Julian Holmes on The Sears Island Cargo Port


In an Open Letter dated June 5 to Maine Governor Angus King, Wayne resident Julian Holmes criticizes the Governor's economic development and environmental-protection policies. Holmes' observations evolved from responses to a series of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests he made of three Federal and three Maine-State agencies to examine files related to the proposal to develop Sears Island as a cargo port. The files reveal:

  1. Failure by certain State and Federal officials to follow carefully the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act.
  2. Surprisingly skimpy records kept by Governor King on the Sears Island cargo-port, one of King's most highly promoted economic- development plans.
  3. Possible reluctance of Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (DIFW) officials when asked by the Governor's Chief Legal Counsel to make "detailed" responses to Federal scientists on the impact of the Sears Island cargo-port project: "It is a difficult and painful situation for scientific staff [DIFW] when directed to prepare comments on a scientific issue in a particular way which may not reflect staff's scientifically based opinion." (EPA Memorandum, October 19, 1995)

Holmes feels King's meager record-keeping is symptomatic of flawed public policy, and that more concern should be shown by the Governor for existing State and Federal laws that govern the public's right-to-know about operations of government. According to Holmes, too many of King's policies are designed to benefit the wealthy and the interests of big corporations. Yet, promotion and implementation of these policies is at taxpayers' expense -- as with the Sears Island cargo-port, the anti-Ban-Clearcutting campaign, the use of Reformulated Gasoline (RFG), the fast-tracked MBNA corporate compound at Ducktrap Mountain in Northport, and the Kenetech wind-power project.

Regarding RFG, Holmes cites a Department of Environmental Protection communication (May 15, 1996) acknowledging RFG's "limited benefits" in addressing Maine's ozone problem. Says Holmes, "Ozone reduction and improved health for Maine people were sacrificed for political expediency, bad science, and petroleum-industry profits."


June 5, 1996

An Open Letter to
Governor Angus King
State House
Augusta, Maine 04333

Dear Governor King:

I invite you to examine an aspect of Maine life that I feel gets inadequate attention. And that is what is loosely known as white-collar crime.

I say "loosely known" because of the great difficulty a non public-official (citizen) has in establishing willfully bad behavior, as opposed to various degrees of unawareness or indifference on the part of public officials. For instance, it is routine for a prosecutor to "prove" drug possession. It is not so easy for a citizen, with no subpoena power or political clout, to prove that a judge or a prosecutor stole his right to a fair trial or that U.S. Presidents and General Richard Secord, among others, lied about the drug-besotted Iran-Contra affair. Blue-collar and white-collar "crime" are so different! In politics money talks, and justice walks.

For example, the recently aborted Sears Island cargo-port plan to ship wood-chips out of Maine is perceived by many people to have been a pretty shady operation. To what extent white- collar crimes may have taken place during that controversy may never be known. A criminal inquiry has already been squelched by State and Federal officials {1}. And it's pretty obvious that public officials who promoted the cargo port were less interested in protecting the public than were citizens who sought to protect the environment of the Island. A powerful weapon used by some officials in the Sears Island case was government secrecy.

The National Environmental Policy Act requires that public business on important environmental matters, like Sears Island, be conducted in public; and both the Federal and Maine Freedom of Information (FOI) laws require public officials to open their files to public examination. In the case of Sears Island, much public business was deliberately conducted out of the public view, and some officials were more cooperative than others in making available their records.

I filed FOI requests with three Federal and three Maine State agencies. From reasonably to nominally cooperative, so far, have been the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), and the Maine Department of Marine Resources (DMR). Particularly uncooperative was the Maine Department of Transportation (MDOT). And although the legal staff of the Office of Governor has been courteous and helpful in this request, the length of time it took to arrange examinations seemed excessive {2}.

Nevertheless, the yet far-from-complete responses to my FOI requests have provided citizens a ringside seat at these government negotiations on the Sears Island cargo-port, where public officials wrestled privately over public and corporate interests. One fact has become apparent: Officials from the State of Maine were overly supportive of those private interests that would benefit from a publicly funded cargo port at Sears Island.

In contrast to this perspective of Maine officials, the federal Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) consistently championed the protection of Sears Island and Penobscot Bay; and they provided the hard science that more than justified denial of the cargo-port permit.

