Ocean Commissions: Ocean Policy Review and Outlook

Order Code IB10132

CRS Issue Brief for Congress

Received through the CRS Web

Ocean Commissions:

Ocean Policy Review and Outlook

Updated June 30, 2006

John R. Justus, Eugene H. Buck, Jeffrey A. Zinn, and

Wayne A. Morrissey

Resources, Science, and Industry Division

Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

CONTENTS

SUMMARY

MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy

Reports and Working Documents

Delivery of the Commission Report

Summary of Commission Recommendations

Changes Contained in the Final Report

Comments on the U.S. Commission’s Work

Delivery of Administration Response

The Pew Oceans Commission

Summary of Commission Recommendations

Comments on the Pew Commission’s Work

Issues for Congress

LEGISLATION

FOR ADDITIONAL READING

IB10132

06-30-06

Ocean Commissions: Ocean Policy Review and Outlook

SUMMARY

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy (P.L. 106256). Earlier in 2000, the Pew Oceans Commission, an independent group, was established and funded by the Pew Charitable

Trusts to conduct a national dialogue on the

policies needed to restore and protect living

marine resources in U.S. waters. After several

years of work, the Pew Commission released

its final report in June 2003, America’s Living

Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea Change,

outlining a national agenda for protecting and

restoring our oceans.

The Marine Resources and Engineering

Development Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-454) stated

U.S. marine policy objectives, created a National Council on Marine Resources and

Engineering Development, and set up a presidential Commission on Marine Science,

Engineering, and Resources (called the Stratton Commission after its chairman, Dr. Julius

Stratton). The commission’s 1969 final report,

Our Nation and the Sea: A Plan for National

Action, contained recommendations that led to

reorganizing federal ocean programs by establishing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA), beginning new

ocean programs, and strengthening existing

ones.

The U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy

convened its inaugural meeting in September

2001, and established a Science Advisory

Panel plus four working groups to address

issues in the areas of governance; research,

education, and marine operations; stewardship; and investment and implementation.

After hearing from 440 presenters in 10 cities

over 11 months, the U.S. Commission

published its final report in two stages. First,

in April 2004, the commission released a

Preliminary Report for review and comment

by the nation’s governors and interested

stakeholders. Stage two began when the

public comment period closed June 4, 2004,

and the commission commenced reviewing

the comments received from the governors

and others. On July 22, 2004, the commission

approved changes to its Preliminary Report

and directed staff to prepare the final report,

officially titled An Ocean Blueprint for the

21st Century. That report, with its recommendations on a coordinated and comprehensive

national ocean policy, was delivered to the

President and Congress on September 20,

2004. On December 17, 2004, the President

submitted to Congress the U.S. Ocean Action

Plan, his formal response to the recommendations of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy.

By the late 1980s, however, 20 years

after the Stratton Commission, a number of

influential voices among the executive, congressional, and public sectors had concluded

that ocean management by the United States

was fragmented and characterized by a confusing array of laws, regulations, and practices

at the federal, state, and local levels. Moreover, it seemed that various agencies charged

with implementing and enforcing legal regimes had mandates that often conflicted, with

no mechanism for establishing a common

vision and objectives. Support coalesced

around the need for a congressional mandate

to establish a National Oceans Policy Commission, sometimes called a Stratton II Commission, guided by four principles: sustaining

the economic benefits of the oceans; strengthening global security; exploring and understanding the oceans; and preserving and protecting ocean resources while encouraging

their enlightened use. Legislation creating

such a commission was considered in the 98th,

99th, 100th, and 105th Congresses, but it was

not until the 106th Congress in 2000 that

legislation was finally enacted to establish a

Congressional Research Service

˜

The Library of Congress

IB10132

06-30-06

MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

A year and a half after the release of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy’s historic

report and nearly three years after the release of the Pew Oceans Commission report, some

progress on ocean policy reform has been made. However, hundreds of recommendations

suggested by the two commissions have not been addressed.

An assessment released in 2006, U.S. Ocean Policy Report Card, reflects the lack of

progress in implementing new measures, while recognizing that efforts are being made at

many levels. The Report Card was produced by the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, a

collaborative effort involving former members of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy and

Pew Oceans Commission to catalyze ocean policy reform. The initiative is guided by a

ten-member task force, five who served on each commission, and is led by Admiral James

D. Watkins and the Honorable Leon E. Panetta, former chairs of the U.S. Commission and

Pew Commission, respectively. The Report Card assesses the initial reaction to the

commissions’ reports and also assigns grades for actions taken (or not) in 2005. The results

were a grade point average (GPA) of a little over 1.6, or a letter grade D+. The Report Card

also highlights where additional efforts by Congress, the Administration, states, and

nongovernmental stakeholders are necessary and where opportunities for improvements exist

in each of the following areas: national ocean governance reform; regional and state ocean

governance reform; international leadership; research, science, and education; fisheries

management reform; and new funding for ocean policy and programs. More information

about the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, and the complete U.S. Ocean Policy Report

Card, may be found at [http://www.jointoceancommission.org].

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS

Congress has shown particular interest in ocean affairs in recent decades, examining in

detail components of the federal ocean programs, enacting legislation creating new ocean

programs, and taking steps to define a national ocean policy. The Marine Resources and

Engineering Development Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-454) set up a National Council on Marine

Resources and Engineering Development in the White House and initiated work by a

presidential bipartisan Commission on Marine Science, Engineering, and Resources. Dr.

