4 



The Section 7 process is complex, so we have taken great lengths 

 to summarize it in the written testimony. Let me just note here 

 that the process requires Federal agencies to consult with the Na- 

 tional Marine Fisheries Service on activities they authorize, fund 

 or carry out, and then we use the best available information to de- 

 velop biological opinions that represent our opinion regarding 

 whether proposed actions are likely to jeopardize the continued ex- 

 istence of the listed species. It is important to note that this process 

 can be reinitiated and that the consultation process continues. I 

 will discuss more on that later. 



The Section 7 consultation process is very important and the 

 Agency considers it successful. Our written testimony offers several 

 examples of how the National Marine Fisheries Service has used 

 consultations to reduce adverse effects. It is also essential to note 

 that the law does allow some effects. Our objective in every consul- 

 tation is to use our authorities to minimize those adverse effects 

 and to ensure that stocks of listed species are not jeopardized. The 

 recent MWRA consultation was just the latest of several consulta- 

 tions in this area related to the species of concern — the whales and 

 the harbor porpoise (proposed for listing), and the proposed right 

 whale critical habitat. 



In developing our biological opinion, NMFS reviewed the EPA bi- 

 ological assessment, available technical literature, as well as exten- 

 sive additional information provided by other sources, most notably 

 Stop the Outfall Pipe, the Center for Coastal Studies, the New Eng- 

 land Aquarium, MWRA itself, USGS and Barnstable County. Their 

 assistance was appreciated. 



The following remarks capture the essence of our efforts. Again, 

 this is presented in greater depth in the written testimony. 



The biological opinion concluded that the MWRA outfall may 

 effect but is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any 

 listed or proposed species or critical habitat. NMFS believes that 

 water quality conditions in areas commonly used by listed species 

 would not appreciably change from the current situation. While we 

 do not have a precise understanding of the effects of present condi- 

 tions on porpoise and whales, we are confident that the existing 

 outfalls are not jeopardizing the continued existence of any of these 

 species. We have concerns, but they fall short of jeopardy. 



We base our findings on three key points. First, recent research 

 has demonstrated that there is significant export of nutrients from 

 Boston Harbor into the Bay, and model predictions indicate that 

 the proposed discharge will not appreciably change nitrogen con- 

 centrations from existing conditions. Therefore, changes are not ex- 

 pected in the phytoplankton production and community structure, 

 or in zooplankton productivity, density and availability in the 

 areas of whale abundance. 



The second key point. Existing information suggests that the 

 present discharges are not associated with the occurrence and fre- 

 quency of the red tide blooms in Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays. 

 Evidence suggests that nutrient levels at the proposed discharge lo- 

 cations are already in excess of the requirements needed by those 

 species, including some of the toxic species. 



Third point. While contaminants have been detected in harbor 

 porpoise and large whales, pathological effects have not been dem- 



