## Facts

- NOAA designated the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary to protect sensitive marine and historical resources under the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act.
- NOAA regulations for the sanctuary prohibited, among other things, “dredg[ing] or otherwise alter[ing] the seabed in any way,” with limited exceptions (e.g., anchoring and certain commercial fishing activity).
- Private divers excavated artifacts from shipwreck sites within the sanctuary using intrusive methods, including hammering and chiseling.
- The excavation physically disturbed the seabed and left visible scars at wreck sites.
- NOAA initiated an administrative enforcement action, conducted a four-week hearing, found regulatory violations, and assessed civil penalties.
- The district court affirmed the penalties and rejected challenges to the regulation; the divers appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the sanctuary regulation barring dredging or otherwise altering the seabed was unconstitutionally vague or overbroad as applied to shipwreck excavation.
2. Whether the divers’ excavation activities fell within the regulation’s prohibition on altering the seabed.
3. Whether NOAA’s civil penalties were lawful and supported by the administrative record.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment.
- The court upheld the validity of the regulation as applied, rejecting vagueness and overbreadth challenges.
- The court held the divers’ excavation methods constituted prohibited alteration of the seabed.
- The court upheld NOAA’s assessment of civil penalties based on the administrative findings and record.

## Legal Principles

- A regulation must be read in context, including its statutory purpose; language aimed at protecting sanctuary resources is construed to cover conduct that meaningfully disturbs protected areas.
- A rule is not void for vagueness as applied when, in context, it provides fair notice that deliberate and substantial physical disturbance (such as excavation leaving seabed scars) is prohibited.
- Overbreadth and vagueness challenges fail where the application targets concrete, harmful conduct within a regulated protective program, rather than trivial or innocuous contact.
- Courts give substantial weight to a responsible agency’s reasonable interpretation and enforcement of its own regulations within delegated authority.
- Civil penalties imposed after an evidentiary administrative proceeding will be upheld when supported by the record and consistent with governing enforcement authority.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit sustained NOAA’s sanctuary regulation prohibiting seabed alteration and affirmed civil penalties against divers whose shipwreck excavations physically disturbed and scarred the seabed within a national marine sanctuary.


Craft v. Nat’l Park Serv., 34 F.3d 918 (9th Cir. 1994)