TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

Hydrologic/Water 

Resources

7.5

7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-1

7.5 HYDROLOGIC/WATER RESOURCES

7.5.1 Introduction

Water resources include surface waters (lakes, rivers, 

streams, estuaries, seas, reservoirs, etc.) and associated 

hydrologic systems such as wetlands, coastal zones, and 

floodplains. Water resources within the Study Area may be 

used for drinking water, agriculture, industrial processes, 

transportation, and recreation. Wetlands and floodplains 

function as natural flood control systems that reduce the 

speed and volume of runoff, and improve water quality as 

well as provide habitat essential to a healthy ecosystem.

Federal, state, and local governments have developed 

programs and regulations to protect and manage water 

resources. Construction activities and development 

associated with transportation could increase stormwater 

runoff, thereby degrading water quality and affecting

aquatic habitats such as wetlands and estuaries (see 

Chapter 7.6, Ecological Resources, for an in-depth discussion of potential impacts to ecosystems and 

water habitats). This section focuses on water resources within the Study Area.

See Chapter 7.7, Geologic Resources (Section 7.7.3), for a discussion and evaluation of sole source 

aquifers.

7.5.1.1 Definition of Resource

This section includes the definitions, as used in this Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Tier 

1 Draft EIS), of surface waters, water quality, floodplains, freshwater and saltwater wetlands, and 

coastal zones. These resources have been grouped into three main categories: 

4 Freshwater Resources

– Surface Waters include freshwater creeks, streams, rivers, lakes, and ponds that are above 

ground.

– Water Quality is the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of a water body. A water 

body with chronic or recurring monitored violations of the applicable numeric and/or 

narrative water quality criteria is referred to as “impaired.” Streams identified as “impaired” 

are required to have established Total Daily Maximum Loads (TMDL). TMDL is a calculation of 

the maximum amount of a pollutant that the impaired waterbody can receive and still meet 

water quality standards. A water body that has a good water quality is referred to as “high 

quality.” Water quality is determined and enforced at the state level, based on standards set 

by both the state and federal government.

– Freshwater Wetlands, as defined by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE), means those 

areas that are inundated or saturated by surface- or groundwater at a frequency and duration 

sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of 

Key Resource: Hydrologic Resources

§ Regulated by numerous federal, state,

and local laws, regulations and 

Executive Orders.

§ Adverse impacts may be difficult to 

permit or unallowable and may 

influence identification of a Preferred 

Alternative.

§ Types of effects include dredge or fill of 

wetlands; encroachment of floodplains; 

development within designated coastal 

zones; crossing Navigable Waterways.
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-2 Tier 1 Draft EIS

vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service categorizes wetlands by eight wetland types as part of the National Wetlands 

Inventory (NWI). The wetland types that were considered freshwater wetlands for the 

purposes of this assessment include Freshwater Forested and Shrub; Freshwater Emergent; 

Freshwater Pond; Riverine; Lake; and Other Freshwater.

4 Navigable Waters refers to large waterways as defined under Section 10 of the Rivers and 

Harbors Act of 1899 that have been used in the past, are now used, or are susceptible to use as a 

means to transport interstate or foreign commerce to the head of navigation.

4 Floodplains are those areas adjacent to a stream or river that are susceptible to flooding. This 

study focuses on areas designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency as special 

flood hazard areas (SFHA), also known as the area that would be inundated by the 1-percent 

annual chance flood, also known as the 100-year flood.

4 Coastal Resources

– Coastal Zones are defined by Section 304 of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) as 

coastal waters (including the lands therein and thereunder) and the adjacent shorelines, 

strongly influenced by each other and in proximity to the shorelines of the coastal states. 

Designated coastal zones include islands, transitional and intertidal areas, coastal/salt 

marshes (saltwater wetlands), and beaches. The zone extends inland from the shorelines only 

to the extent necessary as determined by each individual state that has a designated coastal 

zone.

– Saltwater Wetlands, as defined by the USACE, means those areas that are inundated or 

saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and 

that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for 

life in saturated soil conditions. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service categorizes wetlands by 

eight wetland types as part of the NWI. The wetland types that were considered saltwater

wetlands for the purposes of this assessment include Estuarine and Marine, and Estuarine 

and Marine Deepwater.

Appendix E, Section E.05, provides a description of the methodology used for analyzing existing 

conditions and Environmental Consequences of each of these hydrologic/water resources.

7.5.1.2 Effect-Assessment Methodology

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) developed an effects-assessment methodology for each of 

the three categories of water resources identified in Section 7.5.1.1. The methodologies provide a 

detailed definition of each resource, data sources, an explanation on how the Affected Environment 

was defined and established, and how the effects on each resource were evaluated and reported.

Table 7.5-1 summarizes key factors associated with the methodologies for each hydrologic/water 

resource evaluated in this Tier 1 Draft EIS.
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-3

Table 7.5-1: Effect-Assessment Methodology Summary: Hydrologic/Water Resources

Resource

Affected 

Environment*

Type of 

Assessment Outcome

Freshwater Resources

Surface 

Waters 2,000 feet

Quantitative: 

Acres/ linear 

feet

Identification of number of surface waters affected by the

Representative Route of each Action Alternative and potential 

associated effects.

Water Quality 2,000 feet Qualitative

Identification of established water quality for identified 

surface waters and understanding of how Action Alternatives 

could influence established water quality.

Freshwater 

Wetlands 2,000 feet Quantitative: 

Acres

Identification of number of acres of freshwater wetlands 

affected by the Representative Route of each Action 

Alternative.

Floodplains

Floodplains 2,000 feet

Quantitative: 

Acres

Qualitative

Identification of number of special flood hazard areas affected 

by the Representative Route of each Action Alternative.

Identification of Action Alternatives located in areas subject to 

increased flood risk due to climate change and sea level rise.

Coastal Resources

Coastal Zones 2,000 feet Quantitative: 

Route miles

Identification of number of route miles of each Action 

Alternative that are within an established coastal zone.

Saltwater 

Wetlands 2,000 feet Quantitative:Acres

Identification of number of saltwater wetlands affected by the 

Representative Route of each Action Alternative.

Sources: NEC FUTURE Freshwater Resources, Floodplain, and Coastal Zones and Saltwater Wetlands Effects-Assessment

Methodologies, Appendix E, Section E.05, 2014

* The Affected Environment for Hydrologic/Water Resources is a 2,000-foot-wide swath centered on the Representative Route.

7.5.2 Resource Overview

Hydrologic resources are protected and regulated under various federal, state, and local laws such as 

the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Implementation of the Action Alternatives can result in 

degradation of water quality, dredge and fill of wetlands, encroachment of floodplains, development 

in coastal zone management areas, and crossing of navigable waterways. These effects would result 

from construction and operations associated with modification of existing rail infrastructure, such as 

expansion of rail rights-of-way, and/or construction of new rail infrastructure, such as railroad tracks 

or stations. Adverse effects on these resources require mitigation and permitting by regulating 

agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(USACE), state environmental agencies, and localities. 

Numerous water resources exist within the Study Area, including within the Affected Environment 

and Representative Route for the existing NEC and each Action Alternative. The FRA collected, 

catalogued, and analyzed data pertaining to waterbodies and corresponding hydrologic systems such 

as floodplains and wetlands, and identified potential impacts to water resources of interest. Appendix 

E, Section E.05, contains a complete list of the hundreds of streams, rivers, lakes, ponds, estuaries, 

and bays that occur within the Affected Environment of the Action Alternatives.
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-4 Tier 1 Draft EIS

Understanding the locations of hydrologic resources is important as it can influence decisions on 

infrastructure needs and design considerations. The analysis presented in this section identifies 

concentrations of known hydrologic resources that the FRA will consider when identifying the 

Preferred Alternative and that future project proponents should evaluate further during Tier 2 project 

planning and development. Key findings of the hydrologic resources analysis are:

4 Benefits

– None of the Action Alternatives cross or intersect any Wild and Scenic River with a special 

water quality consideration. 

– All Action Alternatives incorporate the use of elevated structures and tunnels to minimize 

effects on hydrologic resources.

– Alternative 3 proposes inland routes north of New York City that occur outside of designated 

coastal areas.

