U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Railroad Administration 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

JUNE 2020 

U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Federal Railroad Administration Washington, DC 20590
Finding of No Significant Impact Page ii

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1

2. Project Location.................................................................................................................. 3

3. Statement of Purpose and Need ........................................................................................5

3.1 Purpose of the Project..................................................................................................5

3.2 Need for the Project......................................................................................................5

4. Alternatives .........................................................................................................................6

4.1 Prior Authorized Alternative..........................................................................................6

4.2 Modified Alignment Proposed Alternatives ...................................................................7

4.2.1 Segment 1....................................................................................................................... 7

4.2.2 Segment 2....................................................................................................................... 8

4.2.2 Segment 3....................................................................................................................... 9

5. Selected Alternative..........................................................................................................10

6. Affected Environment and Environmental Impacts........................................................12

7. Section 106 and Section 4(f) Determination....................................................................18

8. Avoidance and Minimization Measures and Commitments ...........................................21

9. Coordination and Consultation........................................................................................32

9.1 Stakeholder Involvement ............................................................................................34

9.2 Public Involvement and Participation ..........................................................................36

10.Conclusion .........................................................................................................................37

References ..............................................................................................................................38

FIGURE

Figure 1: Project Location .......................................................................................................... 4

TABLE

Table 1.1: Impact Summary of Modified Alignment/Selected Alternative...................................15

APPENDICES 

Appendix A: Amended Programmatic Agreement

Appendix B: Section 106 Finding of Effect and DAHP Concurrence
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 1

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

1. Introduction

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Surface Transportation Board (STB) 

prepared a Draft Supplemental Environmental Assessment (DSEA) and a Final Supplemental 

Environmental Assessment (FSEA) (collectively Supplemental EA), to evaluate the Port of 

Moses Lake’s (Port) proposal to construct approximately 7.6 miles of new rail line in two 

separate segments and acquire approximately 3 miles of an existing rail line in a third segment, 

for a project known as the Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project (Project). The 

Supplemental EA was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) to fulfill the requirements of 42 USC 4321 et seq., Council on Environmental Quality 

(CEQ) Implementing Regulations for NEPA (40 CFR Part 1500-1508), FRA’s Procedures for 

Considering Environmental Impacts (64 FR 28545, May 26, 1999, as updated in 78 FR 2713, 

January 14, 2013) (FRA Environmental Procedures), and the STB’s environmental regulations 

(49 CFR Part 1105). STB was the lead federal agency for the Supplemental EA and FRA was a 

cooperating agency. 

In 2008, the Port filed a Petition for Exemption seeking the authority of the STB to construct and

acquire the rail lines. STB’s Office of Environmental Analysis (OEA) and the Washington 

Department of Transportation (WSDOT) prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in 2008-

2009 (Prior EA) to ensure that any STB authorization to construct and operate the Project 

complied with statutory requirements of NEPA, the CEQ’s NEPA implementing regulations, 

STB’s environmental regulations, Executive Orders, the statutory requirements of the 

Washington State Environmental Policy Act, WSDOT environmental requirements, and other 

applicable federal and state rules and regulations. The Prior EA is available on STB’s website, 

then enter “FD 34396” in the Docket Number search window. The Prior EA’s technical 

memoranda and reports are available by request to the STB’s OEA. 

A Programmatic Agreement (PA) was also negotiated and executed in 2009 by OEA, the 

Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP or State 

Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and the Port, to demonstrate compliance with Section 106 

of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). 

STB authorized construction and acquisition of the proposed rail lines (Original Alignment) in a 

decision issued August 27, 2009 in docket numbers FD 34396 and FD 34396 (Sub-No. 1)1

(Authorization Decision) and imposed compliance with terms of the PA as a condition of the 

decision. However, according to the Port, a severe economic downturn in the region, along with 

1 STB’s Sub-No. 1 Docket contains acquisition authority for Segment 3. See Port of Moses Lake--

Acquisition Exemption--Moses Lake, Washington, Finance Docket No. 34936 (Sub-No. 1) (STB served 

Aug. 27, 2009). STB’s authority is permissive and does not require the Port to acquire the segment. 

See James Riffin - Pet. for Declaratory Order, FD 35245, slip op. at 6 (STB served Sept. 15, 

2009), aff’d Riffin v. STB, No. 09-1277, 2010 WL 4924719 (D.C. Cir. Nov. 30, 2010) (per curiam) 

(authorization is permissive, not mandatory). The Port has been in discussions with FRA that it may either 

acquire Segment 3 or enter into a long-term agreement to cover rehabilitation, maintenance and 

operation of the segment.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 2

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

local land use and business developments, delayed the Project and complicated the Port’s 

efforts at securing the financing necessary for the Project. In 2017, the Port was selected to 

receive grant funding for the Project from the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) 

under the Fostering Advancements in Shipping and Transportation for the Long-term 

Achievement of National Efficiencies (FASTLANE) Grant Program, which is being administered 

by FRA. In combination with earlier funding sources from Washington State, the federal funds 

enabled the Port to proceed with the Project. 

In 2018, the Port requested authorization for certain limited route modifications (Modified 

Alignment) to minimize impacts to the built and natural environment and to better fulfill the 

Project purpose. OEA and FRA determined that these circumstances warranted preparation of a 

Supplemental EA pursuant to NEPA, CEQ NEPA regulations, the STB’s environmental rules, 

FRA Environmental Procedures, and other applicable state and federal laws, including the 

NHPA.

Accordingly, in November 2018, the Port filed a Petition to Re-Open the STB proceeding in 

Docket No. 34936, and potential environmental impacts associated with the Modified Alignment 

were analyzed and presented in a Supplemental EA in 2019. FRA was a cooperating agency in 

the Supplemental EA. The terms of the PA were extended in an amendment, executed on July 

3, 2019.2 Under the amendment, the PA is effective for 10 years after the January 2, 2020 

effective date of the STB decision authorizing the proposed modifications to the Project. That 

amendment also included adding FRA as a signatory (Appendix A). 

FRA has prepared this Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) to comply with NEPA, CEQ’s 

implementing regulations, FRA Environmental Procedures, and related laws. FRA has made 

this FONSI based on information included in the Prior EA, Supplemental EA, and all related 

technical memoranda and other materials, which are incorporated by reference to this FONSI.

2 The PA’s original term of 10 years expired on August 27, 2019.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 3

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

2. Project Location

The Project is located in central Washington State in the City of Moses Lake and within Grant 

County, approximately 100 miles west of Spokane and 180 miles east of Seattle. The Project is 

approximately 8.5 miles north of Interstate 90 and lies primarily in the City of Moses Lake, but 

also includes unincorporated areas of Grant County, Washington. Existing land uses include 

agricultural (although there is no zoning for agricultural use), industrial, commercial and 

residential, as zoned and regulated by the City of Moses Lake and/or Grant County. Several 

parcels owned by the Port near the Grant County International Airport (GCIA) are designated as 

the “GCIA Zone” intended to maintain and enhance aviation-compatible businesses. 

The Project location is shown in Figure 1. The Project extends west from the community of 

Wheeler (located east of the City of Moses Lake) to the Crab Creek water crossing, then north 

to the GCIA industrial area, and has three components:

• Segment 1 would include construction of approximately 4.5 miles of new track from the 

Columbia Basin Railroad Company, Inc. (CBRW) rail line in the community of Wheeler, to 

CBRW’s rail line just west the Crab Creek water crossing. Compared to the Original 

Alignment, the Modified Alignment would be located slightly southward as it parallels 

Wheeler Road and would include construction of a safer, perpendicular rail crossing at 

Wheeler Road. It would also avoid crossing Hamilton Road NE and include construction of a 

safer, perpendicular crossing at Industrial Street. 

• Segment 2 would include construction of approximately 3.1 miles of new track from the 

existing CBRW rail line to the eastern side of the GCIA. Compared to the Original Alignment, 

the Modified Alignment would be located eastward at the GCIA, would include the removal 

of a curve, avoid crossing Randolph Road, and reduce the length of track construction. 

• Segment 3 would include the rehabilitation of approximately 3 miles of CBRW track that 

would connect Segments 1 and 2, starting west of Crab Creek and proceeding northwest to 

the Port/GCIA. 
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 4

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

Figure 1: Project Location
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 5

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

3. Statement of Purpose and Need

3.1 Purpose of the Project

The Project’s purpose is to provide rail service to lands designated for industrial development in 

the eastern and northern parts of the City of Moses Lake and east of the GCIA, to enhance 

opportunities for economic development, and to attract new, rail-dependent businesses to those 

areas. 

3.2 Need for the Project

The Project would restore vital rail service to the City of Moses Lake and adjacent to the GCIA 

and allow rail traffic to and from the GCIA industrial area to avoid passing through downtown 

Moses Lake, leaving that area available for possible future development as a waterfront park, 

boardwalk, and bicycle/pedestrian trail. The Project would also eliminate a major impediment to 

retaining and attracting new industries by providing a cost-effective rail connection to the BNSF 

Railway Company mainline (via the CBRW track) for existing businesses, agricultural 

producers, and new industries to ship to and from Pacific Northwest ports and the Midwest.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 6

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

4. Alternatives

The Prior EA and Supplemental EA evaluated Project alternatives developed to meet the 

purpose and need of the Project.

Prior EA 

In the Prior EA, OEA and WSDOT considered 11 Build Alternatives; 9 of the alternatives were 

for Segment 1 and 2 of the alternatives were for Segment 2. Of the 11 alternatives, 8 were 

dismissed because they did not meet the purpose and need of the Project, or were determined 

to be unfeasible due to economic, technical, or constructability issues. The resulting 

environmentally preferred alternative, approved by STB in its 2009 Authorization Decision, 

included the following components: 

• Construction of Segment 1 with the Alternative 1A crossing of Crab Creek, with or without

the “Ecology Modification” (an eastward alignment shift through a large wetland area).

• Construction of Segment 2 without Alternative 2A (a more easterly route by the GCIA).

• Rehabilitation of Segment 3.

Supplemental EA

In the Supplemental EA, OEA and FRA evaluated the Port’s proposed modifications to 

Segments 1 and 2 (Modified Alignment). The Supplemental EA evaluated the potential 

environmental impacts of the Modified Alignment compared to the Original Alignment. 

Following is a description of the alternatives analyzed in the Supplemental EA. 

4.1 Prior Authorized Alternative

Under the Prior Authorized Alternative, the Project’s Original Alignment as approved by the 

STB’s 2009 Authorization Decision would be implemented by the Port. 

Segment 1

The Original Alignment for Segment 1 begins in Wheeler, proceeds south of Wheeler Road and 

continues west paralleling Wheeler Road, crosses Wheeler Road diagonally, proceeds 

northwest to cross Hamilton Road NE, and then proceeds north and west to cross Crab Creek.

Segment 2

The Original Alignment for Segment 2 begins near the end of the existing CBRW rail line at the 

southern end of the GCIA, heads east and turns to the northeast to follow the curve of Randolph 

Road NE, eventually heads north alongside Randolph Road NE, makes a few slight turns as it 

crosses both Randolph Road NE and Tyndall Road NE, and eventually terminates in the 

industrial area on the eastern side of the GCIA.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 7

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

Segment 3

Segment 3 was constructed in approximately 1942 to serve the construction and operation of 

Larson Air Force Base, now the GCIA. Segment 3 has five public at-grade crossings, two of 

which had been signalized but are currently inactive. These two inactive crossing signals 

(Stratford Road and Loring Drive) will be replaced with new cantilevered flashers, crossing 

gates and signal electronics. The remaining three public crossings will have new railroad 

crossing signs installed. Additionally, approximately 400 track feet at the beginning of Segment 

3 will be salvaged and replaced with new upgraded track. This will include the replacement of 

the paved crossings at Kinder and Wenatchee Roads with timber or concrete panels. The 

salvaged track material will be used to replace defective joint bars, tie plates, and rails on the 

remaining portion of Segment 3. Further track work will consist of replacing existing worn or 

otherwise defective ties with new ties; adding ballast; and re-surfacing, lining, and tamping the 

track. These are routine railroad maintenance activities that are accomplished within the existing 

roadbed and do not involve new ground disturbance. Existing drainage ditches and culverts will 

be cleared of blockages. 

The existing alignment and general profile of the existing rail line will not change. Little to no 

new grading work is required and no additional land will be acquired. Under either scenario of 

the Port acquiring Segment 3 or obtaining a long-term operating agreement, CBRW will retain 

the right to operate service.

The Prior Authorized Alternative would not address changes in land use and business 

developments that have occurred since the 2009 Authorization Decision because:

• Primary access driveways to several industrial tenants would be crossed.

• The Grant County Public Works facility and adjacent buildings, and other buildings

constructed since 2009, would not be avoided.

• Impacts to an irrigation system and cropland would not be minimized.

• Impacts to utilities along Hamilton Road NE and Randolph Road would not be minimized.

In addition, the Prior Authorized Alternative (Original Alignment) did not include safety 

improvements that have been identified since 2009, including replacing diagonal crossings with 

perpendicular crossings at Wheeler Road in Segment 1, and at Road 7NE and Tyndall Road in 

Segment 2, and eliminating crossings of Hamilton Road NE in Segment 1 and of Randolph 

Road in Segment 2. For these reasons, the Port sought STB’s authorization to modify the Prior 

Authorized Alternative (Original Alignment).

4.2 Modified Alignment Proposed Alternatives

4.2.1 Segment 1

The Proposed Alternative for Segment 1 would have slight modifications designated as 

Modification 1B to the Original Alignment approved by the STB in 2009. Modification 1B is 

designed to avoid crossing primary access driveways to several industrial tenants; avoid the 
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 8

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

Grant County Public Works facility and adjacent buildings; minimize impacts to an irrigation 

system and cropland; construct a safer, perpendicular rail crossing at Wheeler Road; minimize 

property needed and avoid newly constructed buildings; avoid crossing Hamilton Road NE and 

construct a safer, perpendicular crossing at Industrial Street; minimize impacts to utilities along 

Hamilton Road NE; and minimize wetland impacts and avoid rock outcrops. Modification 1B 

would also use culverts instead of bridges to cross historic earthen irrigation and drainage 

ditches at Rocky Coulee Diversion Canal 180+182 (RCD 180+182) and at East Low Lateral 

Canal 20 (EL 20).