Julius Stratton, then recently retired president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology

and, at the time, Chairman of the Board of the Ford Foundation, was appointed chairman of

the commission by President Lyndon Johnson. The commission, composed of 15 members,

was often referred to as the Stratton Commission. In 1969, the commission completed its

final report, Our Nation and the Sea: A Plan for National Action, and its more than 120

formal recommendations provided what many consider to be the most comprehensive

statement of federal policy for exploration of, and development of, resources from the ocean.

The study and its contents were instrumental in defining the structure, if not all the substance,

of what a national ocean policy could or should look like. Furthermore, new ocean-oriented

programs were initiated and existing ones were strengthened in the years following the

commission’s report, through a number of laws enacted by Congress.

Recommendations of the Stratton Commission led directly, within the following decade,

to forming the National Sea Grant College Program and creating the National Advisory

Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA) and to reorganizing federal ocean

CRS-1

IB10132

06-30-06

programs under the newly established National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

(NOAA). Subsequent legislation on estuarine reserves, national marine sanctuaries, marine

mammal protection, coastal zone management, fishery conservation and management, ocean

pollution, and seabed mining also reflected commission recommendations. Efforts sprang

up within the federal government and among various interagency committees and federal

advisory committees to flesh out how best to implement a truly comprehensive and forwardlooking national ocean policy, most notably articulated in the 1978 Department of Commerce

report U.S. Ocean Policy in the 1970s: Status and Issues.1

Since 1980, with concerns about limiting federal expenditures and streamlining of

government, there have been fewer ocean initiatives, and a number of ocean programs,

particularly those of NOAA, have been consolidated and reduced; however, the programs

begun in the 1970s generally have been reauthorized and have been able to mature. By the

late 1980s, some 20 years after the Stratton Commission and in a climate created by those

successive periods of expansion and relative stability, there appeared to be a broad consensus

among those conversant in ocean affairs that a need existed to redefine or, at the very least,

better define national ocean policy. Two stimuli for this renewed interest were the 1983

proclamation by President Reagan establishing a 200-nautical-mile U.S. Exclusive Economic

Zone (EEZ) and the 1988 extension of the U.S. territorial sea from 3 to 12 nautical miles,

both of which came in the aftermath of the President’s decision that the United States would

not sign the Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Legislation creating an oceans commission and/or a national ocean council to review

U.S. ocean policy was introduced and hearings were held in the 98th, 99th, 100th, and 105th

Congresses. In fact, legislation did indeed pass the House in October 1983, September 1987,

and again in October 1988, but was not acted on by the Senate in any of those instances. In

the 105th Congress, legislation creating both a national ocean council and a commission on

ocean policy passed the Senate in November of 1997, and in 1998 the House passed a bill

creating just a commission on ocean policy. Congress adjourned in 1998, however, before

differences could be reconciled and a bill enacted. It was not until the 106th Congress in

2000 that legislation was finally enacted to establish a 16-member U.S. Commission on

Ocean Policy (P.L. 106-256). That enactment rode a crest of interest generated largely by

a National Ocean Conference convened by the White House in June 1998, in Monterey, CA,

and attended by President Clinton and Vice President Gore,2 and capitalized on a proactive

spirit surrounding the declaration by the United Nations of 1998 as the International Year of

the Ocean.3 Momentum was facilitated with the September 1999 release of a post-Monterey

conference report, ordered by the President and prepared by members of his Cabinet, entitled

1

U.S. Dept. of Commerce, U.S. Ocean Policy in the 1970s: Status and Issues (Washington, DC:

GPO, 1978), 334 pp.

2

U.S. Dept. of Commerce and Dept. of the Navy, Oceans of Commerce ... Oceans of Life,

Proceedings of the National Ocean Conference, June 11-12, 1998, Monterey, CA (Washington, DC:

NOAA, 1998), vi + 241 pp.

3

The International Year of the Ocean was proclaimed by the U.N. General Assembly on Dec. 19,

1994, in resolution A/RES/49/131, Question of Declaring 1998 International Year of the Ocean, at

the initiative of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of the U.N. Educational,

Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

CRS-2

IB10132

06-30-06

Turning to the Sea: America’s Ocean Future, in which recommendations were offered for

a coordinated, disciplined, long-term federal ocean policy.4

Also in 2000, partially in response to that rekindled interest, and partially in response

to congressional legislation having failed final passage in 1998, the Pew Charitable Trusts

established the Pew Oceans Commission, an independent group of 18 American experts in

their respective fields of endeavor. The Pew Commission’s charge was to conduct a national

dialogue on the policies needed to restore and protect living marine resources in U.S. waters.

Pew interests had forged ahead with their effort after an unsuccessful attempt to gain support

among key Members of Congress to introduce legislation that would have established a

public/private, non-governmental oceans commission.

U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy

The Oceans Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-256) mandated a U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy.

