Rail spur faces hurdles

MAT-SU — No matter what route a potential rail spur to Port MacKenzie may take, it’s sure to hit some bumps along the way.

A draft of an environmental impact statement released last month by the Surface Transportation Board raises concerns about each of the three proposed routes.

Running tracks through Willow would likely disqualify the project from federal funding, going through Houston would require filling in the most acreage of wetlands, and the greatest number of private residents would be displaced if tracks followed the Big Lake route.

The STB — the federal agency that permits rail projects — put together the draft EIS at the request of the Alaska Railroad Corp. The railroad wants to run a spur to connect the existing main line to the industrial dock complex at the port.

The railroad initially proposed three main routes plus two ways around the Point MacKenzie Agricultural Project. The route through Houston offers two alternatives for where a spur would connect with the main line.

Beginning in 2008, the STB studied impacts of the different routes on soils, ground and surface water, plants and animals, and cultural and historic resources in each area. The draft version of the EIS stops short of recommending a route, but offers some factors the STB will consider during the final permitting process.

“They all have their issues,” said David Navecky, an environmental protection specialist with the STB.

The rail spur project will only be eligible for federal funding if it takes a route determined to have the lowest impact on the surrounding cultural resources, the draft EIS says. The route through Willow disrupts the most cultural areas — like state recreation areas and historic sled dog trails — and passes through areas likely to hold undocumented cultural resources, the draft EIS said. Thus, it is not eligible for federal funding.

Both routes that would be eligible for federal funding follow the east path around the agricultural project. One would connect to the main line via the south route through Houston, and one would take the Big Lake route.

However, these two routes are not without their own concerns.

The route through Big Lake would run through the greatest number of private properties. The railroad would be forced to buy rights-of-way from property owners, enacting eminent domain if owners are unwilling to sell. The route through Big Lake would also essentially destroy a wetland mitigation project already in place and disrupt the Goose Creek Fen, an area of unique and unbroken vegetative mats.

The route through the south part of Houston actually disrupts the most acreage of wetlands, according to the draft EIS. The value in a wetland is greatly diminished when it is no longer contiguous.

The STB is taking public comment on the draft of the EIS until May 10. The final EIS, which Navecky said should be out by the end of the year, will include a preferred route.

“We don’t have a mathematical equation,” Navecky said. “We weigh all the factors when we decide on our recommended route.”

The STB will take this recommendation under advisement and determine to accept, deny or accept with conditions the permit for the railroad to construct the project. Navecky said the STB has not flatly denied a permit since 1993.

Contact Todd L. Disher at todd.disher@frontiersman.com or 352-2252.