Keeping Our Government Accountable
Thursday, May 22, 2014
Final Research
Picture for a moment instead of a
summer beach packed with smiling faces, one awash with used syringes, dead sea
life and human feces. This vile scene may seem like something you see in a
movie or a television program, however it was realty in the summer of 1988. An
article published in the New York Times paints that picture of the hottest
summer recorded in the East Coast for readers and after many beaches were shut
down public outrage cause government officials to act (Specter, 1993). Understanding
tragically that humans have used our beautiful oceans as one big garbage, a
question that came to mind after reading that New York Times article is, did it
take the United States until 1988 to take action against this? The Santa Clara
Law Review reported that it took Congress until 1972 to pass the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, otherwise referred to as the Ocean
Dumping Act. A concern with this policy is that in 1988 the beaches were still
very polluted, so the question remains of how successful was the implementation
of the Ocean Dumping Act? While the Ocean Dumping Act has had a positive, and
its intended, effect on the environment it hasn’t fully solved this problem and
continued research is still needed.
As
the thesis above indicates, there are many positive aspects agreed upon by
stakeholders in this issue, both supporters and critics of this legislation.
The Santa Clara Law Review lists many positive aspects of the Ocean Dumping Act
including the permit process as well as prohibiting certain substances to be
dumped all together (Kuersteiner, Herbach, 1978). While the permit process has
been subject of much criticism, it allows for an evaluation to be made to
determine if the substance will have a negative effect of human and marine life
however the evaluation process still holds high standards (Kuersteiner,
Herbach, 1978). Also addition positive aspects that have occurred from this legislation
are the addition of a civil suit and the call for continuing research into the
issue of ocean dumping (Kuersteiner, Herbach, 1978).
A
criticism addressed in the New York Times articles touches on the subject that
the Ocean Dumping Act doesn’t actually address the issue of trash and garbage
that is washing up on the beaches and effecting human health (Specter, 1993). For
example, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration conducted a study
that found that deep-water dumping of sludge could safely hold a metropolitan
region of sludge safely and “there would be no apparent threat to human health”
(Swanson, Devine, 1982).
Additional
criticism has been raised over the enforcement of this specific policy. The
National Wildlife Federation brought a suit against the Corps of Engineers, the
agency in charge of dredged spoil in the Ocean Dumping Act, alleging the agency
created the requirements to obtain a permit to dump dredged materials too easy
(Kuersteiner, Herbach, 1978). In 1975 the Senate Commerce Committee also
question the Corps of Engineers on the same accusation (Kuersteiner, Herbach, 1978).
An additional criticism of enforcement has also been brought against the United
States Coast Guard, whose duties are surveillance of ocean dumping. The Coast
Guard had responded to the criticism that they did not receive enough funding
to complete proper surveillance of ocean dumping, and after that Congress did
increase funding for enforcement efforts to the Coast Guard (Kuersteiner,
Herbach, 1978). A final criticism noted by the Santa Clara Law Review is that
the legislative intent of the Ocean Dumping Act is unknown. The unknown aspect
is whether or not this specific legislation’s goal is “to entirely phase out
ocean dumping or to regulate it in order to ‘prevent adverse effects on health
and the marine life’” (Kuersteiner, Herbach, 1978). The permit process is a
large part of the confusion and the unknown effect of deep sea dumping and the
effects to human and marine life. Also the research included in the Ocean
Dumping Act has no priorities, which adds to the confusion over what issue the
legislation is attempting to address (Kuersteiner, Herbach, 1978).
Like
most policies, the Ocean Dumping Act contains both valuable, important aspects
as well as negative aspects. Positive pieces to this specific legislation
include the high standards of the permit process, the outright ban of certain
substances being dumped, the civil suit and the continued research. However,
criticism exists that this policy is unnecessary, that the enforcement of the
policy is not well orchestrated, and that the legislative and research intent
of the policy is unknown. Foremost what we can learn from this issue is that
the “United States needs to do a better job of the overall problem of waste
management” (Swanson, Devine, 1982). We are an extremely wasteful nation and we
need to consume less so we will have less of an environmental impact on the
world. So again, this legislation has had a positive impact on the environment,
it has not solved the problem and continued research is necessary.