The eastern end of Segment 1, south of and parallel to Wheeler Road, would be realigned 

approximately 86 feet southward; there would be a perpendicular crossing, rather than a 

diagonal crossing, at Wheeler Road; there would be a perpendicular crossing at Industrial Street 

rather than a diagonal crossing at Hamilton Street north of Wheeler Road; and the track would 

be realigned approximately 50 feet westward through the southern and western portions of 

Wetland A before crossing Crab Creek.

4.2.2 Segment 2

There are two Proposed Alternatives for Segment 2, Modification 2B and Modification 2C. The 

Port will build either Modification 2B or Modification 2C, not both modifications analyzed in the 

Supplemental EA.

Modification 2B is designed to straighten a curve and reduce the amount of track construction, 

better reach existing and future development areas, and avoid a newly constructed building. 

Modification 2B would:

• Remove a curve and straighten the alignment at the beginning/south end, where it would

connect to the existing CBRW/Segment 3 rail line.

• Reduce the length of track construction by approximately 2,700 feet.

• Shift the alignment east at the north end to better reach existing and future development

areas and to accommodate emerging rail shipping needs.

• Adjust the starting point at the north end of the easterly shift to avoid a newly constructed

building.

Modification 2C is designed to straighten a curve and reduce the amount of track construction, 

better reach future development areas, avoid a newly constructed building, avoid crossing 

Randolph Road and construct safer, perpendicular crossings at lesser-traveled roads, minimize 

impacts to utilities along Randolph Road, and avoid crossing primary access driveways to 

several industrial tenants. Modification 2C would:

• Remove a curve and straighten the alignment at the beginning/south end where it would

connect to the existing CBRW/Segment 3 rail line.

• Reduce the length of track construction by approximately 2,000 feet.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 9

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

• Eliminate rail crossings of Randolph Road immediately south of and within the GCIA

industrial area.

• Shift the alignment further east and away from Randolph Road to minimize conflicts with

utilities (storm drain, sewer, power, natural gas) that emanate from and/or parallel the road.

• Bisect undeveloped portions of existing industrial parcels to allow for future spur sidings and

turnouts that would avoid existing buildings and serve both existing and future industrial

tenants.

• Avoid crossing primary access driveways to existing industrial tenants along Randolph Road

and substantially reduce the amount of grading.

4.2.2 Segment 3 

There are no proposed alternatives or modifications to the Segment 3 Original Alignment 

approved by the STB’s 2009 Authorization Decision. The existing alignment and general profile 

of the existing rail line will not change. Little to no new grading work is required and no 

additional land will be acquired. Under either scenario of the Port acquiring Segment 3 or 

obtaining a long-term operating agreement, CBRW will retain the right to operate service.

The Port did not propose to modify Segment 3 from what was originally studied in the Prior EA 

and approved by the STB in its 2009 Authorization Decision. Therefore, the analysis of Segment 

3 in the Supplemental EA, including environmental impacts from the proposed rehabilitation of 

the CBRW rail line and associated mitigations or Project commitments, identified a change to 

only one environmental condition for one resource – Fish, Wildlife and Vegetation – which is the 

removal of Yuma myotis as a state priority species. Aside from this minor change, this FONSI is 

based on the evaluation of potential impacts of Segment 3 in the Prior EA.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 10

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

5. Selected Alternative

OEA and FRA have determined that the environmentally preferred route for the Modified 

Alignment to the rail line is Modification 1B for Segment 1; Modification 2C for Segment 2, 

incorporating the design changes involving Road I NE proposed by the Port as discussed in 

Chapter 4 of the FSEA; and the Original Alignment for Segment 3 as approved by the STB’s 

2009 Authorization Decision. Modification 1B for Segment 1 and Modification 2C for Segment 2 

are similar to the Original Alignment approved by STB’s 2009 Authorization Decision, with minor 

adjustments that minimize impacts to existing land uses, including land development that has 

occurred in the Project vicinity since 2009. Segment 3 involves rehabilitation of approximately 

three miles of existing CBRW track that connects Segments 1 and 2. Because the Port is not 

proposing to modify Segment 3, it remains as approved by the STB in its 2009 Authorization 

Decision.

Segment 1/Modification 1B would still involve construction of approximately 4.5 miles of new 

track from a connection with CBRW’s rail line in the community of Wheeler on the east side of 

the City of Moses Lake, to a connection with CBRW’s rail line just west of the Crab Creek water 

crossing. However, the following modifications would be made:

• Redesign a curve and industrial and other driveway crossings at the beginning/east end to

accommodate the existing topography.

• Shift the rail line approximately 86 feet southward at the eastern end, south of/along

Wheeler Road, to avoid the Grant County Public Works facility, a buried gas line, and three

buildings.

• Shift the rail line slightly to the north near EL 20, south of Wheeler Road, to avoid an

irrigation pivot and to maximize cropland usability.

• Add a new curve south of Wheeler Road to make a safer, perpendicular rail crossing at

Wheeler Road, and to minimize property needed along the frontage of Wheeler Road.

• Add a new curve north of Wheeler Road to cross Industrial Street, rather than Hamilton

Road NE, to avoid removal of a newly constructed building and impacts to utilities in

Hamilton Road NE (Hamilton Road NE and Industrial Street did not exist when the Project

was originally designed).

• Construct a new, perpendicular at-grade crossing of Industrial Street to maintain access to

industrial properties, rather than closing off Industrial Street and constructing an extension of

Silva Street.

• Deviate the rail line slightly to the west between Hamilton Road NE and Broadway Avenue

to minimize impacts to a wetland, avoid rock outcrops, and enable the rail line to better

follow existing topography.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 11

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

• Install culverts instead of bridges for the crossings of historic, earthen irrigation/ drainage

ditches/canals at RCD 180+182 and EL 20.

3

Segment 2/Modification 2C would still involve construction of approximately 3 miles of new 

track from the existing CBRW line to the eastern side of the GCIA as in the Original Alignment. 

However, the following modifications would be made: 

• Remove a curve and straighten the alignment at the beginning/south end immediately

northeast of the connection with the existing CBRW rail line.

• Reduce the length of track construction by approximately 2,000 feet.

• Eliminate rail crossings of Randolph Road immediately south of and within the GCIA

industrial area.

• Shift the alignment further east and away from Randolph Road to minimize conflicts with

utilities (storm drain, sewer, power, natural gas) that emanate from and/or parallel the road.

• Continue north with the eastern alignment shift, bisecting undeveloped portions of existing

industrial parcels to allow for future spur sidings and turnouts that would avoid existing

buildings and serve both existing and future industrial tenants.

• Avoid crossing primary access driveways to existing industrial tenants along Randolph Road

and substantially reduce the amount of grading.

Segment 3 would still involve rehabilitation of approximately 3 miles of existing CBRW track to 

connect Segment 1 and Segment 2. No changes would be made to the Original Alignment.

3 See Preliminary EA, at page 5-5. Crossings were generally mentioned in the 2009 Authorization 

Decision, slip op at 19. See also 2009 Final EA, at pages ES-20 and 5-16.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 12

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

6. Affected Environment and Environmental Impacts

Based upon the Prior EA and the Supplemental EA, FRA has concluded the Selected 

Alternative will have no foreseeable significant impact on the quality of the natural and human 

environment. FRA finds the Selected Alternative is best able to achieve the Northern Columbia 

Basin Railroad Project purpose and need and would not result in foreseeable significant 

environmental impacts.

The potential for the Project to cause environmental impacts is discussed in Chapter 5 of the 

Prior EA and the Draft Supplemental EA, and is summarized in this section of the FONSI. Table 

1.1 summarizes the potential environmental impacts of the construction and operation of the 

Modified Alignment as presented in the Supplemental EA. The Project scope includes 

avoidance and minimization measures and environmental commitments, which are presented in 

Section 7 of this FONSI.

Potential Environmental Impacts

• Air Quality – Impacts are not expected to be significant because there would be a maximum

of two trains per day (one round trip), and the Port would implement measures to minimize

dust during construction.

• Cultural/Historic/Archaeological (NHPA Section 106) – Potential impacts to unidentified

archaeological resources and/or unidentified historic architectural properties would be

addressed through the PA executed among STB, FRA, DAHP, and the Port. The PA

requires that potential effects to any previously unevaluated parcels and unidentified historic

properties be assessed prior to Project construction and would include consultation with the

appropriate parties. The PA also requires the Port to prepare and implement an

Unanticipated Discovery Plan (UDP) (Appendix A).

• Canals EL 20, EL 20U1 and RCD 180+182 are contributing resources to the Columbia

Basin East Low Feeder Canals System, which is the only identified historic property in the

Project’s Area of Potential Effects (APE) and is in Segment 1. STB, in consultation with

DAHP, determined there would be no adverse effect to this historic property (Appendix B

and Section 8 of this FONSI).

• Fish/Wildlife/Vegetation (Endangered Species Act Section 7) – Impacts are not expected to

be significant because there are no federally-designated or state-designated threatened or

endangered fish or wildlife species or federally-designated critical habitat in the Project area,

and except for Washington State candidate species (burrowing owl, Townsend’s big-eared

bat, western grebe, and Clark’s grebe), state-designated protection status of fish and wildlife

species in the Project area has either remained the same or has changed to less protective

status (i.e., no longer priority species or no longer threatened species). Avoidance and

minimization measures and Project commitments would result in minimal adverse impacts to

the remaining state candidate species.

• Energy – Impacts are not expected to be significant because there would be an insignificant

increase in train traffic (maximum of one round trip per day within the next 10 years); the
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 13

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

Project would not affect the transportation of energy resources4; would have a positive effect 

on the transportation of recyclable commodities (steel); and would result in an insignificant 

amount of increased energy consumption during rail construction and rail operations. 

• Hazardous Materials – There are two low-risk, two moderate-risk, and two high-risk,

hazardous materials sites that may be encountered during Project construction. Impacts are

not expected to be significant because the Port would implement measures regarding the

appropriate handling, disposal, and transportation of hazardous materials if they are

encountered or disturbed during construction.

• Land Use – Impacts are not expected to be significant because acquisition of vacant land for

the Project right-of-way (ROW) needed for Segments 1 and 2 would be conducted in

conformance with federal law, conversion of land for the Project ROW would be consistent

with existing land use plans and policies, no residences or businesses would be relocated

by land acquisition, and to the maximum extent practicable, the Port would advise

businesses and the public of construction schedules in advance to minimize disruptions.

• Noise and Vibration – Impacts are not expected to be significant because there would be a

maximum of two trains per day (one round trip) and sensitive receptors are not present

within the area of impact. The Port would implement measures to minimize noise during

construction.

• Socioeconomics/Environmental Justice – No significant impacts to local communities during

construction and no significant adverse socioeconomic of community impacts and no

disproportionately high or adverse impacts on minority or low-income communities are

expected because no community or population groups would be divided or separated; there

would be no interference with access to neighborhoods or public services; no residential

areas would be separated from retail, service, or employment centers; and no residences

would be acquired for the Project ROW.

• Soils and Geology – Impacts are not expected to be significant because there is low

potential for soil erosion due to the limited number of slope excavations/fills and deep cuts

necessary to construct the Project, the presence of sandy gravel and gravelly sand in

underlying soils throughout the Project area that are not typically subject to liquefaction

during earthquakes, and required revegetation of disturbed areas following construction.

• Traffic/Transportation – Temporary construction and operational impacts from traffic delays

due to the movement of construction equipment on public roads and construction and

operation of new at-grade rail crossings are not expected to be significant. Overall, the

Project would result in a reduced number of rail crossings and there would be minor traffic

wait times at the rail crossings based on the limited amount of vehicular traffic at the

4 STB environmental regulations (49 CFR 1105.7) require that environmental impact analyses describe 

the effect of the proposed action on transportation of energy resources, the effect of the proposed action 

on recyclable commodities, and whether the proposed action would result in an increase or decrease in 

overall energy efficiency. Energy resources include fuel consumption resulting from the Project, as well as 

utility and pipeline corridors potentially affected by the construction of the proposed rail line extension. No 

energy resources are expected to be transported by the Project.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 14

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

crossings, and projected train length (up to 10 rail cars) and train speed (25 mph or less). 

The Port would coordinate with FRA and appropriate state and local agencies regarding 

suitable levels of crossing protection and final design of the grade crossings and associated 

warning devices. The Port would also consider school bus schedules in planning and 

executing the necessary road work. The Port will work with the school district to coordinate 

with the school bus garage during construction5

. 

• Visual Quality – Minimal adverse effects to the visual character of the Project area are

expected because construction activities would be localized and temporary and existing

views include urban, industrial, and transportation elements. The Port would revegetate

disturbed areas following construction.

• Water Resources – The Project involves work in and around waterbodies in Segment 1,

including Crab Creek and irrigation canals/ditches. The Port would minimize or avoid

potential adverse impacts to water quality by implementing specific design and construction

measures for the Crab Creek bridge and implementing best management practices to

control erosion and sedimentation and prevent release of contaminants during Project

construction and operation. The Port would obtain all necessary permits for work in and

around water resources.

• Wetlands – The Project would impact wetlands in Segment 1, however the Modified

Alignment would impact less acreage of wetlands than the Original Alignment because of

the westward shift of the rail line through Wetland A and a reduced footprint and improved

design for the bridge crossing at Crab Creek. Construction staging areas would be located

outside of wetlands, and the Port would adhere to current Washington Department of

Ecology (Ecology) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) guidance on wetland

mitigation that may include purchase of wetland mitigation credits at an approved Wetland

Mitigation Bank rather than developing on-site wetland mitigation.6

5

 Further information on public messaging can be found in Chapter 8 under “Socioeconomics and 

Environmental Justice”; see measure 26 regarding notification of the construction schedule to the 

public. 

6 As of the date of this FONSI, the Port is working with the WSDOT-owned Moses Lake Wetland 

Mitigation Bank that is in the process of being brought up to bank standards by the City of Moses Lake, 

which should be completed by the end of 2020. There are enough credits available to mitigate wetland

impacts from the Project, and WSDOT has indicated a willingness to sell credits to the Port for this 

purpose. If continued coordination with USACE and Ecology results in the Port needing to create, 

restore, or enhance existing wetlands as mitigation for Project impacts, the Port will notify FRA and will 

be responsible for working with FRA to complete any necessary environmental review. 
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 15

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

Table 1.1: Impact Summary of Modified Alignment/Selected Alternative

Resource Segment 1

Modification 1B

Segment 2

Modification 2C Segment 3

Air Quality

• Minor impact from

fugitive dust and

equipment emissions

during construction.