4 Impacts

– All Action Alternatives affect SFHAs, freshwater wetlands, saltwater wetlands, Navigable 

Waterways, and coastal zones.

o Under Alternatives 1 and 2, the majority of the impacts to hydrologic resources occur in 

Connecticut.

o Alternative 3 has the greatest combined effects on SFHAs, freshwater and saltwater 

wetlands and coastal zones of all Action Alternatives. In particular, numerous hydrologic 

resources are associated with the Long Island Sound. 

– Alternative 2 is the only Action Alternative that would bisect the John Heinz Wildlife Refuge 

in Delaware and Philadelphia, PA. The refuge has associated freshwater wetlands and SFHA, 

is ecologically sensitive, and is located in a coastal zone. 

– New crossings of Navigable Waterways would occur under All Action Alternatives. Alternative 

3 proposes the most with 11 new crossings of Navigable Waterways.

7.5.3 Affected Environment

Similar to the Study Area, numerous water resources were identified within the Affected 

Environment. Table 7.5-2 through Table 7.5-7 summarize the quantities, where applicable, and types 

of resources identified for the existing NEC and the Action Alternatives; these tables list only the 

largest water resources, but Appendix E, Section E.05, provides a full listing of resources.
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-5

Table 7.5-2: Summary of Water Resources within the Affected Environment by Action 

Alternative

Resource

Existing 

NEC Alt. 1 Alt. 2

Alternative 3

D.C. to 

NYC

New York City to Hartford Hartford to Boston

via Central 

Connecticut

via Long 

Island

via 

Providence

via 

Worcester

SFHA (acres) 21,270 22,125 25,965 13,015 7,050 6,450 8,510 9,290

Freshwater 

Wetlands 

(acres)

8,535 9,375 11,430 5,155 2,225 1,580 5,705 5,820

Saltwater 

Wetlands 

(acres)

6,430 6,695 7,190 2,535 1,985 6,470 2,875 2,795

Total Wetlands 

(acres) 14,965 16,070 18,620 7,690 4,210 8,050 8,580 8,615

Coastal Zone 

(route miles) 180 225 235 115 110 135 50 15

Source: NEC FUTURE team, 2015

The FRA identified water resources associated with freshwater wetlands within the Affected 

Environment for each of the Action Alternatives. Given the numerous resources present, Table 7.5-3

lists only those resources within counties in which the Affected Environment of an Action Alternative 

contains a higher than average number of freshwater wetlands; the average acreage of freshwater 

wetlands present within each Action Alternative’s Affected Environment is 250 acres per county. Note 

that an Action Alternative may cross a resource and not be listed in Table 7.5-3 if that resource has 

less than 250 acres of freshwater wetlands associated with it for that county.

Table 7.5-3 also notes those resources with special water quality designations. See Appendix E, 

Section E.05, for a complete list of all surface waters and corresponding water quality designations. 

Table 7.5-4 lists Navigable Waterways crossed by either the existing NEC or Action Alternatives. While 

numerous Navigable Waterways exist within the Affected Environments of the Action Alternatives, 

only those that are crossed by the Representative Route are noted. Also noted are Navigable 

Waterways that are not currently crossed by the existing NEC but would be crossed by one or more 

of the Action Alternatives. 

Resources associated with floodplains have been identified within the Affected Environment for each 

of the Action Alternatives. Given the numerous resources present within the Affected Environments 

for each Action Alternative, Table 7.5-5 lists only those resources within counties in which the 

Affected Environment of an Action Alternative encompasses a higher than average number of 

associated SFHA; the average acreage of SFHA present within each Action Alternative’s Affected 

Environment is 700 acres per county.
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-6 Tier 1 Draft EIS

Table 7.5-3: Affected Environment: Water Resources Associated with Freshwater Wetlands 

by Action Alternative

State County Resource of interest

Existing 

NEC

Alt. 

1

Alt. 

2

Alt. 

3

MD

Anne 

Arundel Patuxent River (WQ) X X X X

Baltimore Gunpowder River and Gunpowder Falls (both

WQ) — — — X

Harford Gunpowder and Bush Rivers (both WQ) — — — X

Cecil Susquehanna River — X X X

DE New Castle Christina River (WQ) X X X X

PA

Delaware Delaware River — — — X

Philadelphia Schuylkill River (WQ) — — X X

Bucks Van Skiver Lake X X X X

NJ

Mercer Assunpink Creek (WQ) X X X X

Middlesex Lower Hudson River X X X X

NY Westchester Mamaroneck (WQ) and Cross Rivers — — — X

CT

Fairfield Major Tributaries of Long Island Sound (WQ) — — — X

New Haven Major Tributaries of Long Island Sound (WQ) X X X X

New London Major Tributaries of Long Island Sound (WQ) X X X X

Hartford Major Tributaries of the Connecticut River (WQ) — — X X

Tolland Hop, Skungamaug, Willimantic, Fenton, and 

Mount Hope Rivers (all WQ) — — — X

Windham Connecticut Coastal (Atlantic Ocean) (WQ) — — X X

RI Washington Pawcatuck River and Chapman Pond (both WQ) X X X X

Providence Major tributaries of Narragansett Bay (WQ) — — X X

MA

Bristol Major Tributaries of Massachusetts Coastal 

(Atlantic Ocean) (WQ) X X X X

Norfolk Neponset River (WQ) X X X X

Worcester Quinebaug, Little, French, Quinsigamond, 

Assabet, and Sudbury Rivers (all WQ) — — — X

Source: NEC FUTURE team, 2015

X = The Affected Environment of the Action Alternatives includes 250 or more acres of freshwater wetlands associated with 

resource(s) listed in that county; effects would be subject to Tier 2 analysis.

— = Not applicable within that alternative/option.

WQ – Resource or tributary(ies) have a special water quality designation within the corresponding county boundary.
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-7

Table 7.5-4: Affected Environment: Navigable Waterways Crossed by the Existing NEC and 

Action Alternatives

State County Resource of Interest

Construction 

Type at Crossing

Existing 

NEC Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3

MD

Baltimore Gunpowder River Major Bridge X X X X

Harford Bush River Major Bridge X X X X

DE New Castle Christina River Aerial — — — X*Major Bridge — — X —

Brandywine Creek Aerial X X X X*

PA Philadelphia Schuylkill River Tunnel — — — X*

PA/NJ Bucks/Mercer Delaware River Major Bridge X X X X

NJ Essex/Hudson Passaic River Tunnel — — X* X*Major Bridge X X X X

Hudson Hackensack River Major Bridge X X X X

NJ/NY Hudson/Manhattan Hudson River Tunnel X X* X* X*

NY

Manhattan/Queens/

Kings East River

Tunnel X X X* X*

Major Bridge X X X X

Kings/Queens Newtown Creek Tunnel — — X* X*

Manhattan/Bronx Harlem River Tunnel — — — X*

Suffolk Port Jefferson Harbor Tunnel — — — X*

CT Fairfield Pequonnock River Major Bridge X X X X

NY/CT Suffolk/New Haven Long Island Sound Tunnel — — — —

CT

New Hven

West River Major Bridge X X X X

Tunnel — — — —

Mill River Major Bridge X X X X

Tunnel — — — —

Quinnipiac River Major Bridge X X X X

Tunnel — — — —

Hartford Connecticut River Tunnel — — X* X*

Middlesex/ 

New London Connecticut River Major Bridge X X X X

Aerial — X* — —

New London

Niantic River Major Bridge X X X X

Thames River Major Bridge X X X X

Mystic River Major Bridge X X X X

Stonington Harbor Major Bridge/ 

Common Grade X X X X

CT/RI New London/ 

Washington Pawcatuck River Aerial X X X X

Trench — X* — —

RI Providence Seekonk River Tunnel — X* X*

Source: NEC FUTURE team, 2015

X = Denotes the Navigable Waterway is crossed by the existing NEC or Action Alternative. 

