DOCSLIB.ORG

From “Magic Pipe”

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From “Magic Pipe” WILL “MAGIC FUEL” BE THE NEXT “MAGIC PIPE”? ALASKAN FEDERAL EMISSIONS CONTROL AREA LAWSUIT RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT INDUSTRY EXPOSURE UNDER NEW RULES highlights the processes employed by the federal government in applying and enforcing Introduction and Background international standards in areas that extend beyond U.S. territorial waters. Regardless of In a lawsuit that raises unique the outcome of the case, two things are very questions about international and federal law, clear: (1) increasingly stricter air emissions the State of Alaska is seeking an injunction requirements for ships, in some shape or form, against the Federal government which, if are here to stay, and (2) the Federal granted, would prevent Federal agencies from government is serious about enforcing them. enforcing an offshore segment of the newly As a matter of fact, the first known U.S. created North American Emissions Control citation for ECA related deficiencies occurred Area (ECA). The case, which is the first of its in early February of this year, when a kind involving new international standards Panamanian flagged bulk carrier was issued and corresponding U.S. laws that came into two operational deficiencies in New Orleans effect in August 2012, argues that by the U.S. Coast Guard. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Coast Guard’s Port State Control Report, the regulations requiring ships transiting the area vessel had compliant fuel onboard, but failed of the ECA off of Alaska’s coast to burn lower to use it while operating in the North sulfur fuel will have the practical effect of an American ECA, and both the Master and additional corporate tax on the shipping and Chief Engineer were not familiar with the tourism industries so vital to Alaska’s operation of Annex VI related equipment and economy. According to Alaska, the additional the current ECA rules. While there has been costs of complying with the ECA, which no report of any subsequent criminal encompasses areas off of the southeastern and investigation of the vessel or her crew, this central parts of Alaska that include shipping incident signals that U.S. inspectors are routes, will ultimately be passed on to the actively paying attention to vessel compliance consumer, making the already high cost of with the new ECA and low sulfur fuel shipping goods to the state and the cruise ship standards and will be on the lookout for passenger fares even more expensive. violations. The suit is one of the latest Similarities in the recordkeeping developments in the government’s “phased” requirements of Annex VI to those employed approach to cutting sulfur emissions that has in respect to MARPOL1 Annex I (prevention seen some states, like California, seek tighter of oil pollution) and Annex V (garbage regulation of maritime emissions, and others, management), when coupled with the U.S. like Alaska, seek fewer restrictions. Although government’s aggressive pursuit of maritime the immediate impacts of the case may not be environmental crimes cases, makes one recognized by the broader shipping industry, wonder: will the stricter fuel requirements the dispute underscores the varied reactions expose vessels and vessel interests to criminal state governments and industry are having to and civil liability the way oily water separator the new federal emission requirements, and (“OWS”) cases have to date? After all, in the 1 The information contained in this document is for general informational purposes only, does not constitute legal advice, and is presented without any representation or warranty as to its accuracy, completeness, or timeliness. The use of, including the transmission through or receipt of information from, this website does not create an attorney-client relationship with Chalos O'Connor, LLP, or any of its attorneys, and you. last five years alone, U.S. criminal and enforcement of certain types of violations investigations and prosecutions of alleged based upon each agency’s expertise and OWS related misconduct and Oil Record authority. Book log entries have resulted in millions of dollars in criminal fines and community In general, suspected violations of service payments, and thousands of months of MARPOL and the APPS in which there is criminal probation for vessel owners and probable cause to believe a criminal violation operators, including the mandatory has occurred are referred, normally by the implementation of expensive environmental Coast Guard, to the Department of Justice for compliance monitoring programs by many of further investigation and prosecution. In the these entities for their fleets. 30 years since the enactment of APPS, U.S. agencies have refined their tactics for Moreover, the very same statute relied investigating suspected APPS matters and upon by the U.S. government for the improved their coordination, leading to more investigation and prosecution of suspected frequent and successful criminal prosecutions MARPOL Annex I (oil) and V (garbage) under the statute, which in turn deliver violations also governs Annex VI. The U.S. positive publicity and substantial fines to the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships government. In particular, the U.S. (commonly referred to as the “APPS”) government has increasingly credited the implements all of the international MARPOL allegations of and relied upon testimony from treaty and its Protocol, outlining among other so called “whistleblowers,” who may receive things the administration and enforcement of up to half of a criminal fine levied in a MARPOL, issuance of certificates, reporting criminal APPS case. A mere allegation alone requirements, violations, and penalties