Part
V Table of Contents
II. Section:Resource
Protection
A. Introduction
[Part
V TOC]
The proposed designation of Monterey Bay as a National Marine
Sanctuary focuses attention on the value of the area's resources
and qualities. To ensure that these resources and qualities are
protected, the Sanctuary resource and quality protection program
includes: (l) statement of Sanctuary resource and quality protection
goals; (2) promulgation of Sanctuary regulations, including procedures
for working with existing regulatory authorities in cases of overlapping
jurisdiction; (3) contingency planning and emergency response;
(4) encouraging compatible use of the Sanctuary; and (5) surveillance
and enforcement, including coordination of policies and procedures
among the agencies sharing responsibility for resource protection
and enforcement of Sanctuary regulations in addition to those
already in place.
B.
Goals
[Part
V TOC]
The highest priority management goal for the Sanctuary is the
protection of its marine environment, resources and qualities.
Many of the activities that affect the Sanctuary marine environment
are presently governed by existing State and Federal regulations
under the jurisdiction of many different agencies. When this occurs,
a National Marine Sanctuary may serve the function of coordinating
the activities of these management and regulatory agencies by
specifically taking steps to:
- Coordinate policies and procedures among the agencies sharing
responsibility for protection and management of resources;
- Encourage participation by interested agencies and organiza-
tions in the development of procedures to address specific management
concerns (e.g., monitoring and emergency-response programs);
- Develop an effective and coordinated program for the enforcement
of Sanctuary regulations;
- Enforce Sanctuary regulations in addition to other regulations
already in place;
- Promote public awareness of, and voluntary compliance with,
Sanctuary regulations and objectives, through education and
interpretive programs stressing resource sensitivity and wise
use;
- Ensure that the water quality of the Sanctuary is maintained
at a level consonant with Sanctuary designation;
- Establish memoranda of agreement and other mechanisms for
coordination among all the agencies participating in Sanctuary
management;
- Ensure that the appropriate management agency incorporates
research results and scientific data into effective resource
protection strategies;
- Reduce threats to Sanctuary resources and qualities.
C.
Sanctuary Regulations
[Part
V TOC]
A summary of the existing regulatory regime in the area of the
proposed Sanctuary and the proposed Sanctuary regulations are
included in Part III of this document. The final regulations (Appendix
B) describes the relationship between Sanctuary designation and
other regulatory programs. The proposed Designation Document also
includes a list of activities subject to regulation now or in
the future.
To ensure protection of Sanctuary resources and qualities and
conservation of Monterey Bay's valuable habitat, NOAA proposes
eight additional regulations governing oil, gas and mineral activities;
discharges and deposits (from both within and from outside of
the boundaries); historical resources; alteration of or construction
on the seabed; marine mammals, sea turtles and seabirds; overflights
and personal water craft. In addition, two regulations are proposed
to aid the enforcement of the other regulations: a prohibition
of possession of resources and one on interference with enforcement
operations. Vessel traffic may be regulated in the future after
SRD has consulted with the U.S. Coast Guard regarding threats
to Sanctuary resources and qualities from vessel traffic and appropriate
means of reducing those threats.
Kelp harvesting and aquaculture have also been added to the scope
of future regulations. There is little data to show whether current
levels of activities are negatively impacting the Sanctuary area.
There is a concern that future intensive use of areas of the coast
for aquaculture may degrade water quality and disrupt benthic
habitats as well as impact other user groups. Kelp harvesting
may negatively impact kelp bed habitat although little data exists
regarding this impact. Addition of these activities to the scope
of future regulation anticipates any necessary action that the
Sanctuary may have to take once data become available and after
working with relevant agencies and affected parties.
D.
Contingency Plans
[Part
V TOC]
The resources of the Sanctuary are susceptible to natural and
human-related changes. Many of these changes are gradual and can
be detected only through long-term monitoring of environmental
and biological indicators. However, certain sudden and catastrophic
changes in conditions (due to an accidental oil spill or vessel
grounding, for example) could seriously impact resources and present
severe health and safety hazards.
1.
Existing Capabilities
[Part
V TOC]
A number of Contingency Plans are presently in effect in the Monterey
Bay area. Under the National Contingency Plan for the removal
of oil and hazardous substances in coastal and ocean areas of
EPA's Region IX (California, Nevada and Arizona), remedial action
to control or remove this type of material that could endanger
the public health is the responsibility of U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
directed Regional Response Teams acting through an On-Scene Coordinator
and a Regional Response Center. The USCG's hazardous materials
mission under the Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency
Plan is to: (1) prevent spills, (2) investigate spills that may
occur and (3) coordinate response between all responsible parties.
