Jackson Hole news | Jackson Hole feature | Jackson Hole environmental | Jackson Hole sports | Today's News

Road plan steamrolls environmental concerns
Federal watchdog agency's call for sensitivity rejected by Togwotee Pass road engineers.

By Rebecca Huntington

Highway officials have rejected the Environmental Protection Agency's advice to select a Togwotee Pass road upgrade plan that would best protect "this fragile mountain environment."

The Federal Highway Administration overruled the federal environmental watchdog agency in a decision released last week to the News & Guide. The decision, made Feb. 18 but not publicly acknowledged until Thursday, paves the way for an estimated $80 million overhaul of Highway 287/26 over Togwotee Pass, which could take a decade to complete. The mountain pass is home to world-class big game herds and many threatened and endangered species, including grizzly bears, lynx and wolves. The road passes through the Shoshone and Bridger-Teton national forests and a small part of it is in Grand Teton National Park.

EPA officials outlined concerns about the project's impacts to water quality, wetlands and wildlife in a letter dated Dec. 23, 2003. The letter commented on a study by highway officials designed to disclose the project's environmental impacts. EPA questioned the thoroughness of that study and recommended paving less ground than planned.

The primary issue raised by EPA was the width of highway shoulders. The federal highway department, in cooperation with Wyoming Department of Transportation, originally proposed 12-foot traveling lanes with 6-foot shoulders. But highway officials increased shoulder widths to 8 feet in the final proposal, increasing the amount of pavement by 14 acres and bringing the total pavement for wider shoulders to 147 acres, according to EPA.

The wider shoulders could increase runoff and result in additional erosion and water pollution, stated the EPA letter, signed by Larry Svoboda, director of the National Environmental Policy Act Program Office of Ecosystems Protection and Remediation.

The EPA applauded highway officials for reducing the project's overall footprint by reducing clear zones and shrinking shoulder widths along passing lanes and in some sensitive areas.

But EPA concluded the 8-foot shoulders were overkill and asked highway officials to select another construction alternative, which was considered but rejected, that called for 4-foot shoulders and no passing lanes. EPA contends that 4-foot shoulders would cause less disturbance to the sensitive mountain environment while still meeting highway safety and capacity goals.

For example, Beartooth Highway and some mountain highways in Colorado were upgraded with shoulders of 2 to 3 feet, EPA states. The Beartooth Highway project, also in Wyoming, struck a balance between increased safety and protecting the environment, EPA states.

EPA blasted highway officials for using bicycling as a justification for wider shoulders.

Highway officials stated that wider shoulders were proposed in response to public requests for a better cross-country bicycle route in the highway department's final environmental impact statement.

EPA countered that the Beartooth Highway, also a popular cross-country bike route, did not require such wide shoulders.

"We have not seen mountain highways with moderate traffic volumes, such as [Togwotee Pass], where bicycle safety was used to justify such inordinately wide road shoulders," EPA states.

Moreover, EPA pointed out the short cycling season on the mountain pass and stressed that frequent clearing of sand, gravel, glass and debris would be necessary to make the entire shoulder desirable for cyclists.

"Again we are aware of no mountain roads with 8-foot shoulders on both road sides," EPA states. "The important wildlife habitats, visual qualities and sightseeing values, and other aesthetic qualities provide the rationale to limit the shoulders to only that necessary for motorist and bicyclist safety."

Highway officials responded that the 8-foot shoulders are based on national standards and provide for both bike and automobile safety. Also, highway officials said they would work with an advisory committee to look for opportunities to minimize impacts to threatened and endangered species.

EPA's letter, meanwhile, also concluded that highway officials failed to thoroughly study environmental impacts.

For example, the highway study did not quantify the potential impact of sediments, heavy metals, nutrients, oil, grease, deicing salts and litter from highway run-off on water quality and sensitive fish and aquatic plants, EPA states. Moreover, wider shoulders may increase impacts to wildlife, which highway officials also did not analyze, EPA concluded.

"The project has remaining significant, adverse environmental impacts in highly valued, fragile ecosystems and critically endangered wildlife habitats," EPA wrote. "We believe greater analysis of those impacts are needed before proceeding with 8-foot wide shoulders."

Highway officials disagreed.

Regarding water quality, highway officials responded that impacts are expected to be short term and erosion control structures would be installed to reduce pollution. Moreover, long-term water pollution would be the same under all alternatives, including no construction, because traffic levels would remain the same, highway officials said.

Highway officials also defended their choice as the best alternative for wildlife because widening the road would reduce the need for guardrails and retaining walls, which can trap wildlife in the highway corridor. Widening also would allow for flattening slopes, which would make it easier to replant road cuts, reduce erosion and improve drivers' sight distance, highway officials said.

Based on those findings, the highway officials rejected EPA's conclusion that having a smaller footprint would be the "environmentally preferred alternative." Highway officials said EPA erred in its analysis and concluded instead that a larger footprint is "environmentally preferred."

EPA's critique, however, also questioned whether highway officials would qualify for a federal permit to fill wetlands because the project is not the least damaging alternative. Federal regulations allow wetlands to be filled only when no other practical alternative exists.

The project will impact 13.1 acres of wetlands, double the impact of another alternative, which would harm only 6.8 acres of wetlands by reducing shoulders to 4 feet and eliminating passing lanes.

Highway officials countered that they picked the least damaging alternative that meets goals for roadway safety and reduces the potential for landslides. Highway officials also said they would try to further avoid wetlands in the final design.

The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials standard is for 8-foot shoulders for 55-mph speeds when traffic volumes exceed 2,000 per day, as on Togwotee. However, AASHTO allows 6-foot shoulders where necessary to reduce construction impacts.

WYDOT confirmed its decision on the upgrade to the News&Guide on Thursday although the record of decision was signed Feb. 18. There is no appeal process.

WYDOT spokeswoman Sarah Hogan could not say why no public notification of the decision was made. But she said: "We're certainly not trying to make it difficult for people to get the information."

Respond to this article by e-mailing publisher@jhnewsandguide.com