4

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSEQUENCES AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

This chapter summarizes the environmental consequences of the BWI Rail Station based on
the existing and future environmental conditions, and impacts of the Build Alternative, that
were documented in Chapter 3. Section 4.2 discusses the unavoidable adverse impacts and
proposed mitigation measures.

4.1

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

This EA documents each environmental assessment measure analyzed in Sections 3.1

through 3.16. Chapter 6 contains the Section 4(f) Evaluation. Table 4.1-1 summarizes the
findings of these assessments. Section 4.2 provides a more detailed discussion of the impacts
and proposed mitigation measures for those resources where unavoidable adverse impacts
were identified.
TABLE 4.1-1: SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
NEPA Environmental Measure

Environmental Consequences

3.1 Regional and Local Transportation

The project would improve rail operations and passenger service.

Demolition and replacement of the Reece Road Bridge would occur over
the rail mainline; however, local traffic operations would be maintained. No
adverse impact on local or regional roadway system.

3.2 Land Use, Neighborhoods,

Community Facilities

The project would have no direct impacts on existing and future land uses
along the project corridor. The project serves to focus development into
areas designated for growth, with 93 percent of the project length within the
Maryland designated priority funding areas (PFAs). The improvements
related to the BWI Rail Station are consistent with land use plans envisioned
for this site.
Minimal slivers of right-of-way acquisition are anticipated along the project
corridor for a total of 11 acres. No residences or businesses would be
displaced by the project.

3.3 Socioeconomics, Environmental

Justice, and Childrens
Environmental Health and Safety
Risks

The project would have no impacts to population growth and demographic

trends, or childrens environmental health and safety risks. Low-income and
minority populations have been identified along the project corridor.
However, since the project would be constructed primarily within the
existing right-of-way, the anticipated human and environmental adverse
effects of the project would not be disproportionately borne by minority or
low-income populations.

BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-1

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

TABLE 4.1-1: SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

NEPA Environmental Measure

Environmental Consequences

3.4 Air Quality

Project construction activities would generate criteria air pollutant emissions

well below the general conformity de minimis thresholds. Construction of
the project would be consistent with the State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The project would have no substantial long-term, adverse operational
impacts on air quality.

3.5 Noise and Vibration

The project would have no significant increases in noise or vibration levels

would occur at nearby sensitive noise receptors. Nor would project-related
construction activities adversely impact nearby noise-sensitive receptors.

3.6 Energy and Sustainable Design

Overall, the project may result in a slight increase in energy usage during
construction and a slight increase in energy usage from the larger BWI Rail
Station. Increased train efficiency and an overall decrease in energy
consumption by Amtrak and Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC)
trains would balanced the effect. Additionally, there may be energy savings
through reduction in automobile trips if the increased efficiency of Amtrak
and MARC trains attracts more riders. Implementation of the fourth track of
the project would need no additional transmission assets. The larger BWI
Rail Station could result in a slight increase in energy usage for lighting and
climate control due to the larger facility but use of the proposed Leadership
in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) would offset the increased
energy efficiencies.

3.7 Water Resources

3.7.1 Surface Water, Waterbodies,
and Drainage Basins

Widening the existing rail embankment, existing bridges, and culverts would
impact surface waters. Avoidance and minimization measures already
incorporated into the preliminary design include 23 retaining walls, totaling
approximately 13,410 linear feet. Nine of these retaining walls, totaling
approximately 7,740 linear feet, would minimize impacts to delineated
watercourses. Unavoidable stream relocations would occur using natural
stream design techniques. Compensatory mitigation requirements will be
determined as a part of the permitting process with the United States Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Maryland Department of the Environment
(MDE).

3.7.2 Wild and Scenic Rivers

The NPS identified no designated Wild and Scenic Rivers in the state of
Maryland. The project corridor crosses the Severn River and watershed, an
officially designated Scenic river by the Maryland General Assembly. The
project would not alter the landscape or viewshed, and the use of best
management practices (BMP) will ensure the preservation of the ecological
resources within the local watersheds.

3.7.3 Groundwater/ Aquifers/Wells

The project corridor contains no groundwater supplies, aquifers or wells;

therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated.