for by a whistleblower that a vessel has violated violations of the APPS. The APPS provides the APPS will, in almost all cases, trigger a for both civil and criminal penalties, making lengthy (and costly) investigation by U.S. the knowing violation of the APPS a Class D authorities in port. felony. With such a the powerful tool at its The APPS, for the most part, provides disposal, substantial incentives for successful inspection, examination and investigation APPS prosecutions, and an established authority for suspected violations of the Act to statutory framework for handling such matters two agencies: the U.S. Coast Guard, and the under the APPS, there is little reason the Coast EPA. In 2011, the two agencies entered into a Guard, EPA and Department of Justice will non-binding Memorandum of Understanding approach suspected violations of Annex VI to establish how they would mutually under the APPS any differently than those implement and enforce the newly created involving the other MARPOL annexes (i.e. oil ECAs, including the referral of violations and and garbage). evidence from one agency to another and the provision of relevant technical expertise. For their part, there are steps vessels, While the EPA has authority to issue Engine their owner and operators can take if indeed International Air Pollution Prevention the current pattern for enforcement of (EIAPP) certificates, the Coast Guard has law international environmental standards enforcement authority to board ships on the continues. Vessels calling in U.S. waters and high seas and waters subject to U.S. at U.S. ports, can expect rigorous scrutiny of jurisdiction, as well as certain facilities ashore. their records concerning the purchase and use The agreement delineates the investigation of compliant fuels. Consequently, owners and 2 The information contained in this document is for general informational purposes only, does not constitute legal advice, and is presented without any representation or warranty as to its accuracy, completeness, or timeliness. The use of, including the transmission through or receipt of information from, this website does not create an attorney-client relationship with Chalos O'Connor, LLP, or any of its attorneys, and you. operators should be vigilant about compliance, the area.2 Beginning in August, 2012, ships International Safety Management (ISM) Code subject to MARPOL regulations transiting the policies and procedures, and onboard training North American ECA, which extends 200 of vessel personnel; and, regulated entities nautical miles from a substantial portion of such as corporate vessel owners and technical both the American and Canadian coastlines, managers, should be knowledgeable about must burn low sulfur fuel oil (not exceeding government requirements, policies and one percent or 10,000 “parts per million.”). In options, with a view towards avoiding many addition to the new North American ECA and of the pitfalls the maritime industry has seen existing ECA’s in the Baltic and North Seas, with OWS cases and Oil Record Book another ECA in the Caribbean Sea is slated to requirements. enter into force in January 2013 and take effect in 2014 and 2015. In general, by 2015 MARPOL, APPS, ECAs and the New most ships will have to cut their fuel sulfur Lower Sulfur Fuel Requirements standard to .10 percent when operating within ECAs, and by 2020 all ships operating When the revised Annex VI to the anywhere (i.e. outside of ECAs) must cut their International Convention to Prevent Maritime fuel sulfur standard to .5 percent. Increasingly Pollution (MARPOL) entered into force in stringent emissions requirements and fuel June 2010, new limitations on sulfur oxides, standards therefore already apply, or will soon which will progressively increase over the apply, to ships whether they are operating next seven years, were put into place. These inside or outside
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Prevention of Pollution By
    A selection of articles previously Prevention of published by Gard AS pollution by oil 2 © Gard AS, December 2013 3 Contents Introduction 5 Shipping industry guidance on the use of Oily Water Separators Ensuring compliance with MARPOL 6 Clearing of shore pipelines following cargo operations at terminals 8 US Pollution - California Certificates of Financial Responsibility (COFR) Requirements 10 Australian Pollution Law – Oil Pollution Indemnity Clause for Penalties and Fines 11 Limitation of liability for pollution clean-up costs in China 13 The silent sentinels – Increased use of remote marine pollution sensors 15 New Greek marine pollution legislation 17 New wine from old wineskins? - Current efforts to retrieve oil from sunken vessels 19 Australia toughens pollution laws 21 New Pollution Regulations in China - FAQs II 22 Charterers’ pollution liability in Brazil 24 Perfecting pollution prevention? - The State of Washington enacts a new statute 26 The state of environmental crime enforcement in the US 27 US law – Criminal prosecutions of MARPOL violations 32 ICS/ISF guidance on environmental compliance 34 Oil and water don’t mix 35 Environmental Crime – Myths and Reality 36 Oily water separation and discharge: Risk of oil pollution versus vessel’s safety 37 The finer points of oil pollution 40 US Coast Guard formal policy on voluntary disclosure of MARPOL violations 43 Oily water separator bypass in the US - The tables are turned 44 US law - MARPOL violations in the US 45 Environmental crime - Oily water discharge off the East Coast of Canada 46 Pollution - The hard line taken by the French criminal courts on oil discharge from ships 47 Disclaimer The information contained in this publication is compiled from material previously published by Gard AS and is provided for general information purposes only.