A particularly disturbing aspect of your cargo-port "support package" was the attempt by both the Maine DMR and the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (DIFW) to debunk science provided by the FWS and NMFS in defense of the environments of the Island and Bay {3 a and b}. This effort was requested by your Chief Legal Counsel {4}. The resulting DMR work was criticized as "irresponsible" by the Jackson Estuarine Laboratory which found DMR's position to be based on "false and misleading information" {5}. Coincidentally, the DMR Commissioner has been accused publicly of "supporting overfishing of commercial fisheries" {6}.

In your files was the DIFW letter which argued vigorously against the need for the strong environmental protection recommended for Sears Island by the FWS and the NMFS {7}. There was also a DIFW request for "further guidance", in this effort {8}. I did not find in your files a response to that request. I did find a memorandum of thanks from Chief Legal Counsel Libby Butler to both DMR and to DIFW for "correct[ing] the serious federal agency misstatements about the [Sears Island] project impacts" {9}. However I did not find in your files the FWS response that disagreed with the DIFW letter, a copy of which response had been sent to you {10}. I did find, in EPA files, discussion of "a difficult and painful situation for scientific staff [DIFW] when directed to prepare comments on a scientific issue in a particular way which may not reflect staff's scientifically based opinion." {11 a and b}.

In your files were several pages of helpful hints, if you will, on promoting the cargo-port. One page was titled "DEBUNKING THE MYTHS" {12}. Coincidentally, from federal agency files came a copy of a nineteen-page propaganda handbook financed by Maine taxpayers which instructs cargo-porters on how to keep the public guessing {13}.

This handbook is truly alarming. For instance, to the question "Should Maine export woodchips", the "Preferred Approach" response is, "Explain that this is not a NEPA [National Environmental Policy Act] issue, but rather a policy issue..." {14}. Regarding how "hinterland" jobs and income would benefit from the cargo port, the handbook says: "Remove all discussion of economic benefits to the hinterland from the general discussion of secondary and cumulative impacts." {15}. As to the propriety of expending public funds on a Sears Island promotional video that cost Maine taxpayers $10,000, the proper response is: "State that this is not a NEPA issue" {16}.

Contrary to assertions in this handbook, NEPA requires study of all environmental and economic impacts; {17} but some Maine and some federal officials have seemed indifferent to NEPA Regulations.

NEPA requires that the public be notified and encouraged to be involved "in decisions which affect the quality of the human environment". The secrecy with which Maine officials tried to negotiate the Sears Island cargo-port proposal with federal officials appears contrary to NEPA {18}.

Minutes of at least three of the many secret meetings of the Sears Island "team" were prepared by the same contractor that produced the "handbook" discussed above {19}.

With respect to the Sears Island files in your office, I found missing a number of documents that could have provided pertinent information on the cargo-port proposal, as well as on public opinion.

Not in your files was the official transcript of last September's public hearing on Sears Island {20}. This document alone would have suggested to you that the project is not supported by the general public; of the 73 private citizens (non-public officials) who stayed through the 12-hour hearing and actually spoke, 54 opposed the cargo port and 19 supported it.

Also not found in your files were the verbatim minutes of three secret meetings attended by representatives from the Maine Department of Transportation (MDOT). If these documents had been handy, you might have found significant the protracted disputes over the environment of Penobscot Bay {21}.

Nor was there in your files an indication of how things went at your Sears Island meeting in Washington DC with EPA Director Carol Browner {22a and b}.

I did not find in your files the comprehensive report by the Conservation Law Foundation (CLV) {23} on the inadequacies of the Sears Island Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) prepared by the Maine Department of Transportation. A copy of the CLV report had been sent to you.

The DMR attempt to discredit the Federal scientists {24} was analyzed by the Ilseboro Island Trust. Though a copy of that analysis was sent to you, {25} I did not find it in your files.

The Island Institute submitted to you a copy of its analysis {26} of the MDOT Sears Island DSEIS. That analysis was missing.

I found in your files no telephone or E-Mail logs, no record of cabinet-meeting discussions of Sears Island and, with the exception of a single news clipping, no documents for the busy Sears-Island month of December 1995. Nor could I determine whether paper-company and wood-chip interests had communicated with you about Sears Island.