• Minor impact from

locomotive particulate

and carbon monoxide

emissions during

operation.

• Minor impact from

fugitive dust and

equipment emissions

during construction.

• Minor impact from

locomotive particulate

and carbon monoxide

emissions during

operation.

• Minor impact from

fugitive dust and

equipment emissions

during construction.

• Minor impact from

locomotive particulate

and carbon monoxide

emissions during

operation.

Cultural/Historic/

Archaeological 

• No adverse impact if

utilizing culvert

crossing at historic

canal EL 20U1 and

replacing bridge

crossings with culvert

crossings at historic

canals RCD 180+182

and EL 20.

• Not applicable/no

resources present.

• Not applicable/no

resources present.

Fish/Wildlife/

Vegetation

• Impacts to state

candidate species

including burrowing

owl, Townsend’s bigeared bat, western

grebe, and Clark’s

grebe during

construction and

operation.

• No impacts to listed

federal or state

threatened or

endangered species

(none present).

• Impacts to state

candidate species

including burrowing owl

and Townsend’s bigeared bat during

construction and

operation.

• No impacts to listed

federal or state

threatened or

endangered species

(none present).

• Impacts to Townsend’s

big-eared bat (state

candidate species)

during construction and

operation.

• No impacts to listed

federal or state

threatened or

endangered species

(none present); Yuma

myotis removed as a

state priority species in

2017.

Energy

• Minor increase in

energy consumption

during construction

and operation, but

insignificant impact to

energy supplies.

• Minor increase in

energy consumption

during construction and

operation, but

insignificant impact to

energy supplies.

• Minor increase in

energy consumption

during construction and

operation, but

insignificant impact to

energy supplies.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 16

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

Resource Segment 1

Modification 1B

Segment 2

Modification 2C Segment 3

Hazardous 

Materials

• Potential to impact

two low-risk and one

moderate-risk

hazardous materials

sites during

construction.

• If shipped over rail

line, potential release

of hazardous

materials during

operation

emergencies such as

derailments or natural

disasters.

• Potential to impact one

moderate risk and two

high-risk hazardous

materials sites during

construction.

• If shipped over rail line,

potential release of

hazardous materials

during operation

emergencies such as

derailments or natural

disasters.

• If shipped over rail line,

potential release of

hazardous materials

during operation

emergencies such as

derailments or natural

disasters.

Land Use

• 54 acres of land

acquired and

permanently

converted to rail rightof-way.

• Relocation of one

commercial entity

after land acquisition.

• 33 acres of land

acquired and

permanently converted

to rail right-of-way.

• Not applicable/existing

rail line.

Section 4(f) 

Properties

• De minimis impact

determination to

historic canals EL 20,

EL 20U1, and RCD

180+182.

• No Section 4(f)

properties present.

• No Section 4(f)

properties present.

Noise/Vibration • No significant noise or

vibration impacts.

• No significant noise or

vibration impacts.

• No significant noise or

vibration impacts.

Socioeconomics/

Environmental 

Justice

• No significant adverse

socioeconomic or

community impacts

during construction or

operation.

• No significant adverse

socioeconomic or

community impacts

during construction or

operation.

• No disproportionately

high or adverse impact

on minority or lowincome communities.

• No significant adverse

socioeconomic or

community impacts

during construction or

operation.

• No disproportionately

high or adverse impact

on minority or lowincome communities.

Soils/Geology

• Areas disturbed

during construction

subject to increased

erosion and soil

impacts.

• No impacts to soils or

geology during

operation.

• Areas disturbed during

construction subject to

increased erosion and

soil impact.

• No impacts to soils or

geology during

operation.

• No impacts to soils or

geology during

construction or

operation.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 17

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

Resource Segment 1

Modification 1B

Segment 2

Modification 2C Segment 3

Traffic/

Transportation

• Temporary traffic

delays during

construction.

• Beneficial impact of

perpendicular

crossing versus

diagonal crossing at

Wheeler Road.

• No significant adverse

impacts on traffic or

transportation during

operation.

• Temporary traffic

delays during

construction.

• Beneficial impact of

reduced number of

road crossings (3

versus 5 crossings.)

• Beneficial impact of

perpendicular road

crossings versus

diagonal crossings at

Road 7NE and Tyndall

Road.

• No significant adverse

impacts on traffic or

transportation during

operation.

• Temporary traffic delays

during construction.

• No significant adverse

impacts on traffic or

transportation during

operation.

Visual Quality

• Insignificant localized

and temporary

impacts during

construction.

• Minimal adverse

impact to three

viewpoints during

operation.

• Insignificant localized

and temporary impacts

during construction.

• No adverse impacts

during operation.

• Insignificant localized

and temporary impacts

during construction.

• No adverse impacts

during operation.

Water Resources

• Potential adverse

water quality impacts

to Crab Creek and

irrigation canals

during construction.

• Potential impact to

Crab Creek floodplain.

• No significant impacts

during operation.

• No water resources

present.

• No water resources

present.

Wetlands

• Direct and indirect

adverse impacts to

1.23 acres of wetlands

during construction

and operation.

• No wetlands present. • No wetlands present.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 18

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

7. Section 106 and Section 4(f) Determination

Section 106 Cultural, Historic and Archaeological Resources

The Columbia Basin East Low Feeder Canals System was the only resource identified as 

eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) in the Prior EA. Four 

elements that are part of the canals system are present in Segment 1: RCD 180+182, EL 20, EL 

20U1, and EL 20 Extension. The RCD 180+182, EL 20, and EL 20U1 are contributing resources 

to the NRHP-eligible Columbia Basin East Low Feeder Canals System, while the EL20 

Extension is non-contributing. During Section 106 consultation that occurred as part of the Prior 

EA, OEA determined that Project construction and operation would not adversely affect the 

historic canals, and that bridges spanning EL 20 and RCD 180+182, and a culvert placed in EL 

20U1, would have no adverse effects on the canals. DAHP concurred with OEA’s finding of no 

adverse effect on April 7, 2009.7

The Port proposed a design change under Modification 1B that would replace the bridges at EL 

20 and RCD 18+182 with reverse siphons (a type of culvert). Individuals meeting the U.S. 

Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI) Professional Qualification Standards from Jacobs Engineering, 

Inc. (Jacobs), a consultant hired by the Port, conducted a supplemental field survey in May 

2017 and assessed whether there would be an adverse effect from using culverts instead of 

bridges at these two historic canal crossings.

Under the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s Section 106 implementing regulations (36 

C.F.R. § 800.5), a project would have an adverse effect if it would diminish any of the

characteristics of a historic property that qualifies it for inclusion in the NRHP. These

characteristics include the integrity of the property's location, design, setting, materials,

workmanship, feeling, or association. Jacobs’ 2017 assessment built upon the previous

2007/2008 assessment prepared for WSDOT and the Prior EA by HDR Engineering, Inc. and

Jones & Stokes Associates, and concluded that the proposed design refinements would not

diminish integrity of location, setting, workmanship, feeling, or association, and would only

cause a minor alteration to integrity of materials and design. Based on these recommendations,

OEA determined there would be no adverse effect from the proposed design change from

bridges to culverts associated with the Modified Alignment. DAHP concurred with OEA’s

determination on June 18, 2019.

Jacobs’ SOI qualified professionals also conducted an archaeological pedestrian survey 

consisting of intensive survey, reconnaissance survey, and limited subsurface testing in 2018. 

The survey covered 30 of 44 parcels in the Project’s APE where landowner right-of-entry was 

granted along proposed Modifications 1B, 2B, and 2C. Subsurface investigations focused on the 

Segment 1/Modification 1B crossing at Crab Creek and the upland areas along the easternmost 

7 2009 Final EA, at Appendix A
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 19

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

end of Segment 1/Modification 1B.8 No cultural resources were identified in surface or 

subsurface contexts. Jacobs also concluded that the location of the Modified Alignment is 

characterized primarily by Pleistocene deposits in upland settings with low potential for buried 

archaeological sites or areas modified by varying degrees of development. Therefore, 

previously unrecognized archaeological resources are unlikely to occur along most of 

Modification 1B and along all of Modifications 2B and 2C. 

Programmatic Agreement (PA)

Following issuance of the Prior EA, a PA was negotiated and executed in June 2009 among

STB, DAHP, and the Port to identify, assess, avoid, minimize, and mitigate effects to historic 

properties in accordance with Section 106 of the NHPA and to ensure that archaeological 

resources and/or historic architectural properties on unevaluated and/or inaccessible parcels 

would be assessed prior to initiation of Project construction. WSDOT and the CBRW, as the 

proposed operator of the Project, were consulting parties to the PA. 

The PA also established processes for the phased identification and evaluation of potential 

effects to any previously unidentified historic properties including archaeological resources 

through consultation with appropriate parties and required that the Port develop and implement

a UDP. The PA originally had a term of 10 years (until August 27, 2019), but it has been 

extended in an amendment to remain in effect for 10 years after the January 2, 2020 effective 

date of the STB decision authorizing the proposed modifications to the Project. The amendment 

also added FRA as a signatory to the PA (Appendix A). 

Section 4(f) Determination

Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 United States Code [USC] 

303), hereinafter referred to as Section 4(f), provides protection to publicly owned parks, 

recreation areas, wildlife, and waterfowl refuges, and public or private historic resources. 

Section 4(f) prohibits the use9 of these lands unless USDOT determines either:

• There is no feasible and prudent avoidance alternative and the action includes all possible

planning to minimize harm to the property resulting from such use.

8 These areas were of particular focus because they were areas most likely to have moderate to high 

potential for the presence of archaeological resources based on archaeological sensitivity modeling of

environmental variables (e.g. distance to water, elevation, soil type, etc.) typically observed at recorded 

archaeological sites within this region of Washington State.

9 A use under Section 4(f) is when land from a Section 4(f) property is permanently incorporated into a 

transportation facility. A constructive use is when a project’s proximity impacts are so severe that the 

projected activities, features or attributes that quality a resource for protection under Section 4(f) are 

substantially impaired and the resource can no longer perform its designated function.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 20

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

• The use of the property, including any measure(s) to minimize harm (such as any

avoidance, minimization, mitigation, or enhancement measures) would have a de minimis

impact.10

The Prior EA did not identify or evaluate impacts to any Section 4(f) properties because there 

was no USDOT/FRA approval required for the Project at that time. A Section 4(f) analysis was 

conducted for the Modified Alignment as part of the Supplemental EA. The NRHP-eligible 

Columbia Basin East Low Feeder Canals System is the only Section 4(f) property associated 

with the Project.

Modification 1B crosses historic canals EL 20, EL 20U1, and RCD 180+182, which are 

contributing features to the Columbia Basin East Low Feeder Canals System. OEA determined 

that the installation of culverts at these canal crossing locations would result in only minor 

physical alterations by introducing a maximum of 100 linear feet of culvert in each canal. These 

limited alterations would not diminish any aspect of the canals system’s physical integrity or 

ability to convey their historic significance, and would not diminish integrity of location, setting, 

workmanship, feeling, or association, and would only cause a minor alteration to integrity of 

materials and design. In OEA’s June 17, 2019 finding of no adverse effect letter to the DAHP, 

OEA stated that FRA intended to make a de minimis impact determination upon DAHP

concurrence with OEA’s finding. 

FRA determined that the Project will have a de minimis impact on the Section 4(f) property

because installation of culverts at these canal crossings would result in only minor physical 

alterations that would not have an adverse effect on the canals. DAHP, the official with 

jurisdiction regarding Section 4(f)-protected historic sites, concurred with OEA’s finding of no 

adverse effect pursuant to Section 106, and also with FRA’s intended de minimis finding under 

Section 4(f), in a letter dated June 18, 2019 (Appendix B). 

10 A de minimis impact is one that, after taking into account avoidance, minimization, mitigation and 

enhancement measures, results in no adverse effect to the activities, features, or attributes qualifying a 

park, recreation area, or refuge for protection under Section 4(f).
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 21

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

8. Avoidance and Minimization Measures and Commitments

As described previously, the Project would not result in significant impacts to the human or 

natural environment. The Port will implement specific avoidance and minimization measures, 

minor mitigation measures, and other environmental commitments. The Port will provide an 

“Avoidance and Minimization Measures Plan”, consistent with this FONSI, to FRA for review 

and approval concurrent with the submission of the Final Design package and prior to initiation 

of construction of the Project.

The Port is required to comply with all applicable federal permitting requirements during the 

implementation of the Selected Alternatives, which include:

• Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)

• Clean Water Act of 1972, Sections 303 and 304, 401, 402, and 404

• Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980

(CERCLA)

• Construction Stormwater General Permit (Washington Department of Ecology)

• E.O. 12088, Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards (1996), amended in 1996

by E.O. 13016, Amendment to E.O. 12580

• Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) of 1970

• Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) of 1947, amended in 1972

• Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of

1970, as amended by the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of

1987

• National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (Public Law 89-665; 16 U.S.C. 470 et

seq.)

• Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSHA)

• Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA)

• Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

• Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA)

• Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970

The following avoidance and minimization measures recommended by FRA are presented by 

environmental resource area. If a measure imposed by the STB’s 2009 Authorization Decision 

has been revised, it is followed by notes in parentheses indicating whether it was revised in the 

Draft Supplemental EA and/or in the Final Supplemental EA and the reason for the revision. 

Measures imposed in 2009 and recommended again here without changes have no notes. 
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 22

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

Some minor editorial changes that do not affect the substance of the measures imposed in 2009 

have been made for clarity. 

The measures listed here are the same as those included in the Draft Supplemental EA except 

for revisions to what are now measures 7, 8, 11, 15, 28, 36, and 53. Numbering has been 

changed to be consecutive.

Air Quality

1. The Port11 shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) and appropriate fugitive

dust suppression controls, such as spraying water on haul roads adjacent to

construction sites and exposed soils, street sweeping, covering loaded trucks, and

washing haul trucks before they leave the construction site.