* Denotes new proposed crossing

— = Not applicable within that alternative/option
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-8 Tier 1 Draft EIS

Table 7.5-5: Affected Environment: Water Resources Associated with Floodplains by Action 

Alternative

State County Resource of interest

Existing 

NEC Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3

MD

Anne Arundel Patuxent River X X X X

Harford Gunpowder and Bush Rivers X X X X

Cecil Susquehanna River — — X X

DE New Castle Christina and Delaware Rivers X X X X

PA

Delaware Delaware River — — — X

Philadelphia Schuylkill River — — X X

NJ Middlesex Major Tributaries of the Raritan and Lower 

Hudson Rivers X X X X

NJ Hudson Passaic, Lower Hackensack, and Hudson Rivers X X X X

NY Westchester Mamaroneck and Cross Rivers — — — X

CT

Fairfield

Major tributaries of Long Island Sound 

including Rippowam, Goodwives, Fivemile, 

Norwalk, Indian, Saugatuck, Mill, Rooster, 

Pequonnock, Housatonic, and Noroton Rivers

X X X X

New Haven

Major tributaries of Long Island Sound 

including Wepawaug, Hammonasset, Indian, 

Oyster, Cove, West, Mill, Quinnipiac, Little, 

Farm, East, Neck, and Cover Rivers

X X X X

Middlesex

Major tributaries of Long Island Sound 

including Hammonasset, Indian, Hammock, 

Menunketesuck, Patchogue, Oyster, 

Connecticut, and Patchogue Rivers

X X X X

New London

Major tributaries of Long Island Sound 

including Lieutenant, Dick, Threemile, 

Fourmile, Pattagansett, Niantic, Thames, 

Poquonock, Mystic, and Pawcatuck Rivers, 

Stonington Harbor, and Quanaduck Cove 

X X X X

Hartford Connecticut River — X — —

RI Washington Pawcatuck River X X X X

MA Worcester Quinebaug, Little, Quinsigamond, and Sudbury 

Rivers (all WQ) — — — —

Source: NEC FUTURE team, 2015

X = The Affected Environment of the Action Alternative includes 700 or more acres of special flood hazard areas associated with 

resource(s) listed; potential effects subject to Tier 2 analysis.

— = Not applicable within that alternative/option

(WQ) – Resource has special water quality considerations.
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-9

The FRA identified coastal resources within the Affected Environment for each of the Action 

Alternatives. Given the numerous resources present, Table 7.5-6 lists only those coastal resources 

within counties in which the Affected Environment of an Action Alternative contains a higher than 

average number of acres of saltwater wetlands; the average acreage of saltwater wetlands present 

within the each Action Alternative’s Affected Environment is 200 acres per county. Note that an 

Action Alternative may bisect a coastal resource and not be listed in the table if less than 200 acres 

of saltwater wetlands are associated with it for that county.

Table 7.5-6: Affected Environment: Coastal Resources Associated with Saltwater Wetlands

by Action Alternative

State County Resource of interest

Existing 

NEC Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3

MD

Baltimore Back River (WQ) X X X X

Harford Gunpowder River (WQ) and Chesapeake Bay X X X X

DE New Castle Christina River (WQ) X X X X

NJ Hudson Hackensack and Hudson Rivers X X X X

NY

New York Hudson and East Rivers (both WQ) X X X X

Suffolk Long Island Sound X X X X

CT

Fairfield Long Island Sound X X X X

New Haven X X X X

Middlesex Long Island Sound and Connecticut River (WQ) X X X X

New London Major Tributaries of Long Island Sound X X X X

RI Kent Greenwich Bay (WQ) X X X X

Source: NEC FUTURE team, 2015

X = The Affected Environment of the Action Alternative bisects 200 or more acres of saltwater wetlands associated with 

resource(s) listed; potential effects subject to Tier 2 analysis.

WQ – Resource or tributaries have a special water quality designation within the corresponding county boundary.

Table 7.5-6 notes the identified resources with special water quality designations. Appendix E, 

Section E.05, contains a complete list of all surface waters and corresponding water quality 

designations.

The assessment of the effects on coastal zones by Action Alternatives included identifying counties 

within the Affected Environment where the Action Alternative intersects CZMA boundaries, as well 

as describing the CZMA boundaries for each state. Because the coastal zone extends inland from the 

shoreline only to the extent necessary to control the shoreline as defined by each state, CZMA 

boundaries differ between jurisdictions. Jurisdictional coastal zones have been established for each 

affected state with the exception of Washington, D.C. The entire state of Delaware is a designated 

coastal zone. 

Table 7.5-7 summarizes, by state, the CZMAs located in each Action Alternative’s Affected 

Environment. 
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-10 Tier 1 Draft EIS

Table 7.5-7: Affected Environment: Coastal Zone Management Act Description Intersected 

by Action Alternative 

State County

Coastal 

Resource CZMA Description by State

Existing 

NEC

Alt.

1

Alt.

2

Alt.

3

MD

Baltimore

Chesapeake Bay

The Maryland coastal zone 

comprises the land, water and 

subaqueous land between the 

territorial limits of Maryland in the 

Chesapeake Bay, Atlantic Coastal 

Bays and the Atlantic Ocean, as well 

as the towns, cities, and counties 

that contain and help govern the 

thousands of miles of Maryland 

shoreline. The Maryland coastal zone 

extends from 3 miles out in the 

Atlantic Ocean to the inland 

boundaries of the 16 counties and 

Baltimore City that border the 

Atlantic Ocean, Chesapeake Bay and 

the Potomac River up to 

Washington, D.C.

X X X X

Baltimore City X X X X

Hartford X X X X

Cecil X X X X

DE New Castle

Delaware Bay/Delaware River

Under the federal Coastal Zone 

Management Act, the entire state of 

Delaware is considered a coastal 

zone. Major water crossings include 

White Clay Creek and Christina River. 

X X X X

PA

Delaware Within Pennsylvania, the Delaware 

Estuary stretches 57 miles along the 

coastline in Bucks, Philadelphia, and 

Delaware Counties. The coastal zone 

varies from one-eighth mile wide in 

urban areas like Philadelphia, to over 

3.5 miles in Bucks County and 

extends to the Pennsylvania/New 

Jersey boundary in the middle of the 

Delaware River. The coastal zone 

contains environmentally important 

islands, as well as the marshes and 

shorelands of tributary streams that 

are tidally influenced. The head of 

tide for the Delaware Estuary is 

located at the falls of the Delaware 

River near Morrisville, PA, and 

Trenton, NJ.

X X X X

Philadelphia X X X X

Bucks X X X X
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-11

Table 7.5-7: Affected Environment: Coastal Zone Management Act Description Intersected 

by Action Alternative (continued)

State County

Coastal 

Resource CZMA Description by State

Existing 

NEC

Alt.

1

Alt.

2

Alt. 

3

NJ

Mercer

Delaware Bay/Delaware River

Raritan Bay/Raritan River

Newark Bay/Hackensack River

Hudson River

New Jersey’s coastal zone 

encompasses tidal and nontidal

waters, waterfronts, and inland 

areas. The coastal zone includes the 

Hudson River from the interstate 

border with New York, Newark Bay,

and Hackensack River, and related 

tidal waters south to the Raritan Bay.

The coastal zone continues along the 

Raritan Bay then extends south from 

Sandy Hook to Cape May Point 

encompassing the state territorial 

waters of the Atlantic Ocean and 

associated tidal waterbodies. From 

Cape May Point, the coastal zone 

trends north to Trenton and contains 

waters for the Delaware Bay and 

River and includes tidal portions of 

their tributaries. The coastal zone 

boundary encompasses 

approximately 1,800 miles of tidal

coastline, including 126 miles along 

the Atlantic oceanfront from Sandy 

Hook to Cape May and ranges in 

width from 100 feet to 16.2 miles.

X X X

Middlesex X X X X

Union X X X X

Essex X X X X

Hudson X X X X
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-12 Tier 1 Draft EIS

Table 7.5-7: Affected Environment: Coastal Zone Management Act Description Intersected 

by Action Alternative (continued)

State County

Coastal 

Resource CZMA Description by State

Existing 

NEC

Alt.

1

Alt.

2

Alt. 

3

NY

New York

Hudson River/East River/Long Island Sound

The New York inland coastal 

boundary varies but is generally 

1,000 feet from the shoreline of the 

mainland in non-urbanized areas of 

the state. In urbanized and 

developed coastal locations, the 

inland boundary is generally 500 feet 

from the mainland’s shoreline, or 

less than 500 feet where a railroad 

or roadway runs parallel to the 

shoreline at a distance of less than 

500 feet; in these locations the 

railroad or roadway defines the

coastal boundary. In addition, the 

coastal zone boundary may extend 

inland up to 10,000 feet to 

encompass coastal resources such as 

areas of exceptional scenic value, 

agricultural or recreational lands, 

and major tributaries and headlands 

in some areas of the state such as 

Long Island Sound and the Hudson 

River Valley. The seaward coastal 

zone boundary in New York extends 

3 nautical miles into the Atlantic 

Ocean for land bordering the ocean.