MDOT serves as your manager for the Sears Island cargo-port project. On November 16, 1995, I filed an FOI request to examine MDOT Sears Island files. I have not yet received permission to do so.

As for the EPA files I have examined to date, between September 1 and October 24, 1995 there were more than thirty Sears-Island memoranda internal to the Region-I office in Boston. For the much longer period September 1, 1995 to March 5, 1996, your files show only eight Sears-Island internal memoranda involving the office of The Governor.

I find it odd that one of the highest-priority economic- development projects on your agenda has such skimpy files -- missing so much information that citizens and officials had taken the trouble to send to you. The cargo-port project alone cost taxpayers a great deal of money, perhaps some of which could have been saved if you had been aware of information in EPA files on the questionable economic viability of such a port {27a through c}.

By not taking advantage of information available to you and to agencies of Maine Government, your economic development policies may continue to suffer from overdependence on aggressive corporate interests that so heavily influence Maine's economy.

For example, when you were running for election, you questioned, for good scientific reason, automotive Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) reduction (CARTEST) as a method of reducing ozone pollution {28}. Following your election, your Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) introduced Reformulated Gasoline (RFG). RFG is your VOC-reduction substitute for CARTEST, and it is apparently equally ineffective at reducing ozone. Though people who suffer from pollution will probably notice no improvement in ozone levels from the use of RFG, ARCO Chemical Company smiles all the way to the bank with the profits from this new policy {29a through c}.

On February 16, 1996, I submitted, for the second time, to the DEP a commentary on Maine's scientifically indefensible RFG policy {30}, and invited a response on the science of ozone reduction under conditions characteristic of Maine (NOx-limited atmosphere). That response, dated May 15, is confirmation that Maine's VOC-reduction program is not very effective; it suggests that VOC reduction [such as Maine's RFG program] could work in a densely developed area like Chicago or Milwaukee; and it states that the primary reason Maine adopted its VOC-reduction program was because the EPA demanded it under threat of financial sanctions against Maine.

"As we've discussed in the past, the bulk of the Department's ozone control efforts to date have focussed on the reduction of VOCs. Although it is almost universally accepted that the control of VOCs in a NOx limited environment such as Maine's (or most non-urban areas) will provide only limited benefits in controlling ozone, we must not forget that the Department's control efforts to date have been driven primarily by the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, which mandate specific VOC control strategies and levels of reductions. As the implementing agency for the State, it is our responsibility to ensure that Maine does not suffer the potential consequences of federal sanctions such as the oft-mentioned withholding of highway funds.

...While certain localized areas may benefit from the reductions of VOCs (e.g., the Chicago-Milwaukee Corridor), significant additional NOx reductions combined with VOC reductions contained within the various states' rate of progress plans will likely provide the greatest directional improvement in air quality for Maine and the remainder of the eastern seaboard."{31}

Thus, your support of the mandatory use of Reformulated Gasoline (RFG) in Maine rejects the science of air pollution by advocating a fuel product that will only marginally reduce Maine's serious ozone pollution.

In short, with RFG for Maine, ozone reduction and improved health for Maine people were sacrificed for political expediency, bad science, and petroleum-industry profits. In 1995, Arco Chemical Company, which produces RFG additives, spent $82,349 lobbying in Augusta {32}. Not unlike policies of the tobacco industry, your administration has favored corporate, rather than public health.

Recently, you have embarked upon another tax-supported venture to promote corporate welfare by trying to defeat the Ban Clearcutting citizen referendum. Your personal anti-Ban- Clearcutting rhetoric threatens to raise emotions to dangerous levels by declaring the referendum a "loaded gun pointed at the head of the Maine economy" {33}. You seem willing to overlook the current loss of Maine forestry-related jobs and the inevitable increase in this loss rate that would result from continuing to clearcut away Maine's forests. I wonder if your files on Maine's forests are as skimpy as those on Sears Island.

The proposed cutting of 2800 acres of forest on the Schoodic Peninsula and the resulting public outrage {34a trhough f} is an example of Maine's failure to come to grips with the inadequate protection provided for our forest resources by current forestry practices. And how anachronistic to have the Schoodic operation located next to Acadia National Park!