Appointed by the President, the commission was required to issue findings and make

recommendations to the President and Congress for a coordinated and comprehensive

national ocean policy. The new policy was to address a broad range of issues, from the

stewardship of marine resources and pollution prevention to enhancing and supporting

marine science, commerce, and transportation. The full scope, stated in §3(f)(2) of the

Oceans Act, is:

(A) An assessment of existing and planned facilities associated with ocean and coastal

activities, including human resources, vessels, computers, satellites, and other

appropriate platforms and technologies;

(B) A review of existing and planned ocean and coastal activities of federal entities,

recommendations for changes in such activities to improve efficiency and

effectiveness and to reduce duplication of federal efforts;

(C) A review of the cumulative effect of federal laws and regulations on U.S. ocean and

coastal activities and resources, an examination of those laws and regulations for

inconsistencies and contradictions that might harm those ocean and coastal

activities and resources, a review of conflicts with state ocean and coastal

management regimes, and recommendations for resolving such inconsistencies to

the extent practicable;

(D) A review of the known and anticipated supply of, and demand for, ocean and

coastal resources of the United States;

(E) A review of and recommendations concerning the relationship between federal,

state, and local governments and the private sector in planning and carrying out

ocean and coastal activities;

(F) A review of opportunities for developing or investing in new products,

technologies, or markets related to ocean and coastal activities;

(G) A review of previous and ongoing state and federal efforts to enhance the

effectiveness and integration of ocean and coastal activities;

(H) Recommendations for any modifications to U.S. laws, regulations, and the

administrative structure of Executive agencies necessary to improve the

understanding, management, conservation, use of, and access to ocean and coastal

resources; and

4

U.S. Dept. of Commerce and Dept. of the Navy, Turning to the Sea: America’s Ocean Future

(Washington, DC: NOAA, 1999), 64 p.

CRS-3

IB10132

(I)

06-30-06

A review of the effectiveness and adequacy of existing federal interagency ocean

policy coordination mechanisms, and recommendations for changing or improving

the effectiveness of such mechanisms necessary to respond to or implement the

recommendations of the commission.

The 16 appointments to the commission by President Bush were finalized on July 3,

2001. Those appointments were based on a process that included nominations by the

Congress and appointment by the President.

The commission convened its inaugural meeting on September 17-18, 2001, in

Washington, DC, and commissioners selected Admiral James D. Watkins, U.S. Navy

(Retired) as chairman. Through several sessions the commission established four working

groups to address issues in the areas of governance; research, education, and marine

operations; stewardship; and investment and implementation. The working groups were

charged with reviewing and analyzing issues within their specific areas of focus and

reporting their findings to the full commission.

The Oceans Act of 2000 specifically directed the commission to establish a Science

Advisory Panel to assist in preparing the report and to ensure that the scientific information

considered by the commission and used by each of the working groups was based on the best

scientific information available. The composition of the Science Advisory Panel was

determined by the commissioners; members were recruited in consultation with the Ocean

Studies Board of the National Research Council at the National Academy of Sciences and

reflected the breadth of issues before the commission. The commission agreed that the

Science Advisory Panel members would be divided into four working groups consistent with

the full commission’s working group structure.

The commission began its work by launching a series of public meetings to gather

information and hear about the most pressing issues that the nation faced regarding the use

and stewardship of the oceans. The working groups played a vital role in maximizing the

effectiveness of the regional public meetings and identifying key issues to be addressed by

the commission. Group members ensured that, in each region visited, the commission heard

presentations on a balanced and wide-ranging set of topics and elicited information necessary

to ultimately address the requirements put forth in the Oceans Act of 2000. Based on the

information gathered at the public meetings, the working groups identified and reviewed key

issues, outlined possible options for addressing those issues, and determined the need for

white papers to provide more detailed information on specific topics. The deliberations of

each working group were shared with the other groups throughout the process to ensure

thorough integration and coordination in developing the final commission report and

recommendations.

After hearing from 440 presenters at 15 public meetings in 10 cities over 11 months and

conducting 17 additional site visits around the country, the commission completed its

information-gathering phase in October 2002. The commission entered its deliberative phase

in November 2002, and the last meeting dedicated to open public discussion of policy

options — the fifteenth and final public commission meeting — was held April 2-3, 2003,

in Washington, DC.

CRS-4

IB10132

06-30-06

Reports and Working Documents. Supporting documents, working papers, and

publications either produced for or generated by the commission include:

!

Draft Policy Option Documents. At its meeting on November 22, 2002, the

commission made the transition from fact-finding to deliberation with its

first public discussion of a document entitled Draft Policy Options. The

issues were organized and presented within the framework of the

commission’s new Draft Table of Contents Document, which also was made

available at the meeting. Progressive and revised versions of both the Draft

Policy Options Documents and the Draft Table of Contents Document were

prepared and distributed at successive commission meetings on January 24,

2003, and on April 2-3, 2003.

!

Working Table of Contents. In May 2003, the commission posted the initial

framework for its draft final report in a Working Table of Contents. This

document has evolved based on ongoing analyses, discussions,

deliberations, writing, and editing.

!

Synthesis and Summary of Testimony. Two documents were completed in

June 2003. A Synthesis of Testimony Organized by Policy Topic highlights

the presentations made to the commission at its public meetings held from

September 2001 through November 2002. A Summary of Testimony

Indexed by Presenter includes overviews of invited testimony and public

comment before the commission at those same public meetings.

!

Governing the Oceans. This document was prepared by the Sea Grant Law

Center, University of Mississippi, for use by the commission members and

staff as a reference during their work collecting and analyzing information

about the nation’s oceans and coasts. It contains a Cumulative List of

Statutes, Summaries of Other Relevant Laws, International Materials, and

Resources (including acronyms and internet sites).

!

Developing a National Ocean Policy: Midterm Report of the U.S.

