Exhibit A?
Port Commission 123A",
MeetingMW

PUGET
SOUNDKEEPERo
ALLIANCE

Friends of         g
the Earth

Amy Jankowiak
Department of Ecology
Northwest Regional Office
Water Quality Program
3190 160th Avenue SE
Bellevue, WA 98008
amy.jankowiak@ecy.wa.gov

13 February 2012

Re: Support Proposed Amendments to the Cruise Ship MOU

Dear Ms. Iankowiak,

Thank you for proposing two of the three amendments put forward by Friends of the Earth,
People for Puget Sound and Puget Soundkeeper Alliance for the Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) governing cruise ship discharges in Washington State waters and
the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary.1 We strongly support both proposed
amendments and we urge the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), Port of
Seattle (Port) and North West & Canada Cruise Association (NWCCA) to adopt the most
protective measures for Puget Sound as a part of the Cruise MOUa full wastewater
discharge ban for cruise ships in all MOU waters. Furthermore, more than 1,300 Friends of
the Earth members and activists in Washington State submitted comments in support of
a
cruise ship wastewater no-discharge zone.2

I.       Introduction
Last year Ecology, the Port and NWCCA agreed to establish a process to solicit public
suggestions for possible additions or changes to the 2004 Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) every three years. Therefore, this comment period is particularly important in that it
will be the last time in three years the public will have any say in the growing introduction of
nutrients, toxics, pharmaceuticals, bacteria and disease into the Sound. We support the
governor's initiative to restore the health of the Puget Sound ecosystem - an initiative which

1 http:[ [www.egywagovmrograms
[wg [wastewater [ cruise mou [index.html.
2 Letters from Friends of the Earth activists have been submitted
electronically to the MOU parties
under separate cover.

will cost millions of dollars. We need all partners, including the Department of Ecology and
the Port of Seattle to help protect this investment.

The Port of Seattle reported that the 2011 cruise season was more robust than expected.
The port counted 885,949 cruise passengers among 196 ship calls in the late-April-
through-early-October cruise season. It is the express goal of the Port's Century Agenda to
double the number of cruise ship calls within 20 years. According to Ecology, four of the
vessels calling in 2011 had traditional Marine Sanitation Devices, eight had Advanced
Wastewater Treatment Systems (AWTS), and two were of unknown capability. It is
troubling that despite Ecology's ability to board these vessels, they were unable to even
ascertain the type of treatment system on two of the 12 vessels home-ported in Seattle. We
are concerned that at the end of the eight cruise seasons (since the inception of the MOU)
that complete data including this basic information has not yet been provided by the cruise
ship industry.

The amendments proposed by Friends of the Earth, People for Puget Sound and Puget
Soundkeeper Alliance and those that were accepted by the MOU parties are not intended to
be punitive. Rather, they afford the MOU parties the opportunity to demonstrate their
collective leadership in contributing to the region's economy while minimizing
environmental impacts.

The fact that none of the homeported vessels, capable of carrying more 5,000 passengers
and crew typically producing over 200,000 gallons of sewage (black water) and up to 1
million gallons of gray water per week,3 sought permission to discharge in State waters this
past season, demonstrates their ability to comply with a discharge ban. However, that
could change annually they can simply seek permission from Ecology at the beginning of
each new cruise season. For example, it is not clear what Disney will do next season when
they will begin homeporting ships in Seattle.

We believe that it is imperative that our public agencies and responsible industry leaders
do their part to assure that as this industry continues to enjoy rapid expansion, it takes all
reasonable efforts to minimize their impacts.

[1.     Cruise Ship Pollution Harms the Environment & Public Health
Information from a 2008 US. EPA report4 indicates that regulated and unregulated
discharges from cruise ships have the potential to harm the marine environment. For
example, as demonstrated in greater detail below, the various pathogens and pollutants
found in wastewater released into marine waters by cruise ships, even when treated by
varying treatment systems, exceed state and federal standards, harm marine resources,
and impair recreational opportunities. The introduction of significant volumes of fecal

3 Cruise Ship Pollution: Background, Laws and Regulations, and Key Issues RL32450, Congressional
Research Service, Claudia Copeland, updated Nov. 17, 2008, at CRS-Z.
4 Cruise Ship Discharge Assessment Report, US. Environmental Protection
Agency, Dec. 29, 2008, at
3-5  3-28, htt :  www.e a. ov owow oceans cruise shi 5  df 0812cruiseshi dischar e
assesspdf. (hereinafter Cruise Ship Report).

coliform,5 6 nutrients,7 chlorine,8 and metals9 through ship discharge is incompatible with
the core elements of the of the Puget Sound Partnership's Action Agenda.