On another front, your administration's fast-tracking of MBNA's application to construct its corporate compound on Ducktrap Mountain in Northport also seems politically driven {35a and b}. The consequences of such corporate takeovers of our most valuable scenic and environmental resources are worthy of more consideration than Maine officials are providing.

In effect, Mr. Governor, economic policies of the State of Maine are confiscatory of property owned by your constituents, the citizens of Maine {36} -- property eyed by corporate interests whose causes your administration espouses. By "property" I mean our environmentally and productively degraded public waters that should provide livelihood for Maine people; the public air that should be keeping us healthy instead of making all too many people ill; the public scenery that brings joy to native Mainers (like myself) and visitors alike; the public lands that should be keeping the public water clean, protecting and nurturing our public forest resources, and protecting the fish and wildlife; the public freedom from all manner of government ripoffs that take from the less fortunate to benefit the affluent corporate "friends" of Maine government.

This problem of confiscation of public property in Maine has been summed up eloquently by one of your constituents, Ron Huber, Director of the Coastal Waters Project:

"In this fin de siecle era of restless capital flowing at high speed hither and yon across the globe in search of some transitory host, it becomes ever more necessary to aggressively defend our public assets time and again if we are to keep possession of them."{37}

With all due respect, Mr. Governor, I think your understanding of public rights would be enhanced if you were to become more aware of the laws governing them -- such as Maine's Public Access Law, and NEPA. As for your Sears Island files, I assume your office simply does not retain all information provided to you. This, of course, is reasonable and necessary. Nevertheless, you may wish to revisit our public-access law, because one of its features is to enable the public to find out what information in your possession makes you "tick", so to speak.

In the hands of the public, this information might encourage officials to pay closer attention to the every day business of government which, to an increasingly cynical public, may often appear as white collar crime, or at best, a systematic disregard for the public sensibility.

Bringing public awareness to bear on marginal performance by public officials could result in halting unwise, expensive, public policy before it involves vast sums of public money and criminal investigations as, unfortunately, was the case at Sears Island {38a through e} . Perhaps no criminal inquiries are presently anticipated with respect to other Maine economic-development ventures, but promotion with public monies, by public agencies, of projects like Northport (MBNA), RFG, CARTEST {39 a and b}, and Kenetech {40a through d} is still a reality. Avoiding these public expenses in these cases would have been "win-win" situations for both Maine Government and its citizens.

Sincerely, JCH


1. Dieter Bradbury, "Criminal probe of cargo project blocked by state, federal officials", Maine Sunday Telegram, November 28, 1993, p.1A.

2. Nancy Allen, Letter to Hon. Angus King, December 20, 1995. Letter asked to see Governor's Sears Island files on communications with Governor's Office. First examination of files took place on January 19, 1996. Because so little information was in the files, a second examination of the files was requested to confirm results of the first. That took place on April 9. To arrange these two examinations involved letters from Allen to King, and to King Legal Counsel Libby Butler, dated 12/20/95, 1/3/96, 1/24/96, 2/5/96, 2/12/96, 3/5/96, 3/7/96, and 3/19/96; and Letters from Butler to Allen dated 12/27/95, 1/30/96, 2/7/96, 2/21/96, 3/6/96, and 3/26/96.

3a. Robin Alden, Commissioner, Maine Department of Marine Resources (DMR), Letter to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), October 13, 1995.

3b. Ray B. Owen, Commissioner, DIFW, Letter to FHWA & ACOE, October 13, 1995.

4. Elizabeth R. Butler, Chief Counsel to the Governor, Memorandum to DMR Commissioner Robin Alden and DIFW Commissioner Ray B. Owen, October 13, 1995.

5. Frederick T. Short, Ph.D., Associate Research Professor, Natural Resources Department, Jackson Estuarine Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire; Letter to Robin Alden, November 30, 1995.

6. Vaughn C. Anthony Ph.D., Chief Scientist, Retired, National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Region, "Commissioner Alden's `Do-Nothing' Management Appalling", The Maine Sportsman, April 1996, p.6.

7. See note 3b.

8. Fred Hurley, Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (DIFW), FAX to Legal Counsel to the Governor Libby Butler, October 13, 1995. "Enclosed please find draft copy of Sears Island letter (October 13, 1995, letter from DIFW to FHWA and ACOE). Any further guidance on this matter will be appreciated."