Commission on Ocean Policy. This September 2002 report describes the

commission’s activities, plans, and some preliminary observations as the

commission moved to complete its fact-finding phase.

!

Toward a National Ocean Policy: Ocean Policy Topics and Related Issues

Document (Working Draft for Public Comment). This July 2002 paper was

designed to present both the scope and the content of a potential national

ocean policy. Specifically, the commission was interested in whether or not

the topics and questions outlined in this document captured the key issue

areas for policy options that should be addressed by the commission, as

required by the Oceans Act of 2000.

!

Elements Document. Entitled Developing a National Policy for Our Ocean

Future and released in April 2002, the Elements Document, as it came to be

known, contained the broad ocean policy elements that the commission

identified as essential to a sound national ocean policy. This document

CRS-5

IB10132

06-30-06

would serve as a framework for the commission’s inquiry and eventual

development of recommendations.

!

Law of the Sea Resolution. Passed unanimously by the members of the

commission at their meeting in Washington, D.C., on November 14, 2001,

the resolution recommended that the United States immediately accede to

the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.

All of the documents listed above are available in pdf format on the commission’s website

at [http://www.oceancommission.gov/documents/welcome.html].

Delivery of the Commission Report. The commission published its final report

in two stages. First, on April 20, 2004, the commission released a Preliminary Report, which

was available for a 30-day period of review and comment by the nation’s governors and

interested stakeholders. That Preliminary Report was built on information presented at the

public meetings and site visits, combined with the latest scientific and technical information

on oceans and coasts and input from hundreds of experts. Although the Preliminary Report

was a work in progress, its findings and policy recommendations reflected a consensus of

commission members and presented what the commissioners believed to be a balanced

approach to protecting the ocean environment while sustaining the vital role oceans and

coasts play in the national economy.5 On May 14, 2004, the commission announced that it

had extended the closing date for public comment on the Preliminary Report to June 4, 2004.

The extension applied to governors and all other stakeholders.

Stage two commenced when the public comment period closed on June 4 and the

commission began reviewing the comments received and modifying the report in response

to gubernatorial or stakeholder input. At its 16th public meeting on July 22, 2004, the U.S.

Commission on Ocean Policy approved changes to its Preliminary Report and directed staff

to prepare the final report, bearing the official title An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century.

That report, with its recommendations on a coordinated and comprehensive national ocean

policy, was delivered to the President and Congress on September 20, 2004, in ceremonies

at the White House and on Capitol Hill.

Summary of Commission Recommendations. The commission presented 212

recommendations throughout An Ocean Blueprint; however, thirteen “critical” actions

recommended by the commission can be summarized as follows:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Establish a National Ocean Council in the Executive Office of the President,

chaired by an Assistant to the President.

Create a President’s Council of Advisors on Ocean Policy.

Strengthen NOAA and improve the federal agency structure.

Develop a flexible and voluntary process for creating regional ocean councils,

facilitated and supported by the National Ocean Council.

Double the nation’s investment in ocean research.

5

The U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy’s preliminary report, Preliminary Report of the U.S.

Commission on Ocean Policy, was available at [http://oceancommission.gov/documents/prelim

report/welcome.html] on April 27, 2004.

CRS-6

IB10132

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

06-30-06

Implement the national Integrated Ocean Observing System.6

Increase attention to ocean education through coordinated and effective

formal and informal programs.

Strengthen the link between coastal and watershed management.

Create a coordinated management regime for federal waters.

Create measurable water pollution reduction goals, particularly for nonpoint

sources, and strengthen incentives, technical assistance, and other

management tools to reach those goals.

Reform fisheries management by separating assessment and allocation,

improving the Regional Fishery Management Council system, and exploring

the use of dedicated access privileges.

Accede to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Establish an Ocean Policy Trust Fund based on revenue from offshore oil and

gas development and other new and emerging offshore uses to pay for

implementing the recommendations.

Changes Contained in the Final Report. At its 16th public meeting on July 22,

2004, the commission unanimously approved a number of modifications to recommendations

and text in the commission’s Preliminary Report, which were carried through to the final

report, An Ocean Blueprint. There is, however, no change in the thirteen critical actions

listed above. Those modifications derived from comments totaling more than 600 pages

from 37 governors and five tribal leaders, over 800 public commenters, stakeholders and

other experts and advisers, as well as technical corrections provided from federal agencies.

A detailed summary of specific changes appearing in An Ocean Blueprint are available on

the commission’s website.7 Changes of an overall general nature now in the final report

include the following:

!

!

!

!

!

The report was revised to further emphasize the important role of states, and

to clarify that the Commission favors a balanced, not a “top down” approach

of shared responsibility to ocean and coastal issues.

The report clarifies the Commission’s intent to embrace all coastal areas and

decision makers, including the Great Lakes, U.S. territories, and tribes.

Many sections of the report were revised to address the issue of climate

change and its impacts on the oceans and coasts.

The importance of cultural heritage in connection with the ocean was more

fully recognized and addressed.

Discussions about the funding needed to implement recommendations were

consolidated into an expanded Chapter 30 (“Funding Needs and Possible

Sources”).

Comments on the U.S. Commission’s Work. The Governors’ and Tribal

Leaders’ comments on the Commission’s Preliminary Report were generally favorable. Most

6

An integrated regional system including (1) raw measurements of oceanographic parameters, with

data assembled and checked for quality; (2) data management and communications involving a

system of standards and protocols to allow a wide variety of data to be located, integrated, and

archived; and (3) data analysis and incorporation into models of environmental behavior.