2. The Port shall comply with the requirements of all applicable federal, state, and local

regulations regarding open burning and the control of fugitive dust related to rail line

construction activities.

3. The Port shall revegetate areas disturbed during construction with native grasses or

other appropriate native habitat as soon as possible after construction activities are

completed, to minimize windblown dust.

4. The Port shall shut off construction equipment when it is not in use to reduce idling

emissions.

5. The Port shall verify that construction equipment is properly maintained and regularly

inspected and that required pollution control devices are in good working condition.

Cultural, Historic, and Archaeological Resources

6. The Port shall comply with the terms of the PA, as amended on July 3, 2019, which sets

forth the steps for the identification and evaluation of historic properties, including

archaeological sites, as well as the mitigation of any adverse effects. The PA addresses

unanticipated historic or cultural properties, archaeological sites, human remains,

funerary items, or assorted artifacts if discovered during Project construction. (Originally

revised in the DSEA; the DSEA revision combined Measures 6 and 7 of the 2009

Authorization Decision.)

Fish, Wildlife, and Vegetation

7. The Port shall abide by construction timing and guidelines stipulated by the Washington

Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) through the Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA).

If there are differences between other measures for this Project and the conditions of the

HPA, the HPA shall take precedence. (Originally revised in the DSEA as Measure 8.)

11 It is understood that the Port may utilize contractors, in which case the Port shall ensure that its 

contractors implement the avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures imposed in this 

proceeding. The Port must also ensure that its operator of the line complies with all measures, including 

the Programmatic Agreement (PA), applicable to line operators.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 23

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

Revised in the FSEA to clarify that the HPA takes precedence if there are other 

conflicting measures.) 

8. The Port shall consult with WDFW and comply with its applicable laws and regulations

so that Project-related construction activities are conducted in a manner that avoids or

minimizes impacts to birds and bats (e.g., roosting bald eagles, over-wintering waterfowl,

migrating shorebirds, foraging bats, and nesting birds). Such measures include, but are

not limited to, avoidance of work that could impact these species, such as construction

activities, within 300 feet of the Crab Creek stream channel from June 1 to September 1.

(Originally revised in the DSEA as Measure 9. Revised to add last sentence

regarding distance and timing restriction in the FSEA.)

9. To minimize disturbance to wildlife and vegetation to the maximum extent possible, the

Port shall limit construction activities, including staging areas and vehicle turnaround

areas, to the rail right-of-way or within previously disturbed areas to the maximum extent

possible. Existing vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. The

Port shall replant disturbed areas with native flora and vegetation unless it would impair

rail operations or maintenance. (Originally revised in the DSEA as Measure 10.)

10. To preserve water quality in aquatic or wetland habitat, the Port shall implement

measures to prevent uncured concrete from coming into contact with surface waters,

and all refueling shall occur more than 200 feet from a water body or wetlands.

11. The Port shall minimize the impacts that could result from over-water structures, such as

the bridge crossing Crab Creek. To minimize or avoid impacts to walleye spawning, the

Port shall comply with measures specified by WDFW. Such measures include, but are

not limited to, avoidance of work within the waters of Crab Creek/Parker Horn between

March 1 and early July. (Originally revised in the DSEA as Measure 12. Further

revised for clarity in the FSEA.)

12. To minimize or avoid impacts to nesting burrowing owls, the Port shall:

a. Conduct a directed survey for burrowing owl nests within 0.5 miles of the areas to be

disturbed by construction. Surveys shall be done during the breeding season (April to

June) and shall abide by a WDFW-approved protocol. Survey results shall be

submitted to WDFW prior to the start of construction. If active nests or nests that

could become active are located within the track alignment footprint, WDFW may

require artificial burrow installations. Artificial burrows would be provided by WDFW

and may be installed within the Project right-of-way. (Originally revised in the

DSEA as Measure 13.a.)

b. Avoid new construction work in areas within 200 meters of identified nesting areas

close to Segment 1 and Segment 2 between February 15 and September 25. If

construction activities take place during this period, then the Port shall consult with

the WDFW to ensure that construction activities are conducted in a manner that

avoids or minimizes impacts to burrowing owls. (Originally revised in the DSEA as

Measure 13.b.)
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 24

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

13. To minimize or avoid impacts to bald eagle roost trees, the Port shall locate the Project

alignment and support areas, such as staging areas, away from roost trees. If clearing of

any roost trees is required, the Port shall create artificial roosts in an appropriate location

near the existing roost.

14. To minimize or avoid impacts to Yuma myotis and Townsend’s big-eared bats, the Port

shall install bat boxes (alternative bat roosting structures) to allow bat roosting near the

Crab Creek crossing.12

Hazardous Materials

15. Prior to initiating any construction activities, the Port shall consult and coordinate with

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) Region 10 Office, USEPA

Superfund program, and the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) concerning

any necessary additional investigations of identified contaminated sites and the

remedies that may be required for those contaminated sites. The Port shall also consult

and coordinate with the USEPA Region 10 Office, USEPA Superfund program, and

Ecology concerning any necessary additional investigations of contaminated sites

encountered during construction and the remedies that may be required for those newly

encountered sites. If USEPA determines it is warranted based on the results of site

investigations, a monitoring program will be developed and implemented during

construction activities. The Port will employ principals of adaptive management during

implementation of the mitigation, avoidance, and minimization measures and any

monitoring program. Site-related consultation, investigation, and monitoring shall be

conducted by a qualified environmental professional as defined by ASTM International

and USEPA. The following contaminated sites have already been identified: (Revised in

the FSEA to add Superfund program, new sites encountered during construction,

monitoring, and adaptive management; formerly Measure 17 in the DSEA.)

a. On Segment 1 and Alternative 1A, the Bernard Cattle Company site at the southwest

corner of Broadway and Road 4 NE (Cherokee Road).

b. On Segment 1 and Alternative 1A, the Francis J. Jenny UST site north of Road 4 NE

between the Bernard Cattle Company site and Crab Creek. (Originally

recommended in the DSEA as a new item under Measure 17.)

c. On Segment 1, the Grant County Road District No. 2 facility on the south side of

Wheeler Road (Road 3 NE) just east of Road L.

d. On Segment 2, the Randolph Road Base Dump (EPA Site No. 8), and the Paint

Hangar Leach Pit (EPA Site No. 22).

e. On Modification 2B, Moses Lake Industries Inc. (Originally recommended in the

DSEA as a new item under Measure 17.)

12 Measure 15 in the 2009 Authorization Decision was deleted in the DSEA because the northern leopard 

frog and its habitat are no longer present in the Project area. 
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 25

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

f. On Segment 2, the Boeing polychlorinated biphenyl cleanup area located on Tyndall

Road.

g. On Modification 2C, the Grant County Shooting Range, the Dumpster Wash Area,

and the Base Closure Landfill. (Originally recommended in the DSEA as a new

item under Measure 17.)

16. The Port shall coordinate with the operator of the rail line to develop a Spill Prevention

Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan and an emergency response plan. In a

manner consistent with applicable legal requirements, the SPCC plan and emergency

response plan shall address the following:

a. Definition of what constitutes a reportable spill.

b. Requirements and procedures for reporting spills to appropriate government

agencies.

c. Equipment available to respond to spills and where the equipment will be located.

d. Training of personnel and training records.

e. List of government agencies and response personnel to be contacted in the event of

a spill.

f. Measures to address the transport of hazardous materials by rail.

17. The Port shall observe the requirements of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)

and other federal, state, and local applicable requirements concerning the handling and

disposal of any hazardous waste or hazardous materials and clean-up in the event of a

spill during construction.

18. The Port shall ensure that the operator of the rail line observes the requirements of FRA

and other federal, state, and local applicable requirements concerning the handling and

disposal of any hazardous waste or hazardous materials and clean-up in the event of a

spill during rail operation.

13

19. The Port shall ensure that locomotives associated with Project operations are checked

regularly for leaks.

Land Use

20. To the maximum extent practicable, the Port shall advise businesses and the public of

construction schedules in advance to minimize disruptions.

21. The Port shall abide by all requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real

Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended (42 U.S.C. § 4601 et seq.).

Relocation assistance shall be provided for any commercial properties acquired for the

Project.

13 The requirements of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) Hazardous Materials 

Regulations, 49 C.F.R. Parts 171-180, apply to the transportation by rail of hazardous waste and other 

hazardous materials, and are subject to enforcement by FRA.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 26

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

22. To the extent practicable, the Port shall negotiate with affected property owners to

minimize any Project-related severance impacts, including impacts to irrigation systems.

23. The Port shall submit form 7460 (Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration) to the

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) prior to construction.

Noise and Vibration

24. During construction, the Port shall ensure that manufacturer-recommended mufflers

have been installed on all diesel-powered equipment and that all equipment is kept in

good operating condition.

25. The Port shall ensure that construction within the boundaries of the City of Moses Lake

will not occur between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. without prior approval by the City

Council.

Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice

26. During Project construction, the Port shall comply with applicable state, county, and city

regulations or requirements regarding detour signs and the routing of construction

vehicle traffic. The Port shall also provide proper notification of the construction schedule

to the public and the nearest fire department and emergency response units.

27. The Port shall work with the operator of the rail line, the City of Moses Lake, community

organizations, and Longview Elementary School to arrange for a rail safety program,

such as Operation Lifesaver,14 to be offered at least once per year for as long as the

Port operates trains over the rail line. (Originally revised in the DSEA as Measure 29.)

28. The Port shall coordinate with the operator of the rail line, the Washington State Utilities

and Transportation Commission (UTC), and the Moses Lake School District, to help

identify and implement practicable safe crossings and other potential rail safety

measures. (Revised in the FSEA to add UTC.)

29. On Segment 3, the Port shall upgrade the existing crossing gate structures and signs to

help provide better advance warnings of approaching trains for pedestrians and drivers.

Soils and Geology

30. The Port shall construct the proposed Project in accordance with the American Railway

Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association guidelines.

31. The Port shall mitigate the potential liquefaction of loose or soft alluvium or other soils

during an earthquake by designing foundation elements for reduced soil strength,

accounting for potential ground displacements, and/or implementing ground

improvements.

14 Operation Lifesaver, Inc. seeks to educate drivers and pedestrians about making safer decisions at 

crossings and around railroad tracks. Information is available on the organization’s website at 

https://www.oli.org/. 
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 27

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

32. The Port shall minimize sedimentation and erosion in the Project area by employing

BMPs during construction.

33. The Port shall revegetate disturbed areas with native grasses as soon as practicable

after Project construction ends.

Traffic and Transportation

34. The Port shall ensure, to the extent possible, that all construction vehicle activity

associated with the construction of the proposed Project occurs during daytime hours.

(Originally revised in the DSEA as Measure 36.)

35. The Port shall consider school bus schedules in planning and executing the necessary

road work.

36. The Port shall consult with appropriate federal, state, and local transportation agencies,

and the three residential landowners near Road I NE, and convene diagnostic review

meetings to evaluate appropriate levels of crossing protection and to determine final

design of the grade crossings and associated warning devices prior to submitting new

crossing petitions to UTC. 15 In addition, the Port shall include notice to the three

residential landowners near Road I NE in any road closure process with Grant County.

(Revised in the FSEA to add the three residential landowners, diagnostic review

meetings, and submittal of new crossing petitions to UTC.)

37. The Port shall comply with applicable FRA track maintenance and inspection standards

or ensure that the operator of the rail line does so.

Visual Quality

38. To the extent practicable, the Port shall be responsible for the following:

a. Ensuring that only the vegetation that needs to be cleared for construction purposes

is removed.

b. Using native flora and vegetation when replanting disturbed areas.

c. Adding compost to the soil before seeding or planting in order to increase plant

establishment.

d. Ensuring that cut-and-fill slopes are blended with the form and line of the existing

landscape through grading practices to enhance visual quality.

e. Ensuring that vegetative buffers, such as trees or bushy shrubs, are located near

residential areas to help screen the railroad corridor from viewers. These buffers

should be located where additional vegetation would not impair visibility at road

crossings.

15 As part of the administration of the USDOT 2017 FASTLANE grant, which is being used to fund final 

design and construction of the Project, the Port shall submit engineering design sets to FRA for review 

and approval.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 28

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

Water Resources

39. The Port shall ensure that any bridge constructed over Crab Creek is designed such that

stormwater runoff does not enter the water body.16

40. For Project-related construction, the Port shall comply with the stormwater management

requirements of all federal, state, and local regulations regarding stormwater

management, including Ecology's Stormwater Manual for Eastern Washington and

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements.

41. The Port shall prepare an approved Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and

a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) plan prior to construction. The

temporary erosion control measures shall be inspected regularly by the Port and

maintained as necessary to ensure that these measures are functioning properly.

42. Consistent with applicable legal requirements, the Port shall coordinate with the operator

of the rail line to prepare a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plan

to minimize any impacts associated with accidental spills of hazardous materials. The

SPCC plan will require the development of a spill contingency plan and will provide for

the implementation of containment and other countermeasures that could prevent spills

from reaching navigable waters or wetlands.

43. The Port shall implement the following erosion and sedimentation controls:

a. Installing silt fencing with geotextile material along the proposed Project area

perimeter to filter sediment from unconcentrated surface water runoff.

b. Placing catch basin inserts in all new and existing catch basins receiving runoff from

the disturbed areas of the Project.

c. Placing straw bales in paths of concentrated runoff to filter sediment.

d. Preserving existing vegetation to the maximum extent possible.

e. Revegetating areas disturbed during construction with native grasses, where

practicable. These areas shall be reseeded as soon as practicable following

construction to prevent erosion.

f. Covering exposed soils with plastic or straw in the event of a major storm.

g. Constructing temporary ditches, berms, and sedimentation ponds to collect runoff

and prevent discharge of sediment into drainages, streams, or wetlands.

h. Installing stabilized construction entrances and exits17 for truck access to the

construction site to protect existing roadways and railroad tracks.

16 As part of the administration of the USDOT 2017 FASTLANE grant, which is being used to fund final 

design and construction of the Project, the Port shall submit engineering design sets to FRA for review 

and approval.

