[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 145 (Thursday, July 27, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46146-46152]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-19028]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Docket No. 000630200-0200-01; I.D. 060800F]
RIN 0648-XA55


New Bedford Harbor Trustee Council

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of proposed restoration ideas for implementation in New 
Bedford Harbor; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On behalf of the New Bedford Harbor Trustee Council (Council), 
NMFS, serving as the Administrative Trustee, announces that the Council 
is proposing 17 restoration ideas for possible implementation through

[[Page 46147]]

funding from the AVX Natural Resource Damages Trust Account (Trust 
Account). Thirty-five natural resource restoration ideas were submitted 
for consideration by the Council. The Council now seeks comment on its 
proposed funding of the 17 ideas including proposed funding levels for 
each of those ideas. The Council had requested ideas, and proposed 
funding levels for those ideas, to restore natural resources that were 
injured by the release of hazardous substances and materials, including 
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), in the New Bedford Harbor Environment 
(Harbor Environment) and in the Federal Register published on August 
16, 1999).

DATES: The Council will accept comments on the proposed restoration 
projects through August 28, 2000.

ADDRESSES: The Council will accept written comments at the following 
locations: New Bedford Harbor Trustee Council, c/o National Marine 
Fisheries Service, 1 Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930, Attn.: Jack 
Terrill, or New Bedford Harbor Trustee Council, 37 N. Second Street, 
New Bedford, MA 02740. Comments also may be sent via facsimile (fax) to 
978-281-9301. Comments cannot be accepted if submitted via email or 
Internet.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack Terrill, Coordinator, 978-281-
9136, fax 978-281-9301, or e-mail [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    New Bedford Harbor is located in Southeastern Massachusetts at the 
mouth of the Acushnet River on Buzzards Bay. The Harbor and River are 
contaminated with high levels of hazardous substances and materials, 
including PCBs, and as a consequence are on the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency's (EPA) Superfund National Priorities List. This site 
is also listed by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental 
Protection as a priority Tier 1 disposal site.
    The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act (CERCLA or ``Superfund,'' 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) 
designates as possible natural resource trustees Federal, state, or 
tribal authorities who represent the public interest in natural 
resources. The trustees are responsible for recovering funds through 
litigation or settlement for damages for natural resource injuries. 
CERCLA requires that any recovered monies be used to ``restore, 
replace, or acquire the equivalent of'' the natural resources that have 
been injured by a release of a hazardous substance.
    For the New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site, there are three natural 
resource trustees on the Council representing the public interest in 
the affected natural resources. They are the Department of Commerce 
(DOC), the Department of the Interior, and the Commonwealth of 
Massachusetts. The Secretary of Commerce has delegated DOC trustee 
responsibility to NOAA; within NOAA, NMFS has responsibility for 
natural resource restoration. The Secretary of the Interior has 
delegated trustee responsibility to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 
The Governor of Massachusetts has delegated trustee responsibility to 
the Secretary of Environmental Affairs.
    The Council issued an initial ``Request for Restoration Ideas'' in 
October 1995 (60 FR 52164, October 5, 1995)(Round I). Fifty-six ideas 
were received from the local communities, members of the public, 
academia and state and federal agencies. The ideas were the basis for 
the alternatives listed in the Council's ``Restoration Plan for the New 
Bedford Harbor Environment'' (Restoration Plan) that was developed to 
guide the Council's restoration efforts. An environmental impact 
statement was prepared in conjunction with the Restoration Plan to 
fulfill requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. A record 
of decision was issued on September 22, 1998, for both the Restoration 
Plan and the environmental impact statement. The record of decision 
provided for implementation of 11 preferred restoration projects 
through funding provided by the Trust Account.
    A second request for proposed restoration ideas was issued in 
August 1999 (64 FR 44505, August 16, 1999) (Round II). Thirty-five 
restoration ideas were submitted to the Council with total requested 
funding of approximately $35.0 million from the Trust Account. The 
Council held a meeting on October 26, 1999, to provide an opportunity 
for oral presentations of the submitted ideas. The Council also 
solicited public comments on the ideas and held a hearing on November 
23, 1999, to give the public further opportunity to comment on the 
ideas. The project ideas were reviewed by the Council's legal advisors 
who provided comments regarding whether or not particular ideas 
satisfied the legal criteria for funding. In addition the ideas were 
evaluated by technical advisors who developed recommendations with 
respect to the technical feasibility and restoration benefits of each 
of the ideas.
    The Council carefully considered all public comment received and 
the comments from its technical and legal advisors and staff. The 
Council discussed each idea, and following this review process, the 
Council identified preferred project ideas for potential funding.
    The Council is now seeking public review of the preferred project 
ideas and the proposed level of funding for each project.
    At the conclusion of the comment period, the Council will consider 
the comments from the public and its advisors before making any final 
decisions as to the projects eligible for potential funding through the 
Trust Account.
    Upon the Council's final decisions, certain projects may require a 
competitive solicitation in order for the Council to provide funding. 
If necessary, the solicitation will be a formal request following the 
appropriate contract or grant procedures. Construction or 
implementation of the projects ultimately selected could be awarded to 
private entities, commercial firms, educational institutions or local, 
state or Federal agencies. All projects will ultimately be funded 
through contract or grant procedures that will provide conditions to 
ensure that the funds are expended prudently and as proposed.
    Prior to final approval for funding, all selected projects require 
environmental review under applicable law and the submission of 
detailed scopes of work for Council review and approval. In addition, 
implementation of the projects may be conditioned or delayed, and the 
funds therefore held in reserve, until more information becomes 
available or specific conditions are met. Funds held in reserve will 
continue to be held in the interest bearing Trust Account, administered 
by the Court Registry Investment System of the United States District 
Courts.