The Eleventh Coast Guard District, based in San Francisco,
will provide Regional Response Center facilities. The On-Scene
Coordinator will receive scientific support from NOAA and assistance
as necessary from the Regional Response Team and other appropriate
Federal and state agencies.
Assistance is also possible from private groups and industry.
All of the relevant public and private agencies that would assist
in a clean-up have Oil Spill Contingency Plans on file in the
USCG Monterey Bay Office which are required to undergo periodic
updates and approval by the USCG (LTJG Ray Perry, Personal Communication,
April 5, 1989).
The Moss Landing Power Plant and Marine Terminal has an Oil
Spill Contingency Plan that was most recently updated in November,
1988. Tankers that unload at the Moss Landing terminal carry
an average of one hundred and fifty thousand (150,000) barrels
of oil. A boat, contracted by PG&E, equipped with portable
skimmers, containment booms and other spill cleanup equipment
accompanies the tanker during unloading. Two more boats are
stationed at the plant docks, similarly equipped, but without
crews. However, some Moss Landing PG&E employees are trained
to operate the boats and equipment and are available on an "on-call"
basis. The USCG can respond within 15 minutes and provide the
necessary additional personnel, boats and equipment from the
Monterey Coast Guard Station, if necessary (Carl Walker personal
communication, May 4, 1989), although it will take longer for
the USCG to also bring the necessary equipment.
Recently a group of local boat operators including fishermen
and researchers have organized themselves to begin determining
their capabilities during an ocean emergency. The group, the
Professional Mariners Response Organization, conducted a small-scale
emergency response drill using only a few boats (5) to determine
the effectiveness of their equipment and the best means of providing
assistance during a real emergency response (Lee Bradford, pers.
comm. June, 1991). The U.S. Navy has a Contingency Planning
Guide (Draft, 1987) that details the oil spill response equipment,
operating personnel and spill response specialists that are
available from the Supervisor of Salvage of the Naval Sea Systems
Command for major spill response efforts. The Navy oil spill
plans outline responsibility for all Navy spills such as those
emanating from damaged Navy Fleet oilers or from Military Sealift
Command chartered tankers. In addition a number of oil companies
and organizations have Oil Spill Contingency Plans or Documents
that are designed to provide information and logistical support
to the responsible government agency, discharger and other interested
agencies in the event of a spill. These organizations include:
Exxon Company (April, 1980), Cities Service Oil and Gas Corporation
(Draft April, 1986; revised, 1988), Atlantic Richfield Company
(April, 1981) and the Western Oil and Gas Association (January,
1987). Finally, Clean Bay and Clean Seas are two industry-supported
oil spill clean-up cooperatives operating in the San Francisco
Bay and the Santa Barbara areas, respectively. The primary responsibility
to develop oil spill prevention control techniques rests with
management of each member company. However, the services, equipment
and personnel of each cooperative are available to member, non-member
and government agencies in each area of interest. The dividing
line between the two cooperative areas of operations is at Cape
San Martin. Therefore the resources of Clean Bay would be most
relevant for oil spills in the Monterey Bay area although mutual
assistance is available from each other's region. Clean Bay
consists of 17 members including 6 oil refineries. The cooperative
would have a 4 hour response time to Moss Landing, and 8 to
10 hours with the vessels located in Richmond. Within 6 to 7
hours Clean Bay could mobilize a plane located in Oakland and
spray dispersants on the spill from the air. This type of dispersant
action needs approval from the Coast Guard (Rick Willett, personal
communication, May 18, 1989). Recent State (SB 2040) and Federal
legislation (Oil Pollution Act) specifically address numerous
additional response, as well as preventative, measures regarding
vessel oil spills (see Appendix C for details regarding this
legislation).
2.
Sanctuary Action
[Part
V TOC]
Overall, the Monterey Bay USCG and the PG&E response capabilities
only seem adequate for immediate response and for minor to moderate
events. Based on their recent involvement in the Exxon Valdez
spill, staff from the Monterey Bay Aquarium have concluded that
the current Monterey Bay contingency plan for oil spill removal
and wildlife recovery is inadequate (Julie Packard, personal
communication, May 1, 1989).