9. See note 4.

10. Michael J. Bartlett (FWS) Letter to FHWA and ACOE, November 22, 1995. This letter responds to arguments made by the Maine DIFW against the level of federal support for environmental protection of Sears Island.

11a. Kyla Bennett (EPA), Memorandum to E. Higgins et al (EPA), October 19, 1995.

11b. Steven John (EPA), Memorandum to Kyla Bennett et al, October 19, 1995.

12. "The Sears Island Cargoport: Debunking the Myths", Gov. King's Sears Island files, Unidentified author, Undated. Promotional arguments favoring the cargo port.

13. "Sears Island Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Major Issues Approach Strategies, Working Draft", Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., Watertown, Massachusetts, December 13, 1995.

14. See note 13, page 5, Issue 11.

15. See note 13, page 6, Issue 13.

16. See note 13, page 15, Issue 33.

17. REGULATIONS For Implementing The Procedural Provisions Of The NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT, 40 CFR 1502.16, 1508.8.

18. NEPA, 40 CFR 1500.1, 1500.2, 1506.6.

19. December 19, 1994, January 10, 1995, and April 24, 1995, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New England Office, Waltham Massachusetts. On December 19 and 20, 1995, the team was scheduled to discuss the propaganda handbook (see note 6) at the Federal Highway Administration Office, Muskie Federal Building, Augusta, Maine; I have not yet found minutes of that meeting.

20. Proceedings, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers In Re: Searsport Island Terminal, Belfast, Maine, September 12, 1995, Downing & Peters Reporting Associates, 193 Middle Street, Portland, Maine, 04101.

21. See note 19.

22a. Bob Hickmott, Assistant to Hon. William S. Cohen, "Meeting with Maine Delegation on Sears Island (5/8/95)", Background Material informing Carol Browner about participants expected to attend the Sears Island meeting of May 8, 1995 in Washington DC.

22b. Hon. Carol M. Browner, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Letter to Hon. Jerry Lewis, May 11, 1995. This letter confirms the meeting of Browner and Governor King.

23. Daniel Sosland, Conservation Law Foundation, Letter to ACOE, FHWA, and MDOT, October 12, 1995.

24. See note 3.

25. Stephen Miller, Ilseboro Islands Trust, Letter to Robin Alden, Commissioner DMR, December 11, 1995. Regarding Alden's letter to the FHWA and the ACOE (see Note 3a), Miller says, "My initial reaction ranged from disbelief to horror ..."

26. Philip W. Conkling et al, Island Institute, "Comments of the Island Institute to the Army Corps of Engineers Regarding the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Study (DSEIS) for the Proposed Sears Island Dry Cargo Terminal, October 13, 1995.

27a. Kyla Bennett (EPA), Memorandum to Elizabeth Higgins and Steven John (EPA), September 6, 1995. References a letter from Coastwise Inc. ("an International Transportation firm") to MDOT Sears-Island Project Manager Brian Nutter and MDOT Transportation Director Robert Elder explaining that a Sears Island cargo port "may very well become a burden to the tax payers".

27b. Phil Colarusso (EPA), Memorandum to D. Fierra et al (EPA), May 10, 1995. Reports on a Sears Island public forum on May 6, 1995. "It appears that the project will provide many fewer jobs than originally promised and the port will be operating in a deficit situation for an extended period. ... I believe people are concerned about the environmental impacts, but are even more concerned about do we even need/want this project to begin with".

27c. Steven John (EPA), Memorandum to Kyla Bennett (EPA), June 26, 1995. References "excellent letter" ... and "great questions" raised by Ruth Robinson of Blue Hill. John's Memo. asks: "What's the story here -- do you think DOT hasn't done this basic economic research, or do you think they have and it isn't good so they are sitting or, they haven't done the research because they suspect/know that it'll be bad news? ... Why does the State have a three port policy if two of those ports are in competition for the same market?"

28. Angus King, memorandum to George Neavoll, September 21, 1994.

29a. Julian C. Holmes, Testimony on State of Maine Implementation of Revised 15% Rate-of-Progress Plan, June 28, 1995.