In total, New York has approximately 

2,625 miles of coast.

X X X X

Queens X X X X

Kings X X X X

Bronx X X X X

Westchester X X X X

Suffolk — — — —

CT

Fairfield

Long Island Sound

Connecticut has a two-tiered coastal 

zone. The first tier “Coastal 

Boundary” generally extends inland 

1,000 feet from the shore. The 

second tier “Coastal Area” includes 

all 36 of the state’s coastal 

municipalities. There are 618 miles of 

coastline in Connecticut. The Long 

Island Sound is Connecticut’s largest 

and most important natural 

resource.

X X X X

New Haven X X X X

Middlesex X X X X

New London X X X X
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-13

Table 7.5-7: Affected Environment: Coastal Zone Management Act Description Intersected 

by Action Alternative (continued)

State County

Coastal 

Resource CZMA Description by State

Existing 

NEC

Alt.

1

Alt.

2

Alt. 

3

RI

Washington

Narragansett Bay

Rhode Island’s coastal zone 

encompasses the entire state,

although the inland extent of the 

Coastal Program’s regulatory 

authority is generally 200 feet inland 

from any coastal features. Rhode 

Island has approximately 384 miles 

of coastline. Narragansett Bay is a 

major coastal feature in Rhode 

Island.

X X X X

Kent X X X X

Providence+ X X X X

MA Suffolk

Boston Bay

The official Massachusetts coastal 

zone includes the land and waters 

within the seaward limit of the 

state’s territorial sea to generally 100 

feet landward of the first major land 

transportation route encountered 

(e.g., road, highway, rail line, etc.).

The following locations are included 

in the state’s coastal zone: all of 

Barnstable, Dukes, and Nantucket 

Counties; tidal rivers and adjacent 

uplands, at a minimum, to the extent 

of vegetation affected by measurably 

saline water; and anadromous fish 

runs in coastal towns. Coastal zone 

associated with Boston Bay in Suffolk 

County is the only coastal resource

within the Affected Environment.

X X X X

Source: NEC FUTURE team, 2015

X = Affected Environment of Action Alternative intersects the state designated coastal zone (CZMA); effects would be subject to 

Tier 2 analysis.

— = Not applicable within that alternative/option

7.5.3.1 Existing NEC

The Affected Environment of the existing NEC encompasses more than 8,500 acres of freshwater 

wetlands. The majority of these wetlands, more than 40 percent, occur in New Jersey and Rhode 

Island. Approximately 21,270 acres of SFHA exist within the Affected Environment of the existing NEC 

with the majority occurring in Connecticut and associated with the Long Island Sound.

There are 226 waterbodies present within the Affected Environment of the existing NEC with special 

water quality designations. Additionally, there are 24 Navigable Waterways within the Affected 

Environment of the existing NEC.

Coastal resources along the existing NEC include approximately 6,430 acres of saltwater wetlands, 

associated with: Gunpowder River and Chesapeake Bay in Maryland; Christina River in Delaware;
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-14 Tier 1 Draft EIS

Hackensack River and Hudson River in New Jersey; and the East River and Long Island Sound in New 

York. The existing NEC travels through designated coastal areas protected by the CZMA in Maryland, 

Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts.

7.5.3.2 Alternative 1

The Affected Environment of Alternative 1 encompasses over 9,300 acres of freshwater wetlands, 

more than 70 percent of which are classified as Forested/Shrub wetlands. Just over 40 percent of the 

freshwater wetlands present within the Affected Environment occur in Connecticut and Rhode Island 

and are associated with resources of Long Island Sound and Narragansett Bay. The Affected 

Environment of Alternative 1 encompasses over 22,100 acres of SFHA. More than 8,000 acres of 

affected SFHA are present within the Affected Environment in Connecticut and are associated with 

the Long Island Sound.

The Affected Environment of Alternative 1 encompasses 239 waterbodies with special water quality 

considerations. There are 24 Navigable Waterways present within the Affected Environment of 

Alternative 1, three of which are new proposed crossings. 

The Affected Environment of Alternative 1 encompasses over 6,640 acres of saltwater wetlands, 

which is only 4 percent more acres than are within the existing NEC. Nearly 60 percent of the affected 

saltwater wetlands are in Connecticut and are associated with Long Island Sound. The majority of the 

CZMA traversed by the Affected Environment of Alternative 1 are in Connecticut and are associated 

with the Long Island Sound.

7.5.3.3 Alternative 2

The Affected Environment of Alternative 2 encompasses over 11,400 acres of freshwater wetlands, 

nearly 70 percent of which are classified as Forested/Shrub wetlands. Just under half of the 

freshwater wetlands encompassed by the Affected Environment are present in Connecticut and 

Rhode Island and are associated with resources of Long Island Sound and Narragansett Bay. The 

Affected Environment of Alternative 2 also encompasses wetlands associated with the John Heinz 

National Wildlife Refuge in Delaware County, PA. The Affected Environment of Alternative 2 

encompasses nearly 26,000 acres of SFHA. More than 9,300 acres of affected SFHA are present within

Connecticut, CT, and are associated with the Long Island Sound.

The Affected Environment of Alternative 2 includes 291 waterbodies with special water quality 

considerations. There are 25 Navigable Waterways within the Affected Environment.

Coastal resources associated with the Affected Environment of Alternative 2 encompass 7,200 acres 

of saltwater wetlands, which is 12 percent more acres than the existing NEC. Approximately 

53 percent of the saltwater wetlands are present in the Affected Environment in Connecticut and are 

associated with Long Island Sound. The majority of the CZMA traversed by Alternative 2 are in 

Connecticut and are associated with the Long Island Sound.
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-15

7.5.3.4 Alternative 3

Washington, D.C., to New York City

Many water resources are present within the Affected Environment of the Washington, D.C., to New 

York City portion of Alternative 3. This route option encompasses nearly 5,150 acres of freshwater 

wetlands. The Affected Environment in Middlesex County, NJ encompasses the highest acreage of 

freshwater wetlands at approximately 1,060 acres associated with the lower Hudson River.

Floodplains (SFHA) are associated with many of these water resources and wetlands. Approximately 

13,000 acres of SFHA are present within the Affected Environment of this portion of Alternative 3.

Large concentrations of SFHA are associated with the Gunpowder River in Harford County, MD, the 

Christina and Delaware Rivers in Delaware, the Schuylkill River in Philadelphia, PA, and the Raritan 

and lower Hudson Rivers in Middlesex County, NJ.

There are 95 waterbodies present within the Affected Environment of this route option that have 

special water quality designations; 10 waterbodies are considered Navigable Waterways.

Coastal resources associated with this portion of Alternative 3 include approximately 2,530 acres of 

saltwater wetlands associated with the Back River, Gunpowder River, and Chesapeake Bay in 

Maryland; the Christina River in Delaware; and the Hackensack and Hudson Rivers in New Jersey.

Additionally, this portion of Alternative 3 travels through designated coastal zones that are protected 

under the CZMA in Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey.

New York City to Hartford

Via Central Connecticut

This route option encompasses approximately 2,230 acres of freshwater wetlands, most of which are 

located in New Haven County and Fairfield County, CT, and are associated with the Long Island Sound. 

Areas of SFHA are also encompasses by the Affected Environment of this route option and are 

associated with tributaries of the Hudson River in New York and with numerous tributaries that drain 

to the Long Island Sound in Connecticut. Approximately 7,050 acres of SFHA are present within the 

Affected Environment of this route option.

There are 116 waterbodies with special water quality designations present within this route option.

Seven waterbodies are considered Navigable Waterways.

Coastal resources within this route option include approximately 1,985 acres of saltwater wetlands 

associated with the Hudson and East Rivers, and the Long Island Sound. This route option also travels 

through designated coastal zones that are protected under the CZMA in New York and Connecticut.

Via Long Island

This route option is proposed to tunnel underneath the Long Island Sound. The Affected Environment 

encompasses approximately 1,580 acres of freshwater wetlands associated with the Long Island 

Sound and the Connecticut River. New Haven County, CT, has the highest acreage of wetlands within 

this route option at approximately 870 acres. Areas of SFHA are present within the Affected 

Environment of this route option and are associated with tributaries to the Hudson and Mamaroneck 
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-16 Tier 1 Draft EIS

Rivers in New York and tributaries that drain to the Long Island Sound. Approximately 6,450 acres of 

SFHA are present within the Affected Environment of this route option.