7

[http://www.oceancommission.gov/documents/prelim_report_changes.pdf].

CRS-7

IB10132

06-30-06

of the 42 respondents (37 governors and 5 tribal leaders) highlighted the report’s

comprehensive treatment of ocean and coastal issues, the economic importance of oceans and

coasts, and the need to take immediate action to protect and enhance the health of these

resources. Their primary concerns related to funding issues; the participation of states,

territories, and tribes in national policy development; and the need for flexibility in the

implementation of such policies.8

Public comments were received from private citizens (including school children), nongovernmental organizations, trade associations, governmental and quasi-governmental

organizations (e.g., regional fishery management councils), academicians, scientists, and

lawyers. The vast majority of public commenters thanked the Commission for its hard work,

praised the report as comprehensive and balanced, and voiced their support for

implementation of the recommendations. Although many were supportive of the report’s

major themes and recommendations, a significant number of commenters highlighted areas

of particular concern, including national and regional governance, federal organization,

offshore management regimes, funding for science and research and for implementation of

Commission recommendations, ecosystem based management, regulation and enforcement,

and living marine resources. Furthermore, there were numerous additional comments on a

suite of issues, including cruise ships, climate change, atmospheric deposition, invasive

species, bottom-trawling, bycatch, wind energy, coastal development, international ocean

policy, and seafood safety.9

Soon after the release of the commission’s preliminary report, individual Members of

Congress commented on the report and its recommendations.10 Some Members identified

recommendations, such as the transfer of NASA earth satellites to NOAA,11 for specific

criticism. Meanwhile, members of the commission and participants in its advisory process

generally spoke favorably of its recommendations.12 Articles and editorials in regional media

generally focused on selected issues of local relevance,13 and interest groups highlighted

specific issues.14 Some states have made their comments publically available.15 Some

8

A general summary of comments submitted by the governors and tribal leaders on the Preliminary

Report is available online at the Commission’s website, [http://www.oceancommission.gov/

newsnotices/summary_govcomments.pdf]. The full text of their comments is also available online

at [http://www.oceancommission.gov/documents/gov_comments/welcome.html].

9

A two-page summary of the public comments is available online at the Commission’s website

[http://www.oceancommission.gov/newsnotices/summary_publiccomments.pdf].

10

For example, see [http://cantwell.senate.gov/news/releases/2004_04_20_oceans.html], visited on

July 7, 2004.

11

For example, see [http://www.seaflow.org/article.php?id=179], visited on July 7, 2004.

12

For example, see [http://www.ocean.udel.edu/newscenter/OceanQA.html], viewed on July 7, 2004.

13

Greg C. Bruno, “Sea Change for State: National Ocean Report Could Have Big Impact on

Florida,” Gainesville Sun, Apr. 21, 2004; Wesley Loy, “Commission Gives Props to Alaska

Fisheries,” Anchorage Daily News, Apr. 20, 2004.

14

For example, see [http://www.boatus.com/gov/oceanpolicy/], visited July 7, 2004.

15

For example, see those of Texas posted at [http://www.governor.state.tx.us/divisions/bpp/files/

(continued...)

CRS-8

IB10132

06-30-06

criticism has focused on the timing of the report’s release and comment period as conflicting

with resource users’ busiest times,16 while others criticized the report and recommendations

as further contributing to excessive government control.17

Delivery of Administration Response. Within 120 days after receiving and

considering the commission’s report, the President was required to submit to Congress a

statement of proposals to implement or respond to the commission’s recommendations for

a national policy on ocean and coastal resources (§4(a) of P.L. 106-256). In doing so, the

President was directed to consult with state and local governments and non-federal

organizations and individuals involved in ocean and coastal activities (§4(b) of P.L. 106256).

On December 17, 2004, the President submitted to Congress U.S. Ocean Action Plan,

his formal response to the recommendations of the U.S. Commission. The content and text

of the 39-page Action Plan may be viewed in pdf format at [http://ocean.ceq.gov/actionplan.

pdf]. Also on December 17, President Bush signed an executive order establishing, as a part

of the Council on Environmental Quality and for administrative purposes only, a Committee

on Ocean Policy. That committee would be led by the chairman of the Council on

Environmental Quality. The details of the executive order may be found on the White House

website at [http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/12/20041217-5.html].

The Pew Oceans Commission

The Pew Oceans Commission, an independent group of 18 American leaders, was

established in April 2000 and funded by a $5.5 million grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts

to conduct a national dialogue on the policies needed to restore and protect living marine

resources in U.S. waters. This commission released its final report, America’s Living

Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea Change, on June 4, 2003, outlining a national agenda for

protecting and restoring our oceans.18 In addition, during this process, nine “science reports”

were also prepared and released.19

Summary of Commission Recommendations. The commission’s 26

recommendations, organized within six categories, can be summarized as follows:

15

(...continued)

ocean_policy.pdf], visited on July 7, 2004.

16

For example, see [http://congress.org/congressorg/bio/userletter/?id=159&letter_id=93815376],

visited July 7, 2004.

17

For example, see [http://www.seaflow.org/article.php?id=179], visited July 7, 2004.

18

The full report was available at [http://www.pewtrusts.org/pdf/env_pew_oceans_final_report.pdf]

on Feb. 19, 2004.