    [Show full text]
  • Pollution Prevention the Role of the Shipmaster
    Pollution prevention The role of the shipmaster Captain Harry Gale board and presence of adequate reception auditing to ensure compliance. MNI facilities in port. There are important A shipping industry guidance leaflet on ecological reasons to try to reduce these the use of OWS notes that companies Technical Manager operational discharges, especially in coastal should establish a realistic operating waters and areas of international importance budget for environmental compliance; for the conservation of wildlife. However, to provide meaningful and targeted training make this effective the motivation and in environmental awareness and Marpol Shipmasters are coming under empowerment of ships’ staff to comply with compliance; recognise the value of open increased pressure to comply with the regulations is essential. communication with the crew and reward environmental requirements and Port state control and other authorities compliance; and address potential non- pollution regulations. Regulations are now seen to be vigorously pursuing compliance (see p6). on waste from ships now include violations of pollution regulations. As a Such guidelines address issues of oil and sludge from bilges, cargo result, companies and seafarers need to specific training on relevant Marpol waste, garbage, air emissions and realise that the authorities will detect even requirements, including supplementary ballast water. Engagement the most minor violations of Marpol. Millions training, documentation and establish between an owner, who may have of dollars in fines are being levied and both formal policy documents and procedures an excellent safety management company and seafarers can be liable to on Marpol compliance and training. But system (SMS) with high level criminal prosecution and imprisonment.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Oil in Water Monitoring & Discharge
    Guide to oil in water monitoring & discharge www.rivertrace.com 1 Introduction While the intention of MARPOL Annex VI aimed at reducing air pollution from ships’ engines is laudable, with the benefit of hindsight it can be seen that regulating for different exhaust components at different times and in different ways has complicated matters more than was probably necessary. For each component regulated, new technologies have been developed but all are expensive and sometimes also require additional power thus increasing CO2 emissions or else they are seen as somehow cheating the intention of the regulation by moving the emission from air to sea. This latter is particularly true of washwater and more especially from exhaust gas cleaning systems or wet scrubbers used for removing SOx from the exhaust stream of vessels burning fuels containing levels of sulphur above those permitted under MARPOL Annex VI. The Exhaust Gas Recirculation method of reducing NOx emissions also involves washwater treatment and is now being seen as problematic also. This guide looks at the subject of washwater and examines some of the major issues. www.rivertrace.com GUIDE TO OIL IN WATER MONITORING & DISCHARGE | 2 What is 01 washwater? An explanation of how wet scrubbers and EGR systems work with particular regard to the production of washwater. The chapter will look at the composition of washwater and the polluting components as well as the scientific dispute as to its effects upon the environment. When fuels are burned in a marine engine, numerous chemical reactions take place in the combustion chamber as the chemicals in the fuel and the upper cylinder lubricant (in a low- speed two-stroke engine) combine with the gases in the inlet air during combustion.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Circular Mc-4/2013/1
    Singapore Operations Office: 10 Anson Road #25-16, International Plaza, Singapore 079903 Tel: (65) 6224 2345 Fax: (65) 6227 2345 Email: [email protected] Website: www.tvship.com MARINE CIRCULAR MC-4/2013/1 7/2013 FOR: Ship Owners, Ship Managers, Ship Operators, Ship Masters, Ship Officers, Classification Societies SUBJECT: MONITORING AND CONTROL OF OIL DISCHARGE DEFINITIONS: The following abbreviations stand for: ° “IOPP” – International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificate ° “IMO” – International Maritime Organization ° “ISM Code” – International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention ° “MARPOL” – International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 ° “MEPC” – IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee ° “MSC” – IMO Maritime Safety Committee ° “ODMCS” – Oil Discharge Monitoring and Control Systems ° “OFE” – Oil Filtering Equipment ° “OWS” – Oily Water Separator ° “PSC” – Port State Control ° “RO” – Recognized Organization as defined by IMO Resolution A.789(19) ° “SMS” – Safety Management System as defined by the ISM Code ° “ST” – Short Term The term “Administration” shall mean the Tuvalu Ship Registry. PURPOSE: The purpose of this marine circular is to impress on ship masters, officers, ship owners, operators and managers that overboard discharges of oil or oily mixtures in excess of the concentrations specified in MARPOL Annex I is not allowed at all times except as permitted therein, as well as to provide the procedures to be followed in the event of an OCDMS failure. REFERENCES: (a) MARPOL Annex I (b) IMO Resolution A. 586(14) of 20 Nov 1985 (c) MEPC/36/22, Paragraph 9.40 of 11 Nov 1994 (d) IMO Circular MSC-MEPC.4/Circ.3 APPLICATION: This circular applies to all Tuvalu flagged vessels unless expressly provided in MARPOL Annex I.
    [Show full text]
  • Com(2019)379/F1
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 30.8.2019 COM(2019) 379 final ANNEXES 1 to 2 ANNEXES to the Proposal for a Council Decision on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union at the Second Ministerial Meeting of the Bonn Agreement with regard to the Bonn Agreement Strategic Action Plan (BASAP) 2019 – 2025 annexed to the Ministerial Declaration and with regard to the Ministerial Declaration EN EN ANNEX 1 Ministerial Declaration Bonn, Germany 11 October 2019 WE THE MINISTERS AND THE MEMBER OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION, responsible for dealing with pollution of the Greater North Sea and its Approaches by oil and other harmful substances have met in Bonn on 11 October 2019 for the Second Ministerial Meeting of the Bonn Agreement in the presence of Intergovernmental Organisations and Observers from neighbouring regions; ACKNOWLEDGING 50 years of successful cooperation within the framework of the Bonn Agreement and RECOGNISING the common benefit of further invigorating our cooperation to prevent, prepare for and respond to accidental and illegal marine pollution from maritime activities in the Greater North Sea and its Approaches; WELCOMING the accession of Spain to the Bonn Agreement and the realignment of the Zone of Responsibility between France and Spain, following which the scope of the Bonn Agreement maritime area will include the Bay of Biscay; AIMING to strengthen the protection of our coastal and marine environment from marine pollution as a result of activities in the Greater North Sea and its Approaches and the way in which
    [Show full text]
  • Annex I Requirements
    09/07/2015 TRACECA REGIONAL SEMINAR ON MARPOL AWARENESS AND IMPLEMENTATION Moldova – 21 to 23 July 2015 1 Annex I Requirements MARPOL how to do it (Part IV) Implanting the regulations Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Oil 2 Brief History 1859 Oil Discovered 1861 First Oil Shipped in Barrels 1896 First Bulk Oil Ship (GLUCKAUF) 1926 International Maritime Conference Washington, D.C. 1935 League of Nation prepares draft convention 1954 International Convention for the Prevention of Oil Pollution (OILPOL 54) 1967 TORREY CANYON oil spill 1973 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73) 1978 MARPOL 78 Protocol AMOCO CADIZ oil spill 1989 EXXON VALDEZ oil spill 1990 US Oil Pollution Act (OPA 90) 1992 MARPOL 92 Amendments 1993 BRAER oil spill 1999 SEA EMPRESS oil spill 1999 ERIKA oil spill 3 1 09/07/2015 Implementing the Regulations In this session we will look at what has to be done by the following: Shipbuilders and shipowners regarding equipment, construction, procedures and training Maritime Administrations regarding own flag ships, port State duties and coastal State duties Ports regarding provision of waste reception facilities 4 Annex I in Brief Entry into force – 2 Oct ‘83 Applies to all ships (not just oil tankers) Controls discharges of oil Sets equipment/construction standards Requires maintenance of Oil Record Book Requires Survey and Certification of ships Needs Ports to provide reception facilities 5 (“revised”) MARPOL ANNEX I CHAPTER 1 – GENERAL DEFINITIONS – APPLICATION
    [Show full text]
  • Bilge Water Management and Pollution