3.7.4 Stormwater Runoff/

Water Quality

7.6 acres of new impervious areas could affect stormwater runoff.

Preliminary Environmental Site Design (ESD) techniques include wet swales
and grass swales to satisfy stormwater management requirements with
underground filtration and storage at the BWI Rail Station. Erosion and
sediment control measures include sediment traps and basins, super silt
fence, and other construction BMPs designed in compliance with current
regulations.
Fish species would be adequately protected by the Use I in-stream work
prohibition time-of-year restriction, through sediment and erosion control
measures, and other best management practices.

BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-2

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

TABLE 4.1-1: SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

NEPA Environmental Measure

Environmental Consequences

3.8 Wetlands and Floodplains

3.8.1 Wetlands

The project would impact approximately 6.98 acres of wetlands. Of these

wetlands, 1.52 acres are Maryland Wetlands of Special State Concern
(WSSC). An estimated 10.28 acres of wetland mitigation would be required
with 3.22 acres of that being mitigation for WSSC.
A total of approximately 4,647 linear feet of streams would be displaced, the
largest single impact approximately 1,155 linear feet of Stony Run.
Compensation for unavoidable and necessary wetland and stream impacts
will be provided, as required. A conceptual mitigation plan has been
prepared and coordinated with the regulatory and resource agencies and
mitigation planning is ongoing. Final compensation acreages and locations will
be determined as a part of the permitting process with USACE and MDE.

3.8.2 Floodplains

The project would impact approximately 19.6 acres within the mapped 100year floodplain. The project would fill floodplain areas associated with Stony
Run and its tributaries (15.3 acres), Herbert Run (0.5 acre), and the Patapsco
River (3.4 acres). Lesser impacts would occur within Severn Run (0.3 acre)
and Beaver Creek (0.1 acre) floodplains.
Retaining walls will minimize floodplain impacts. Design of floodplain
crossings will minimize floodplain encroachments and possible flood level
increases, to the extent practicable. All construction occurring within the
100-year floodplain will follow Executive Order 11988, Floodplain
Management permitting procedures and guidelines.

3.9 Ecological Resources

3.9.1 Vegetation, Wildlife, Rare,
Threatened, and Endangered
Species

The project corridor contains no federally listed rare, threatened or

endangered species. The project would displace approximately 1,102 square
feet of giant cane, a State-listed species. This impact represents
approximately 0.5 percent of the total 4.56-acre area of giant cane identified
within the study limits. Ongoing coordination with DNR Wildlife and
Heritage Service (WHS) throughout the later design and permitting phases
will determine specific mitigation measures.

3.9.2 Forest Stand Delineation

The project would impact approximately 17.3 acres of mapped forest stands.
DNR approved the Forest Stand Delineation Survey Report on February 2,
2012. MTA would take all practicable measures during final design to avoid
and minimize impacts to forest resources at which time a Forest
Conservation Plan (FCP) will be developed in cooperation with DNR. A final
FCP will be required once final design is complete Approximately 20 acres of
reforestation will be required based on preliminary calculations. During final
design, MTA would investigate opportunities for reforestation areas within
the Limits of Disturbance (LOD) and undisturbed portions of the right-ofway. However, if MTA cannot satisfy mitigation requirements wholly or
partially on-site, it will expand the search for a mitigation site (or sites) to
areas within the projects watersheds or into the affected counties.

BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-3

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

TABLE 4.1-1: SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

NEPA Environmental Measure

Environmental Consequences

3.9.3 Coastal Zone Management and

Chesapeake Bay Critical Area
(CBCA)

Marylands Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) is based on existing laws

and authorities and the consistency determination is incorporated within
other permit processes. The Coastal Zone Consistency determination will
be issued as part of the states wetlands authorization. The project will likely
involve unavoidable impacts to the critical area, and MTA would take all
practicable measures to avoid and minimize impacts. MTA will coordinate
with CBCA Commission (CBCAC) will be conducted to define projectspecific mitigation.

3.9.4 Invasive Species

Final design will reflect native revegetation and minimize invasive

establishment in disturbed areas.