II. The Preferred Project Ideas Recommended by the Trustee Council

    Following is a description of the preferred project ideas proposed 
by the Council for potential implementation and funding. The Trustee 
Council has also make available an environmental assessment which will 
provide further information on the preferred project ideas and a 
discussion on those ideas which are not considered preferred projects, 
including a brief discussion of some of the reasons why the project is 
not preferred. This information will be made available at the Council 
offices (see ADDRESSES):

[[Page 46148]]

1. Acushnet River Valley Conservation Project (Council suggested 
amount: $964,000)

    This idea involves the purchase of either a fee interest in, or 
conservation restriction for, approximately 245 acres of land along the 
Acushnet River. The land is characterized by 1.5 miles (2.4 kilometers) 
of non-tidal riverfront containing hardwood and pine forests, open farm 
land, red maple and shrub swamps and freshwater meadows. Accordingly, 
this project acquires and protects against development, the equivalent 
of river lands lost or injured due to contamination along the Acushnet 
River estuary. In addition, the acquisition and/or conservation of this 
land will help to restore downstream natural resources which were 
injured through PCB contamination. Among the primary benefits resulting 
from implementation of this idea would be protection of water quality 
downstream and the protection of passive recreation lands and/or fish 
and wildlife habitats. These tracts of land appear to have high habitat 
value and would greatly contribute to protection of the Acushnet River 
watershed. The cost of the land purchase or imposition of a 
conservation restriction at $3,900/acre appears to provide good 
environmental benefits for the cost. While this site is not contiguous 
to the area of contamination, it is expected to provide much needed 
protection to the injured natural resources, particularly anadromous 
fish injured by the contamination.
    All Council-funded land purchases require a habitat value analysis, 
a fair market appraisal, title exam, an environmental site assessment, 
property boundary surveys and a conservation restriction to be held by 
a grantee acceptable to the Trustee Council before the project can be 
implemented (collectively referred to hereinafter as the ``standard 
pre-acquisition tasks'').