19

The topics of the nine science reports were (1) Managing Marine Fisheries in the United States;

(2) A Dialogue on America’s Fisheries; (3) Socioeconomic Perspectives on Marine Fisheries in the

United States; (4) Marine Reserves: A Tool for Ecosystem Management and Conservation; (5)

Ecological Effects of Fishing; (6) Coastal Sprawl; (7) Marine Pollution; (8) Marine Aquaculture;

and (9) Introduced Species.

CRS-9

IB10132

06-30-06

A. Governance for Sustainable Seas

1. Enact a National Ocean Policy Act to protect, maintain, and restore the

health, integrity, resilience, and productivity of our oceans.

2. Establish regional ocean ecosystem councils to develop and implement

enforceable regional ocean governance plans.

3. Establish a national system of fully protected marine reserves.

4. Establish an independent national oceans agency.

5. Establish a permanent federal interagency oceans council.

B. Restoring America’s Fisheries

6. Redefine the principal objective of American marine fishery policy to

protect marine ecosystems.

7. Separate conservation and allocation decisions.

8. Implement ecosystem-based planning and marine zoning.

9. Regulate the use of fishing gear that is destructive to marine habitats.

10. Require bycatch monitoring and management plans as a condition of

fishing.

11. Require comprehensive access and allocation planning as a condition of

fishing.

12. Establish a permanent fishery conservation and management trust fund.

C. Preserving Our Coasts

13. Develop an action plan to address non-point source pollution and protect

water quality on a watershed basis.

14. Identify and protect from development habitat critical for the functioning

of coastal ecosystems.

15. Institute effective mechanisms at all levels of government to manage

development and minimize its impact on coastal ecosystems.

16. Redirect government programs and subsidies away from harmful coastal

development and toward beneficial activities, including restoration.

D. Cleaning Coastal Waters

17. Revise, strengthen, and expand pollution laws to focus on non-point

source pollution.

18. Address unabated point sources of pollution, such as concentrated animal

feeding operations and cruise ships.

19. Create a flexible framework to address emerging and nontraditional

sources of pollution, such as invasive species and noise.

20. Strengthen control over toxic pollution.

E. Guiding Sustainable Marine Aquaculture

21. Implement a new national marine aquaculture policy based on sound

conservation principles and standards.

22. Set a standard, and provide international leadership, for ecologically

sound marine aquaculture practices.

F. Science, Education, and Funding

23. Develop and implement a comprehensive national ocean research and

monitoring strategy.

CRS-10

IB10132

06-30-06

24. Double funding for basic ocean science and research.

25. Improve the use of existing scientific information by creating a

mechanism or institution that regularly provides independent scientific

oversight of ocean and coastal management.

26. Broaden ocean education and awareness through a commitment to teach

and learn about our oceans, at all levels of society.

Comments on the Pew Commission’s Work. As anticipated, comments on the

commission’s work ranged the full gamut from dismissive to laudatory. Some were

concerned that the commission’s work was not objective, being overly influenced by the

“environmental agenda” of the Pew Charitable Trusts as an attack on commercial seafood

harvesting, while ignoring other significant issues such as the damaging effects of oil spills

in the marine environment.20 Representative Richard Pombo, Chairman of the House

Committee on Resources, issued a press release critical of the Pew Commission report,

concluding “we cannot expect such a group to issue non-biased recommendations.”21 Praise

for the report came primarily from commission members, who saw the report as a long

overdue update of antiquated U.S. ocean policy, offering practical solutions to reverse

declining trends.22 John Flicker, the President of the Audubon Society, referred to this report

as a wake-up call to all Americans that our oceans and coastal areas are in real trouble, and

providing a blueprint for action to protect ecosystems at risk.23 It is important, however, to

recognize that the Pew Commission report covered only a limited portion of the topics

comprising the universe of ocean issues, compared with the U.S. Commission on Ocean

Policy, which covered a much broader cross-section of issues within that universe.

Other than the House Resources Committee press release, others in Congress did not

immediately react to the release of the Pew Oceans Commission report. Although the Pew

report was subsequently mentioned in several congressional fora, Congress has postponed

any action until the completion of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy’s report and

recommendations. It is not entirely clear exactly what influence the Pew report has had

either on Congress or, for that matter, on the deliberations of the U.S. Commission on Ocean

Policy, although it should be recognized that Pew commissioners, including chairman Leon

Panetta, did testify before the U.S. Commission on several occasions.

Issues for Congress

The 109th Congress is considering legislative responses to the findings and

recommendations of the Pew Oceans Commission report, America’s Living Oceans:

Charting a Course for Sea Change, and the report of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy,

An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century.

20

Nils E. Stolpe, The Pew Commission — A Basis for National Ocean Policy? Available at

[http://www.fishingnj.org/netusa23.htm], visited Feb. 19, 2004.

21

[http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/Press/releases/2003/0604Pews.htm], visited Feb. 19, 2004.

22

Pat White and Jane Lubchenco, “New Policies on Ocean Fishing Overdue,” The Boston Globe

(June 5, 2003), p. A19.

23

John Flicker, “Save the Coasts, Even if Only for Our Sake,” Sun Sentinel (June 19, 2003) p. 25A.