    LOSS PREVENTION BRIEFING FOR NORTH MEMBERS SHIPS / MARCH 2014 Bilge Water Management & Pollution Contents Introduction Introduction .................................................................... 1 Pollution fines for the illegal discharge of oil contaminated Oil Pollution Cases in the USA ........................................ 2 bilge water continue to occur, particularly so when violations arise or are uncovered in the United States. Shipboard Bilge Water Management .............................. 2 If a vessel is found to be in violation of legislation such as Bilge Water ..................................................................... 2 the US Clean Water Act or the US Act to Prevent Pollution Bilge Water Treatment .................................................... 3 from Ships, then fines can total several million US dollars and crew members Oil Water Separators ....................................................... 3 can find them Oil Content Monitors ....................................................... 4 sentenced to prison Oil Record Book ............................................................. 5 terms. Violators may face the equally serious Illegal Practices ............................................................... 5 and additional charges Methods of Detection ..................................................... 7 of obstruction of Culture of Compliance .................................................... 7 justice. Owners may also be subject to a Whistle-blowing .............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Maritime Transport Committee Cost Savings Stemming
    DSTI/DOT/MTC(2002)8/FINAL MARITIME TRANSPORT COMMITTEE COST SAVINGS STEMMING FROM NON-COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS IN THE MARITIME SECTOR This report examines the the unfair commercial advantage afforded to substandard shipowners who fail to comply with international environmental regulations that apply to their ships. It has been prepared for the Maritime Transport Committee and is being made available to a wider audience. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2003 Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques FOREWORD This report examines the unfair commercial advantage afforded to substandard shipowners who fail to comply with international environmental regulations that apply to their ships. It is the second in a series intended to highlight the cost savings and ensuing competitive advantage that such shipowners gain over their law-abiding counterparts. The first report examined the unfair economic advantage to be derived through non-compliance with international rules pertaining to safety at sea* and the third will seek to quantify how unscrupulous shipowners/operators can unfairly benefit from non- compliance with international rules related to the manning of vessels. In January of 2003 this report was presented to the Maritime Transport Committee (MTC) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. It was declassified by the MTC at that meeting. The report was prepared by Philippe Crist. It is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the
    [Show full text]
  • Oily Bilgewater Separators
    United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Wastewater Management Washington, DC 20460 Oily Bilgewater Separators EPA 800-R-11-007 November 2011 Oily Bilgewater Separators CONTENTS CONTENTS Page SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 SECTION 2 REGULATION OF OIL IN BILGEWATER DISCHARGE ......................................................... 3 SECTION 3 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES AND COMPONENTS OF BILGEWATER SEPARATORS ........... 7 3.1 Gravity Oil Water Separators .................................................................................. 7 3.2 Centrifugal Separators ............................................................................................ 8 3.3 Polishing Treatment for Bilge Separators ............................................................... 8 3.3.1 Absorption and Adsorption ......................................................................... 9 3.3.2 Biological Treatment ................................................................................ 10 3.3.3 Coagulation and Flocculation ................................................................... 11 3.3.4 Flotation .................................................................................................... 11 3.3.5 Membrane Technologies (Ultrafiltration) ................................................. 12 3.4 Residual Generation .............................................................................................. 14
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Ocean Ranger Guidebook
