Stellwagen Bank Final EIS and Management Plan 



Page 113 



supportable thresholds of significance. Such 

 planning ideally should be addressed jointly by EPA, 

 COE, and NOAA. 



Impacts of continued disposal activities were 

 evaluated in the MBDS site evaluation study (COE, 

 1988) and in the DEIS (EPA, 1989). No effects on 

 Sanctuary resources or quaUties from disposal 

 activities at MBDS have been identified as a result 

 of these evaluations. This conclusion is based on a 

 number of studies including: surveys to determine 

 the extent of the disposed sediments on the bottom; 

 biological colonization on and around the disposed 

 sediments; sediment chemistry surveys; and surveys 

 of contaminant levels in organisms hving on and 

 near the site. Many of these studies have focused 

 on near-field samples, where impacts could be 

 expected to be most evident. Disposed sediments 

 have been found to exist in well-defined deposits 

 within either the present or the historical disposal 

 sites. Bottom-dwelling organisms have recolonized 

 these deposits, and are similar to the commimities 

 present at undisturbed reference sites. Sediment 

 chemistry in these deposits has been generally 

 consistent with that of sediments originally tested at 

 the dredged materials disposal site. Contaminant 

 levels found in the marine worm Nephtys . the clam 

 Astarte . the shrimp Pandalus . and the scallop 

 Placopectin indicate minimal bioaccumulation levels 

 at and around the disposal site at the time of those 

 studies. 



At present, the MBDS site is considered an 

 Impact Category II" site, as defined in Title I 

 regulations and criteria (40 CFR § 228.10(c), 

 indicating that no detectable changes in species 

 composition or population has occurred in habitats 

 immediately outside the deposition area (EPA, 

 1990). It does not appear, therefore, that the 

 previous use of the site has significantly degraded 

 the resources of the area. 



The preferred Sanctuary regulatory alternative 

 is to prohibit disposal of dredged materials 

 anywhere within the Sanctuary. Assuming that a 

 permanent MBDS is designated outside the 

 Sanctuary boundary, there should be no 

 environmental impact on Sanctuary resources or any 

 economic impact on users of the MBDS. NOAA 

 plans to review disposal permit appUcations in order 



to ensure that disposals do not enter the Sanctuary 

 and harm Sanctuary resoiu'ces or quahties. 

 However, since there is no evidence of hcum to 

 Sanctuary resources or qualities from MBDS 

 activities, no certification of these permits is 

 necessary. 



b. Disposal of Fish Processing Wastes 



1) No Sanctuary Regulation: Under this 

 regulatory alternative, the disposal of fish wastes, 

 i.e., wastes from fish processing operations, would 

 not require a permit under the Ocean Dumping Act 

 (Title I of the MPRSA), provided that disposal not 

 occur in 'harbors or other protected or enclosed 

 coastal waters'! or any other location that may 

 'feasonably be anticipated to endanger health, the 

 environment, or ecological systems. "(40 CFR 



§ 220.1(c)). Proposals for disposal of fish wastes 

 also may be required to meet EPA conditions 

 related to location, character of the materials to be 

 disposed, and methodology of the disposal activity. 

 The terms of these conditions would be developed 

 by EPA in consultation with NMFS and the fishing 

 industry. 



2) Disposal of Fish Processing Wastes Subject 

 to Sanctuary Certification: Under the preferred 

 regulatory alternative, proposals involving the 

 disposal of fish processing wastes would have to be 

 certified by the Assistant Administrator of NOAA 

 to ensure that the activity is consistent with the 

 purposes of the Sanctuary, and that it will have no 

 significant effect on Sanctuary resources or qualities. 

 This additional certification process will ensure that 

 the Sanctuary, not specifically mentioned in the 

 Ocean Dumping Act, is considered during any EPA 

 decisionmaking process related to the disposal of 

 fish processing wastes. Listing this as a regulated 

 activity will also allow oversight of any fish 

 processing wastes disposal activity occurring outside 

 the Sanctuary boundary, to ensure that the effects of 

 such activity do not enter the Sanctuary and cause 

 harm to Sanctuary resources or quaUties. 



c) Discharge of Trash and Other Debris 



As discussed in Part Two, Section II.C.4. 

 (Commercial Shipping), existing regulatory 

 authorities permit the discharge of several types of 