Works Cited
Devine, M., and R. L.
Swanson. "Ocean Dumping Policy." 24.5 (1982): 14-20. Web. 22 May
2014.
Kuersteiner, Richard
L., and Etta G. Herbach. "In Pursuit of Clean Oceans - A Review of the
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act." Santa Clara Law Review 18.1 (1978): 157-82. Web. 22 May 2014.
Specter, Michael.
"Sea-Dumping Ban: Good Politics, But Not Necessarily Good Policy." The New York Times. The New York Times,
21 Mar. 1993. Web. 22 May 2014.
Research Proposal
According to the
United States’ Environmental Protection Agency in 2012 there was 32 million
tons of plastic waste created however only nine percent of that was able to be
recycled (EPA, 2014). While this statistic doesn’t include plastics found in
automobiles, it still means around 29 million tons of plastic waste that are
unaccounted for. The question I asked myself upon learning this is “Is there
anything being done to prevent all this plastic pollution created by the United
States?” I found the answer to this question depended on where the plastic was
being polluted in the United States. There is specific legislation enacted in
the United States to prohibit the dumping of all types of waste, including
plastic. This piece of legislation was proposed for a very important reason,
dumping waste into our ocean has negative effects on both marine life as well as
human life. However, after this legislation was passed what have the effects
been on our oceans? Also what effects has it caused our country? The topic I
have chosen to research is the implementation of the Ocean Dumping Act and what
affects it has caused for our oceans as well as our country.
This
topic is very important to study because it aims to create a solution to a huge
problem that was occurring. Prior to the implementation Ocean Dumping Act in
1972 the US National Academy of Science estimated that “100 million tons of
petroleum products, two to four million tons of acid chemical wastes from pulp
mills, more than one million tons of heavy metals in industrial wastes and more
than 100,000 tons of organic wastes” were released into marine environment in 1968.
While this legislation was intended to have a positive effect, my rationale
behind researching this topic is to see if it truly has had a beneficial
impact. My curiosity was originally sparked in researching the effectiveness
the Ocean Dumping Act because our ocean clearly still has a pollution issue.
However the question still remains if there has been an improvement since the
implementation of this policy? Also if it has improved does the current
pollution around our coasts exist because the materials that were previously
dumped non-biodegradable? An article written in the New York Times also
questions the Ocean Dumping Act by saying its “Good Politics, But Not
Necessarily Good Policy”. The article argues that this law is moving pollution
from the oceans to our land. My research is going to see if this argument is
still relevant today as the article was written 21 years ago.
The
Ocean Dumping Act has two main goals: “to regulate intentional ocean disposal
of materials, and to authorize any related research”. The Environmental
Protection Agency is in charge of regulating dumping of all materials disposed
of in the ocean. The legislation requires that materials cannot be disposed of
at least three miles away from the shoreline. However EPA is allowed to issue
permits to allow dumping in the ocean as long as it will not danger human life
or the marine environment. This is also an issue I will look into during my
research. For organizations that chose to ignore this law, there is a hefty
price. The EPA can press criminal charges that include a $250,000 fine and a
potential five years in prison.
The
key player of this issue will definitely be the EPA, as they are charged with
the implementation of this law. However there are many other actors who deal
with different aspects of this legislation (those organizations are the U.S.
Coast Guard, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration). Other players I will be observant of in my
research are corporations who create a large amount of waste, looking into
where their waste now goes after this law was enacted.
One
of my academic sources I have found is a review of this legislation conducted
by the Santa Clara Law Review. This source is academic as it is a law review
clearly conducting an analysis of the implementation of this policy. Two
additional sources I have found for my research is the Natural Resources
Defense Council and the EPA themselves. The EPA is an academic source as they
are in charge of implementation and is the organization that has the authority
to press criminal charges in matters of dumping pollution into the oceans. The
Natural Resources Defense Council is also an academic source because they are
an organization comprised of environmental and legal experts.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)