17 A stabilized construction entrance involves placing blacktop or gravel along the edge of the roadway to 

avoid erosion or displacement of soil where trucks access and leave the roadway.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 29

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

i. Cleaning any storm sewer facilities affected by Project construction to prevent

sediment from leaving the site after construction is completed and erosion control

measures are removed.

44. If the erosion and sediment control measures described above are not adequate to

control erosion and sedimentation, all work shall cease, and the Port shall consult with

Ecology regarding additional erosion control or restoration measures to protect adjacent

properties.

45. To avoid or minimize impacts to water resources during construction, the Port shall

implement the following measures:

a. Consulting with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and complying with the

requirements of the Section 404 permitting process (Segment 1/Alternative 1A only).

b. Consulting with Ecology and complying with the requirements of the Section 401

Water Quality Certification (WQC) process (Segment 1/Alternative 1A only).

c. Locating equipment staging areas further than 200 feet from water bodies (Parker

Horn, Crab Creek, or wetlands).

d. Leaving in place erosion control measures at culvert construction sites until the

permanent culvert construction process is completed.

e. Coordinating with farmers and/or agricultural businesses regarding drainage issues

that might arise.

f. Applying noxious weed control measures by an appropriately licensed contractor,

using herbicides approved by the USEPA’s Region 10 Office. Herbicides shall not be

applied during periods of high wind.

46. To prevent non-sedimentation pollutants (such as hazardous materials) from entering

water bodies, the Port shall implement the following measures:

a. Handling and disposing of all pollutants used on-site during construction in a manner

that does not contaminate stormwater, wetlands, irrigation canals, Parker Horn, or

Crab Creek.

b. Establishing staging areas for equipment repair and maintenance at least 200 feet

from all wetlands or water bodies.

c. Inspecting all construction equipment regularly for any fuel, lube oil, hydraulic fluids,

or antifreeze leaks. If leaks are found, the Port shall immediately remove the

equipment from service and repair or replace it and remediate the spill.

d. Disposing any washout from concrete trucks in a manner that avoids dumping it into

storm drains or onto soil or pavement.

e. Ensuring that thinners and solvents are used at least 200 feet from wetlands or water

bodies. Capturing, containing, and properly disposing of thinners and solvents.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 30

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

f. Requiring that fuel trucks maintain a minimum distance of 200 feet from water bodies

and fueling construction vehicles away from sensitive areas, such as areas of

permeable soils where a spill could more easily migrate to surface water.

g. Designing staging areas to capture all runoff and/or spills.

h. On-site excavated material, and/or clean structural rock from local commercial

quarries that meets the engineering design criteria for use in railroad construction,

may be used for fill. On-site excavated materials used for fill shall be tested before it

is placed into surface water to ensure it is free of polluting materials. On-site

excavated material shall not be used for fill if polluting materials are found and shall

be removed from the site using BMPs. (Originally revised in the DSEA as

Measure 48.h.)

47. The Port shall implement the following construction-related avoidance and minimization

measures at the Crab Creek crossing:

a. Isolating cast-in-place concrete bridge piers or abutments from water in Crab Creek

for seven days to allow the concrete to cure and to avoid toxicity to aquatic life.

Uncured or wet concrete shall not come into contact with flowing waters. Any

isolated water that comes into contact with wet concrete and that has a pH greater

than nine shall be pumped out and disposed of appropriately. (Originally revised in

the DSEA as Measure 49.a.)

b. Consultation with USACE, Ecology, and WDFW, and compliance with the

requirements of the Clean Water Act Section 404 permit, the Section 401 WQC, and

the HPA.

48. To minimize the operational effects of the proposed Project on water resources, the Port

shall implement the following railroad practices, or ensure that the operator of the rail

line does so:

a. Develop a bridge maintenance plan in compliance with FRA regulations.

b. Regularly check locomotives associated with the proposed operations to identify and

repair fluid leaks or discharges.

Wetlands

49. Prior to submittal of wetland permit applications to appropriate federal, state, and local

agencies, the Port shall perform additional field work and conduct analysis for the

properties that were previously unavailable for wetland assessment.

50. The Port shall avoid or minimize disturbance to wetland areas whenever possible during

construction.

51. The Port shall not allow construction staging areas in wetlands, including wetlands

located within the Project right-of-way. (Originally revised in the DSEA as Measure

53.)
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 31

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

52. The Port shall prepare a Wetland Mitigation Plan to describe measures to avoid and

minimize impacts to wetlands. The following measures shall be included:

a. Compensating for unavoidable impacts by creating, restoring, or enhancing existing

wetlands, or by purchasing compensatory wetland mitigation credits at an approved

Wetland Mitigation Bank. (Originally revised in the DSEA as Measure 54.a.)

b. Adhering to current agency guidance on wetland mitigation, Wetland Mitigation in

Washington State18, as well as guidance in the City of Moses Lake’s Shoreline

Management Master Plan and the Critical Areas Ordinance (for wetlands within the

city), and complying with replacement ratios, buffer width, site selection criteria, and

other criteria presented in this guidance.

c. Identifying a suitable off-site mitigation site.

d. Designing bridge span widths, fill slope angles, and the alignment to minimize

impacts to wetlands and other aquatic resources.

e. Restoring disturbed areas in native plant communities near Wetland A and in the

Crab Creek area to improve habitats and buffer wetlands. (Originally revised in the

DSEA as Measure 54.e.)

f. Including habitat restoration to the extent practicable in the design of the proposed

Crab Creek bridge to offset loss of wildlife habitats.

53. The Port shall mitigate wetland impacts at an available and approved Wetland Mitigation

Bank if this is the preferred mitigation method of USACE and Ecology and shall comply

with additional mitigation measures, if any, required by these agencies and the City of

Moses Lake. If using a Wetland Mitigation Bank, the Port shall prepare a Mitigation Bank

Use Plan that describes the appropriate categories, functions, and acreage of each

impacted wetland and buffer and describes cost, credit ratio calculations, and available

number of credits for purchase. The following impacted wetlands in Segment 1 shall be

mitigated at an approved Wetland Mitigation Bank if the Port is required to do so by

USACE, Ecology, or the City of Moses Lake: Wetland A, Wetland B, Wetland C and

Wetland E. (Originally revised in the DSEA as Measure 55. Further revised in the

FSEA for clarity.)

54. The Port shall ensure that irrigation ditches and canals are either avoided by spanning

both banks with the crossing structure, or that a culvert is installed to allow water to flow

beneath the rail fill.

Permit Conditions

55. Conditions of all permits shall be included in any construction documents that the Port

provides to contractors.

18 Ecology, USACE Seattle District, and EPA Region 10. 2006. Wetland Mitigation in Washington State: 

Part 1 and Part 2. Version 1. Washington State Department of Ecology Publications #06-06-011a and 

#06-06-011b. Olympia, WA. March 2006.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 32

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

9. Coordination and Consultation

Prior EA

As part of the environmental review process for the Prior EA, STB’s OEA and WSDOT

conducted public outreach and solicited public comments regarding Project alternatives. Prior to 

starting the NEPA process in 2007, OEA and WSDOT prepared a Public Involvement Plan to 

engage the public during the alternative analysis process for the Project. Public meetings and

outreach for the Preliminary EA included a Public Open House held on July 19, 2007;

presentations to the Moses Lake City Council and Port of Moses Lake on October 17, 2007; and 

website information.

Six alternatives for the original Project design were developed prior to starting the NEPA 

process and the Preliminary EA. These included a No-Build Alternative and the following Build 

Alternatives: 

• Segment 1 south of Wheeler Road and crossing at Parker Horn.

• Segment 1/Alternative 1A south of Wheeler Road and crossing at Crab Creek.

• Segment 2 providing access to the interior of the GCIA industrial area.

• Segment 2/Alternative 2A providing access to the east side of the GCIA industrial area.

• Segment 3 rehabilitation of an existing rail line between Parker Horn/Crab Creek and the

GCIA.

The July 2007 Public Open House was attended by 85 people, and 45 comments were received 

in response to the meeting. Of those comments, 13 supported the Project as proposed, two

thought that the existing rail line should be refurbished and no new line constructed, and 26

requested that the Project team consider a route north of Wheeler Road (subsequently named 

“July Alternative”) that would entirely bypass the existing developed area of the City of Moses 

Lake. The comments also indicated concerns about traffic delays at railroad crossings; the

safety of students who attend Longview Elementary School, who may cross or trespass on the

existing track (Segment 3); and incompatibility with an existing residential area near the 

Segment 3 existing track; noise; pedestrian and bicycle safety, aesthetics and community 

cohesion; economic impacts; and delays to emergency vehicle response times. 

A comparison of the July Alternative and the Build Alternatives was presented at the October 

2007 City Council and Port meetings. Following those meetings, a member of the public 

suggested an additional northern route (subsequently named “October Alternative”).

On November 7, 2008, OEA and WSDOT issued a Preliminary EA with a 30-day public 

comment period to ensure that any STB authorization to construct and operate the Project 

complied with statutory NEPA requirements, CEQ guidelines, STB’s environmental regulations, 

Executive Orders, the statutory requirements of the Washington State Environmental Policy Act, 

WSDOT environmental requirements, and other applicable federal and state rules and 

regulations.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 33

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

The Preliminary EA analyzed the No Build and Build Alternatives in depth, including the July 

Alternative and the October Alternative. The July and October Alternatives were withdrawn from 

further consideration primarily because they did not meet the purpose and need of the Project. 

OEA and WSDOT held a Public Open House on November 20, 2008 to present the Preliminary 

EA, provide additional information about the Project, facilitate public involvement in the 

environmental review process, and receive comments. Approximately 38 people attended the 

Open House, and a total of 29 written comments from elected officials, organizations, agencies, 

companies and private citizens were received by the end of the public comment period on 

December 8, 2008. 

The Final EA, issued in May 2009, responded to comments on the Preliminary EA; developed 

and analyzed five additional alternatives for Segment 1, including one alignment modification 

(Ecology Modification); corrected or added to information in the Preliminary EA; modified 10 of 

57 measures contained in the Preliminary EA; and recommended one new measure. The 

additional Segment 1 alternatives in the Final EA differed in the track location and length,

number of at-grade road crossings, impacts to wetlands, zoning of land within the right-of-way, 

number of structures affected, and engineering challenges (such as gradient, height of cut

slopes, and radius of curves). The additional alternatives, except for the Ecology Modification, 

were rejected as not meeting the Project purpose and need or were determined to be unfeasible 

due to economic, technical, or constructability issues. 

The environmentally preferred alternative selected in the Final EA, and subsequently authorized 

by the STB in a decision dated August 27, 2009, included the Segment 1 Alternative 1A 

crossing of Crab Creek and the option to use the Ecology Modification, the standard version of 

Segment 2 without Alternative 2A, and the acquisition19 and rehabilitation of Segment 3.20

Further, STB’s OEA determined that preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

was not necessary because there would not be significant environmental impacts due to the 

avoidance and minimization measures imposed on the Port by the STB 2009 decision.

21

Supplemental EA

As previously described in Section 1, following a period of economic downturn, the Project was 

selected to receive grant funding from the USDOT under the FASTLANE program in 2017 

(administered by FRA), and the Port proposed minor modifications to the STB-authorized 

Segment 1 and Segment 2 alignments to minimize impacts to the built and natural environment 

and to better fulfill the Project purpose. 

19 As noted in Footnote 1, the Port sought and obtained authority from the STB to acquire and rehabilitate 

Segment 3 which is an existing rail line. However, the Port may either acquire Segment 3 or enter into a 

long-term agreement with CBRW to cover rehabilitation, maintenance and operation of the segment.

20 See, e.g., Authorization Decision (Aug. 27, 2009), slip op. at 5-7. See also Final EA (May 8, 2009) at 

pages ES-5 and ES-9, showing maps of the various alternatives.

21 Final EA at page ES-2. See also Authorization Decision (Aug. 27, 2009), slip op. at 6-7.
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 34

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

On November 2, 2018, the Port filed a Petition to Re-Open the STB proceeding in Docket No. 

34936. To ensure compliance with NEPA for the proposed modifications, a Draft Supplemental 

EA (July 11, 2019) and Final Supplemental EA (November 5, 2019) were prepared by the STB 

as the lead federal agency. FRA is a cooperating agency. FRA used the Draft and Final 

Supplemental EAs to inform its NEPA compliance responsibilities regarding the Port’s 2017 

request and subsequent selection to receive a $9.9 million USDOT FASTLANE grant. FRA 

separately considered the entire environmental record in issuing this FONSI.

9.1 Stakeholder Involvement

Prior EA

On April 2, 2007, STB’s OEA and WSDOT initiated consultation with four federally recognized 

Native American tribes (Colville Confederated Tribes, Confederated Tribes and Bands of the 

Yakama Nation, and Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation) and one 

unrecognized Native American tribe (Wanapum Tribe), via letters through mail, for information 

regarding the presence of sensitive Native American cultural resources or other sensitive 

resources within the Project area, consistent with Section 106. 

OEA and WSDOT also sent letters on April 2, 2007 to the following Federal, state and local 

agencies to facilitate timely identification, evaluation, and resolution of environmental and 

regulatory issues related to the Project:

Federal Agencies

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

U.S. Bureau of Land Management* 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service* 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service* 

NOAA Fisheries Service

National Park Service

Federal Railroad Administration

Federal Aviation Administration* 

State Agencies

Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) or State 

Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)* 

Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development

Washington State Department of Ecology
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 35

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife* 

Washington State Department of Natural Resources

Washington State Department of Transportation, North Central Region* 

Washington State Parks* 

Washington State Utilities and Transportation Commission

Local Agencies

Grant County Community Development Department* 

Grant County Economic Development Council* 

Grant County Public Utility District

Port of Moses Lake* 

City of Moses Lake Community Development Department* 

Moses Lake Irrigation and Rehabilitation District

TransCo, via the Washington State Potato Commission* 

Quad-County Regional Transportation Planning Organization

OEA and WSDOT also made presentations to the Moses Lake City Council and Port of Moses 

Lake on October 17, 2007. Of the agencies contacted regarding the Project, only those marked 

with an asterisk (*) on the previous list provided OEA and WSDOT with information, which was 

included in the Preliminary EA. The Grant County Fire District and Longview Elementary 

School/Moses Lake School District also provided information.