2. Buzzards BayKeeper (Council suggested amount: $150,000)

    The BayKeeper would be an on-the-water initiative to primarily 
monitor whether trustee funded projects are being properly implemented 
and to identify any activities that may be adversely affecting 
successful implementation. Accordingly, the BayKeeper will be assisting 
the Council's efforts to restore natural resources by monitoring the 
Trust Account funded projects and by providing information to assist in 
the effective implementation of such current and future projects. The 
BayKeeper is also envisioned as supporting education projects and 
wetland restoration activities associated with the harbor cleanup and 
restoration. The Council currently believes that the BayKeeper can 
provide additional monitoring and assistance to both existing and 
future Council funded projects such as eelgrass, saltmarsh and tern 
restoration projects as well as providing overall monitoring of 
activities that may adversely affect restoration projects. The funding 
request would support these BayKeeper activities for a 5-year period.

3. Community Rowing Boathouse (Council suggested amount: $25,000 for a 
study on lost recreational use, $250,000 for new boat(s) and a 
boathouse if the results of the study indicate a sufficient loss of 
access to the Harbor through recreational boating due to PCB related 
injury to natural resources to justify the expense of the proposed 
idea.)

    This idea involves the purchase or construction of additional boats 
and the planning and construction of a boathouse to be used for an 
existing whaleboat rowing program for youth and adults. The boathouse 
facility would include space for storage, repair, maintenance, and 
construction of boats. If the project were funded, participation in the 
boating programs would be offered free of charge to all New Bedford 
schoolchildren.
    Any funding for this idea is contingent upon obtaining the results 
of the study and analysis, described here, that demonstrate a loss of 
access to the Harbor for recreational boating due to PCB-related injury 
to natural resources to justify the expense of the proposal. 
Accordingly, if the study demonstrates a loss of access to the Harbor 
to recreational boating due to PCB-related injury to natural resources, 
the overall goal of this project is to compensate for that lost access 
and natural resource service by providing the equivalent of such lost 
access and natural resource service, by providing people with a means 
of direct access to the Harbor through an on-the-water activity within 
the Harbor. The provision of additional boats or construction of new 
boat(s) and/or a boathouse would address this goal by allowing an 
expansion of an existing harbor-oriented boating program with an 
emphasis on youth rowing. In addition the boathouse could possibly be 
used for similar programs offered by other groups. The Trustees will 
consider this project, and/or alternative projects to enhance boating 
uses, subject to further legal review.
    Several of the restoration ideas received in both Round I and Round 
II have involved projects to restore lost recreational uses. It has 
become apparent that the Council requires more information on certain 
injuries to recreational uses of natural resources resulting from PCB 
contamination, before the Council can evaluate the merits of additional 
projects which address specific impacts to recreational use of natural 
resources in the Acushnet River and New Bedford Harbor. The Harbor has 
been closed to fishing since 1979 and swimming since 1982. The 1986 
damage assessment considered lost use values associated with impacts to 
the commercial lobster fishery, recreational fishing, beach use and 
coastal property value decreases associated with public awareness of 
the PCB contamination. The damage assessment did not study any impacts 
to other recreational uses, including boating. It is not known whether 
these other uses were considered at the time that the prior studies 
were performed.
    The Council recommends commissioning a study to evaluate whether 
there has been other lost recreational use(s) of the New Bedford Harbor 
Environment associated with PCB-related injuries to natural resources. 
The information resulting from the study would then be available to 
determine which access and recreation projects are legally fundable 
and, possibly, the level of funding the Trustees should consider 
relative to other recreational projects and restoration priorities.

4. Marsh Island Salt Marsh Restoration (Council suggested amount: 
$750,000)

    The original idea (Harbor Open Space/Public Access Study) contained 
many aspects including the study of Marsh Island for passive recreation 
and environmental aspects. In reviewing this idea, the technical 
advisors favored the restoration of the salt marsh on Marsh Island. Of 
the eight sites proposed for study, the Marsh Island site appears to 
show the greatest potential for restoration and public access. This 
site could have both a salt marsh through the restoration of former 
tidal and/or non-tidal wetlands and re-establishment of the upland 
maritime plant community, and a passive recreation park. There is a 
bedrock outcrop at the shoreline which would make an excellent focal 
point for the park with the restored salt marsh and tidal gut 
immediately south of this outcrop.
    As discussed here, this project represents the restoration of a 
saltmarsh, a natural resource which was injured by PCB contamination.
    Some salt marshes within the New Bedford Harbor Environment are

