37 



Do either of the assaulted Federal agencies wish to have a last 

 word here? 



Mr. KoTELLY. Just a point on the permit. You are right. The next 

 Federal action will be the permit. We have committed to having at 

 least two public hearings, one at the Cape and one in Boston — per- 

 haps two in Boston, starting next March. 



As the other historian, Peter mentioned being around in 1983. 

 Actually, I was too, when we first started on the Boston Harbor 

 Project. I can tell you that, at that time, we had a real major dis- 

 grace on our hands. NOAA had depicted Boston Harbor as the 

 worst-polluted harbor on the East Coast at that time. 



I think we have made a great deal of progress since then. As I 

 mentioned earlier, we got rid of the scum, floatable material, the 

 grease and oil. We also got rid of the sludge in 1991. We have seen 

 considerable improvement to the harbor. I think the outfall, where 

 it is located, with its dilution and dispersion will certainly clean up 

 Boston Harbor even more without degradation to Massachusetts 

 Bay. 



Obviously, there is a lot of concern which we have heard this 

 morning. We are taking all of the recommendations from the bio- 

 logical opinion given by NMFS and others on the monitoring and 

 contingency planning very seriously. We intend to do everything 

 we can to protect Massachusetts Bay. 



Mr. Studds. Mr. Bigford, you wanted to comment? 



Mr. Bigford. Sorry to interject. Thank you for this opportunity. I 

 do not feel assaulted — certainly no less so than in a normal inter- 

 nal staff meeting. I think this has been a cooperative effort. I be- 

 lieve the agencies, the citizen groups, the academic institutions, ev- 

 erybody who is involved in this has pulled together quite well. I 

 certainly appreciate all of the contributions that they have made to 

 the biological opinion and the entire consultation process. 



Besides the groups mentioned earlier, I just wanted to give spe- 

 cial thanks to the citizen groups who have been doing a lot of this 

 on their own time, and also the MWRA Outfall Monitoring Task 

 Force, which has proved to be a very good sounding board for a lot 

 of the issues that we have been working on. I think that the whole 

 effort has been very illuminating. As somebody pointed out in their 

 written testimony (I believe it was the Cape Cod group or the Sci- 

 ence Advisory Panel), this consultation process is ongoing. We look 

 forward to working with all of these groups into the future, too. 



Mr. Studds. Thank you very much. Let me just say that we have 

 some questions submitted to us by some of the aforementioned citi- 

 zens groups — and I concur with you heartily in the constructive 

 role they have played. We are going to ask you, if you folks would 

 not mind, to submit written answers to those for our record. We do 

 not have time to ask them all at this point. 



If I could just close with an observation or two. First of all, I 

 think all of you, and each in your own way, in your own responsi- 

 bilities and your own knowledge and areas of expertise, have shoul- 

 dered an enormous burden here, and I think, for the most part, dis- 

 charged it very very well. I know what kind of pressure you are 

 under, Mr. MacDonald. I know the kind of scorn and abuse that 

 some of the agencies have taken from time to time. As you have 

 been candid yourself in saying, your record is not perfect. No one's 