29b. Julian C. Holmes, Commentary on Maine Department of Environmental Protection proposal to meet Federal Ozone Standards, Board of Environmental Protection Meeting, July 19, 1995.

29c. Julian C. Holmes, "Drive for clean air retarded", Guest Column, Kennebec Journal, August 4, 1995, p.6.

30. See note 29b.

31. James Brooks, Director, Air Quality Bureau, Maine DEP, Letter to JCH, May 15, 1996.

32. Liz Chapman, "Report: Lobbyists paid record $3.5 M", Lewiston Sun-Journal, May 18, 1996, p.1A.

33. John Hale, "King rejects proposal to ban clear-cutting", Bangor Daily News, February 9, 1996, p.A1.

34a. Permit by Rule, ID# 15502, April 3, 1996, Granted April 5, 1996 by Maine Department of Environmental Protection, for "Stream Crossing" at Schoodic Peninsula timber harvest.

34b. Notice of Intent to Harvest Forest Products, Notification Number 159800, 2800 acres to be harvested, Winter Harbor Holding Inc. c/o Siren Mgt., 40 Exchange Place, New York, NY 10005, April 12, 1996, Maine Forest Service.

34c. Kathy Holliman, "Timber plan irks officials at Acadia -- Harvesting set to begin on Schoodic Peninsula", Bangor Daily News, April 17, 1996, p.A1.

34d. Kathy Holliman, "Acadia chief rebuffed -- Park's private neighbor plans Schoodic timber harvest", Bangor Daily News, April 25, 1996, P.A1.

34e. W. Kent Olson, "Schoodic Trees ... and more", Bangor Daily News, April 25, 1996.

34f. "The Schoodic Cut", Editorial, Bangor Daily News, April 25, 1996, p.A10.

35a. Walter Griffin, "DEP won't require hearing on MBNA center -- Company says mountaintop retreat will blend into the environment but opponents aren't so sure", Bangor Daily News, March 27, 1996, p.B1.

35b. Walter Griffin, "MBNA development at Northport under fire -- Environmentalists ask state to take good look at Ducktrap Mountain conference center project", Bangor Daily News, April 9, 1996, p.B1.

36. Ron Huber, Director Coastal Waters Project, "The Challenge of Public Property Rights", Guest Column, Camden Herald, April 11, 1996.

37. See note 36.

38a. See note 1.

38b. See note 36.

38c. Ron Huber, "Upset in Maine - Sears Island Cargo Port Goes Down the Tubes", The Northern Forest Forum, Mud Season 1996, p.8.

38d. Sears Island Marine Dry Cargo Terminal, Financial Summary, June 30, 1995; Maine Department of Transportation total expenditures are $20.9 million.

38e. Sears Island Project Manager Brian Nutter, Letter to JCH, December 18, 1995; 1995 MDOT expenditures on Sears-Island private consultants was #1.14 million.

39a. Maine Governor John McKernan launched CARTEST; Gov. King abandoned it.

39b. "Lawyers for CarTest keep appeal alive with written arguments", The Kennebec Journal, May 25, 1996, p.13.

40a. Peter Jackson, "Wind-energy project to be one of biggest", Kennebec Journal, August 21, 1995, p.11; Kenetech Windpower Inc. 600-windmill project in western Maine to cost $200 million.

40b. Robert Kimber, "Fragile mountaintops more valuable than windpower", Kennebec Journal, August 24, 1995, p.17.

40c. Pamela Prodan, "Maine Windpower Plan Stalls; Legal Challenge Continues", The Northern Forest Forum, Midwinter 1996, p.17.

40d. "Wind power plan stalled by problems", Editorial, Kennebec Journal, January 8, 1996, p.12; Wind power analyst Henry Hermann says, "The [windpower] machine ... doesn't appear to work very well."

[Julian's Home Page]    [Julian's Letters Index ]    [Maine Greens Home Page]    [Interesting Links]

Document name, ver, and desc: ~troberts/julian/sears76.html v 0.03 - Voices of Green Maine - Julian Holmes on The Sears Island Cargo Port
Originally created and updated by: 28 dec 97 / rlw
E-mail: webmaster@mainegreens.org
Last updated by: 8-Feb-98 / TomR
E-mail: Snakeroot DataGraphics