There are 87 waterbodies with special water quality designations present within the Affected 

Environment of this route option. There are eight Navigable Waterways crossed by the Affected 

Environment of this route option. 

Coastal resources exist within the Affected Environment of this route option and include 6,470 acres 

of saltwater wetlands associated with the East River, Long Island Sound, Connecticut River, Niantic 

River and the Thames River. This route option also travels through designated coastal zones that are 

protected under the CZMA in New York and Connecticut.

Hartford to Boston

Via Providence

This route option encompasses approximately 5,705 acres of freshwater wetlands associated with 

the Connecticut River, Pawcatuck River, Chapman Pond, and Neponset River. Approximately 8,510 

acres of SFHA are present with the Affected Environment and are also associated with these 

waterbodies. In addition, SFHA associated with Narragansett Bay, Seekonk River, and Central Pond 

are present within this route option. 

There are 131 waterbodies with special water quality designations present within the Affected 

Environment of this route option. Ten waterbodies are considered Navigable Waterways.

Coastal resources exist within the Affected Environment of this route option and include 

approximately 40 acres of saltwater wetlands within Suffolk County, MA. This route option also 

travels through designated coastal zones in Massachusetts. 

Via Worcester

This route option encompasses approximately 5,820 acres of freshwater wetlands. The majority of 

the wetlands are associated with the Neponset River in Bristol and Norfolk Counties, MA. 

Approximately 9,290 acres of SFHA exist within the Affected Environment of this route option and 

are primarily associated with many streams and tributaries throughout Bristol County, MA, and the 

Wading River Reservoir. 

There are 146 waterbodies with special water quality designations present within the Affected 

Environment of this route option. Ten waterbodies are considered Navigable Waterways in this route 

option. 

Coastal resources within the Affected Environment are limited to approximately 30 acres of saltwater 

wetlands in Suffolk County, MA. This route option does not traverse a designated coastal zone.

7.5.4 Environmental Consequences

This section provides an overview of the effects on hydrologic resources of the No Action and Action 

Alternatives. It presents a general discussion of the types and locations of hydrologic resources 
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-17

affected for each alternative followed by a more specific discussion organized by hydrologic resource 

on the types of effects that could occur for the various construction types proposed.

Effects on water resources would result from both improvements included as part of the No Action 

and Action Alternatives. Improvements anticipated under the No Action Alternative could affect 

water resources occurring within and adjacent to the existing NEC right-of-way. Mitigation and 

permitting of water resources affected under the No Action Alternative would be the responsibility 

of project sponsors undertaking those actions.

Table 7.5-8 provides the total number of acres or route miles of water resource that would be 

affected by the Representative Route of each Action Alternative, and a discussion of the data follows.

Table 7.5-8: Environmental Consequences: Quantitative Impacts to Water Resources by 

Action Alternative

Resource Alt. 1 Alt. 2

Alternative 3

D.C. to 

NYC

New York City to Hartford Hartford to Boston

via Central 

Connecticut

via Long 

Island

via 

Providence

via 

Worcester

SFHA (acres) 1,135 1,520 1,420 355 350 460 495

Freshwater 

Wetlands (acres) 290 450 545 85 100 340 240

Saltwater 

Wetlands (acres) 255 295 190 115 465 105 90

Total Wetlands

(acres) 540 745 735 200 560 445 330

Coastal Zone 

(route miles) 225 235 115 110 135 50 15

Source: NEC FUTURE team, 2015

7.5.4.1 Alternative 1

Alternative 1 would have the least number of impacts to water resources. Nearly 40 percent of 

impacts to floodplains and wetlands, and 60 percent of impacts to coastal zones, would occur along 

the coast between New Haven, CT and Washington, RI, with New London, CT having the largest 

combined total effects resulting primarily from the Old Saybrook-Kenyon bypass. 

7.5.4.2 Alternative 2

Alternative 2 would have higher impacts to water resources than Alternative 1 but lesser impacts 

than Alternative 3. As is the case for Alternative 1, a large portion of the impacts to water resources 

would occur along the coast of Connecticut; however, the county with the highest number of acres 

of affected wetlands would be Hartford, CT.

Alternative 2 is the only Action Alternative that would bisect the John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge 

in Delaware and Philadelphia, PA. The Wildlife Refuge has associated freshwater wetlands and SFHA, 

is ecologically sensitive and located within a coastal zone.
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-18 Tier 1 Draft EIS

7.5.4.3 Alternative 3

Washington, D.C., to New York City

Impacts resulting from this route option would differ very little from Alternatives 1 and 2. The 

greatest impacts would occur along coastal areas associated with the Chesapeake Bay, Delaware Bay 

and River, and Hudson Bay, although a large number of freshwater wetlands would be affected in 

Central New Jersey.

New York City to Hartford

Via Central Connecticut

This route option would have considerably fewer impacts to water resources than the Long Island 

route option particularly with regard to wetlands. On the other hand, there is very little difference 

between the total acreage of affected SFHA between this routing option and the Long Island routing 

option.

Via Long Island

This route option would have considerably higher impacts to water resources than the Central 

Connecticut route option particularly with regard to wetlands. This route option would affect nearly 

three times the number of acres of wetlands as would the Central Connecticut route option and 

would traverse through 20 percent more route miles of coastal zone. Much of the impacts would 

result from the proposed tunnel that would cross Long Island Sound affecting saltwater wetlands, 

coastal resources, and SFHAs in NY and CT.

Hartford to Boston

Via Providence

This route option would affect just 10 percent fewer acres of SFHA than the Worcester route option, 

however, approximately 35 percent more acres of wetlands would be affected in RI and MA, and 

nearly four times as many route miles of coastal zone would be traversed.

Via Worcester

This route option would affect 10 percent more acres of SFHA than the Providence route option. The 

impacts to wetlands and coastal resources would be lesser than those impacts from the Providence 

route option.

Action Alternatives could affect water resources along the Northeast Coastline. Twenty-four 

waterbodies were identified as experiencing the greatest combined impact to water resources. 

Combined impact refers to instances where Environmental Consequences may be aggravated by 

impacts to multiple hydrologic systems (e.g. wetlands and floodplains). Unless otherwise noted, 

Table 7.5-9 lists each resource that is navigable, has potentially affected associated wetlands and 

designated SFHA, and is in regulated coastal zones. The tables also notes the counties identified as 

being at significant risk from climate change related flooding including sea level rise, storm surge, and 

riverine flooding. A more detailed discussion and analysis on climate change is provided in Section 

7.15. Table 7.5-9 lists those resources crossed by the Representative Route of one or more of the 

Action Alternatives. Additionally, Table 7.5-9 identifies waterbodies that would be affected by 
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-19

proposed improvements to three stations associated with one or more Action Alternatives, all of 

which are categorized as existing with proposed improvements. Appendix E, Section E.05, provides 

quantifiable effects, organized by state and county, for each of the Action Alternatives.

Table 7.5-9: Environmental Consequences: Water Resources with Greatest Combined 

Impact within the Action Alternatives 

State County Resource Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3

Station 

ID

Station 

Name

MD

Baltimore City Chesapeake Bay — — X —

Baltimore County/Harford Gunpowder River — X — —

Harford* Bush River** X X X —

DE

New Castle* Christina River X X X —

New Castle Brandywine Creek X X X —

PA Philadelphia* Schuylkill River X X X —

NJ Essex/Hudson Passaic River X X X —

Hudson* Hackensack River X X X —

NJ/NY Hudson*/Manhattan Hudson River X X X —

NY Manhattan/Queens/Kings East River X X X —

CT

Fairfield* Pequonnock River — X X 105 Bridgeport

New Haven* West River X X X —

New Haven* Mill River X X X —

New Haven* Quinnipiac River X X X —

New Haven* Mill River X X X —

Middlesex*/New London Connecticut River X X X —

Hartford* Connecticut 

River** — X X —

New London* Niantic River X X X —

New London* Thames River X X X —

New London* Mystic River X X X —

New London* Stonington Harbor X X X —

CT/RI New London*/ 

Washington* Pawcatuck River X X X 123 Westerly

RI Providence Seekonk River — X X —

MA

Middlesex/Suffolk Charles River — — X —

Suffolk Fort Point Channel X X X 143

Boston 

South 

Station

Source: NEC FUTURE team, 20154

X = –Resource is present within the Action Alternative Affected Environment; potential effects subject to Tier 2 analysis.