3.10 Parklands and Recreational Areas

Patapsco Valley State Park property is adjacent to both the east and west
sides of the existing rail corridor in the vicinity of the rail bridge crossing of
the Patapsco River. The project would require three narrow strips of park
property totaling approximately 0.65 acre. DNR currently uses the area as
vegetative buffer for Patapsco Valley State Park with no planned
development. DNR concurred on February 6, 2012 that the project would
not adversely affect the activities, features and attributes of the Patapsco
Valley State Park.

3.11 Visual Impacts and Light Emissions

The project would not change the overall landscape. The experience of
visual resources and the general aesthetic conditions of the area would also
remain unchanged.

3.12 Cultural Resources

Archeological Sites: Four archeological sites are located in the revised LOD.
The Build Alternative will have an adverse effect on the Harmans Site (Site
18AN29B), the Telegraph Dorsey Prehistoric Site (Site 18AN1478), and the
OKeefe Site East (Site 18AN1482). It will have no adverse effect on the
Higgins Site (Site 18AN489). Although an additional site, Selby Grist Mill-Mill
Dam Site (Site 18AN1209) is located outside of the LOD, no adverse effect
is expected due to protective fencing and field orientation for construction
personnel, which is warranted because of its proximity to project
construction.

3.12 Cultural Resources (Continued)

Architectural Properties: Three previously recorded NRHP-eligible

architectural properties are located in the Area of Potential Effect (APE).
The project would have an adverse effect on one resource, Bridge No.
0207500 (Reece Road Bridge), due to demolition. The project would have
no adverse effects to Bridge No. 3011 or the Harmans Post Office.
MTA and FRA will continue to coordinate with MHT and the Section 106
consulting parties throughout the Section 106 process.
The FRA/MTA is developing the MOA in consultation with MHT and the
Section 106 consulting parties. In addition, the MTA invited the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation to consult on the project, but the ACHP
declined. With a signed and executed MOA, there would be no significant
impacts to cultural resources as defined under NEPA, and the execution and
implementation of the MOA will conclude the Section 106 process under
the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA).

BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-4

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

TABLE 4.1-1: SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

NEPA Environmental Measure
3.13 Geology, Soils and Farmland

Environmental Consequences
The project would have no long-term effects on geology and topography.
Construction of the project would have short-term impacts on soils.
Sediment and erosion control plans will be prepared in accordance with the
Maryland Department of the Environments Standards and Specifications for
Soil Erosion and Sediment Control (2011).
As the project is located within an area identified as an Urbanized Area (UA)
on United States Census Bureau mapping, there is no impact on prime
farmland soils as defined by the Farmland Protection Policy Acts definition
of prime farmland.

3.14 Hazardous Materials

Three recorded hazardous material sites are within 0.2-mile of the project
right-of-way. No additional right-of-way would be required from these
properties. Amtrak is not aware of any contamination within the Amtrak
right-of-way within the project corridor. A Phase I and/or Phase II
Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) will be required for additional right-ofway.

3.15 Indirect and Cumulative Effects

Beneficial cumulative effects include improved mobility and accessibility for

residents, commuters, and intercity rail and air passengers who travel to
Washington, D.C., Baltimore, and the communities in between. This project
would also support development in the areas designated by local
jurisdictions.
Due to minimization and mitigation efforts to resources directly impacted by
the project (wetlands, streams, floodplains, cultural resources, forests, and
public parkland), the Build Alternative would have little, or no, indirect
impacts.
The project could possibly contribute to cumulative effects to wetlands,
streams, and floodplains. The relative contribution of the project to the
overall cumulative effects on these resources would be small.

3.16 Safety and Security

Amtrak has current safety-related programs and policies for the safety of its
passengers and employees. The project would upgrade the existing physical
conditions of this portion of the Northeast Corridor (NEC), which would
result in improved infrastructure, a higher level of maintenance, and
enhanced safety. Improvements at the BWI Rail Station would improve safe
pedestrian flows by providing more area for pedestrian circulation, and
expected reductions in potential pedestrian and vehicular conflicts.

4.2

UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS AND MITIGATION

Based on the results of the environmental assessment described in Chapter 3, the project
will have unavoidable adverse effects on wetlands, streams, floodplains, forests, state rare,
threatened and endangered species, a National Register-Listed historic bridge, and public
parkland. The following sections discuss the measures to avoid or minimize adverse
impacts and commitments to reduce potential effects of the project.

