Sears Island History 1995. Oppo writes Council on Environmental Quality: EPA's J. Devillar's not following law

Ron Huber
COASTAL WATERS PROJECT
POB 1871

Rockland ME 04841

October 13, 1995   (by Fax)

Ray Clark
Council on Environmental Quality
722 Jackson Place
Washington DC

Dear Mr. Clark

Two persons (Mark Imlay and Denny Haldeman) suggested I contact you  concerning our group's efforts to make sure that NEPA issues are properly addressed in the course of the Section 10/404/permitting process for the Sears Island cargoport proposal in Searsport Maine. 

The Coastal Waters Project is a citizens association dedicated to the protection and restoration of estuarine and nearshore fish and shellfish habitat along the Atlantic coast.

Briefly, the Maine Dept of Transportation, in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration has prepared a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement*  pursuant to the state's proposal to build a cargo terminal on undeveloped Sears Island in upper Penobscot Bay, Maine. The terminal would provide deepwater access to rail and highway connections in central Maine, and on into Quebec.  Primary cargo will be woodchips for export on the world market. Industrial growth in the vicinity of the port is also anticipated.

We are concerned that  the project as laid out in the Supplemental EIS* will have unacceptable adverse secondary and cumulative impacts to estuarine and marine resources of Penobscot Bay and the Gulf of Maine (including species managed under federal fishery management plans and the Atlantic Salmon which is under review for listing under the Endangered Species Act), as well as unacceptable adverse secondary and cumulative impacts to impacts to wetlands, federally listed T & E species and economically managed forest resources in the anticipated woodchip sourcing area of the forests of Maine (and possibly Canada).

However, the SEIS for the project does not address these offsite impacts, and the Maine DOT is resisting the inclusion of such impacts in the SEIS. We want to make sure that these impacts gets the consideration we believe they deserve.  National Marine Fisheries Service and the US Fish & Wildlife Service are both concerned about the DSEIS' inadequacies. 

In their comments, EPA staff has rated the project review EO-2 (Does not meet the purposes of NEPA) in accordance with their national rating system.  EPA region 1 Director John Devillars, however, appears somewhat lukewarm to his staff's recommendations that offsite impacts be evaluated.  

In addition, at a regional meeting on marine habitat issues, NMFS staff suggested that "the elevator doesn't work here anymore", referring to elevation of their concerns within NOAA and the Dept of Commerce.

In light of these potential barriers to getting the proposed project's off-site impacts fully considered, I would like an opportunity to visit your office early next week to discuss our concerns in greater detail. I am in the Washington area for unrelated reasons for several more days. If this would not be possible, perhaps you could you contact me at 301-773-___ or 301-773-_____ and we could discuss these issues over the telephone.

Sincerely

Ron Huber, director

Coastal Waters Project

* A Supplemental EIS was required after numerous deficiencies were found in the original EIS for this project.