CRS-11

IB10132

06-30-06

Those reports covered an array of issues, such as the Law of the Sea; national and

regional governance; federal organization, regulation, and enforcement; offshore

management regimes; funding for sound science and research and for implementing

commission recommendations; oceanic education; coastal and watershed management; and

ecosystem-based management. Ancillary issues relate to questions about the timing and level

of the response and the fiscal implications and out-year budgetary impacts on current and

future ocean programs.

The same law that created the U.S. Commission (P.L. 106-256) also required the

President to submit to Congress a statement responding to the commission’s

recommendations for a national policy on ocean and coastal resources. That statement, U.S.

Ocean Action Plan, was delivered on December 17, 2004. It was confined largely to

documenting current efforts. Many in the ocean community view the Administration’s

response as limited and are likely to seek more extensive congressional action. In the 109th

Congress, committees of relevant jurisdiction have thus far adhered to their own ocean action

agendas, guided, in large part, by the Pew and U.S. Commission reports, and shown little

interest in holding hearings to assess the Administration’s statement.

The 109th Congress also is considering other ocean matters, including ocean exploration;

ocean and coastal observing systems; marine debris research, prevention, and reduction; and

ocean and coastal mapping integration. Related issues have arisen, such as whether to (1)

provide additional funds for ocean-related research; (2) replace a fragmented administrative

structure with a more overall, coherent federal organization; or (3) adopt bold new

approaches for managing marine resources, such as setting aside large reserves from selected

or all uses. Two omnibus bills were introduced in June 2005, H.R. 2939 and S. 1224, whose

contents encompass this broad array of crosscutting concerns. Hearings on that legislation

are anticipated at some point in this current congressional session.

LEGISLATION

H.R. 50 (Ehlers). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Organic Act.

Reestablishes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the

Department of Commerce (DOC), headed by an Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans

and Atmosphere who shall serve as the Administrator of NOAA. The bill would create a

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for science and technology to coordinate science

activities across the agency. NOAA would be restructured around four areas: the National

Weather Service, Research and Education, Operations and Services, and Resources

Management. The bill also would create a chief operating officer to manage the agency’s

day-to-day operations. The House Science Committee adopted a substitute amendment that

would emphasize NOAA’s role in forecasting tsunamis, require NOAA to notify Congress

when it starts new satellite programs, and clarify that nothing in the bill would affect the

authority of other federal agencies. Introduced January 4, 2005, and referred to House

Committee on Science and House Committee on Resources. House Science Subcommittee

on Environment, Technology, and Standards voted March 15, 2005, to approve, with

amendments, for full committee consideration. House Science Committee markup session

held May 17, 2005, and H.R. 50 ordered to be reported (amended). House Resources

Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans held a hearing May 19, 2005;

CRS-12

IB10132

06-30-06

subcommittee consideration and markup session held May 19, 2005. Superseded by H.R.

5450.

H.R. 2939 (C. Weldon). Oceans Conservation, Education, and National Strategy for

the 21st Century Act. A bill to establish a national policy for our oceans, to strengthen the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and to establish a Committee on Ocean

Policy. The purpose of this act is to secure, for present and future generations of people of

the United States, the full range of ecological, economic, educational, social, cultural,

nutritional, and recreational benefits of healthy marine ecosystems, by (1) establishing a

comprehensive national oceans policy that is binding on all covered actions that may

significantly affect U.S. ocean waters and ocean resources; (2) requiring covered actions to

be consistent with the purposes and policies of this act; (3) mandating that clear standards

be set against which compliance with the national oceans policy can be measured; (4)

providing a mechanism through which compliance with this act can be assured; (5)

consolidating and restructuring federal ocean programs to support this act; (6) promoting

ecologically sustainable ocean resource use and management by strengthening and

empowering ocean governance; and (7) enhancing responsible ocean stewardship.

Introduced June 16, 2005, and referred to the House Committee on Resources, and in

addition to the House Committee on Science.

H.R. 5450 (Ehlers). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act. An

organic act that would reestablish the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

(NOAA) in the Department of Commerce (DOC), headed by an Under Secretary of

Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere who shall serve as the Administrator of NOAA, and

would restructure NOAA into four areas: National Weather Service, Research and Education,

Operations and Services, and Resources Management. The legislation would generally

maintain the existing programs, rules, regulations, and leadership structure of NOAA, but

would create a position for a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Science and

Technology to coordinate science activities across the agency and a chief operating officer

to manage the agency’s day-to-day operations. The bill would require NOAA to

communicate weather emergency information to other federal agencies, to report to Congress

annually on contracts and subcontracts with overseas companies and on the off-shoring of

agency jobs, and to report to Congress when major programs experience budget overruns or

delays. Introduced May 22, 2006, and referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition

to the Committee on Resources. On May 31, 2006, House Resources Committee requested

Executive Comment from U.S. Department of Commerce. House Science Committee

markup session held June 14, 2006, and H.R. 5450 ordered to be reported, with amendments.

S. 39 (Stevens). National Ocean Exploration Program Act. A bill to establish a

coordinated national ocean exploration program within the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration. Introduced January 25, 2005, and referred to the Senate

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Committee on Commerce, Science,

and Transportation ordered reported favorably, without amendment, March 10, 2005.

Reported April 13, 2005, by Senator Stevens without amendment, S.Rept. 109-57. Placed

on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, April 13, 2005, Calendar No. 71.

Passed Senate, July 1, 2005, with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. Referred July 11,

2005, to the House Committee on Science, and in addition to the House Committee on

Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans.