One of the first management actions of the Sanctuary will be
to run an emergency response exercise for an oil spill in the
Sanctuary boundary. The intent of this exercise will be not
only to test the adequacy of existing plans and the availability
and effectiveness of the equipment allocated but also to provide
an opportunity for existing emergency response agencies and
personnel to work with the Sanctuary and to define each others
roles and responsibilities.
A Marine Safety Office Contingency Plan is currently under
review at the Coast Guard station in Monterey Bay. It is designed
to incorporate and coordinate the above plans, resources and
equipment in the event of a spill in the Monterey Bay region.
Sanctuary personnel will work with the USCG during the preparation
of this plan to identify those areas where the Sanctuary can
assist and supplement necessary actions as well as take the
lead in areas of Sanctuary expertise.
The Sanctuary program is preparing a National Plan with additional
site specific plans, such as for Monterey Bay, that will recognize
the need for ongoing training and importance of appropriate
equipment on hand in the event of a large-scale emergency that
will require long-term response and clean-up capabilities.
To provide further protection to Monterey Bay resources and
qualities, the Sanctuary staff will assess the state of preparedness
of the relevant parts of the contingency plans as they relate
to the Sanctuary. This action will entail exchanging information
with government and industry response teams and seeking their
support in assessing detection and clean-up capabilities that
can be used to protect Sanctuary resources and qualities and
a possible trial simulation in Monterey Bay. In addition, and
consistent with the National Marine Sanctuary Program Regulations
(15 CFR Part 922), NOAA will provide the necessary resources
and impetus to develop and implement a site-specific contingency
and emergency-response plan designed to protect the Monterey
Bay Sanctuary's resources and qualities. The plan shall contain
alert procedures and actions to be taken in the event of an
emergency such as a shipwreck or an oil spill. The plan will
specify the role of the Sanctuary and with which action items
it has lead responsibility versus providing assistance when
requested by another lead agency.
A SRD-level contingency and emergency-response plan has been
prepared for the Channel Islands and Key Largo National Marine
Sanctuaries. A similar plan for the proposed MBNMS will be created
that will:
- Describe emergency-response procedures and coordination
requirements for SRD and Sanctuary staff;
- Provide a geographic information system depicting resources
at risk;
- Outline procedures for emergency research; and
- Provide damage assessment guidelines.
In conjunction with this plan, agreements may be formulated
to improve spill detection programs and augment containment
capabilities (i.e., with additional equipment, staff, and deployment
plans). These efforts will be closely coordinated with similar
efforts to protect the Elkhorn Slough NERR.
E.
Compatible Use of the Sanctuary
[Part
V TOC]
Encouraging the private and public uses of the Sanctuary, not
prohibited pursuant to other authorities, in ways that are compatible
with the primary objective of resource protection is an important
aspect of the resource program. Thus the Sanctuary will:
- Encourage the public who use the Sanctuary to respect sensitive
Sanctuary resources and qualities.
- Provide relevant information about Sanctuary regulations and
use policies;
- Collaborate with public and private organizations in promoting
compatible use of the Sanctuary; and
- Monitor and assess the levels of use to identify and control
potential degradation of resources and minimize potential user
conflicts.
- Monitor commercial and recreational activities in the Sanctuary
and encourage other agencies to do so to detect areas of particular
management concern;
- Collect and publicize information on commercial and recreational
activities in the Sanctuary;
- Consulting with other agencies on policies and proposals for
the management of activities which may affect protection of
Sanctuary resources and qualities; and
- Developing educational materials aimed at enhancing public
awareness of the Sanctuary's resources and qualities and their
need for protection.
Monitoring and information exchange programs are discussed under
research (Section III). The development of materials is discussed
under education (Section IV).
F.
Surveillance and Enforcement
[Part
V TOC]
1.
Sanctuary Action and Coordination with Existing Agencies
[Part
V TOC]
A primary feature of the resource protection program is the surveillance
of Sanctuary waters and enforcement of applicable regulations.
Although a detailed enforcement plan has not been developed, NOAA,
at present, envisions a State-Federal cooperative enforcement
system involving the State of California Resources Agency, the
U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National
Marine Fisheries Service and the National Park Service.
