Connector Highway Clears EPA Review

"Whatever it is we say, the state can just say it's perfect and fine and every problem is fixed," said Brian Henry of the Audubon Naturalist Society. "There's nothing we can say back to that because we haven't even seen the report yet."

Opponents of the project said they spotted many concerns in the draft released more than a year ago, including the project's cost, the limited traffic relief it would provide and what they said was a biased and faulty economic analysis.

They also contend that the process was rigged, because the Bush administration put it on a fast track in 2003. "The EPA has ruled on this before," Henry said. "The only difference now is we have a Bush EPA, which says something different."

Federal officials have said they are satisfied with Maryland's plans to address environmental concerns by building bridges over sensitive areas, using advanced technology to manage storm-water runoff and narrowing the road in places. State officials have also said they would spend $262 million to make environmental improvements around the highway.

Montgomery County Council member Phil Andrews (D-Gaithersburg-Rockville) said yesterday that regardless of the report's details, the process was flawed.

"Any study such as this one that considers only one alternative to relieving east-west congestion, and the only alternative is an expensive toll highway, is at best incomplete and at worst bogus," he said.

Many also said that the public should be given at least three months to comment on the final environmental review because of its complexity. A spokesman for the Federal Highway Administration said the comment period was extended from the normal 30 days to 45 days because of the controversial nature of the project.

Nonetheless, avenues for stopping the highway are narrowing. Aside from raising objections to the environmental report, opponents hope that state legislators will reject the price tag. If those options fail, opponents have promised to take legal action to stop construction.

"We do expect desperate opponents to file lawsuits to try to stop this, and we will be prepared to defend the decision," Flanagan said, adding that court action would not delay construction.

Other supporters were excited yesterday by the prospect of a new road in the Washington region.

"This would be the first major highway in a 25-year-plus time frame, and we're very pleased because it will improve mobility," said Bob Grow of the Greater Washington Board of Trade.