IS^/SS	16; 2.5	Lc3 erM mir yis/

* dmr diaagreeB with the joint evaluation's statement that this will be the largeat impact in New England in the past decade. dmr^b disagreement is bawd on its dispute with the federal resourQo agencies over the eelgrasa impact assessment.
We believe our atatement iis correct.  Mhon putting this project into context, all the marine and freshwater impacts wore considered.  Indeed, epa New England informally surveyed other ooaatal EPA regiona to determine if any other Region had allowed such a large marine impact.  The poll of other regions did not able to turn up any other projects that allowed thia severe of a lose to submerged aquatic vegetation (sav).  From a regional standpoint, EPA stands by ite statement that, if permitted as proposed, this would be the most damaging project in recent memory in New England to submerged aquatic vegetation; with the additional impacts to intertidal mudflats, subtidal bottom and freshwater wetlands/ it would surpass any project in New England in the last decade in terms of impacts to aquatic resources,
* dmr dix&grftas with the statement that commercial fishing would be affected by the project,
Direct ic.ob to commercial fishing will be felt by displacement of gear and fishing opportunities.  Some lobster gear is currently deployed in the area adjacent to the rook jetty.  This area would be lost to lobstermen. Furthermore, four acres of sortsheil cl&m habitat has already been lost and remains unmitigated.
Indirect lo»» will occur via the loss of habitat for commercially important finfish and invertebrates (lobster, —craba, claws, worms) as discussed earlier.  Thua, we believe that a negative impact will bo felt by the commercial fishing industry.
* DMR believes that a mitigation plan can be developed to compensate fully for the unavoidable impacts of the project.
The federal resource agencies have aucn experience in attempting to recreate, restore or mitigate for the reaouroCB and habitats that would b® lost by this project. we continue to pledge our assistance in this regard, while acknowledging that the challenge is great.
X hope theae comments help you in your continued review and respective decisions on the proposed terminal.  I urge you to more carefully consider the joint evaluation document prepared by my staff and representatives from fws and NMFS.  Our agencies have d&voted considerable time and axpertise to ensuring that our