JUNEAU -- The long-contentious road north from Juneau may be taking a new higher profile, even a national profile, as groups for and against the road have worked to turn the Alaska Department of Transportation's public comment process on the road into a referendum on the project.
That process drew a surprising 42,746 comments on the $574 million project to extend the Juneau road system 50.8 miles up Lynn Canal toward Skagway and Haines. A new ferry terminal would take vehicles from the road's end to those cities, where travelers can connect to the Alaska Highway and the continental road system.
Turning the environmental impact statement public comment process into an informal referendum is a tactic that environmental groups have long used, but pro-build groups also used aggressively this time.
Environmental groups reached out to their statewide and national network of supporters to weigh in strongly against the road.
But Juneau's road advocacy group Citizens Pro-Road countered with ads featuring former first lady Sandy Parnell urging support of the DOT's preferred road plan.
"Many Alaskan families would love to visit the capital city, and surely would if they could drive," Parnell said in the group's ads, which went on to urge filing a comment in favor of the road alternative.
Union construction workers hoping for the project also weighed in with ads as well.
DOT spokesman Jeremy Woodrow said the bulk of the comments came from electronic form letters, with the vast majority of those coming from Earthjustice, a San Francisco-based group with an office in Juneau.
Earthjustice's Juneau attorney, Holly Harris, said it was important for federal and state decision-makers to understand that better ferry service, an alternative rejected in the environmental impact statement in favor of the road, had wide support.
"People across the country embrace and cherish the Tongass as a national treasure. The overwhelming response from Alaskans, as well as those outside Alaska, demonstrates that people want the safer, cheaper, and less environmentally damaging alternative of continued community-to-community ferry service," Harris said in a statement provided by Earthjustice's Maggie Caldwell.
Earthjustice was responsible for 36,459 form letter comments.
Other big contributors to comments were the Alaska Wilderness League, which generated 3,900 comments, and the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, which produced 895, Woodrow said. There were 122 comments at public hearings and 92 "hard copy" comments mailed or handed in at hearings.
But what impact will those comments have?
Woodrow said the total number of comments doesn't actually matter, and the department is looking for information that may point out flaws in the studies and plan to help them ensure they've made the correct decision with the chosen option in the final EIS due out next year.
"What the department is looking for is substantive comments that are constructive to the document," he said.
The environmental, economic and other studies are required under the National Environmental Policy Act for projects getting federal funding, but they don't require any specific outcome, just that knowledgeable decisions are made. They don't have to be the most popular decision.
"The NEPA process isn't a voting process, so I don't know how effective that is, but those are people who don't think it makes sense to build a road at taxpayer expense through this wild land," said Buck Lindekugel, an attorney with SEACC.
Every comment gets reviewed, but Woodrow said the form letters don't add substantially to the department's workload.
While the analysis of those comments is ongoing, the department moved ahead on its preferred alternative, the road up the east side of Lynn Canal, by applying for a wetlands fill permit last month.
Woodrow said filing that application now would save time by having the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers review it while the EIS is also being finalized.
It's important to do the two reviews simultaneously, he said.
"If you went step by step for each project it would take many years to get even the simplest project out the door, and this one is obviously much more complex," he said.
Woodrow also provided new project timelines, driven by the practical issues of permit review.
The wetland fill permit may take nine months to a year to complete, with the review of public comments possibly taking a similar amount of time, especially if additional or expanded studies are required.
That would mean the earliest that the road could get approvals, if the final plan calls for the road alternative, would probably be next fall, Woodrow said. Or, that could be when environmental groups again challenge it in court if the final EIS is flawed, Lindekugel said.