[[Page 46149]]

contaminated by PCBs. Species are exposed to PCBs each time they use 
the marsh resulting in harmful health effects. Restoration of marsh 
habitat that is in the vicinity of the Harbor but is not impacted by 
contaminants will help support resources dependent on marshes that have 
been injured within the Harbor Environment. Habitat for resident fish 
species could be restored, as well as intertidal habitat for avifauna 
and other marine biota. Public access via foot trails would allow 
direct access to the harbor.
    More information is needed on the ownership of the property. In 
addition the standard pre-acquisition tasks would need to be satisfied 
before any purchase could occur. (See preliminary decision #1.)

New Bedford Aquarium

    Several project ideas were submitted in association with the 
proposed New Bedford Aquarium. The Council reviewed the various ideas 
and has identified the following (#5--8) as among the preferred 
projects:

5. Artificial reef (Council suggested amount: up to $500,000)

    The idea would be to construct a reef three to four times the size 
of an existing artificial reef off Salter's Point, Dartmouth, MA, 
constructed in 1998 using reef balls. Because bottom habitat has been 
adversely impacted by the release of PCBs which settled into the bottom 
sediments, this project should help to restore those natural resources 
injured by PCB sediments in the Harbor bottom. Living resources using 
or coming in contact with the bottom risk contamination from the PCBs. 
Properly constructed and appropriately located artificial reefs can: 
(1) enhance or replace injured fish habitat; (2) facilitate access to 
areas with fish species and utilization by recreational and commercial 
fishermen; and (3) increase total fish biomass within a given area.
    The Council would provide funding for a preliminary identification 
of appropriate locations, and the materials and/or structures to be 
utilized at such locations. If a suitable location is found, a reef 
would be constructed with Trust funds. Funding would also include a 
monitoring component to determine if the goals of the project are being 
achieved, to identify any necessary modifications, and to ensure that 
intended benefits are being realized by the injured natural resources.

6. Educational exhibit on PCB impacts to natural resources and examples 
of how to change everyday behavior to have a positive impact on the 
Harbor Environment (Council suggested amount: $150,000)

    The exhibit would contain essentially two components or goals. The 
first purpose of the exhibit would be to explain what PCBs are, what 
they were used for in industry, their disposal into the Harbor, and 
then examine the effects of PCB contamination on the six major 
taxonomic groups of organisms (fish, crustaceans, mollusks, plankton, 
annelids, birds) located in the New Bedford Harbor Environment. The 
exhibit would be expected to educate the public on the harmful effects 
of the PCB discharges and efforts being made to clean up the harbor and 
restore its natural resources. With this education should come a 
greater appreciation of the Harbor and a concern that further pollution 
should be prevented.
    The second, and perhaps more significant, purpose of the exhibit is 
to educate people to change their routine or everyday behavior to have 
a positive impact on the New Bedford Harbor Environment and its natural 
resources that have been adversely affected by past PCB disposals and 
releases into the Harbor Environment. Examples might include the kinds 
of materials which should not be poured down the house-hold drain, or 
discarded from a boat, or otherwise disposed of into the Harbor 
Environment. By emphasizing simple preventative measures to a large 
audience, such preventive measures may ultimately produce a significant 
cumulative benefit. Because the Aquarium exhibit should reach a large 
audience, including a very significant portion of the greater New 
Bedford area population, it is believed that this educational exhibit 
should have a direct and positive impact on natural resource 
restoration in the harbor.