The Puget Sound Partnership's Action Agenda and ecosystem targets, first developed in
2008, defines what a healthy Puget Sound is, describes the current state of Puget Sound,
prioritizes cleanup and improvement efforts, and highlights opportunities for federal, state,
local, tribal and private resources to invest and coordinate. By statute, the near-term
strategies and actions described in the Action Agenda must be updated every two years.
This proposed amendment specifically supports the Action Agenda's item C8.1 "Establish
no discharge zones for commercial and recreational vessels in all or parts of Puget Sound
that have nutrient and/or pathogen problems." Addressing cruise ship discharges,
as
described in this proposal, is also supported by the comments of the Environmental Caucus
to the Action Agenda.

111.    Banning Cruise Ship Discharges is Consistent with Recent Regulatory
Actions by NOAA in the Olympic Coast Sanctuary and U.S. EPA in California
Due to the above-mentioned concerns on November 1" the Olympic Coast National Marine
Sanctuary published a Final Rule updating its Management Plan and regulations for the
first time since its creation over 17 years ago. The only revision to the regulations "is
a ban
on cruise ship discharges within the sanctuary, a preventative measure to protect water
quality off the Washington coast with negligible economic impact to the industry."10 The
Olympic Coast Sanctuary joins the four National Marine Sanctuaries in California in
adopting a vessel wastewater discharge ban.

In addition, just last week the state of California's application for a statewide No-Discharge
Zone for large passenger ships and other ocean-going vessels 300 gross tons or larger was
finally approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.11 EPA's action will ban all
sewage discharges from large cruise ships and most other large ocean-going ships to state
marine waters along California's 1,624 mile coast from Mexico to Oregon and surrounding
major islands. The action strengthens protection of California's coastal waters from the
adverse effects of sewage discharges from a growing number of large vessels. EPA
estimates that the rule will prohibit the discharge of over 22 million of the 25 million

5 Cruise Ship Report, at 29. Of the 92
samples taken from 21 cruise ships in Alaska during
voluntary sampling in 2000 and 2001, only 43 percent met fecal coliform standards and only 32
percent met total suspended solids standards for ship efuent. Only one sample of 70 met both.
6 Id. at 235. For three pollutants
fecal coliform, total residual chlorine and ammonia
end-of-
pipe discharge levels are high enough that they may not meet NRWQC after mixing when the vessel
is at rest.
A
7 Id. at 2-34.
Average efuent concentrations ofammonia from traditional Type II MSDs and AWTS
exceed all of the water body ammonia standards.
8 Id. at 2-30. Both traditional
Type II MSD and AWTS efuent concentrations exceed NRWQC for
total residual chlorine at the end of the pipe.
9 Id. at 2-31. Several dissolved metals that
are common components of ship piping  copper, nickel,
and zinc  were found at levels approximately one to four times above NRWQC for aquatic life.
10 httpzz [olmpiccoastnoaagom

11 httpzz [www.epagovz
region9 [ mediacenterlnodischarge[index.html.

3

gallons of treated vessel sewage generated by large vessels in California marine waters
each year, which could greatly reduce the contribution of pollutants still found in treated
vessel sewage.

IV.   Conclusion
While it was disappointing not to see mention of support for the Puget Sound Partnership
in the Port's own Century Agenda, the success of the Partnership to recover the Sound by
2020 in light of increasing population pressures, requires that everyone does their part to
be part of the solution. The proposed MOU amendments provide Ecology, the Port and the
NWCCA the opportunity to halt a significant and growing source of Sound pollution
immediately. Growing concern about the impacts of ocean acidication on Pacific
Northwest waters is further exacerbated by the addition of nutrient loading. The exibility
of mobile dischargers to hold their wastes until they are in less impaired waters makes for
a win-win situation.

Thank you for your consideration of the proposed amendments.

If you have any questions, please contact Fred Felleman at (206) 595-3825 and
felleman@ggmcat.net or Marcie Keever at (415) 544-0790 x 223 and mkeever@fge.grg
and Katelyn Kinn at (206) 297-7002 and katelyn@pugetsoundkeeper.org.

Sincerely,

Fred Felleman, Northwest Consultant
Marcie Keever, Oceans & Vessels Project Director
Friends of the Earth

Katelyn Kinn
Legal Affairs Coordinator
Puget Soundkeeper Alliance

Cc:   Port of Seattle Commission
Northwest & Canada Cruise Association