In spite of a favorable environmental assessment issued in April by the National Park Service, several neighborhood groups remain opposed to the university’s planned construction along the Potomac River and are appealing for additional study. The assessment found that the preferred design for the boathouse, which calls for an 18,682-square-foot structure not exceeding 36 feet 6 inches, would cause a light-to-moderate environmental impact. But Matthew Logan, president of the Potomac Conservancy, said in a letter to NPS written in June that the EA did not fully address the potential negative effects the boathouse could have on the quality and flow of water in the Potomac, and requested a more detailed report. “We have carefully reviewed the EA and concluded that its analysis is lacking in several important respects,” Logan said in the letter. “Without a more complete and accurate study, the park service cannot make a fully informed decision regarding the proposed boathouse.” Logan was not available for comment. The objections are the latest obstacle in the university’s fight for its own boathouse, which began nearly a quarter century ago. Plans were delayed for months due to a lawsuit filed by local environmental groups against the NPS in 2004. The university’s crew teams currently share the Thompson Boat House boathouse with George Washington University and several local high schools. In his letter, Logan also questioned the impact the boathouse may have on sight lines from the Canal Towpath and the Washington Canoe Club boathouse, echoing a concern that two other local groups, C&O Canal Association and the WCC, have expressed in recent years. William Line, a spokesman for the NPS, said that the agency has received thousands of comments regarding the EA since its release, and is reviewing the comments “to make a determination as to what our next steps are.” Line said that if the objections to the EA are deemed relevant, it could commission an Environmental Impact Survey, a more in-depth assessment of the boathouse’s potential impact. Line said that the NPS has not set a deadline for when it will conclude its review of the feedback, and that there was no deadline by which the agency must make its decision. Spiros Dimolitsas, the university’s senior vice president and chief administrative officer, sent a letter to Kevin Brandt, superintendent for the C&O Canal National Historic Park, dated the day after Logan’s letter. In his letter, Dimolitsas urged the NPS to move expeditiously on its review and to find that an EIS is not required. “There were no significant impacts identified by the EA,” he said in the letter. “Therefore, further environmental studies are not necessary, warranted, justified or required by law.” As of June, the university had secured 3,253 signatures on a petition in favor of the boathouse, including some from prominent community members. If the NPS finds that no further environmental review is required, the university must then carry out a 1998 land swap agreement with the NPS in order to secure the necessary building parcel. The land swap, which must first be approved by Congress, requires a 120-day review period. All of this must be completed before the university can apply for building permits, a process which can take an additional three to four months. University spokesman Erik Smulson said that the school has no definitive timeline for the completion of the project. “At this point we are waiting,” he said.