Stellwagen Bank Final EIS and Management Plan 



Page 115 



the biological community will almost certainly occur 

 as a result of the discharge. There is some question 

 as to whether EPA Water Quahty Criteria would 

 have to be met within the ZID. Further, 

 considering the high cost of constructing ocean 

 outfalls (the 9.5-mile outfall currently under 

 construction by the MWRA will cost a minimum of 

 $278 miUion), any outfall would Ukely require a 

 significant capacity large enough to justify its cost. 

 Language in the existing regulatory authorities is 

 somewhat broad, providing few performance 

 standards. Given that this area contains a number 

 of highly sensitive resources and is subject to 

 intensive human use, even relatively small impacts 

 can produce significant environmental changes. 



With regard to the proposed MWRA outfall, 

 the results of extensive analyses regarding the 

 effects of its proposed discharge indicate the outfall 

 would not be directly affected by this Sanctuary 

 prohibition. Although the MWRA outfall will be 

 the most significant single input of wastewater into 

 waters adjacent to the Sanctuary, the MWRA has 

 suggested that adverse impacts on Sanctuary 

 resources are extremely unlikely (MWRA, 1990). 

 This conclusion is based in part on physical 

 oceanographic analysis of Massachusetts Bay, which 

 generally appears to be well-mixed, allowing 

 appropriate dilution of the effluent. In addition, the 

 level of treatment of the effluent will be greatly 

 improved; the concentrations of toxic contaminants 

 in the waste stream are likely to be reduced by 

 implementation of an industrial pretreatment 

 program; sludge will no longer be discharged into 

 coastal waters; and more effective grit screening will 

 remove a larger portion of plastics and other 

 floatable materials. Results of a far-field modeling 

 study (MWRA, 1987- Volume V/Appendix H) 

 appear to support these conclusions. 



The EPA designation of Massachusetts Bay and 

 Cape Cod Bay as an Estuary of National 

 Significance, under the National Estuary Program 

 (NEP), also plays an important role in this 

 discussion. Many of the potential implications of 

 point source and non-point source discharges will be 

 carefully scrutinized in the Management Conference 

 developed under this Program. The research and 

 monitoring undertaken in the Massachusetts Bays 

 Program (MBP), and the management plan 



ultimately developed will focus attention on the 

 quahty of these waters and will contribute 

 significantly to informed decisionmaking regarding 

 wastewater discharges to coastal waters. 



Under any regulatory alternative, establishing 

 a high degree of coordination with the MBP/NEP 

 is essential. The management framework 

 established through the MBP/NEP will greatly 

 enhance resource protection within the Sanctuary. 

 Appropriate channels of communication and 

 coordination should be established, and a priority 

 placed on this coordination activity. 



Of equal importance will be close coordination 

 with the Massachusetts Ocean Sanctuaries Program 

 (within the Massachusetts Department of 

 Environmental Management), particularly in hght of 

 the prohibition against new or increased discharges 

 in designated Ocean Sanctuaries, except as 

 permitted through a very strict variance procedure. 



2. Ocean Incineration 



a. No Sanctuary Regulation: Under the 

 regulatory status quo , existing authorities provided 

 in Title I of the MPRSA would continue to apply to 

 any proposed incineration activities. Under those 

 authorities, ocean incineration of waste materials 

 may occur (except as described below) imtil there 

 has been designated an incineration site (pursuant 

 to 40 CFR § 228.4(b)). Additionally, Title I 

 regulations place requirements upon EPA to 

 consider the effects of designating incineration sites 

 near significant areas, such as marine sanctuaries 

 (See 40 CFR §§ 228.5 and 228.6). 



Pending the promulgation by EPA of specific 

 criteria regulating ocean incineration activities, 

 permits for this activity may only be granted as 

 'Interim"or as 'lesearch" permits. 



b. Identify the Activity as Subject to 

 Regulation: Under this alternative, no regulation of 

 ocean incineration activities would be proposed at 

 this time. However, in the event of EPAS 

 identification of a proposed incineration site which 

 occurs within the boundaries of the designated 

 Sanctuary, or in the event of appUcations for 

 permission to conduct incineration operations under 