    2019 Ocean Ranger Guidebook Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 2/8/2019 Cover photo: NCL Norwegian Pearl, NCL Norwegian Bliss, and the PCL Star Princess docked in Skagway 6/13/2018. Note: This guidebook is intended for use by Ocean Rangers, the Ocean Ranger Contractor, and CPVEC Staff. It is availble to cruise ship operators and to the public. For information on this publication or to report errors please contact the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Commercial Passenger Vessel Environmental Compliance (ADEC-CPVEC) Program, 410 Willoughby, Juneau, AK 99801, Program Manager Ed White at (907) 465-5138 or [email protected] Record of Changes (2019) Change Date Revised Revised by Updated 2019 Guidebook & TOC to match OR Job Aid. 12/18/18 JZ No longer Chapter/Section now all content organized by Section / Sub-Section (e.g. Chapter 2: Wastewater, Secton 1 changed to Section 1: Wastewater, Sub-Section 1.) Changed Sections in Chapter 9 (Sections A-D) to 12/20/18 JZ Appendices A-D Moved Acronyms to front of Guidebook 12/20/18 JZ Moved Wastewater Definitions to Section 1: Wastewater 12/20/18 JZ Updated Seasonal Checklist instructions to match changes 2/5/19 JZ made to that document in 2019. Acronyms/Abbreviations Used AAC Alaska Administrative Code ADEC Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation AS Alaska Statute AWTS Advanced Wastewater Treatment System BNA Base/Neutrals, Acids BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand – 5-day BW blackwater CDC Centers for Disease Control & Prevention CFR Code of Federal Regulations COC Chain of Custody COC Certificate of Compliance, CG Form 3585.
    [Show full text]
  • Max1 Studies Final Report
    November 13, 2015 MAX1 STUDIES FINAL REPORT I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 2 II. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 4 III. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................ 5 IV. MARPOL REGULATIONS OVERVIEW........................................................................................................ 6 V. PROJECT EXECUTION AND DESIGN ........................................................................................................ 9 VI. PARTNER ORGANIZATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 13 VII. MAX1 CHRONOLOGY .................................................................................................................................. 14 VIII. MAX1 SURVEY KEY FINDINGS ................................................................................................................. 36 IX. MAX1 CONFERENCE ................................................................................................................................... 48 X. WIKIPEDIA UPDATES .................................................................................................................................. 49 XI.
    [Show full text]
  • Ocean Dumping Jacquelin Uhlik I
    Why Lawyers Should NOAA what CERCLAs in our Oceans: Laws and Regulations Governing Ocean Dumping Jacquelin Uhlik I. Introduction North Carolina heavily relies on clean coastal conditions for healthy coastal communities and a robust economy. The total economic impact of the seafood industry in North Carolina was $336,537,384 in 2008,1 though this impact has been decreasing since 2000.2 The beach tourism and recreational sectors generated a total economic impact of approximately $2.5 billion in 2008.3 These two industries contribute substantially to North Carolina’s Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”), and are highly dependent on the coast. More specifically, these industries rely heavily on clean coastal water conditions.4 In light of the fact that 29% (approximately eighty- seven million people) of this nation’s population resides in coastline counties (counties bordering coastal water or territorial sea),5 it is important to understand how these laws and regulations function and influence future decision making. Part II gives a brief history of international ocean dumping regulations and their importance in the development of dumping legislation in the United States. Part III describes federal laws and regulations concerning ocean dumping. Part IV explains how federal and state regulations interact. Part V gives examples of recent instances of ocean dumping. Part VI 1 DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT, N.C. DEP’T. OF ENV’T AND NAT. RESOURCES, NC BEACH AND INLET MANAGEMENT PLAN FINAL REPORT, IV-24 (April 2011) [hereinafter NC BEACH REPORT], available at http://www.nccoastalmanagement.net/BIMP/BIMP%20Section%20IV%20-%20Socio- Economic%20Value%20of%20NC%20Beaches%20and%20Inlets_Formatted.pdf.
    [Show full text]