*= County has been identified as having significant risk of climate change related flooding.

** = CZMA associated with this resource at this location is not intersected by the Action Alternative Affected Environment

— = Not applicable within that alternative/option

The potential for construction-related impacts, both temporary and permanent, differs depending on 

the expected construction type. The six primary construction types are Bridge, At-Grade, 

Embankment, Trench, Tunnel, and Aerial Structure. A discussion of the types of temporary and 

permanent Environmental Consequences associated with each construction type for each water 

resource follows. 
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-20 Tier 1 Draft EIS

7.5.4.4 Freshwater Resources 

Temporary construction impacts that involve land-disturbing activities (including the placement of 

fill) and may cause soil erosion, sedimentation, and stormwater runoff are regulated and may be 

restricted, prohibited, and/or require special permits. Erosion and sedimentation may result in 

degradation of aquatic habitat, species, and food sources. Long-term construction impacts that 

involve land-disturbing activities and that may cause destruction of animal habitat and increased

runoff volume caused by an increase in impervious surface and pollution load are also regulated and 

may be restricted, prohibited, and/or require special permits. Other potential impacts include an 

alteration of stream discharge caused by silt loading, increased siltation downstream of stream 

crossings, increased nutrient loading from runoff during construction, destabilization of water 

temperature, alteration of water levels and flows, and increased potential for toxic substance release 

from construction vehicles or equipment. These impacts may result in degradation of water quality 

and aquatic habitat.

4 Major Bridge: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives should 

be moderate. Some impacts that would affect the runoff volume and/or pollution load (thus 

degrading water quality, vegetation, and aquatic habitat) are expected but may be temporary. 

4 At-Grade: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives are likely 

to be high. Impacts that would affect the runoff volume and/or pollution load (thus degrading 

water quality and aquatic habitat) will be unavoidable and permanent.

4 Embankment: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternativesshould 

be negligible. Some impacts that would affect the runoff volume and/or pollution load (thus 

degrading water quality and aquatic habitat) are expected but may be temporary. 

4 Trench: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives should be 

negligible. Some impacts that would affect the runoff volume and/or pollution load (thus 

degrading water quality and aquatic habitat) are expected but may be temporary.

4 Tunnel: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives should be 

negligible. No major impacts that would affect the runoff volume and/or pollution load are 

expected. Areas where the Representative Route of an Action Alternative includes tunnel-type 

construction and crosses a wetland are not counted as an impact in the quantification of wetland 

impact.

4 Aerial Structure: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives

should be moderate. Some impacts that would affect the runoff volume and/or pollution load 

(thus degrading water quality and aquatic habitat) are expected but may be temporary.

7.5.4.5 Navigable Waterways

Construction of bridges and aerial structures has the greatest potential to affect Navigable 

Waterways. Close coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Coast Guard is 

required for any proposed new crossing of a Navigable Waterway to ensure that the crossings are 

designed so that travel is not impeded either temporarily during construction or permanently.
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-21

7.5.4.6 Floodplains

The potential for construction-related impacts differ depending on the expected construction type.

Construction that involves buildings, dredging, filling, paving, and excavation within the designated 

floodplain, may divert flow, cause erosion and sedimentation, and/or cause an increase in the Base 

Flood Elevation (BFE). These activities are regulated and may be restricted, prohibited, and/or require

special permits. However, areas where the Representative Route of an Action Alternative includes 

tunnel-type construction and crosses a floodplain are not counted as an impact in the quantification 

of floodplain impact.

4 Major Bridge: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives should 

be low to moderate. Some impacts that may divert flow or result in changes to the BFE are 

expected but may be temporary. 

4 At-Grade: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives are likely 

to be high. Impacts that could divert flow and/or result in changes to the BFE are unavoidable 

and permanent; therefore, impacts to the SFHA are expected.

4 Embankment: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives are 

likely to be high. Impacts that could divert flow and/or result in changes to the BFE are 

unavoidable and permanent; therefore, impacts to the SFHA are expected.

4 Trench: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives should be 

low to moderate. No major impacts that would divert flow or result in changes to the BFE are 

expected. Temporary construction measures may be necessary to divert flow to prevent water 

from entering the project site.

4 Aerial Structure: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives

should be low to moderate. Some impacts that may divert flow or result in changes to the BFE 

are expected but may be temporary.

7.5.4.7 Coastal Resources

Saltwater Wetlands

Temporary construction impacts that would involve placing fill material in the designated wetland 

area and might cause soil erosion, sedimentation, or increased risk of contamination associated with 

presence of heavy equipment is regulated and may be restricted, prohibited, and/or require special 

permits. Long-term construction impacts that would involve clearing vegetation or adding fill and 

might cause destruction of animal habitat is also regulated and may be restricted, prohibited, and/or 

require special permits. Other potential impacts include changes in light incidence and water clarity 

and changes in and destabilization of water temperature caused by increased light incidence from 

vegetation removal, and alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to 

surface or groundwater flow. However, areas where the Representative Route of an Action 

Alternative includes tunnel-type construction and crosses a saltwater wetland are not counted as an 

impact in the quantification of saltwater wetland impact.
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-22 Tier 1 Draft EIS

4 Major Bridge: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives should 

be moderate. Some impacts that would affect the water quality and/or vegetation (thus 

degrading animal habitat) are expected but may be temporary.

4 At- Grade: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives are likely 

to be high. Impacts that would reduce water quality and/or remove vegetation (thus degrading 

animal habitat) will be unavoidable and permanent. Retaining walls or steeper side slopes could 

be evaluated to reduce the overall footprint of the at-grade alternative. 

4 Embankment: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternativesshould 

be moderate. Some impacts that would affect the water quality and/or vegetation (thus 

degrading animal habitat) are expected but may be temporary.

4 Trench: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives would likely 

be moderate. Some impacts that would affect the water quality and/or vegetation (thus 

degrading animal habitat) are expected but may be temporary.

4 Aerial Structure: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives

should be moderate. Some impacts that would affect the water quality and/or vegetation (thus 

degrading animal habitat) are expected but may be temporary.

Coastal Zones

The potential for construction-related impacts differs depending on the expected construction type.

Temporary construction impacts that involve the clearing of vegetation or soil exposure and may

cause soil erosion, sedimentation, or increased risk of contamination associated with presence of 

heavy equipment are regulated and may be restricted, prohibited, and/or require special permits. 

Long-term construction impacts in coastal areas that may cause destruction of animal habitat or 

degradation to circulation, natural erosion, or existing drainage patterns are also regulated and may 

be restricted, prohibited, and/or require special permits. 

4 Major Bridge: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives should 

be moderate. Some impacts that would affect the vegetation and/or natural patterns are 

expected but may be temporary.

4 At-Grade: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives are likely 

to be high. Impacts that would affect the vegetation and/or natural patterns will be unavoidable 

and permanent.

4 Embankment: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternativesshould 

be moderate. Some impacts that would affect the vegetation and/or natural patterns are 

expected but may be temporary.

4 Trench: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives should be 

moderate. Some impacts that would affect the vegetation and/or natural patterns are expected 

but may be temporary.

4 Tunnel: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives would be 

high. Effects of tunneling should be further investigated to determine potential effects on tidal 
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-23

flows and patterns within Long Island Sound, fish spawning and migration, and near-shore flora 

and fauna. 

4 Aerial Structure: Potential impacts resulting from the construction of the Action Alternatives

should be moderate. Some impacts that would affect the vegetation and/or natural patterns are 

expected but may be temporary.

Development within the jurisdictional CZMA boundaries requires a Federal Consistency Certification.

The federal consistency review is based on the enforceable policies of the state CZMA. Each state’s

Coastal Zone Management Plan is applicable in those areas within its jurisdiction-all portions of the 

route within the coastal zone management boundary are included. A summary of each state’s 

enforceable policies as they relate to potential Environmental Consequences and effects from the 

Action Alternatives are as follows:

4 Washington, D.C.: There is no established coastal zone in Washington, D.C.

4 Maryland: Maryland’s enforceable policies apply to coastal uses associated with transportation 

and development that affect Chesapeake Bay, tidal and nontidal wetlands, and living aquatic 

resources.

4 Delaware: The Delaware coastal management program policies pertain to living resources, public 

investment, water supply management, pollution prevention, and natural areas management.