7. Marine fish stock enhancement (Council suggested amount: up to 
$1,950,000)

    The New Bedford Aquarium proposal would construct a fish hatchery 
co-located at the Aquarium site. This facility will raise species that 
have been injured by PCB contamination for two possible purposes: 
First, stocking of hatchery raised fish could be one of the means of 
replacing some fish species, natural resources that were injured by 
PCBs (winter flounder, scup tautog), if a methodology can be found 
which is protective of the wild stocks and assists in their survival. 
Second, hatchery raised fish may be found to provide other ecosystem 
services, such as supporting the food chain in an environmentally 
protective way. In other words, because certain fish species were 
injured by PCB contamination, supplying hatchery raised fish may assist 
restoration efforts by reducing PCB contamination in the food chain. In 
order to determine if such potential restoration efforts will benefit 
the injured marine fish species, the Trustees need to obtain 
information on the feasibility and efficacy of using a hatchery 
facility to provide for either or both of these purposes.
    While the Trustees cannot ascertain, at this point, the scope and 
scale of the facility that will be needed to answer these questions or 
to supply these needs, or the breadth and duration of the studies that 
will be necessary, the Trustees have earmarked up to $1,950,000 with 
the hope of accomplishing these goals: (A)design and implementation of 
a feasibility study to evaluate the potential for a hatchery facility 
to aid the Trustees' in restoring, replacing or acquiring the 
equivalent of injured fish species by satisfying either or both of the 
objectives described here; (B)if justified by the feasibility study, 
design and construct an appropriate portion of the Aquarium to house a 
hatchery facility to facilitate accomplishment of either or both of the 
objectives described above. The funding would support construction and 
operations of the facility for over 5 years, following which the 
Aquarium would be expected to continue operating the facility. It would 
also provide a facility which promotes a collaborative approach between 
Federal, state, academic and private interests that would further 
research capabilities on aquaculture. In addition, this facility would 
serve as a working exhibit of the Aquarium and would provide training, 
research and education capabilities which should promote aquaculture 
within the region. The Trustees believe that this funding amount is 
appropriate for a project that can provide this level of information 
and services for future use in restoring injured natural resources in 
the harbor.
    The Trustees will first evaluate the outcome of the feasibility 
study against the current needs for restoration. Assuming that the 
feasibility study supports this hatchery approach, then the Trustees 
will need to work with the Aquarium as the design of the facility moves 
forward. Planning for hatchery facilities must provide for the 
restoration needs, including a determination of what can feasibly be 
built into the Aquarium to satisfy either of the dual purposes, and 
whether or

[[Page 46150]]

not the studies and construction could be completed within the 
timeframe that would provide information to the Trustees and 
restoration in a timely manner.
    The Aquarium proposal specified that fish produced in such a 
facility may also be used for human consumption. Council funding may 
not be used for this purpose and the proposed funding level reflects 
this restriction.

8. Saltmarsh creation (Council suggested amount: up to $750,000)

    This idea proposes to construct a saltmarsh on the Aquarium site to 
be colonized with both low and high marsh plant species and animals. 
The saltmarsh would: (1) replace injured saltmarsh habitat, a natural 
resource; (2) serve as a living exhibit of the aquarium and be part of 
a public park; (3) remove nitrogen from the seawater effluent from the 
Aquarium's tanks and Harbor waters which may be used to supplement tank 
flows; and (4) produce marsh plants for use at the Aquarium site and 
throughout the Inner Harbor. Funding would be for the design, 
construction and planting. A boardwalk and signage would be erected to 
allow significant access with minimal impact to the marsh while 
explaining the functions of a saltmarsh to a large audience. The 
saltmarsh and exhibit would educate the public on the importance of 
preserving, restoring or creating salt marshes and, hopefully, 
influence a change in behavior to protect salt marshes from future 
development and its resultant destruction of this essential habitat.
    The Council intends to reserve funding for projects 5 through 8 
until after a specific funding goal for the total Aquarium has been 
met. The Council requests comment on this concept and suggestions 
regarding the amount to be raised, or other distinguishing events 
before release of funds should occur. Note: for certain projects it may 
be appropriate to release funds at an earlier time than for others. The 
Council is also seeking comment on its decision to have Council-funded 
projects available for viewing without an admission fee. Aquarium 
projects 6, 7, and possibly 8, would be part of the facility for which 
an admission fee would be charged and the Council requests suggestions 
on how access can be provided to these projects at no cost to the 
visitor.