4.2.1 Wetlands
Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, mandates that each Federal agency avoid, to
the extent possible, the long- and short-term adverse impacts associated with the
BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-5

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

destruction or modification of wetlands. It seeks to avoid direct or indirect support of new

construction in wetlands wherever there is a practicable alternative.
The analysis of wetlands defined its study area as land within 125 feet on either side of the
existing outside tracks. Ninety-four wetlands totaling 61 acres were delineated within the
study area, including wetlands within and outside the railroad right-of-way. The project
avoids the majority of individual wetlands delineated. The project would impact a total of
approximately 4,647 linear feet of streams. The largest single impact would be
approximately 1,155 linear feet of Stony Run.
The project would impact approximately 6.98 acres of wetlands, for which permits will be
required. Table 4.2-1 provides a summary of wetland impacts. The affected wetlands are
both Wetlands of Special State Concern (WSSC) and non-WSCC.
TABLE 4.2-1: SUMMARY OF WETLAND IMPACTS (ACRES)
Impacts

Non-WSSC

WSSC

Total

Palustrine Forested

1.57

0.18

1.75

Palustrine Scrub Shrub

0.03

0.03

Palustrine Emergent

3.86

1.34

5.20

5.46

1.52

6.98

Total

Analyses of alternatives to reduce or avoid impacts were coordinated with resource and
regulatory agencies, and the project reflects specific alternative and design choices made to
minimize impacts to wetlands and address agency comments and concerns, particularly
regarding minimization of impacts to high quality WSSC. Appendix A contains minutes of
agency meetings documenting this coordination and Appendix B contains the Alternatives
Report with details of the alternatives analyses conducted to minimize impacts to sensitive
resources. MTA substantially avoided or reduced potential wetland impacts during
preliminary engineering through use of alignments shifts, reduced limits of disturbance,
and retaining walls. The use of retaining walls reduced impacts to 17 wetlands, including
four WSSC.
Compensation for unavoidable wetland impacts from the project will be provided, where
required, in cooperation with USACE and MDE. Potential wetland mitigation could include
enhancement/restoration of existing wetlands or wetland creation onsite or offsite, or use of
credits from an approved wetlands mitigation bank. FRA and MTA initiated early and
ongoing coordination through the MDOT Interagency Review Meeting process. MTA
developed a conceptual mitigation plan as the first milestone in the mitigation planning
process and the resource agencies reviewed, and accepted, potential sites at the conceptual
level. FRA and MTA will continue to meet with the resource agencies during subsequent
final design and permitting to coordinate final mitigation measures and meet stream and
wetland mitigation requirements. With the avoidance and minimization measures
incorporated in the current design of the Build Alternative and the preliminary mitigation
measures identified in cooperation with the regulatory agencies, MTA and FRA anticipate

BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-6

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

that the Build Alternative will not result in significant impacts to wetlands and other Waters
of the U.S.

4.2.2 Floodplains
Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management and Protection, regulates floodplains. As
identified in Section 3.8, the project traverses extensive areas of floodplain.
The project would require fill within the 100-year floodplain, including two designated
floodways, to widen the rail embankment to support a fourth track through low-lying areas.
Based on preliminary project design and analysis, the project would disturb approximately
19.6 acres within the mapped 100-year floodplain. The project would primarily fill
floodplain areas associated Stony Run and its tributaries (15.3 acres), Herbert Run (0.5 acre),
and the Patapsco River (3.4 acres). Lesser impacts would occur at Severn Run (0.3 acre), and
Beaver Creek (0.1 acre).
Retaining walls will minimize floodplain and floodway impacts. MTA has designed
crossings to minimize floodplain encroachments and possible flood level increases, to the
extent practicable. MTA would consider and incorporate restoration and preservation of the
natural and beneficial value of floodplains in the project corridor, wherever feasible. Based
on the current design of the Build Alternative and current guidelines, MTA does not
anticipate an increase in the base flood elevation of greater than one foot in the floodways
crossed by the project. All construction occurring within the 100-year floodplain will follow
proper permitting procedures and guidelines in accordance with Executive Order 11988,
Floodplain Management.
The MTA will identify mitigation measures during final design in coordination with the
regulatory agencies and in conjunction with mitigation development for wetland and
watercourse impacts, as wetlands can offer flood storage functions. The project would not
exacerbate known downstream flooding issues. Stormwater measures developed in
accordance with environmental site design will help to minimize any post-construction
increases in runoff from the new impervious areas. The Patapsco River, located just east of
the project, is a tidal waterway. Its flood characteristics in the project corridor may be less
influenced by stormwater runoff volume than by downstream tidal effects.