4 Pennsylvania: Policies and performance standards contained in the Pennsylvania coastal zone 

management program include coastal hazard areas, wetlands, fisheries management, and 

intergovernmental coordination.

4 New Jersey: Coastal zone management rules define special areas and establish standards for 

activities in general water areas, stormwater management criteria, mitigation requirements, and 

other necessary measures based on the proposed activity type and its location. All tidelands are 

overseen by the Tidelands Resource Council and the New Jersey Department of Environmental 

Protection Bureau of Tidelands Management.

4 New York: New York’s coastal management program is based on 44 coastal policies that guide 

economic growth while preserving coastal areas. Policy categories include fish and wildlife, water 

and air resources, flooding and erosion, and public access. The New York City Waterfront 

Revitalization Program is the city’s principal coastal zone management tool and contains 

additional policies that pertain to habitat, wetlands, and visual access.

4 Connecticut: For federal undertakings, the proposed activities must demonstrate federal 

consistency in both the coastal boundary and the coastal area. The coastal management program

regulates work in tidal, coastal and navigable waters and tidal wetlands under the Connecticut

Coastal Management Act.

4 Rhode Island: Coastal Resources Management Council assent is required for all development or 

operations within, above, or beneath tidal waters that are below the mean high water mark 

extending out to the extent of the state’s jurisdictional boundary in the territorial sea. Council 

assent is also necessary for actions occurring on coastal features or within all directly associated 

contiguous areas where it is necessary to preserve the integrity of coastal resources. Areas 
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-24 Tier 1 Draft EIS

requiring more stringent regulationsinclude Greenwich Bay, Pawcatuck River, the Atlantic Ocean, 

and Shoreline Change Areas.

4 Massachusetts: Jurisdictional authority may extend beyond the defined coastal zone boundary 

when activities in adjacent marine waters or land areas can be reasonably expected to affect the 

resources, land, or water uses of the Massachusetts coastal zone. The major Massachusetts 

coastal program policies include coastal hazards, habitat, ocean resources, ports and harbors, and 

water quality.

7.5.5 Context Area

Numerous water resources are located within the Context Area. Some of the larger water resources 

for each state include the Chesapeake Bay, Patuxent River and Susquehanna River in Maryland; 

Delaware River in Delaware and Pennsylvania; Assunpink Creek and lower Hudson River in New 

Jersey; Mamaroneck and Cross Rivers in New York; major tributaries to the Long Island Sound, 

Connecticut River, Connecticut Coastal (Atlantic Ocean) in Connecticut; Pawcatuck River, Chapman 

Pond and Scituate Reservoir in Rhode Island; and the Charles River and Neponset River in 

Massachusetts. Many of these water resources have associated wetlands, floodplains, coastal zones, 

and navigable waterways.

7.5.6 Potential Mitigation Strategies

Potential mitigation strategies to address adverse effects on hydrologic resources are presented 

below by specific topic. Many of the strategies discussed are most appropriate during the design and 

construction phases of a project. 

7.5.6.1 Water Quality/Stormwater Management

4 Prepare site-specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan.

4 Infiltrate stormwater on-site when possible.

4 Minimize length of waterbody crossing.

4 Incorporate pervious materials in design.

4 Implement soil erosion and sediment control features where applicable.

4 Minimize segments of railway that closely parallel streams and waterbodies.

4 Incorporate vegetative buffers to intercept runoff.

7.5.6.2 Wetlands

Temporary construction access into the wetlands should be limited to the maximum extent 

practicable. Implementing appropriate soil erosion and sediment control measures—using timber 

mats, and minimizing compression of the soil—will lessen the severity of the temporary impact. All 

areas temporarily disturbed should be restored to pre-construction elevations using appropriate soil 

types and will be replanted with native wetland vegetation. Where permanent impacts are 

unavoidable, the Tier 2 project proponents should apply the following compensatory mitigation 

concepts:
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-25

4 Elevate tracks using piers.

4 Avoid wetland crossing where feasible.

4 Minimize width of disturbance within wetlands.

4 Utilize wetland protection features while performing activities in wetlands.

4 Implement soil erosion and sediment control features where applicable.

4 Limit removal of vegetation within wetlands.

4 Limit activity in wetlands and re-vegetate immediately following completion of grading.

4 Restore, enhance, and preserve wetland as deemed appropriate.

4 Provide in-lieu fees and wetland mitigation banking.

7.5.6.3 Floodplains

4 Use construction best management practices to reduce or prevent sedimentation from 

construction site.

4 Construct at-grade sections on embankments with culverts.

4 Construct tracks above the BFE using piers.

7.5.6.4 Coastal Resources

4 Elevate tracks using piers.

4 Prepare site-specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan.

4 Infiltrate stormwater on-site when possible.

4 Incorporate pervious materials in design.

4 Minimize length of waterbody crossing.

7.5.7 Subsequent Tier 2 Analysis

Analysis presented in this Tier 1 Draft EIS is based on readily available information and mapping. As 

such, the FRA did not undertake any field investigations to confirm resources identified. During 

subsequent Tier 2 analysis, site-specific identification of hydrologic resources and assessment of the 

extent of effects are necessary. Considerations pertaining to coordination and permitting that may 

be required as parts of the Tier 2 analysis are provided below for each water resource subcategory.

7.5.7.1 Water Quality

Federal statutes governing watersheds and surface water quality include the following:

4 Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires the EPA to develop and implement the 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.

4 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) is a permit program that controls 

water pollution by regulated point sources and stormwater that discharges pollutants into Waters 

of the United States.
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-26 Tier 1 Draft EIS

The NPDES is administered by the EPA; however, the NPDES permit program is administered by 

authorized states. For all jurisdictions, the presence of CWA Section 303(d) must be determined and 

the jurisdictions must establish priority rankings and develop Total Maximum Daily Loads for these 

waters. In addition to the NPDES regulations, many states have additional regulations regarding water 

quality and stormwater management. Table 7.5-10 discusses additional state regulations.

Table 7.5-10: Water Quality/Stormwater Regulations by Geography

Geography Water Quality/Stormwater Management Considerations for Tier 2 Analysis

D.C. District Department of the Environment

Chapter 5 of Title 21 of the D.C. Municipal Regulations establishes regulations pertaining 

to water quality and pollution. The regulations aim to prevent and control: 

■ The pollution of the Potomac River and its tributaries

■ Land-disturbing activities

■ Accelerated soil erosion and sediment control

■ Sediment deposition into the Potomac River and its tributaries (including the 

Anacostia River)

■ Health hazards due to pollution of the Potomac River and its tributaries.

The chapter requires the creation and approval of a soil erosion and sediment control plan 

in addition to a stormwater management plan for development.

MD Department of the Environment

In Maryland, higher pollutant removal or environmental performance than the minimum 

standards established in the Maryland Stormwater Management Design Manual is needed 

to fully protect aquatic resources and/or human health and safety within a high valued

watershed or receiving water. Watershed classifications that are required to meet higher 

standards include:

■ Maryland Critical Area Intensely Developed Areas (IDA)

■ Coldwater Streams (Uses III and IV)

■ Sensitive Streams

■ Wellhead Protection

■ Reservoir Protection (USE I-P, III-P and IV-P)

■ Shellfish/Beach (Use II)

■ EPA Tier II waters

The Code of Maryland Regulations requires that the environmental site design process 

begin at the project conception and proceed through the final approval with phased plans 

submitted for the concept, site development and final stormwater management that 

include both the stormwater management plan and soil erosion and sediment control 

features.
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-27

Table 7.5-10: Water Quality/Stormwater Regulations by Geography (continued)

Geography Water Quality/Stormwater Management Considerations for Tier 2 Analysis

DE Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Division of Watershed 

Stewardship

Section 7400 of Title 7 Natural Resources and Environmental Control of the DE 

Administrative Code established surface water quality standards and designated uses for 

the defined watersheds included the following uses:

■ Public Water Supply Source.

■ Industrial Water Supply.

■ Primary Contact Recreation.

■ Secondary Contact Recreation.

■ Coldwater Fish.

■ Agricultural Supply.

■ Waters of Exceptional Recreation of Ecological Significance.

■ Fish Aquatic Life & Wildlife.

■ Harvestable Shellfish Waters.

■ Sediment and stormwater approvals per the 5101 Sediment and Stormwater 

Regulations are required for land use changes or construction activities for residential, 

commercial, industrial, or institutional land use.

