Office determines that the existing management system is 

 sufficient to respond to these needs if and when they become 

 apparent. In this regard, the Marine Mammal Commission 

 recoimnends that no regulatory action be taken at this tine, but 

 that the right to develop fishery related regulations within 

 sanctuary boundaries be reserved for possible action if existing 

 authorities prove insufficient to address site-specific 

 conservation needs. 



Page 144-145. Discharge of Trash and Other Debris: This section 

 discussed a proposal to prohibit all discharges of trash or other 

 debris in the proposed sanctuary. While the action seems 

 appropriate, it may be inconsistent with U.S. obligations under 

 the Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships. 

 Alternatively, there may be a D.S. obligation for notifying the 

 International Maritime Organization of such action. Therefore, 

 if it has not already been done, your Office should consult with 

 the Coast Guard to ensure that the measure is consistent with 

 U.S. obligations under MARPOL Annex V. 



Page 1S5. Activities Subject to Regulation : This section 

 identifies activities that may be subject to regulation. Items a 

 and b indicate that discharging or depositing any materials or 

 substances within or near the sanctuary could be subject to 

 regulation. As we understand it, there are plans for 

 constructing a sewage outfall from Boston in the vicinity of 

 Stelluagen Bank. Because an outfall near the Bank could affect 

 resources within the sanctuary, an ability to establish discharge 

 related regulations, even though they may occur outside sanctuary 

 boundaries, seems desirable. However, we are uncertain as to the 

 authority for such a measure and therefore, it would be useful to 

 discuss the authority for actions as might be taken under item b. 



Item 'h' indicates that "operation of commercial (other than 

 fishing) vessels" may be subject to semctuary regulation. 

 Because commercial fishing vessels, as well as other types of 

 vessels, may pose a threat to the marine life within the proposed 

 Sanctuary, the Marine Mammal Commission recommends that the 

 parenthetical clause exempting fishing vessels from possible 

 regulation, be deleted, and that the item be expanded to include 

 recreational vessel traffic as well. For reasons noted above, 

 the Commission also recommends that commercial and recreational 

 fishing be added to the list of activities that could be svibject 

 to regulation within the sanctuary at a future date, if evidence 

 indicates that measures needed to avoid or reduce adverse effects 

 on living marine resources in the sanctuary are not being taken. 



Pages 236 to 238, Appendix E; References: As indicated above, 

 there is information cited throughout the document that is not 

 properly referred. There are also cited references that are not 

 included in this appendix. For example, the draft humpback whale 



recovery plan Is listed on page 236 under U.S. Department of 

 Commerce, 1989, and again on page 238 under U.S. Humpback Whale 

 Recovery Team, 1989. Apparent references to this document in the 

 text (e.g. p. 38), however, refer to "National Marine Fisheries 

 Service, 1989", which does not appear in the Appendix. Such 

 confusion complicates efforts to assess the accuracy of 

 information presented in the document. The citations in this 

 Appendix should be checked carefully to ensure that they are 

 accurate and consistent with the references in the text. 



I hope these comments and recommendations are helpful. If 

 you or your staff have any questions concerning them, please 

 call. 



Sincerely, 



A(X\ 



(Y)^ 



M 



^John R. Twiss, Jr. 

 Executive Director 



\ 



Page G36 