Since the proposed Sanctuary would include both State and Federal
waters, close coordination between State and Federal authorities
would be required. To achieve this objective the Sanctuary envisions
an agreement where Federal Sanctuary officers are deputized
to enforce existing State regulations and State enforcement
officers are deputized to enforce Sanctuary regulations. All
officers funded by NOAA would report directly to the Sanctuary
manager and work full-time on Sanctuary management issues. This
mutual deputization would foster a close working relationship
between the State and the Sanctuary as well as assist in increasing
mutual goals of enhanced resource protection.
Boats for both State and Federal officers would be made available
by the Sanctuary to patrol the Sanctuary for not only education
and enforcement purposes but also to increase the visibility
of the Sanctuary and the public awareness of the Sanctuary.
A radio transmitter would be established from the local Sanctuary
headquarters using a 100 Watt VHF transmitter to create coordinated
network of enforcement personnel to assist with rapid response
to diving or boating accidents or an oil spill response. Due
to the geographic limits on the range of the transmitter to
boats (30 mile max.) and from boat-to-boat (15 mile max.) and
the large size of the proposed Sanctuary, repeaters would have
to be established on towers along the coast to enable long-range
communication. A dedicated frequency for Sanctuary operations
would be made available using the existing dedicated frequency
bands for government use.
The Sanctuary also intends to take advantage on either a regular
basis or on an ad hoc basis, depending on availability, of NOAA
aircraft that fly over the Sanctuary area that could provide
additional assistance during enforcement actions or emergency
responses. Aerial surveys could also be arranged for research
purposes as well as assist in concentrating on-water actions
to specific locations.
The USCG has broad responsibility for enforcing all Federal
laws in navigable waters under U.S. jurisdiction. Where these
laws regulate fishing harvests, the USCG works closely with
the NMFS and the CDF&G. The CDF&G enforces Federal as
well as California fishing regulations as applicable in state
waters and the exclusive economic zone (200 miles from the State's
coastal baseline) and acts as the primary agency for the enforcement
of fishery regulations applying to Monterey Bay.
Sanctuary designation would have the effect of broadening USCG
enforcement responsibilities to include the enforcement of Sanctuary
regulations. Neither NOAA nor the USCG has the resources to
conduct systematic surveillance and enforcement operations to
ensure compliance with Sanctuary regulations. However, both
the USCG and the State conduct operations in the area. The USCG
would provide limited surveillance in conjunction with multi-mission,
surface or aerial operations.
NOAA plans to rely on such observers from other agencies and
cooperating organizations, including excursion and service boat
operators, to assist in providing the surveillance information
needed for the enforcement program. The enforcement program
is expected to be sufficiently strong to deter widespread violation
of Sanctuary regulations. However, in the event that analyses
of use patterns after Sanctuary designation indicate that additional
surveillance is required, NOAA will provide for more intensive
enforcement to protect Sanctuary resources and qualities. The
effectiveness of Sanctuary enforcement operations will be evaluated
two years after Sanctuary designation and annually thereafter.
Sanctuary violations will be processed through the Southwest
regional office of the NOAA General Counsel. In conjunction
with the Sanctuary manager, the regional counsel will develop
a civil penalty schedule for sanctuary violations. The regional
counsel will issue a Notice of Violation Assessment (NOVA) to
persons who violate sanctuary regulations based on reports from
enforcement personnel.
Emphasis will also be placed on information development and
dissemination as well as after-the-fact enforcement efforts.
The interpretation and education program will therefore be important
in engendering voluntary compliance with Sanctuary regulations.
2.
Public Education and Information
[Part
V TOC]
Because the most effective enforcement is prevention, the Sanctuary
education program will make every effort to inform users of
the need to use the Sanctuary environment wisely. The focus
of the first year of the education program will be to inform
the public about the existence of the Sanctuary, its purpose
and intent, its areal coverage and the National significance
of its resources and qualities. Much of this effort will involve
the preparation of easily understood brochures and other written
materials on regulations, and the reasons for them. These materials
will be made available to all Sanctuary users.
3.
Planning and Coordination
[Part
V TOC]
Information obtained from the research program and from surveillance-enforcement
activities on Sanctuary visitor use patterns, frequently occurring
violations, and potentially sensitive resources, will be reviewed
in periodic meetings between the Sanctuary Manager, the Sanctuary
Advisory Committee and enforcement agency personnel to determine
the adequacy of surveillance levels.
Section
III
Part
V Table of Contents
|