Project History
Environmental Review Process Resumed
Under the stewardship of CFLHD, the Hoover Bypass Project was
rekindled and the federally mandated environmental review process
resumed. The National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), our country's basic charter for
protection of the environment, provides a framework for federal
agencies to build projects like the Hoover Dam Bypass, while taking
into account environmental factors. Examples of environmental
factors include wildlife, noise, public safety, public service, air
quality, and traffic circulation. The environmental process for the
Hoover Dam Bypass Project followed the NEPA process ultimately
leading to a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and a
Record of Decision (ROD).
CFLHD studied four alternatives
(including the "no-build" alternative) to determine the
best crossing of the river from an engineering standpoint, while
creating the least amount of impact to the surrounding environment.
CFLHD completed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement in
September 1998, with the cooperation of the Nevada Department of
Transportation, the Arizona Department of Transportation, the U.S.
National Park Service, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S.
Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. Public hearings were held in Kingman, Boulder City
and Las Vegas in October 1998. Through an open forum, CFLHD
solicited comments from experts in the field of transportation,
environmental groups, regulatory agencies, and members of
surrounding communities. Formal
consultation with the Fish & Wildlife Service, Corps of
Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency, and the State Historic
Preservation Officers helped define mitigation measures to be
incorporated into the project. Additional comments and mitigation
measures were addressed in the FEIS issued in January 2001.
CFLHD identified the Sugarloaf
Mountain Alternative as the preferred alternative based on five key
factors:
- Comments
received from the public, and other local, state and federal
agencies during the environmental process.
- Collectively
minimizing environmental impacts.
- Engineering
and operational advantages.
- Minimizing
harm to Section 4(f) properties.
- Slightly lower construction
costs.
 Record
of Decision Issued
A Record of Decision was issued by
FHWA in March 2001. This was the final step mandated by
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and provides the green
light for the project to move ahead.
The Record of Decision identified the Sugarloaf
Mountain Alignment as the preferred alignment.
This was one of three alignments studied in detail as part of
the Environmental Impact Statement. Learn
more about the Sugarloaf Mountain Alignment
on the Design
Activities page.
Download
a copy of the EIS
Download a copy of the ROD
A Project Management Team (PMT) was developed to
oversee the design and construction of the project.
The PMT has representation from each of the major project
stakeholders including the Federal Highway Administration, the
States of Arizona and Nevada, the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), the
Western Area Power Authority (WAPA) and the National Park Service
(NPS). CFLHD has the lead management role for all elements of project procurement,
design and construction.
Design
Consultant Selected
On
July 12, 2001, CFLHD awarded a contract to HDR Engineering, Inc. to
provided design and construction support services for the Hoover
Bypass Project. An
integrated team of professionals from HDR Engineering, T.Y. Lin
International, Sverdrup Civil, Inc. and several supporting
sub-consultants make up the consultant team, collectively know as Hoover
Support Team.
The
work to be undertaken included design of roadways, bridges, tunnels,
wildlife underpasses and overpasses, utility design, high-capacity
transmission tower relocations and a signature long-span bridge over
the Colorado River. The
work also included geotechnical engineering, survey and mapping, and
corridor architectural design.
Environmental mitigation measures outlined in the EIS are
being
implemented, and supplemental studies and documents have been and will be prepared
as needed. Construction
support services are also being provided.
Design
Advisory Panel (DAP) Established
The
DAP was established by FHWA as a result of the Programmatic
Agreement that commits FHWA to implement specific activities and
mitigation measures to resolve the adverse effects on historic
properties. The DAP,
under the leadership of the CFLHD provided input regarding the
Corridor Design Criteria to minimize adverse effects to the Hoover
Dam National Historic Landmark.
The DAP consists of members from FHWA, ADOT, NDOT, the Nevada
and Arizona State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs), the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), the National
Historic Landmark (NHL) Coordinator, NPS, BOR, WAPA and a Native
American tribal representative, as well as an independent
architectural historian and an independent registered landscape
architect. The DAP is
not responsible for technical and safety requirements, and will
not make recommendations that are not technically feasible or are
outside the scope and budget of the project.
The
first DAP workshop was held December 3-5, 2001, in Las Vegas.
Native American Consultation to Continue
FHWA
has made a commitment to continue the government-to-government
consultation with the affected tribal governments throughout the
design and construction process through a Memorandum of
Understanding. FHWA,
with the consulting tribes under the Programmatic Agreement and
Treatment Plan, has worked to refine and elaborate on the measures to reduce
adverse effects on the Sugarloaf Mountain Traditional Cultural
Property (TCP). The
tribes also have a representative on the DAP to provide input
on the design aspects of the new bridge and roadway, and have been
given the opportunity to monitor construction of the roadway
facility through the TCP area and the related lithic scatter located
on the eastern flank of Sugarloaf Mountain.
|