9. Nonquitt Salt Marsh Restoration (Council suggested amount: $150,000)

    This idea was originally suggested in Round I. As discussed here, 
this project represents the restoration of a saltmarsh, a natural 
resource which was injured by PCB contamination. The idea involves 
installing a new 100-foot (30.5-meter) culvert, remove a tidal slide 
gate and replace a headwall to improve tidal flushing of the 60-acre 
Nonquitt Marsh, Dartmouth. Some salt marshes within the New Bedford 
Harbor Environment are contaminated by PCBs. Species are exposed to 
PCBs each time they use the marsh resulting in harmful health effects. 
Restoration of marsh habitat that is in the vicinity of the Harbor but 
is not impacted by contaminants will help support resources dependent 
on marshes that have been injured within the Harbor Environment.
    Inadequate flushing has resulted in elevated salt levels in the 
Nonquitt marsh. Occasionally, storms will block the culvert pipe with 
sediment and vegetation. This problem was compounded when a large storm 
in the late 1970's caused a complete blockage of the pipe which 
resulted in the marsh vegetation dying off due to long periods of 
flooding. The distressed vegetation has yet to recover and the peat 
within the marsh is decomposing and eroding. By improving tidal 
flushing of this marsh, normal salinity, vegetation and productivity of 
the marsh will be restored. Included in the project idea was the 
construction of a marsh observation platform to facilitate public 
access to the site.
    During Round I the Council decided to postpone the final decision 
regarding funding of this project pending further evaluation of 
comments received regarding: the costs of the project and the potential 
for costsharing; whether other design and location alternatives are 
under consideration; the possible impacts to the marsh from fecal 
contamination and freshwater inputs; and public access to the marsh. 
The Council has evaluated those comments and the responses received 
from the applicant and determined that the project meets the criteria 
for funding and will provide substantial increased benefits to injured 
natural resources within the New Bedford Harbor Environment.

10. Popes Beach Land Purchase (North) (Council suggested amount: 
$55,000)

    This idea proposes to purchase and place a conservation restriction 
on six parcels of land totaling 2.6 acres on the northwest portion of 
Sconticut Neck, Fairhaven. This property consists of dunes, beach, sand 
flats and salt marsh habitats. Just offshore are recreational shellfish 
beds to which the public would also be provided access. The purchase 
and conservation easement should contribute indirectly to the 
protection and restoration of that shellfish resource, a natural 
resource which was injured by PCB contamination. This property would 
add to the growing inventory of undeveloped coastal wetlands along 
Sconticut Neck and is contiguous to undeveloped lands in upper Priests 
Cove. The shoreline, tidal flats, marshes and shellfish beds within the 
Harbor were contaminated by the release of PCBs. The purchase of this 
property will acquire equivalent property to that which was impacted 
and will protect the habitat from future development providing a 
benefit to natural resources. The technical advisors believe it 
provides good environmental benefits at reasonable costs. The standard 
pre-acquisition tasks would need to be satisfied before the purchase 
could occur. (See preliminary decision number 1.)

11. Popes Beach Land Purchase (South) (Council suggested amount: 
$145,000)

    This idea proposes to purchase and place a conservation restriction 
on approximately 3.5 acres of land on the northwest portion of 
Sconticut Neck, Fairhaven. The shoreline edge is characterized by a 
dune-like plant community. The intertidal sandflat and nearby subtidal 
waters provide feeding and cover habitat for estuarine finfish species. 
The remaining property is characterized by shrub, sapling and common 
reed-dominated plant community cover. The purchase and placement of a 
conservation restriction on this property will acquire equivalent 
property to that which was impacted by PCB contamination within the 
Harbor and will protect the habitat from future development providing a 
benefit to natural resources. The goal is to preserve this estuarine 
habitat from future development. This land is not contiguous with the 
other land proposed for purchase but is in the same general area. It is 
believed to have good habitat value which a habitat value analysis 
could confirm. The standard pre-acquisition tasks would need to be 
satisfied before the purchase could occur. (See preliminary decision 
#1.)