4.2.3 State-listed Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species

Sensitive species at the state level are regulated under the Nongame and Endangered
Species Conservation Act (Annotated Code of Maryland 10-2A-01) and supported by
regulations set forth in COMAR Title 08.03.08, which contains the official state list of species
considered endangered, threatened, and in need of conservation (COMAR 1985). The DNR
WHS is responsible for protecting resources under these provisions.
As stated in Section 3.9, the LOD of the Build Alternative would impact approximately 1,102
square feet (0.025 acre) of an existing population of giant cane, a state-listed rare species.
The impact would be due to grading adjacent to the terminus of the relocated access road,
BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-7

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

stormwater treatment and right-of-way drainage swales, and temporary sediment and
erosion control measures south of Old Stoney Run Road. The impact has been minimized
during preliminary engineering by eliminating a portion of the track-side access road
through this area and further minimization efforts will be investigated during later phases
of design. Other potential impacts to rare species and their habitats were avoided or
minimized through the alternatives analysis and selection process during the development
of the Build Alternative with extensive input from regulatory and resources agencies (See
Appendices A and B).
Impacts to rare state species do not typically require mitigation once all practicable efforts to
minimize impacts are implemented. However, ongoing coordination with DNR WHS
throughout the later design and permitting phases, when final LODs are available, will
determine specific mitigation measures, if required.

4.2.4 Forests
DNR regulates forest resources in Maryland under the Maryland Forest Conservation Act
(FCA). Forests, as defined by DNR, include a biological community dominated by trees and
other woody species that are at least 50 feet wide and 10,000 square feet in area (COMAR
15.15.03.02).
The FCA aims to protect forest resources and requires submittal of a Forest Stand
Delineation (FSD) and a Forest Conservation Plan (FCP) to the DNR Forest Service for
approval for any project requiring a grading permit or erosion and sediment control plan on
a tract of 40,000 square feet or more. The FSD characterizes environmental features and
existing forest cover within the project boundaries, while the FCP documents the projects
proposed forest clearing, forest protection measures, and proposed reforestation to mitigate
forest impacts.
Of the 44 forest stands delineated within the corridor as shown in Section 3.9, all but two
contained priority resources such as streams or wetlands, making these forests a priority for
retention under the FCA. MTA also identified 70 specimen trees throughout the project
corridor. The MTA submitted the FSD for this project to DNR, which approved it on
February 2, 2012.

4.2.5 Cultural Resources

According to state and federal law, federal agencies are required to consider archeological,
architectural, and Native American resources in their project planning. These laws include
the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended), most notably Section 106 of the
act and its enabling legislation found at 36 CFR 800; Maryland Historical Trust Act of 1985
(as amended), and the State Financial and Procurement Article 5A-325 and 5A-326 of the
Annotated Code of Maryland. In compliance with these laws, FRA established the Area of
Potential Effects; completed determinations of eligibility; and executed assessments of
effects.
BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-8

