117 



Conservation Law Foundation 



outfall — currantly unknown -- could deliver contaminants to 

 unexpected locations where sea turtles or whales feed. The 

 widely held fear of increased red tides from offshore delivery of 

 nutrients could come to pass, in spite of judgements today that 

 that is unlikely, and right whales, humpback whales and fin 

 whales could conceivably start washing up dead on our beaches as 

 a result . 



Although we agree with the biological opinion that the 

 likelihood of these calamitous scenarios coming to pass is very 

 low, they cannot be ruled out altogether. Therefore, we support 

 the conservation rBcommendations included in the biological 

 opinion, and we applaud NMFS's stated intention of reinitiating 

 formal consultation every five years, or sooner if new 

 information or other changes warrant it. Our specific reactions 

 to each of the conservation recommendations follows. 



Contingency Planning 



We agree that, prior to issuance of the NPDES permit, some 

 contingency planning should occur for the possibility that 

 treatment in excess of secondary treatment may be necessary in 



the future . We suggest that it take the form" of a study of the 

 options for and feasibility of reducing nutrients, solids, and 

 contaminance . We question, however, whether preparation of an 

 EIS ac this stage would be feasible, given that the specific 

 operational reg-^irements for any tertiarv- treatment have not yet 

 beer, definsc. 



The contingency planning should also include a study of the' 

 feasibility of partially or completely diverting the effluent 

 back to some or all of the current outfalls near Deer Island, in 

 the event that offshore discharge is determined to be deleterious 

 in_ unexpected ways. This study is essentially the same as A-5 

 below, which NMFS recommends as a mitigative measure. 



Additional Studies 



We agree that additional studies A-l, A-2, A-3, A-5, and A-6 

 should be conducted prior to discharge of primary treated sewage 

 from the new outfall, with the results reviewed by NMFS. With 

 respect to A-4 , we believe that reliable predictions on the 

 effects of the outfall plume on plankton patches will not 

 realistically be possible, even with additional studies, so we 

 question the usefulness of requiring this study prior to 

 discharge. Monitoring plankton patches should .occur, however, 

 both before and after discharge. 



t OP!KTtO ON ^CTCL£D P«»€0 



