communications-based nonprofit

organization dedicated to advancing ocean conservation.

Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (North Amer-

ica) (WDCS (NA)). WDCS (NA) is a MA incorporated not-

for-profit and is part of the WDCS group. Established in

1987, WDCS is the global voice for the protection of whales,

dolphins and their environmeni.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.