Overview
Title
Proposed Modification of NPDES General Permit for Offshore Seafood Processors in Alaska (AKG524000)
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The EPA is thinking about letting boats that process seafood in Alaska dump waste a bit closer to the shore because the fish are moving to new places. They're trying to make sure this doesn't hurt a special bird too much and want to know what people think about the plan.
Summary AI
In March 2021, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed modifying an existing permit related to the discharge of seafood processing waste from vessels in federal waters off Alaska. The modification, requested by the Freezer Longline Coalition, would allow vessels to discharge waste closer to the shore during certain months due to changing conditions in the Bering Sea. The EPA determined the change could negatively affect the spectacled eider, a threatened bird species, but will include measures to reduce harm. Feedback on this modification is open to the public until March 31, 2021.
Abstract
In June 2019, EPA Region 10 reissued a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for offshore seafood processors operating in federal waters off the coast of Alaska. The permit, which became effective on July 17, 2019, authorizes discharges of seafood processing waste from vessels that: Discharge at least 3 nautical miles (NM) or greater from the Alaska shore; and, which engage in the processing of fresh, frozen, canned, smoked, salted or pickled seafood, the processing of mince, or the processing of meal, paste and other secondary by-products. On March 30, 2020, the Freezer Longline Coalition (FLC) requested that EPA modify the permit to allow for a currently-prohibited seasonal discharge (between June 10 and December 31, the fleet's "B Season") within 1 NM of wintering critical habitat (Unit 5) for the spectacled eider. According to the FLC, the requested modification is a result of changing fish migration patterns and ice coverage in the Bering Sea, and is "necessary to ensure the continued commercial viability of its members." While requested by FLC, a permit modification would apply to all vessels covered under the Permit. EPA has tentatively decided to modify the permit to allow for discharge within 1 NM of Unit 5 during the fleet's B season. All other conditions of the permit will remain unchanged. EPA is only accepting comments on the modified authorization for vessels to seasonally discharge within 1 NM of spectacled eider wintering critical habitat (Part III.B.7 of the modified general permit). Only the conditions subject to modification are reopened for public comment.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
In March 2021, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a modification to an existing permit related to the disposal of seafood processing waste from vessels operating in federal waters off the coast of Alaska. Initially issued in June 2019, this National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit authorized the discharge of waste from seafood processors at least three nautical miles from the shore. However, a request by the Freezer Longline Coalition (FLC) on March 30, 2020, prompted the EPA to consider revising the permit. The proposed change would allow these vessels to release waste within one nautical mile of wintering critical habitat for the spectacled eider, a threatened bird species, during certain months. The EPA seeks public comments on this proposal until March 31, 2021.
Significant Issues and Concerns
A central concern raised by this modification proposal involves the potential environmental impact on the spectacled eider and its critical habitat. The EPA has acknowledged that the change is "likely to adversely affect" the species, although attempts will be made to mitigate this harm. The exact nature and quantified extent of these impacts remain unclear, leaving the public with ambiguous information about potential environmental consequences.
Moreover, the requirement for vessels to be moving while discharging, as well as the specifics of daily sea surface monitoring, lacks detailed explanation. These details are critical for understanding the efficacy of proposed mitigation measures meant to protect marine environments.
Additionally, there is a noticeable absence of information regarding the enforcement of compliance with these measures. Without clear guidelines on monitoring and enforcement, it is uncertain how effectively these protections will be implemented.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
Broadly, this permit modification raises environmental concerns that might affect public interest in preserving local ecosystems and maintaining biodiversity. There could be reputational risks for entities associated with the seafood industry if public perception aligns unfavorably with the proposed changes due to potential threats to the spectacled eider.
For seafood processing stakeholders, particularly those backing the FLC, the modification is seen as essential for commercial viability in response to changing fish migration patterns and ice conditions in the Bering Sea. This could provide operational flexibility and economic benefits to these entities if the permit is amended as requested.
There might be a perceived bias towards seafood processing groups in the process, given the lack of alternative perspectives or opposition mentioned in the document. Transparency and engagement with diverse stakeholders, including environmental groups, could enhance the credibility and balance of the decision-making process.
Ultimately, this proposed permit modification presents a complex issue where the needs of commercial fisheries intersect with environmental protection mandates. It invites critical examination from the public to ensure that both economic and ecological interests are adequately addressed.
Issues
• The document does not specify the cost implications of allowing discharge within 1 NM of spectacled eider wintering critical habitat, which could involve spending that favors certain seafood processors without clear justification for public expense.
• Unclear language regarding the potential environmental impacts and mitigation measures, using terms like 'likely to adversely affect' the spectacled eider and its critical habitat without quantifying the impact.
• The requirement for vessels to be moving while discharging and the details of sea surface monitoring are not explained thoroughly enough to determine their effectiveness in mitigating environmental impacts.
• The document mentions a Best Management Practices Plan and other mitigation strategies without detailing how compliance with these measures will be monitored or enforced.
• The phrase 'permittees must conduct daily sea surface monitoring' is vague about the specific parameters to be monitored or the methodology to be used.
• Potential bias towards the Freezer Longline Coalition and other seafood processing groups in the permit modification process, as no alternative perspectives or opposition voices are mentioned.