Supplemental EA

OEA initiated consultation with the four federally recognized Native American tribes and the one 

non-federally recognized Native American tribe noted previously, via letters through mail and 

email on September 21, November 9 and December 4, 2018, to verify the Modified APE for the 

proposed alignment modification. Consistent with Section 106 of the NHPA, OEA contacted the 

four tribes on May 23, 2019 via letters through mail and email to review and participate in 

the Amended PA associated with the overall Project. 

Consistent with Section 106, OEA consulted with DAHP to verify the Modified APE, which the 

DAHP approved via letters on August 22, 2018 and November 6, 2018. OEA also consulted 

DAHP on April 25, 2019 to review and concur with findings of the cultural resources report and 

Section 4(f) analysis associated with the Project’s Modified Alignment, which DAHP approved 

via letter on November 6, 2018. OEA also consulted DAHP on March 6, 2019, April 1, 2019 and 

May 21, 2019 to review and approve the Amended PA.

Jacobs’ biologists also consulted the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife on December 5, 

6, and 10, 2018 and on April 1, 2019 to update the Fish, Wildlife, and Vegetation sections and 

the avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures in the Supplemental EA. Jacobs’ staff 
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 36

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

also consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on October 24 and October 28, 

2019 confirming that Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 consultation regulations do not 

specifically provide a mechanism for the USFWS to concur with a “no effect” determination by 

the STB. 

9.2 Public Involvement and Participation

Prior EA

Public outreach for the Preliminary EA included a Public Open House held on July 19, 2007. 

The public review period for the Preliminary EA began on November 7, 2008 and ended on 

December 8, 2008. Distribution letters were mailed to elected officials, Tribes, federal agencies, 

state agencies, local agencies, and other interested parties on November 7, 2008. The 

Preliminary EA was also available for review at the Moses Lake Public Library and on STB’s 

website. Written comments were collected during this time and a Public Open House was also 

held on November 20, 2008 to facilitate public involvement in the environmental review process.

A total of 29 comments were filed with STB by agencies and other interested parties and were 

considered in the Project’s Final EA. Please refer to the May 2009 Final EA for the comment 

letters and responses. 

Supplemental EA

On July 11, 2019, STB issued the Draft Supplemental EA for public review and comment and 

published a Notice of Availability in the Federal Register (84 FR 33114). OEA provided notice of 

the Draft Supplemental EA to all parties of record for this proceeding, parties that submitted 

comments for the Prior EA, as well as to federal, state, and local agencies and officials, and 

Tribes served in 2007 for the Prior EA, in addition to those noted previously. The Draft 

Supplemental EA was made available on STB’s website and printed copies were made 

available for review at the City of Moses Lake Public Library and at the Port of Moses Lake 

office in Grant County, Washington.

STB encouraged the public and any interested parties to submit written comments on all 

aspects of the Draft Supplemental EA. The comment period closed on August 12, 2019. STB 

received six comments; five comments were received from state and federal agencies and one 

comment was received from the Port. Additionally, one letter with environmental comments was 

received from an individual before the DSEA was served. STB and FRA considered all 

comments received and responded to all substantive comments in the Final Supplemental EA in 

Chapters 3 and 4 of the document which was finalized on November 5, 2019 and is available by 

searching Environmental Reviews by state on the Environment page of FRA’s website. 
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 37

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

10. Conclusion

FRA finds that the Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project as presented and assessed in the 

Prior EA and Supplemental EA satisfies the requirements of NEPA (42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 et seq.), 

the CEQ regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and FRA's Procedures for Considering 

Environmental Impacts (64 FR 28545, May 26, 1999, as updated in 78 FR 2713, January 14, 

2013), and would have no foreseeable significant impact on the quality of the human or natural 

environment provided it is implemented in accordance with the commitments identified in this 

FONSI. This FONSI is based on the Prior and Supplemental EAs, which were independently 

evaluated by FRA and determined to adequately and accurately define the purpose and need, 

evaluate environmental impacts, and identify appropriate avoidance, minimization, and 

mitigation measures and commitments. As the Project sponsor, the Port of Moses Lake is 

responsible for implementing all environmental commitments identified in this FONSI. The Prior 

and Supplemental EAs provide sufficient evidence and analysis for FRA to determine that an 

Environmental Impact Statement is not required for the Northern Columbia Basin Railroad 

Project as presented.

____________________

Date

_____________________________________________ 

Jamie P. Rennert 

Director, Office of Program Delivery

Office of Railroad Policy and Development

Federal Railroad Administration

FRA’s Office of Railroad Policy and Development prepared this document in May 2020 in

accordance with FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts and NEPA. For 

further information regarding this FONSI contact:

Lydia Kachadoorian Environmental Protection Specialist 

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Railroad Administration

Office of Railroad Policy and Development

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590

Phone: (781) 227-0778 

The following organization(s) assisted FRA’s Office of Railroad Policy and Development in the 

preparation of the associated Supplemental EA:

Surface Transportation Board (STB), Office of Environmental Analysis (OEA)

Jacobs Engineering Inc. 
Finding of No Significant Impact Page 38

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

References

Surface Transportation Board (STB) Office of Environmental Analysis and the Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA). 2019. Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project – Final 

Supplemental Environmental Assessment. November 5, 2019. 

Surface Transportation Board (STB). 2009. Decision-STB Finance Docket No. 34936; Port of 

Moses Lake-Construction Exemption-Moses Lake, Washington; Port of Moses LakeAcquisition Exemption-Moses Lake, Washington. August 21, 2009.

Surface Transportation Board (STB) Section of Environmental Analysis and the Washington 

State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2009. Northern Columbia Basin Railroad 

Project – Final Environmental Assessment. May 2009. 

Surface Transportation Board (STB). 2008. Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project – 

Preliminary Environmental Assessment. November 7, 2008.

Surface Transportation Board (STB). 2019. Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project – Draft 

Supplemental Environmental Assessment. July 11, 2019.
Finding of No Significant Impact

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

APPENDIX A 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT
NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 

AMONG 

THE SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD, 

THE FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION, 

THE WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORIC 

PRESERVATION, AND 

THE PORT OF MOSES LAKE 

REGARDING STB FINANCE DOCKET NO. 34936, PORT OF MOSES LAKECONSTRUCTION EXEMPTION - MOSES LAKE, WASHINGTON 

AND 

STB FINANCE DOCKET NO. 34936 (SUB-NO. 1 ), PORT OF MOSES LAKE -

ACQUISITION EXEMPTION - MOSES LAKE, WASHINGTON 

AND 

STB FINANCE DOCKET NO. 34936 (SUB-NO. 2), NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN 

RAILROAD-OPERATION EXEMPTION-MOSES LAKE, WASHINGTON 

AND 

FRA'S ADMINISTRATION OF FY17 INFRASTRUCTURE FOR REBUILDING 

AMERICA GRANT FUNDS 

WHEREAS, the Port of Moses Lake (Port) is proposing the Northern Columbia Basin 

Rail Project located in Grant County, Washington (hereinafter, "the Project"), which is 

an undertaking as defined in 36 C.F.R. § 800.16(y) with the potential to adversely affect 

historic properties; and 

WHEREAS, on August 27, 2009, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) issued a 

decision authorizing construction of two segments of rail line and acquisition of a third 

segment of rail for the Project that was then proposed by the Port, subject to 

environmental mitigation measures, including compliance with Section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), 54 U.S.C § 306108; and 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 1 of 16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
WHEREAS, the Port is now seeking authorization from STB for modifications to the 

route of the rail construction previously authorized as part of the Project; and 

WHEREAS, the Port applied for and is receiving funding from the US Department of 

Transportation under its Fiscal Year 2017 Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) 

Grant Program for the Project and the USDOT's Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) 

is administering the INFRA grant and the Port intends to use INFRA funds to pay for 

right-of-way (ROW) acquisition, final design, and construction of the Project; and 

WHEREAS, STB is preparing a Supplemental Environmental Assessment 

(Supplemental EA) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

for the proposed modified route for the Project and FRA is participating in the 

preparation of the Supplemental EA as a cooperating agency; and 

WHEREAS, a Programmatic Agreement (hereinafter Agreement) to govern compliance 

with Section 106 of the NHPA for the Project was previously executed among STB, the 

Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (which serves as the 

State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)), the Port, the Washington State Department 

of Transportation (WSDOT), and the Columbia Basin Railroad Company, Inc. (CBRW) 

on June 10, 2009 and due to modifications to the Project, the Agreement is being 

amended to (1) extend the time period set forth in the Duration Clause (Section X), (2) 

to add FRA as a Signatory, (3) to update the Agreement to align with guidance and 

policies issued by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) since 2014, 

and (4) address additional Section 106 compliance requirements that are necessary as 

a result of the proposed route modifications. This executed version shall supersede the 

June 10, 2009 version; and 

WHEREAS, the Project, with the proposed modifications and as illustrated in Appendix 

A, consists of the following three segments and associated activities: acquire ROW 

through purchase, design, and construct approximately 4.5 miles of new rail line along 

the Wheeler Industrial Corridor, between the area known as Wheeler and Parker Horn, 

and reroute rail traffic from the existing aging rail infrastructure to this new route 

(Segment 1 ); acquire ROW through purchase, design, and construct approximately 3.1 

miles of new rail line to access industrial lands adjacent to the Grant County 

International Airport (Segment 2); and acquire existing rail line through donation from 

CBRW and rehabilitate approximately three miles of existing track between Parker Horn 

and the Airport, restoring rail service to the Port and Airport and connecting Segments 1 

and 2 (Segment 3); and 

WHEREAS, STB, as the lead federal agency responsible for compliance with Section 

106 for the Project, has consulted with SHPO, pursuant to 36 C.F.R. Part 800; and 

WHEREAS, pursuant to 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(a)(2), FRA, in correspondence dated July 

25, 2018, designated STB to serve as the lead federal agency to fulfill the agencies' 

collective Section 106 compliance responsibilities and participated in the preparation of 

this Agreement and is a Signatory; and 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 2 of16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
WHEREAS, the Port as the Project Applicant is an Invited Signatory to this Agreement; 

and 

WHEREAS, STB consulted with the following federally-recognized Native American 

tribes and invited them to participate in this Agreement: the Confederated Tribes and 

Bands of the Yakama Nation; the Colville Confederated Tribes; and the Confederated 

Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon. However, those Tribes have not 

elected to participate; and 

WHEREAS, STB consulted with the non-federally recognized Wanapum Tribe and 

invited it to participate in this Agreement, and the Wanapum Tribe has not elected to 

participate; and 

WHEREAS, STB has consulted with the WSDOT Rail, Freight, and Ports Division and 

invited WSDOT to sign this Agreement as a concurring party, and WSDOT has agreed; 

and 

WHEREAS, once the Project has been constructed, CBRW shall operate service over 

the line, and was invited by STB to sign this Agreement as a concurring party, and 

CBRW has agreed; and 

WHEREAS, on December 8, 2008, STB invited the ACHP to participate in the 

development of this Agreement, and the ACHP declined to participate; and 

WHEREAS, STB, pursuant to 36 C.F.R. § 800.4(a)(1 ), established the Area of Potential 

Effects (APE) for the Project as it was originally proposed by the Port in 2009 (Original 

APE), which encompassed a 200-acre area extending 50 feet on either side of the 

proposed rail corridor centerline. Analysis of potential noise and vibration impacts 

considered historic buildings or structures within this 100-foot-wide corridor. SHPO 

concurred with the Original APE in a November 2, 2007 letter; and 

WHEREAS, the APE has been adjusted to cover the proposed modified route for the 

Project (Modified APE). Generally, the Modified APE for the proposed alignment 

modifications is 100-feet-wide (50 feet on either side of the proposed track centerline). 

The Modified APE for Segment 1 has been expanded at certain locations, ranging from 

90 feet to 120 feet on either side of the modified track centerline, to accommodate 

construction, staging, and/or laydown areas. Likewise, the Modified APE for Segment 2 

has been expanded to include review of two alternative modifications to the originally 

proposed route, and ranges from 100 feet wide to approximately 325 feet wide, 

including a staging area at the north end of the alignment. STB's Office of 

Environmental Assessment (OEA), FRA, and SHPO approved the Modified APE in 

August 20181 and November 20182

; and 

1 August 22, 2018 letter from SHPO to OEA 2 November 6, 2018 letter from SHPO to OEA 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 3 of16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
WHEREAS, a cultural resource survey to identify historic properties in the APE and 

evaluate whether the historic properties are eligible for listing in the National Register of 

Historic Places (NRHP) was conducted in 20083

; and 

WHEREAS, a supplemental resource survey was conducted in 2019 to investigate the 

surface and subsurface of the Modified APE that included previously unsurveyed 

parcels4; and 

WHEREAS, STB has determined that some areas within the APE are not currently 

accessible and cannot be adequately investigated prior to the Port's acquisition of the 

ROW, and may contain NRHP-eligible historic properties; and 

WHEREAS, a phased process for compliance with Section 106, as provided for in 36 

C.F.R. § 800.4(b)(2), is appropriate because historic and archaeological investigations 

are still in process and cannot be completed on all land within the APE until the Port 

acquires the property for the Project; and 

NOW, THEREFORE, STB, FRA, the Port, and SHPO (collectively referred to as the 

Signatory Parties or Signatories) agree that the Project is subject to the following 

stipulations in order to take into account the effects of the Project on historic properties 

and further agree that these stipulations shall govern the Undertaking and all of its parts 

until this Agreement expires or is terminated. 

STIPULATIONS 

I. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS 

A. All work carried out under this Agreement shall be conducted by or under the 

direct supervision of a person or persons meeting, at a minimum, the Secretary 

of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards (36 C.F .R. Part 61 ). 

B. All work carried out under this Agreement shall meet the Secretary of the 

Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation 

(48 Fed. Reg. 44716) as well as standards and guidelines for historic 

preservation activities as established by SHPO. 

C. Timeframes and Notification 

1. All time designations in this Agreement are in calendar days unless otherwise 

stipulated. If a review period ends on a Saturday, Sunday or Federal holiday, 

3 HDR Engineering, Inc. 2008. Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project Draft Cultural Resources Report 4 Jacobs. 2019. Port of Moses Lake Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project Supplemental Cultural Resources 

Investigations for Draft Supplemental Environmental Assessment. Historic canals in the original and modified APE 

were also looked at further and are discussed in Jacobs. 2017. Historic Canals Effects Assessment for the Northern 

Columbia Basin Railroad Project. 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT- Page 4 of16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
the review period shall be extended until the first business day following the 

Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday. 