CRS-13

IB10132

06-30-06

S. 361 (Snowe). Ocean and Coastal Observation System Act of 2005. A bill to develop

and maintain an integrated system of ocean and coastal observations for the nation’s coasts,

oceans, and Great Lakes, improve warnings of tsunamis and other natural hazards, enhance

homeland security, support maritime operations, and for other purposes. Introduced February

10, 2005, and referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation ordered reported favorably, without

amendment, March 10, 2005. Reported April 19, 2005, by Senator Stevens without

amendment, S.Rept. 109-60. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders,

April 19, 2005, Calendar No. 76. Passed Senate July 1, 2005, with an amendment and an

amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent. Referred July 11, 2005, to the House

Committee on Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans, and in addition to the

Committee on Science.

S. 362 (Inouye). Marine Debris Research Prevention and Reduction Act. A bill to

establish a program within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the

United States Coast Guard to help identify, determine sources of, assess, reduce, and prevent

marine debris and its adverse impacts on the marine environment and navigation safety, in

coordination with non-federal entities, and for other purposes. Introduced February 10, 2005,

and referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation ordered reported favorably, with an

amendment, March 10, 2005. Reported April 13, 2005, by Senator Stevens with an

amendment, S.Rept. 109-56. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders,

April 13, 2005, Calendar No. 70. Passed Senate July 1, 2005, with amendments by

Unanimous Consent. Referred July 11, 2005, to the House Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure, and in addition to the House Committee on Resources. House Resources

Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans held hearings September 29, 2005. On November

16, 2005, Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans discharged; Full Committee consideration

and mark-up held; ordered reported (amended) by unanimous consent, H.Rept. 109-332, Part

I.

S. 364 (Inouye). Ocean and Coastal Mapping Integration Act. A bill to establish a

program within the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration to integrate federal coastal

and ocean mapping activities. Introduced February 10, 2005, and referred to Senate

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Full committee consideration and

markup held March 10, 2005, by Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation. Committee

on Commerce, Science, and Transportation ordered reported favorably, with amendments,

April 14, 2005. Reported July 13, 2005, by Senator Stevens with amendments, S.Rept.

109-102, and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, Calendar No.

161.

S. 1224 (Boxer). National Oceans Protection Act of 2005. The purpose of this act is

to secure, for present and future generations of people of the United States, the full range of

environmental, economic, educational, social, cultural, nutritional, and recreational benefits

of healthy marine ecosystems. Includes titles cited as the Ballast Water Management Act of

2005; the Cetacean and Sea Turtle Conservation Act of 2005; the Deep Sea Coral Protection

Act; the Ernest “Fritz” Hollings National Ocean Policy and Leadership Act; and the Fisheries

Science and Management Enhancement Act of 2005. Introduced June 9, 2005, and referred

to Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

CRS-14

IB10132

06-30-06

S.Amdt. 259 to S.Con.Res. 18 (Boxer). To express the sense of the Senate regarding

the need for a comprehensive, coordinated, and integrated national ocean policy. Introduced

March 17, 2005. S.Amdt. 259 agreed to March 17, 2005, in the Senate by unanimous

consent. S.Con.Res. 18 agreed to in Senate with amendments by yea-nay vote, 51-49, March

17, 2005. Senate incorporated S.Con.Res. 18 into H.Con.Res. 95 as an amendment and

agreed to H.Con.Res. 95 on April 4, 2005. Conference report on H.Con.Res. 95 filed April

28, 2005, H.Rept. 109-62. Conference report agreed to in the House (214-211), April 28,

2005. Conference report agreed to in Senate (52-47), April 28, 2005.

FOR ADDITIONAL READING

Buck, Eugene H., Ocean Commission Reports: Side-by-Side Comparison of Provisions on

Living Resources, Excluding Fisheries, CRS Congressional Distribution Memorandum,

September 30, 2004 (updated), 22 pp.

Buck, Eugene H., Ocean Commission Reports: Side-by-Side Comparison of Fishery

Provisions, CRS Congressional Distribution Memorandum, October 4, 2004 (updated),

18 pp.

Gish, Ken and Eric Laschever. “The President’s Ocean Commission: Progress Toward a

New Ocean Policy.” N R & E. Summer 2004. p. 17-19, 79.

National Marine Sanctuary Foundation. Capital Hill Oceans Week 2003, Summary Report:

Exploring our Oceans, Managing our Marine Areas. June 11-12, 2003 (Silver Spring,

MD: 2003). 30 pp.

Paul, Linda M. B. “The 2003 Pew Oceans Commission Report: Law, Policy, and

Governance.” N R & E. Summer 2004. p. 10-16.

U.S. Dept. of Commerce. President’s Panel on Ocean Exploration. Discovering Earth’s

Final Frontier: A U.S. Strategy for Ocean Exploration (Washington, DC: NOAA,

October 10, 2000). 64 pp.

U.S. Dept. of Commerce and Dept. of the Navy. Oceans of Commerce, Oceans of Life.

Proceedings of the National Ocean Conference, June 11-12, 1998, Monterey, CA

(Washington, DC: NOAA, 1998). vi + 241 pp.

U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Office of the

Chief Scientist. Year of the Ocean Discussion Papers. March 1998. Prepared by the

U.S. Federal Agencies with Ocean-Related Programs for the International Year of the

Ocean (Washington, DC: GPO, 1998). 1 v. (various pagings).

CRS-15