12. Regional Shellfish Grow Out Up-Well System (Council suggested 
amount: $500,000)

    PCBs discharged into the New Bedford Harbor Environment have 
resulted in elevated levels of PCBs in a variety of fish and shellfish 
species requiring the enactment of fishing closures.
    The goal of this project is to restore shellfish injured by PCB 
contamination through the construction of a shellfish grow out up-well 
system. The system is a tank-based system using recirculated

[[Page 46151]]

sea water, and if selected, it would involve locating an appropriate 
site for the facility, and the design, construction and startup of the 
facility. Once constructed, the facility would be used to raise 
shellfish to a size that, after placement in the wild, would have a 
high probability of surviving to spawning and harvest size. This system 
would assist the Council's shellfish restoration efforts already 
receiving restoration funding. The system would allow shellfish seed to 
be purchased at a small size and then grown under controlled conditions 
to a size that would survive predation. Smaller seed is less expensive 
than larger seed, so this idea would allow more seed to be purchased. 
More areas will be seeded and there will be quicker returns for the 
effort. Although not included in the proposal, based on the technical 
advisors' recommendation, the Trustees will require this project to 
include a component to scientifically document the extent of success of 
this stocking effort.

13. Restoration and Management of Tern Populations (Council suggested 
amount: $1,232,000)

    Roseate and common terns were injured while feeding on PCB 
contaminated fish in the New Bedford Harbor Environment. The project 
goal is to rebuild and restore the population of roseate terns(a 
federally listed endangered species) and common terns through 
management or enhancement of nesting locations. The management aspect 
of this project involves moving other species, such as gulls, off the 
nesting areas and the daily monitoring of the terns that locate at the 
three islands.
    This idea would extend the work being conducted under restoration 
funding from Round I for an additional period of 6 years. Round I 
provided funding ($266,400) to implement biological management and 
monitoring of tern colonies at Bird Island, Marion, Massachusetts, and 
Ram Island, Mattapoisett, Massachusetts to restore population of common 
terns and roseate terns. At a third island, Penikese Island, Gosnold, 
Massachusetts, the project focused on reclaiming the island as a 
nesting site by managing gulls. Preliminary engineering work to 
stabilize Bird island and toxicological analyses of tern eggs were also 
funded.

14. Riverside Auto Wrecking Land Acquisition (Council suggested amount: 
$675,000)

    This idea proposes to purchase and place conservation restrictions 
on four lots in Acushnet totaling approximately 14.3 acres of land in 
the upper harbor portion of the New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site. The 
purchase, and conservation restriction would preserve the land from 
redevelopment and provide protection to the wetlands or wetland fringe 
adjacent to the properties. The wetland fringe is one of the areas 
determined to be contaminated by PCBs and will be remediated by 
removing the contaminated portion followed by replanting. Accordingly 
this project will provide an acquisition of equivalent natural 
resources to those which were injured or lost due to PCB contamination.
    One of the properties is the home of an auto wrecking yard and is 
located across the river from the Aerovox facility, one of the past 
sources of contamination of the harbor. The applicant hopes to use the 
parcels for scientific study, environmental education and habitat 
restoration. The purchase of these parcels (and cleanup through other 
funding sources) would enhance the function of the adjacent wetlands 
and the aesthetics of the upper harbor. The technical advisors 
recommended, and the Council agreed, that any funding provided be 
limited to purchase of, and placement of conservation restrictions on, 
the properties and identified restoration activities but not for the 
cleanup or staffing. The standard pre-acquisition tasks would need to 
be satisfied before the purchase could occur. (See preliminary decision 
number 1.)