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

As a result of these assessments, FRA determined that there are three historic architectural
properties within the APE: Bridge No. 0207500 (AA-2125); Bridge No. 3011 (BA-2782), and
the Harmans Post Office (AA-2298). They are all eligible for listing on the National Register
of Historic Places (NRHP). The project will have no adverse effect on Bridge No. 3011 or the
Harmans Post Office. However, the project will require the demolition and replacement of
Bridge No. 0207500, referred to as Reece Road Bridge. The replacement of Reese Road
Bridge is necessary because the current bridge span cannot accommodate the projects
fourth track. The SHPO is expected to concur that this demolition will result in an adverse
effect to the historic bridge.
The project could affect four archeological sites in the current LOD: Harmans Site
(18AN29B), Higgins Site (18AN489), Telegraph Dorsey Prehistoric Site (18AN1478), and
OKeefe Site East (18AN1482). The Build Alternative will have an adverse effect on three of
the four sites: the Harmans Site (Site 18AN29B), the Telegraph Dorsey Prehistoric Site (Site
18AN1478), and the OKeefe Site East (Site 18AN1482). It will have no adverse effect on the
Higgins Site (Site 18AN489).
One additional archeological site, Selby Grist Mill-Mill Dam Site (18AN1209), is located
adjacent to, but outside of, the LOD. While the project would not directly impact this site,
MTA and FRA acknowledge that its proximity to the LOD introduces the potential for
construction impacts, if appropriate measures are not deployed to protect it. Although this
site is located outside of the LOD, protective fencing and field orientation for construction
personnel is warranted because of its proximity to project work.
Consultation with Native American groups is ongoing, although MTA has not identified
any sensitive Native American resources in the APE. Consultation with the Oneida Nation
and other potentially interested tribes will continue as the Phase II investigations of the
prehistoric components of 18AN29A, 18AN1478, and 18AN1482 are completed.

Proposed Mitigation Measures for Cultural Resources

As there will be adverse effects to NRHP-eligible historic properties, MTA would
investigate potential measures to minimize or mitigate these adverse effects. These
measures may include additional archeological testing; implementing protective measures
during construction; and photographic documentation of Bridge No. 0207500. After
additional discussions with MHT and consulting parties, the FRA and MTA will develop
the projects MOA, which will include the final agreed-upon mitigation measures, along
with information on the timing of the measures and which agency will be responsible for
implementation.

4.2.6 Section 4(f) Resources

Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act of 1966 (23 U.S.C.138) prohibits use of land from a public
park, recreation area, or wildlife or waterfowl refuge or any significant historic site unless it

BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-9

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

can be demonstrated that there are no feasible and prudent alternatives to avoid the
property and that the project included all possible planning to minimize impacts.
The Build Alternative would have a Section 4(f) use of two parkland and historic properties:
Patapsco Valley State Park and the Reece Road Bridge. DNR concurred on February 6, 2012
that the Build Alternative would not adversely affect the activities, features, and attributes
of the Patapsco Valley State Park and a Section 4(f) de minimis use has been determined. The
Build Alternative, which would require the demolition and replacement of the Reece Road
Bridge, and have a Section 4(f) use of the bridge, includes all possible planning to minimize
harm to this Section 4(f) property resulting from such use. The Section 4(f) Evaluation is
included in Chapter 6.

4.3

ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS

This section summarizes the identified commitments and mitigations measures for longterm operation and short-term construction-related impacts to environmental resources as
identified in Chapter 3.

4.3.1 Land Use, Neighborhoods, and Community Facilities

All land acquisitions will be completed according to the requirements of the Uniform
Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policy Act of 1970, as amended; Title
49, Part 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations (49 CFR Part 24); and all applicable Maryland
regulations and policies.

4.3.2 Air Quality

Construction of the project would be consistent with the State Implementation Plan (SIP).
However, the MTA would consider reasonable short-term construction mitigation
measures. Such measures include dust suppression, proper equipment maintenance and
tuning, and appropriate placement of stationary internal-combustion-powered equipment.

4.3.3 Wetlands and Waters of the United States and Floodplains

MTA will prepare a Joint Federal/State Application for the Alteration of any Floodplain,
Waterway, Tidal or Nontidal Wetland in Maryland permit application during final design.
This application will comply with both the Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section
10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act.
MTA will coordinate, again, with the United States Coast Guard (USCG) regarding the
potential need for a Bridge Permit under Section 9 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 if
the project is not constructed within five years.
Mitigation measures employed to compensate for unavoidable project effects to Waters of
the U.S., including wetlands, will follow federal and state mitigation regulations and
guidelines, as well as other recommendations from federal and state resource agencies.
BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-10

