An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century - California Ocean ...

coastal activities. Close coordination of these efforts will help ensure that the informationproducts developed through maritime awareness can be integrated into other monitoringand observing networks to support a broad variety of management needs.Recommendation 16–14In developing and implementing maritime domain awareness initiatives, the U.S. CoastGuard should work with the National Ocean Council to ensure that, in addition to theirother intended purposes, these initiatives provide effective support for ocean and coastalmanagement needs.References1 U.S. Department of Transportation. An Assessment of the Marine Transportation System: A Report to Congress.Washington, DC, September 1999.2 National Chamber Foundation. Trade and Transportation: A Study of North American Port and Intermodal Systems.Washington, DC: U.S. Chamber of Commerce, March 2003.3 The American Waterways Operators. “Value to the Nation.” Accessed December 1, 2003.4 Business Research and Economic Advisors. The Contribution of the North American Cruise Industry to the U.S.Economy in 2002. Exton, PA: International Council of Cruise Lines, August 2003.5 National Marine Manufacturers Association. “Facts and Figures.” Accessed December 1, 2003.6 U.S. Coast Guard. Prevention Through People Quality Action Team Report. Washington, DC, 1995.7 United Nations Environment Program. Pollution from the Land: The Threat to Our Seas. New York, NY: UnitedNations, 2003.8 National Research Council. Oil in the Sea III: Inputs, Fates, and Effects. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2003.9 “Vessel Operations Under “Flags of Convenience” and National Security Implications.” Statement of Rear AdmiralPaul J. Pluta, U.S. Coast Guard, before the House Armed Services Committee. June 13, 2003.10 U.S. Coast Guard. “Origins of the Port State Control Program.” Posted July 25, 2003; accessed December 1, 2003.11 O’Neill, W. “IMO–30 Years of Change, 30 years of Progress.” Maritime Policy and Management 30 (January/March2003): 1–4.12 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Cost Savings Stemming from Non-compliance withInternational Environmental Regulations in the Maritime Sector. Paris, France, 2003.13 U.S. General Accounting Office. Coast Guard: Strategy Needed for Setting and Monitoring Levels of Effort for AllMissions. GAO–03–155. Washington, DC, November 2002.14 U.S. General Accounting Office. Coast Guard: Comprehensive Blueprint Needed to Balance and Monitor Resource Useand Measure Performance for All Missions. GAO–03–544T. Washington, DC, March 2003.15 Transportation Research Board. The Marine Transportation System and the Federal Role: Measuring Performance,Targeting Improvement. Special Report 279. Washington, DC: The National Academies, 2004.16 Subcommittee on Flag State Implementation. Report to the Maritime Safety Committee and the MarineEnvironmental Protection Committee. FSI 11/23. London, UK: International Maritime Organization, May 6, 2003.17 Seafarers International Research Center. A Study on Fraudulent Practices Associated with Certificates of Competencyand Endorsements. Wales, UK: Cardiff University, January 2001.18 International Information Programs. Marine Environment and Tanker Safety: A G–8 Action Plan. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of State, June 2, 2003.19 U.S. Coast Guard. Port State Control in the United States: Annual Report 2002. Washington, DC, April 2003.20 Ibid.21 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Using Your Head to Help Protect Our Aquatic Resources. EPA 842–F–00–002.Washington, DC, April 2001.22 Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative, Part 2 Report (June 1, 2000, toJuly 1, 2001). Juneau, AK, 2001.23 Business Research and Economic Advisors. The Contribution of the North American Cruise Industry to the U.S.Economy in 2002. Exton, PA: International Council of Cruise Lines, August 2003.24 Ibid.250 A N O CEAN B LUEPRINT FOR THE 21ST C ENTURY