15. Upper Harbor Confined Disposal Facility (CDF)Natural Resource 
Habitat Enhancements (Council suggested amount: $25,000)

    This idea is to enhance the three CDFs north of Coggeshall Street 
being built to hold contaminated harbor sediments by incorporating 
plantings for habitat enhancement which could not otherwise be funded 
or implemented by EPA. The design of the CDFs would incorporate 
plantings conducive to use by birds and other wildlife for similar 
natural resource functions to those lost due to the contamination of 
the CDFs as a result of PCB contamination in the Harbor: such lost or 
injured natural resource functions include cover, foraging and/or 
feeding. The Council would like to first determine, through a study, 
the type of plantings that could be supported by these structures, 
including the sides of the structures. Such plantings would further 
benefit the injured natural resources present in the Harbor. If the 
plantings are determined to be likely to restore or replace PCB-injured 
natural resources in the area, the Council would consider a funding 
level necessary to support the plantings.

16. Upper Sconticut Neck Shellfish/Sewer Installation (Council 
suggested amount:$150,000 for study, $550,000 in reserve)

    This restoration idea seeks to eliminate a potential source of 
pollution which has closed shellfish beds and recreational areas in the 
Outer New Bedford Harbor off Sconticut Neck, Fairhaven. Shellfish beds 
in the Harbor were contaminated with PCBs resulting in fishery 
closures. This project would replace those beds by opening up beds 
closed by septic contamination. It is believed that at least one of the 
sources of pollution into this area is individual septic systems that 
release fecal contaminants which eventually migrate into the harbor. 
Although the Town of Fairhaven has made great efforts to identify 
individual sources and correct the problem, the contamination still 
continues. To further address this problem, the idea proposes to 
connect 450 Sconticut Neck residential dwellings to the municipal sewer 
system, which may reduce fecal contamination in the Outer Harbor. This 
idea, if feasible, will protect an existing shellfish bed from fecal 
bacterial contamination.
    The Council is concerned that there may be several contaminant 
sources that are impacting these shellfish beds. Rather than commit a 
significant amount of funding to correct what may be only one source of 
contamination, the Council would like to undertake a study to determine 
the sources impacting these shellfish beds and the best way to correct 
the source of contamination. If the results conclusively determine that 
the Sconticut Neck septic systems are responsible, and the idea is 
feasible, the Council would then release additional funds to assist the 
design and engineering for this project.

17. Winsegansett Field Station--New Bedford Harbor Environmental 
Education and Coastal Resources Restoration Center (Council suggested 
amount: $360,000)

    This idea contains many different components which the Council 
believes to be severable. The Council preliminarily supports the 
following aspects of the idea: habitat restoration and environmental 
education projects targeting specific human activities. In particular, 
the Council believes at this time that there are discrete habitat 
restoration projects on the property that should be identified and 
implemented, including: restoring salt marsh degraded

[[Page 46152]]

by insufficient flow (salt marshes were injured by PCBs); restoring 
water quality in Winsegansett Pond by investigating and correcting 
pollutant inputs (salt pond habitat assists natural resources injured 
by PCBs); and restoring living resources through eelgrass planting 
(eelgrass plantings assist in the restoration of natural resources 
injured by PCBs). These restoration activities would provide 
replacement for similar lost or injured natural resources in the Harbor 
Environment.
    The Council also believes that there are opportunities to educate 
people about restoration of PCB injured natural resources in the New 
Bedford Harbor Environment through conducting activities at this site 
and encouraging additional restoration efforts. For example, there are 
eelgrass beds, saltmarsh and a salt pond located on the site. As those 
areas are restored, or enhanced, it may be appropriate to provide 
specific training programs to educate schoolchildren, the public, and 
municipal officials regarding the functions of these resources, and the 
appropriate methodologies to restore and monitor the resources in the 
New Bedford Harbor Environment.
    The Council also evaluated the need for a full-time staff person to 
be funded from the New Bedford Harbor Trust Accounts. The Council chose 
instead only to recommend sufficient funds to allow contracting for the 
specific services needed. The Council also recommends some funding for 
the trail and public access improvements and protective/interpretative 
signage.

Classification

    This notice does not contain a collection-of-information 
requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. and 9601 et seq.

    Dated: July 21, 2000.
Andrew J. Kemmerer,
Director, Office of Habitat Conservation, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-19028 Filed 7-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F