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

MTA would mitigate for permanent impacts to streams at a ratio determined in

coordination with USACE and MDE to provide functional replacement of impacted streams.
A replacement ratio of 1:1 linear feet of stream improvement is anticipated; however, the
resource agencies may adjust this ratio as exact ratios can only be determined during final
design of a selected mitigation site.
MTA would comply with mitigation requirements under the Clean Water Act Section 404 to
determine the ratio of wetland acres replaced to wetland acres lost to achieve functional
replacement of impacted wetlands. Mitigation for emergent wetlands typically occur on a
1:1 replacement basis, while mitigation of forested and scrub-shrub wetlands typically occur
on a 2:1 replacement basis, although these ratios may be adjusted during final mitigation
site selection and design. WSSC are typically mitigated on a 3:1 replacement basis; however,
this also could increase during development of the final mitigation plan. The regulatory
agencies will determine the final replacement ratio for WSSC based on the functional
replacement of impacted resources.
The USACE, EPA, and MDE have developed and accepted a Phase I Conceptual Mitigation
Plan (Appendix F). A Phase II Final Mitigation Plan will be developed in compliance with
the Federal Mitigation Rule and state mitigation guidelines as part of the final design and
permitting phase of the project.
The MTA would install wetland protection fencing to protect wetlands and wetland buffers
during construction. All construction occurring within the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) designated 100-year floodplain will comply with FEMA approved local
floodplain construction requirements.

4.3.4 Stormwater Runoff and Water Quality

Sediment and erosion control plans will be prepared in accordance with the Maryland
Department of the Environments Standards and Specifications for Soil Erosion and Sediment
Control (2011).
MTA would design stormwater management facilities required to address water quality
and quantity requirements consistent with environmental site design (ESD) criteria to the
maximum extent practicable in accordance with the requirements under the Stormwater
Management Act of 2007, and guidance by MDE in 2010 and 2011 on the technical
procedures and calculations for ESD requirements.
MTA would address potential effects through the MDE stormwater and sediment and
erosion control permitting process as required under Marylands Erosion and Sediment
Control (E&SC) (COMAR 26.17.01) and Stormwater Management regulations (COMAR
26.17.02).

BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-11

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

4.3.5 Ecological Resources

Aquatic species will be protected with the Use I in-stream work prohibition time-of-year
restriction, through sediment and erosion control measures, and other best management
practices. Coordination with DNR WHS during final design will determine specific
mitigation measures for impacts to the giant cane, as State-listed species.
Forest Conservation Plans, or similar will be prepared during final design and would detail
additional impact avoidance and minimization techniques to be applied during
construction. MTA will submit Forest Conservation Plans to DNR for review and approval
during final design.
During final design, MTA will identify forest mitigation sites in cooperation with DNR
within the LOD, and identify undisturbed portions of the right-of-way. If mitigation
requirements cannot take place wholly or partially on-site, the MTA would expand the
search for a mitigation site (or sites) to areas within the projects watersheds or into the
affected counties.
Tree protection fencing will be installed along the outside edge of the limit of disturbance
where necessary to prevent access by construction equipment, staging, and stockpiling of
materials within forest retention areas.

4.3.6 Chesapeake Bay Critical Area

MTA will coordinate with CBCAC to define the project-specific mitigation related to the 10Percent Rule requirement for any new impervious area within the Critical Area and/or any
planting requirements.

4.3.7 Cultural Resources

Proper safeguards (e.g., protective fencing, field orientation/education for construction
personnel, and on-site archeological monitoring will reduce potential effects to the Higgins
archeological site. Where impacts to other archeological sites in the LOD are unavoidable,
additional Phase II archeological investigations would evaluate sites for National Register
eligibility. As project planning proceeds, FRA and MTA will continue to identify design
modifications that could further avoid or minimize potential effects on archeological
resources.
MTA will record, in coordination with MHT, to Historic American Engineering Record
(HAER) Standards prior to construction or demolition of the Reece Road Bridge. FRA and
MTA will continue to consult with Section 106 consulting parties and MHT to develop and
execute the MOA. MTA will develop provisions for continued coordination and site
protection during construction in consultation with MHT and other consulting parties,
which will be included as commitments in the MOA.

BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-12

Environmental Assessment

4 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND

UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

4.3.8 Hazardous Materials

A Phase I and/or Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) will be required for
additional right-of-way areas needed for the project. During final design and construction, if
the project encounters contaminated soils, MTA would evaluate off-site remediation,
chemical stabilization, or other treatments and disposal options.

BWI Rail Station Improvements and Fourth Track Project

4-13

Environmental Assessment