PA Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Land and Water Conservation

25 Pa Code 93.9 designates water uses and water quality criteria for surface waters in 

Pennsylvania. Under PA DEP Chapter 102 Regulations, any project proposing earth 

disturbance activities is required to develop and implement a written Post Construction 

Stormwater Management (PCSM) plan. The PCSM design shall be planned according to the 

following principles:

■ Protect the integrity of stream channels and maintain and protect the physical, 

biological, and chemical qualities of the receiving stream;

■ Prevent an increase in the rate of stormwater runoff;

■ Minimize any increase in stormwater runoff volume;

■ Minimize impervious areas;

■ Maximize the protection of existing drainage features and vegetation;

■ Minimize disturbance including land clearing and grubbing;

■ Minimize soil compaction; and

■ Utilize structural and non-structural best management practices to prevent or 

minimize changes in stormwater runoff.
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-28 Tier 1 Draft EIS

Table 7.5-10: Water Quality/Stormwater Regulations by (continued)

Geography Water Quality/Stormwater Management Considerations for Tier 2 Analysis

NJ Department of Environmental Protection and Department of Agriculture, Division of 

Agricultural and Natural Resources

The New Jersey Surface Water Quality Standards (N.J.A.C. 7:9B) designate water uses and 

water quality criteria for surface waters in New Jersey. Projects discharging into surface 

waters classified as FW1 and Category one (C1) are required to meet more stringent 

stormwater runoff quality criteria. C1 waters are those that are protected from measurable 

changes in water quality based on their exceptional ecological, recreational, water supply 

or fisheries resources significance. FW1 waters are those waters that are to be maintained 

in their natural state of quality (set aside for posterity) and not subject to any manmade 

wastewater discharges or increases in runoff from anthropogenic activities.

NY Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Water

In New York State, waterbodies are assigned a “best use” classification:

■ Class AA and A – drinking water

■ Class B – public swimming and contact recreation activities

■ Class C – fishing and non-contact activities

■ Class D – does not support any of the uses listed above

Waterbodies with AA, A, B and C classifications may also have a “T” or “TS” classification, 

meaning they support trout populations or trout spawning. The Division of Water 

implements its water protection and restoration activities through the State Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System permit program. A permit must be obtained for construction 

activities with one or more acres of disturbance.

CT Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, Water Division

The Connecticut Water Quality Standards divided surface water into three classifications 

that include inland surface waters, coastal and marine surface waters, and groundwater.

Construction general permits apply to construction activities which result in the 

disturbance of one or more acres of land area on a site. 

RI Department of Environmental Management, Stormwater Program

The Rhode Island Office of Water Resources implements the State’s Water Quality 

Standards Program. Surface waters are assigned the as designated uses that include 

freshwater and seawater. General permits for construction activities apply to construction 

activities which disturb one or more acres of land. In Rhode Island, there are other 

regulatory mechanisms to control erosion and sedimentation as required by the Rhode 

Island Department of Environmental Management Freshwater Wetlands, Water Quality 

Certification Programs, the Coastal Resources Management Council, and in towns and cities 

that have a Qualifying Local Program that have been formally approved by the Rhode Island 

Department of Environmental Management and the Rhode Island Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System Program.
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-29

Table 7.5-10: Water Quality/Stormwater Regulations by (continued)

Geography Water Quality/Stormwater Management Considerations for Tier 2 Analysis

MA Department of Environmental Protection, Water, Wastewater & Wetlands and Bureau of 

Resource Protection

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection issued the Stormwater 

Management Standards to address water quality and water quantity which includes 

pollution, flooding, low base flow and recharge. More stringent requirements are in place 

for critical areas. Critical Areas include:

■ Outstanding Resource Waters;

■ Special Resource Waters;

■ Recharge areas for public water supplies;

■ Bathing beaches;

■ Coldwater fisheries; and

■ Shellfish growing areas.

Source: NEC FUTURE team, 2015

7.5.7.2 Wetlands

Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of “Waters of the United States,” as 

defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act 

(CWA) (33 USC 1344). These waters are regulated by the USACE. Any action that proposes to dredge 

or place fill material into surface waters or wetlands is subject to these provisions. The USACE issues 

general and individual permits. In issuing permits, the USACE must comply with the Section 404(b)(1) 

Guidelines (40 CFR Part 230), which generally require selection of the practicable alternative that 

causes the least harm to the aquatic ecosystem.

In New Jersey, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) has assumed the 

USACE’s responsibility for administering the Section 404 permitting program. Therefore, Section 404 

permits in New Jersey are issued by NJDEP rather than USACE, pursuant to the same legal standards 

that apply to the USACE. 

Each state in the Study Area has enacted laws and regulations to protect wetlands and regulate

activities impacting certain types of wetlands as defined by each state. The following laws and 

programs with the corresponding state oversight agencies must be considered as part of the Tier 2 

analysis:

4 Maryland Tidal Wetlands Act – Maryland Department of the Environment, Water Management 

Administration

4 Maryland Nontidal Wetlands Protection Act– Maryland Department of the Environment, Water 

Management Administration

– MD DEP can and has, delegated regulatory authority to county governments that have 

enacted a nontidal wetland protection program.

4 Delaware Wetlands Act of 1973 –Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control of 

Delaware
7.5. Hydrologic/Water Resources

Page | 7.5-30 Tier 1 Draft EIS

4 Pennsylvania Dam Safety and Waterway Management Act – Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection

4 New Jersey Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act – New Jersey Department of Environmental 

Protection

4 New York Freshwater Wetlands Act – New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

4 Connecticut Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act – Connecticut Department of Energy and 

Environmental Protection

– In 1987, the Connecticut legislature amended the Act to include language assigning regulatory 

authority to its municipalities. As a result, all 169 of Connecticut’s municipalities have 

municipal inland wetland agencies.

4 Rhode Island Freshwater Wetlands Act – State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations 

Department of Environmental Management

Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act – Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection

7.5.7.3 Navigable Waters

U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) bridge permits are required for the construction or modification of a bridge 

or causeway across a Navigable Waterway of the United States. A bridge permit is the written 

approval of the location and plans of the bridge or causeway to be constructed or modified. Federal 

law prohibits the construction of these structures unless authorized by the USCG. Coordination with 

the USCG should be initiated in the early stages of development of the project and continue 

throughout the development of the project.

7.5.7.4 Floodplains

The Federal Emergency Management Agency administers the National Flood Insurance Program and 

is charged with identifying and delineating SFHAs. Floodplain management permits are typically 

obtained at a local level. Municipalities maintain floodplain management ordinances that meet 

minimum federal regulations and often require more restrictive provisions based on additional state, 

county, and local requirements. For areas where floodplains may be affected, specific information 

about the type of development, size of development, the SFHA zone and proposed elevation must be 

provided to obtain a permit. 

As part of the President’s Climate Action Plan, the President released Executive Order 13690, 

Establishing a Federal Risk Management Standard and Process for Further Soliciting and Considering 

Stakeholder Input (FFRMS). FFRMS requires all future federal investments in and affecting floodplains 

to meet the level of resilience as established by the Standard.

Tier 2 analysis will further define the effects on floodplains and determine the actual results of 

encroaching/filling identified floodplains at specific locations, as well as include the development of 

mitigation measures and designs that would avoid or minimize the effects on floodplains.

Additionally, requirements of FFRMS will be integrated into subsequent analysis to ensure adherence 

to resiliency standards pertaining to floodplains.
7. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies

Tier 1 Draft EIS Page | 7.5-31

7.5.7.5 Coastal Zones

Coastal resources are protected at the federal level by the CZMA. Under the CZMA, direct federal 

actions, federal license or permit activities, and federal financial assistance activities that have 

reasonably foreseeable coastal effects must be consistent with the enforceable policies of state 

coastal management programs. For development within a designated coastal zone, a Coastal Zone 

Federal Consistency Certification will be required. 

The following state agencies have jurisdiction over review and approval of coastal zone consistency 

determinations and further coordination with each entity will be required as part of the Tier 2 

analysis:

4 Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Chesapeake & Coastal Program

4 Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Delaware Coastal 

Management Program

4 Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Coastal Resources Management Program

4 New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Land Use 

4 New York State Department of State, Office of Coastal, Local Government and Community 

Sustainability

4 Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, Office of Long Island Sound 

Program

4 Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council

4 Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Office of Coastal Zone Management