2. All review periods stipulated by this Agreement start on the day the 

documents are sent to the relevant parties which constitutes notification 

unless otherwise stipulated in this Agreement. 

3. All notifications required by this Agreement shall be sent by email and/or 

other electronic means unless a recipient requests a hard copy notification. 

D. Document Review 

1. Where required under this Agreement, STB, in coordination with the Port, 

shall submit documentation to the Signatory Parties, any interested or 

affected Native American tribes, and other consulting parties for review, 

comment and/or concurrence. 

2. If the appropriate parties do not provide written comments to STB as 

specified during the specified review period, it is understood that the nonresponding parties have no comments on the submittal, and STB shall 

proceed to the next step of the consultation process. 

3. If the Signatory Parties, any interested or affected Native American tribes, or 

other consulting party objects or recommends extensive revisions to 

submissions, STB, in coordination with the Port, shall work expeditiously to 

respond to objections and resolve disputes. STB may elect to follow the 

dispute resolution process identified in Stipulation VI to resolve any such 

dispute. 

11. ADDITIONAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE APPROVED APE 

A. The Port shall notify STB of any changes in Project plans and the following 

shall occur if those changes are not major changes to the Project that 

require reopening F.D. 34936 for new or additional authorization from STB: 

1. STB, in consultation with FRA, shall review the changes in Project plans 

to determine if they necessitate revisions to the approved APE. 

2. If the APE requires revision, the Port, in coordination with STB, shall 

prepare a written justification with accompanying graphics, as 

appropriate, for the proposed revised APE, which STB shall submit to 

SHPO for review. 

3. Following SHPO concurrence on the revised APE, STB shall promptly 

notify the Signatories, any interested or affected Native American tribes, and 

other consulting parties of the revised APE. 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 5 of 16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
4. As appropriate, the Port shall update or perform additional cultural 

resources work in accordance with Stipulation Ill or IV of this Agreement. 

The Port shall not commence ground disturbing and/or construction 

activities within the revised APE prior to the completion of the Section 

106 process required by this Agreement until such time as Approval to 

Proceed is received in accordance with Stipulation V. 

111 . PHASED SECTION 106 IDENTIFICATION, EVALUATION, AND 

ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS 

A. The Port shall conduct cultural resource survey work on parcels contained within 

the Modified APE that were not part of previous investigations, and any 

previously inaccessible parcels that are included in the Supplemental EA. 

8 . Once access to a previously inaccessible area within the Modified APE has been 

obtained, the Port shall: 

1. Provide written notification to ST8, Signatories, interested and affected Native 

American tribes, and other consulting parties of the survey methodology and 

Project schedule at least fourteen (14) calendar days prior to initiating the 

cultural resources survey. 

2. Conduct a cultural resources survey and produce a Draft Survey Report with 

associated Historic Property Inventory (HPI) forms to identify archaeological 

resources and historic structures that are 45 years old or older. Any identified 

resources shall be inventoried per Stipulation 1.8 and evaluated for their 

eligibility for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The 

Draft Survey Report shall: a) summarize the findings; b) make 

recommendations regarding any resources' eligibility for listing in the NRHP; 

and c) assess effects to historic properties applying the criteria for adverse 

effects (36 C.F.R. §§ 800.5 (a)(1) and (2)) as a result of the Project. 

3. Specify any resources within the Draft Survey Report that were not fully 

identified, evaluated, and/or assessed for effects and the reasons why, and 

provide recommended actions for further investigation of those resources. 

C. The Port shall provide the Draft Survey Report and any associated HPI forms to 

ST8. The ST8 shall review and provide written comment to the Port on the Draft 

Survey Report and HPI forms within fourteen (14) calendar days. The Port shall 

revise the Draft Survey Report consistent with ST8's comments and submit the 

revised Draft Survey Report to ST8 within fourteen (14) calendar days of the 

receipt of comments for finalization. 

D. The ST8 shall consult with the Signatories, any interested or affected Native 

American tribe, and other consulting parties on the findings by providing the Draft 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 6 of 16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
Survey Report to them for review and comment. All parties shall review and 

provide written comments within thirty (30) calendar days. 

E. Once STB receives concurrence from SHPO and FRA on the Draft Survey 

Report's sufficiency, the Survey Report shall be finalized by the Port, taking any 

comments received into account, and submitted to STB, SHPO, FRA, and any 

interested or affective Native American tribe and/or consulting parties that 

requested a copy during the comment period. 

F. The STB, in consultation with the Signatories, any interested or affected Native 

American tribes, and other consulting parties, may determine that further 

investigation is necessary. The STB may require the Port to conduct additional 

fieldwork, including a pedestrian survey and/or subsurface testing, as necessary. 

All subsequent work shall be reported in additional Survey Reports following the 

processes outlined in this Stipulation. 

IV. RESOLUTION OF ADVERSE EFFECTS - TREATMENT OF HISTORIC 

PROPERTIES 

A. If STB determines, through the process laid out in Stipulation Ill, that the Project 

shall adversely affect a historic property(ies), it shall address the effects through 

the development of a treatment plan(s), rather than through the development of a 

Memorandum of Agreement or other Section 106 agreement document. A 

treatment plan may address one or multiple historic properties in the same plan. 

B. After taking into consideration the significance of the historic property(ies) affected 

and the severity of the adverse effect(s), STB shall develop a treatment plan that 

proposes to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to the historic property(ies). 

The treatment plan shall include a curation plan for any artifacts that are recovered, 

as applicable. 

C. The treatment plan, and all associated treatment measures, shall be developed and 

implemented by cultural resource professionals that meet the Secretary of the 

Interior's Standards as referenced in Stipulation I.A. 

D. The STB shall submit the proposed treatment plan to the Signatories, any 

interested or affected Native American tribe, and other consulting parties in 

writing for review and comment. All parties shall review and provide written 

comments within thirty (30) calendar days. 

E. If STB receives an objection to the proposed treatment plan, it shall notify all the 

Signatories, any interested or affective Native American tribe, and other consulting 

parties within fifteen (15) calendar days. STB, in consultation with SHPO and the 

objecting party, shall work expeditiously to address the objection. The final version 

of the treatment plan requires SHPO concurrence prior to implementation. 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 7 of16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
F. Unless SHPO, the Signatories, any interested or affected Native American tribe, 

or another consulting party objects within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of the 

proposed treatment plan, STB shall take into account any comments timely 

submitted. STB shall summarize the comments, provide written notification to the 

Signatories, any interested or affected Native American tribe, or other consulting 

parties, and proceed with the implementation of the treatment plan. 

G. The Port shall implement the treatment plan. 

V. APPROVAL TO PROCEED 

The Port shall not proceed with construction of any portion or segment of the Project 

until notified in writing by STB's OEA that all Section 106 requirements are satisfied 

for that specific segment of the Project. This includes all identification , evaluation , 

assessment of effects, and resolution of adverse effects to any identified historic 

properties within the Modified APE for each segment. 

VI. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 

A. Any party to this Agreement or any tribe or other consulting party may object to 

any proposed action(s) or the manner in which the terms of this Agreement are 

implemented by submitting its objection in writing to STB. If STB receives an 

objection, it shall notify the Signatories of the objection and consult with the 

Signatories and objecting party to resolve the objection. If STB determines that 

the objection cannot be resolved through consultation, STB shall: 

1. Forward all documentation relevant to the dispute to the ACHP (with a copy to 

the Signatories). Such documentation shall include STB's proposed 

resolution to the objection. STB shall request that the ACHP provide STB 

with its comment on the resolution of the objection within thirty (30) calendar 

days of receiving documentation. STB shall take into account any timely 

comments received regarding the dispute from the ACHP and the Signatories 

when making its final decision on the dispute. 

2. If the ACHP does not provide comment regarding the dispute within thirty (30) 

calendar days, STB shall make the final decision on the dispute and proceed 

accordingly. 

3. STB shall document this decision in a written response that and provide 

ACHP and the Signatories with a copy of the response. 

4. STB shall then proceed according to its final decision. 

B. Any recommendation or comment provided by the ACHP shall be understood to 

pertain only to the subject of the dispute, and STB's responsibility regarding 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 8 of 16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
actions outside the dispute shall remain unchanged. The parties may continue 

all actions under this Agreement that are not the subject of the dispute. 

C. Each party reserves any and all rights it may otherwise have to enforce its rights 

or seek resolution of the dispute under applicable law. 

VII. AMENDMENTS 

Any signatory to this Agreement may propose that it be amended, whereupon the 

parties shall confer and consider the amendment. Any resulting amendment requires 

the agreement of all Signatory Parties and shall be executed in writing. 

VIII. UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERIES 

In the event that any unanticipated historic or cultural properties, archaeological sites, 

human remains, funerary items, or assorted artifacts are discovered during Project 

construction, the Port shall immediately cease all work and notify STB, the Signatories, 

interested federally-recognized Indian tribes, and other consulting parties, to determine 

if additional consultation and/or mitigation is necessary. In the event that human 

remains are discovered, the Port shall also notify appropriate law enforcement 

agencies. (See the Plan and Procedures for the Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural 

Resources and Human Skeletal Remains in Appendix B). 

IX. TERMINATION AND WITHDRAWL 

A. Should STB find that the terms of this Agreement shall not or cannot be carried 

out, STB shall immediately consult with the other Signatories to develop an 

amendment per Stipulation VII. If within thirty (30) calendar days (or another 

time period agreed upon by all Signatories) an amendment cannot be reached, 

any Signatory may terminate this Agreement upon written notification to the 

other Signatories. 

1. Any discovery of historic or cultural properties, archaeological sites, human 

remains, funerary items, or assorted artifacts in process under the terms of 

this Agreement at the time of the termination shall be processed to its 

completion by the Port. 

B. If at any time, FRA disagrees with the manner in which the terms of the 

Agreement are carried out, FRA may object in writing to STB. STB shall follow 

Stipulation VI in resolving the objection. If STB and FRA are unable to come to 

agreement, FRA may withdraw its participation in this Agreement entirely upon 

30-days written notification to all Signatories, leaving the Agreement in full force 

and effect with respect to STB's Section 106 compliance responsibilities. If FRA 

withdraws from this Agreement, FRA shall be responsible for satisfying its own 

Section 106 compliance responsibilities. 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 9 of16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
C. In the event of termination of this Agreement or FRA withdrawal under 

paragraph B of this stipulation, the Port cannot continue work on the Project until 

STB and/or FRA, as appropriate, executes a new agreement pursuant to 36 

C.F.R. § 800.14(b); requests, takes into account, and responds to comments of 

the ACHP under 36 C.F.R. § 800.7; or otherwise complies with Section 106 per 

36 C.F.R. Part 800. The STB and FRA shall provide written notice to the other 

Signatories as to the course of action pursued. 

D. If the Port withdraws from participation in this Agreement, then the Agreement is 

terminated. 

X. DURATION 

Unless terminated pursuant to Stipulation IX, this Agreement shall terminate 

automatically within ten (10) years after the date of any STB decision authorizing or 

declining to authorize the proposed modifications to the Project in Grant County, 

Washington. 

XI. EFFECTIVE DATE 

This Agreement shall be effective on the date of the last signature by the Signatories. 

Pursuant to 36 C.F.R. § 800.6(c)(2), the effective date of this document is not contingent 

upon the signature of Concurring Parties. 

XII. EXECUTION AND IMPLEMENTATION 

Execution and implementation of this Agreement evidences that STB and FRA have 

taken into account the effects of this undertaking on historic properties, have afforded the 

ACHP a reasonable opportunity to comment, and STB and FRA have satisfied their 

responsibilities under Section 106 of the NHPA and its implementing regulations. 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 10 of 16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
ACCEPTED AND AGREED 

SIGNATORY PARTIES 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 11 of16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
By: 

~a~/2itAcL Date :JJy ~dolq 

Marlys Osterhues, Chief, Environment and Project Engineering Division, Office of 

Railroad Policy and Development 

Federal Railroad Administration 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 12 of 16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
Date: -6/ 2 -r-) )~ 

f Archaeology and Historic Preservation 

Dr. Allyson Brooks, Washington State Historic Preservation Officer 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 13 of16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
The Port of Moses Lake 

Date: 07Jo3} !9 By ~---,-:;--

Jeffrey Bishop, Executive Director 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 14 of 16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
CONCURRING PARTIES 

Washington State Department of Transportation 

By: -------L;Z_ · rlf ________ a_~--- Date:

Ron Pate, Director, Rail, Freight, and Ports Division 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 15 of 16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
Columbia Basin Railroad Company I 

By: z;;,I ~ Date:¥;/7 

Brig Temple, President 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 16 of16 

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
APPENDIX A 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT -

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
PROJECT: Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

CLIENT: Port of Moses Lake (POML)

LOCATION: Moses Lake, Washington

COUNTY: Grant

PLSS: Segment 1: T19N R28E S14, 13, 24 and T19N R29 E S19, 20

Segment 2: T20N R38E S 22, 27, 33, 34

QUADRANGLE: Moses Lake North and Wheeler

BASE MAP:ESRI USA Topo Maps 2018

DATE OF FIGURE: 4/24/19; rev 6/17/20

FIGURE BY:M. Indrebo

VICINITY MAP

±

0 2,600 5,200 Feet 0 875 1,750 Meters

SEGMENT 2

Legend

Segment 1

Original

Segment 1

Mod. 1B

Segment 2

Original

Segment 2

Mod. 2B

Segment 2

Mod. 2C

Segment 3

SEGMENT 1

Washington State

(!

