Ensign moves to get U.S. 95 widening project rolling again

Benjamin Grove and Stephen Curran

Friday, May 13, 2005 | 11:12 a.m.

WASHINGTON -- Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., on Thursday introduced an amendment designed to thwart a Sierra Club lawsuit that has blocked a U.S. 95 widening project.

The Ensign legislation asserts that the widening project shall be considered to meet all requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. The legislation plainly concludes, "The State of Nevada may continue construction of the project described in subsection (a) to completion."

Ensign introduced his legislation as an amendment to the $295 billion highway and transit project bill pending in the Senate. A vote could be held as early as today on the amendment.

The amendment was designed as a federal end-around to the lawsuit filed by one of the nation's leading environmental groups in a case that observers have said could impact a number of construction projects nationwide. The lawsuit alleges the Federal Highway Administration and state Transportation Department have not adequately considered the health impacts of the wider interstate, such as increased air pollution.

The $370 million project would ultimately widen the interstate from six lanes to 10 in the five-mile stretch between Rainbow Boulevard to Interstate 15.

State Transportation Department officials are in discussions with the Sierra Club to possibly reach an agreement in a long-standing lawsuit that threatens to halt improvements to U.S. 95, they said this morning.

Nevada Transportation Department spokesman Dennis Baughman would not say where the negotiations stand or when a settlement is expected, but confirmed that the state agency had been in talks with the environmental advocacy group.

Sierra Club officials said there were talks, but declined to characterize the negotiations.

Tara Smith, conservation organizer for the Southern Nevada Sierra Club, said the group was "disappointed" in the proposed amendment but that its attorneys knew it was coming.

It was unclear Thursday afternoon how the group planned to fight the amendment or whether it could halt the lawsuit, she said.

" At this point, we don't know," said Smith, who functions as the group's local spokeswoman, said. "It's not to the point where it's been voted on and final language hasn't been don't. We're not at the point of speculating how it may or may not affect the lawsuit."

It's not clear that Ensign's amendment would trump an on-going court case and automatically clear the way for construction to move ahead, Ensign spokesman Jack Finn said.

"That's precisely why the senator prefers that an agreement be reached," Finn said.

Congressional sources said there was some concern about whether the legislation would set a precedent that didn't stand up in court.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., supports the amendment if it will speed progress on the construction project. But Reid is expecting that an agreement will be reached sometime next week, negating the need for the amendment, spokeswoman Tessa Hafen said.

Ensign's amendment was introduced but not acted on Thursday and Ensign intends to work to attach it to highway-transportation projects bill, either as an amendment on the floor or through his allies on a House-Senate conference committee. But the amendment would not be necessary provided an agreement of some sort is worked out in the next few days by the involved parties, Ensign spokesman Jack Finn said.

The project is "crucial" to Southern Nevada, Finn said.

"Sen. Ensign is determined to find a way to allow the U.S. 95 widening project to go forward," Finn said. "We have been waiting for sometime for an agreement to be reached."