Project Location

Modification 2B

Modification 2C

SEGMENT 3

±

Modification 1B
PROJECT: Norlham Columbia Basin RaHroad Project 

a.Pe# Pol1 ,ot U1urll1c t•ke (1"014) 2,600 i1!t:'°~=t.h C®Nl'f; 0,,""1 

JIU$( t 10N ~ S i ,, 13, 1'1#ff/ld T19N R29ES19, 20 

QUADRANGLE: Mos6S Lalla North and IM,1111/ar 

BASE MAP: ESRI Digits/ GlobB 2018 

Original Alignment APE --- Hisloric Canal Segmenls 375 750 1,500 Meters 

Modific:alion 18 APE --- Segment 3 OAJE OFnGU/Uc ,_19 JAr,oas· r:1cW~E 8 'r.M..-.cbllrO 14'-
Segment 2 - APE Overview 

Originial Alignment APE 

Modification 28 APE 

Modification 2C APE 

-segment3 

1,000 2,000 Feet 0 350 700 Meters 

I I I I I 

PROJECT: Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project 

CLIENT: Port of Moses Lake (POML) 

LOCATION: Moses Lake 

STATE: Washington N 

COUNTY: Grant 

PLSS: 

QUADRANGLE

BASE MAP: 

T20N 

ESRI 

R38E 

: Moses 

Digital 

S 22

Lake 

, 

Globe 

27, 

North 

33, 

2018 

34 A

DATE OF FIGURE:4/30/ 19 

FIGURE BY: M. lndrebo JACOas· 

0 
PROJECT: Northern Columbia Basin RoiJrosd Project f~,g:;;::..rl~~s::k;al<e (POML) STATE: Washing/on "" COUNTY: Gran/ 

P'-SS: T19NR2BE S14, 13, 24and THJN R29E S19, ZQ --- Segment 3 Modified APE QUADRANGLE: MosBS Lake North and Wheeler 0 375 750 1,500 Meters BASE MAP: ESRI Digital Globe 2018 

Originial Alignment APE DATEOFFIGURE:4130/19 J i A r ,oes

· FIGUR t! O~.ld ....,.,!IO; :14,,... 
APPENDIX B 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT -

AMENDED PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT 
PLAN AND PROCEDURES FOR THE UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF 

CULTURAL RESOURCES AND HUMAN SKELETAL REMAINS 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT, 

IN GRANT COUNTY, WASHING TON 

1. INTRODUCTION 

The following Unanticipated Discovery Plan (UDP) outlines procedures for the Port of 

Moses Lake (Port) to follow, in accordance with state and federal laws, if archaeological 

materials or human remains are discovered. 

2. RECOGNIZING CULTURAL RESOURCES 

A cultural resource discovery could be prehistoric or historic. Examples include: 

• An accumulation of shell, burned rocks, or other food related materials, 

• Bones or small pieces of bone, 

• An area of charcoal or very dark stained soil with artifacts, 

• Stone tools or waste flakes (i.e. an arrowhead, or stone chips), 

• Clusters oftin cans or bottles, logging or agricultural equipment that appears to be 

older than 50 years, 

• Buried railroad tracks, decking, or other industrial materials. 

When in doubt, assume the material is a cultural resource. 

3. ON-SITE RESPONSIBILITIES 

ST P I: STOP WORK. Ifany Port employee, contractor, or subcontractor conducting grounddisturbing activities encounters human skeletal remains during construction, then all activity 

will cease that may cause further disturbance to those remains. The area ofthe find will be 

secured and protected from further disturbance until the State Historic Preservation Officer 

(SHPO) provides notice to proceed. Ifhuman remains are encountered, treat them with dignity 

and respect at all times. Cover the remains with a tarp or other materials (not soil or rocks) for 

temporary protection in place and to shield them from being photographed. Do not speak with 

the media. 

STEP 2: NOTIFY ON-SITE RESPONSIBLE PARTY. Ifthere is an archaeological monitor 

for the project on-site, notify that person, otherwise notify the Project Manager, Foreman, Chief 

Engineer, or whomever is supervising on-site activities. The finding of human skeletal remains 

will be reported to the county medical examiner/coroner and local law enforcement in the most 

expeditious manner possible. The remains will not be touched, moved, or further disturbed. 

The county medical examiner/coroner will assume jurisdiction over the human skeletal remains 

and make a determination ofwhether those remains are forensic or non-forensic. Ifthe county 

medical examiner/coroner determines the remains are non-forensic, then they will report that 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 1 of5 

UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY PLAN 
finding to the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) who will then 

take jurisdiction over the remains. The DAHP will notify any appropriate cemeteries and all 

affected tribes ofthe find. The State Physical Anthropologist will make a determination of 

whether the remains are Indian or Non-Indian and report that finding to any appropriate 

cemeteries and the affected tribes. The DAHP will then handle all consultation with the 

affected parties as to the future preservation, excavation, and disposition ofthe remains." 

STEP 3: NOTIFY THE FEDERAL AGENCY. Contact the Surface Transportation Board's 

Office ofEnvironmental Analysis (OEA) and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). 

Contact Information for OEA: 

Victoria Rutson 

Director, Office ofEnvironmental Protection 

Federal Preservation Officer 

202-245-0295 

Adam Assenza 

Environmental Protection Specialist 

202-245-0301 

Adam.Assenza@STB.gov 

Contact Information for FRA: 

Katherine Zeringue, FRA Federal Preservation Officer 

202-578-4115 

katherine.zeringue@dot.gov 

4. FURTHER CONTACTS AND CONSULTATION 

A. Project Manager's Responsibilities: Stop Work In the Area ofthe Discovery 

• Protect Find: The Port is responsible for taking appropriate steps to protect the 

discovery site. All work will stop in an area adequate to provide for the total security, 

protection, and integrity ofthe resource. Vehicles, equipment, and unauthorized 

personnel will not be permitted to traverse the discovery site. Work in the immediate 

area will not resume until treatment ofthe discovery has been completed following 

provisions for treating archaeological/cultural material as set forth in this document. 

• Direct Construction Elsewhere On-site: The Port may direct construction away from 

cultural resources to work in other areas prior to contacting the concerned parties. 

B. Identification and Consultation 

• Identify f ind: The Port will ensure that a qualified professional archaeologist examines 

the find to determine if it is archaeological and will provide findings to SEA. 

o If it is determined not to be archaeological, work may proceed with no further 

delay. 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 2 of5 

UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY PLAN 
o If it is determined to be archaeological, the Port and OEA will continue with 

notification. 

o Ifthe find may be human remains or funerary objects, the Port will ensure that a 

qualified physical anthropologist examines the find. Ifit is determined to be 

human remains, the procedure described in Section 5 will be followed. 

• Notify DAHP: OEA will contact the Department of Archaeology and Historic 

Preservation (DAHP). 

• Notify Tribes: Ifthe discovery may relate to Native American interests, OEA will also 

contact any federally-recognized tribes with ancestral connection to the area. 

Contact Information for DAHP: 

Dr. Allyson Brooks 

State Historic Preservation Officer 

360-586-3066 or 

Dennis Wardlaw 

Transportation Archaeologist 

360-586-3085 

.GOV 

C. Further Activities 

• Archaeological discoveries will be documented as described in Section 6. 

• Construction in the discovery area may resume as described in Section 7. 

5. SPECIAL PROCEDURES FOR THE DISCOVERY OF HUMAN SKELETAL 

MATERIAL 

Any human skeletal remains, regardless of antiquity or ethnic origin, will at all times be 

treated with dignity and respect. 

The Port will comply with applicable state and federal laws, and the following procedure : 

A. Notify Law Enforcement Agency or Coroner's Office: 

In addition to the actions described in Sections 3 and 4, the Port will immediately notify 

the local law enforcement agency or coroner's office. 

The coroner (with assistance of law enforcement personnel) will determine ifthe remains 

are human, whether the discovery site constitutes a crime scene, and will notify DAHP of 

its determination. 

B. Participate in Consultation: 

Per RCW 27.53.030, RCW 68.50, and RCW 68.60, DAHP will have jurisdiction over 

non-forensic human remains. Port personnel, as well as OEA and the Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA), will participate in consultation. 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 3 of 5 

UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY PLAN 
C. Further Activities: 

• Documentation of human skeletal remains and funerary objects will be agreed upon 

through the consultation process described in RCW 27.53.030, RCW 68.50, and RCW 

68.60. 

• When consultation and documentation activities are complete, construction in the 

discovery area may resume as described in Section 7. 

6. DOCUMENTATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL MATERIALS 

Archaeological deposits discovered during construction will be assumed eligible for 

inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. 

The Port will ensure the proper documentation and assessment of any discovered cultural 

resources in cooperation with OEA, DAHP, affected tribes, and a contracted consultant (if 

any). 

All prehistoric and historic cultural material discovered during project construction will be 

recorded by a professional archaeologist using standard techniques. Site overviews, features, 

and artifacts will be photographed; stratigraphic profiles and soil/sediment descriptions will be 

prepared for subsurface exposures. Discovery locations will be documented on scaled site 

plans and site location maps. 

Cultural features, horizons and artifacts detected in buried sediments may require further 

evaluation using hand-dug test units. Units may be dug in controlled fashion to expose 

features, collect samples from undisturbed contexts, or interpret complex stratigraphy. A test 

excavation unit or small trench might also be used to determine if an intact occupation surface 

is present. Test units will be used only when necessary to gather information on the nature, 

extent, and integrity of subsurface cultural deposits to evaluate the site's significance. 

Excavations will be conducted using state-of-the-art techniques for controlling provenience. 

Spatial information, depth of excavation levels, natural and cultural stratigraphy, presence or 

absence of cultural material, and depth to sterile soil, regolith, or bedrock will be recorded for 

each probe on a standard form. Test excavation units will be recorded on unit-level forms, 

which include plan maps for each excavated level, and material type, number, and vertical 

provenience (depth below surface and stratum association where applicable) for all artifacts 

recovered from the level. A stratigraphic profile will be drawn for at least one wall of each 

test excavation unit. 

Sediments excavated for purposes of cultural resources investigation will be screened 

through 1/8-inch mesh, unless soil conditions warrant 1

/4-inch mesh. 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 4 of5 

UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY PLAN 
All prehistoric and historic artifacts collected from the surface and from probes and 

excavation units will be analyzed, catalogued, and temporarily curated. Ultimate disposition 

of cultural materials will be determined in consultation with OEA, DAHP, and any affected 

tribes. 

Within 90 days of concluding fieldwork, a technical report describing any and all resultant 

archaeological excavations will be provided to OEA, DAHP, and any affected tribes. 

If assessment activity exposes human remains (burials, isolated teeth, or bones), the process 

described in Section 5 above will be followed. 

7. PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION 

Project construction outside the discovery location may continue while documentation and 

assessment ofthe cultural resources proceed. A qualified professional, or a person who 

meets, at a minimum, the Secretary ofthe Interior's Professional Qualification Standards 

(36 C.F.R. Part 61), must determine the boundaries ofthe discovery location. In consultation 

with DAHP, FRA, and any affected tribes, OEA will determine the appropriate level of 

documentation and treatment ofthe resource. OEA will make the final determinations about 

treatment and documentation. Construction may continue at the discovery location only 

after the process outlined in this plan is followed and OEA and FRA determine that 

compliance with state and federal laws is complete. 

NORTHERN COLUMBIA BASIN RAILROAD PROJECT - Page 5 of5 

UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY PLAN 

Finding of No Significant Impact

Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project

June 2020

APPENDIX B 

SECTION 106 FINDING OF EFFECT AND DAHP CONCURRENCE
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD 

Washington, DC 20423 

Office of Environmental Analysis 

June 17, 2019 

Allyson Brooks, Ph.D. 

State Historic Preservation Officer I Director 

Washington State Department ofArchaeology and Historic Preservation 

P.O. Box 48343 

Olympia, WA 98504-8343 

Subject: Northern Columbia Basin Railway Project, Docket No. FD 34936 

Determination of No Adverse Effect 

DAHP Log# 041007-02-STB 

Dear Dr. Brooks: 

As you know, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) previously made a determination 

ofNo Adverse Effect for the Northern Columbia Basin Railway Project NCBRP) in 2009. Your 

office, the Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP), 

concurred with that determination on April 7, 2009. In May and June 2009, STB, DAHP, the 

Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and the Port of Moses Lake Port 

finalized the NCBRP Programmatic Agreement (PA), which, in part, required archaeological 

inventory ofparcels not yet surveyed in 2009 due to lack of access. 

STB, as lead federal agency, is currently preparing a Draft Supplemental Environmental 

Assessment DSEA) for the project due to modifications to the rail alignment and design changes 

at the two historic canals proposed by the Port. The STB's Office ofEnvironmental Analysis 

OEA is managing the environmental and historic review, and the Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA) has joined as a cooperating agency. As part of the historic review, the PA 

is currently in the process ofbeing updated. 

Jacobs Engineering, Inc. (Jacobs) has completed a new cultural resources survey report 

for the NCBRP. The report titled Port ofMoses Lake Northern Columbia Basin Railroad 

Project Supplemental Cultural Resources Investigations for Draft Supplemental Environmental 

Assessment, dated January 2019, was electronically submitted to DAHP via WISSARD on April 

25, 2019. 
Jacobs' 2019 cultural resources survey report provides the results of an inventory for a 

previously un-accessed property and for adjustments to the route alignment/design that were not 

reflected in the 2009 determination. The 2019 inventory consists of a modified Area of Potential 

Effects for Segments 1 and 2 of the NCBRP, with which DAHP concurred in November of2018. 

No new cultural resources were identified during the 2019 survey. Ofnote, an additional design 

change is proposed for crossings oftwo NRHP-eligible canals (EL20 and RCD 180+ 182); the 

Port is proposing to change from the previously approved bridge crossings to culvert/reverse 

siphon crossings. Overall, the report concludes that a finding of "No Adverse Effect" to historic 

properties continues to be appropriate for the project. 

After reviewing all project-related surveys and available resources, OEA has determined 

that the project, with the proposed modifications, would continue to have No Adverse Effect to 

historic properties in accordance with 36 C.F.R. §800.S(b). OEA is seeking DAHP's comments 

and concurrence with this determination. Ifyour office concurs with OEA's "No Adverse Effect" 

determination, FRA intends to make a de minimis impact finding to comply with Section 4(f) of 

the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966. OEA intends to include DAHP's comments 

and concurrence in the DSEA prior to its release for public comment expected this July. 

Thank you for your continued participation in the historic review process for the NCBRP 

project. Ifyou have any questions, please feel free to contact Adam Assenza of my staff at 202) 

245-0301 or adam.assenza@stb.gov. 

Sincerely, 

Victoria Rutson 

Director 

Office ofEnvironmental Analysis 

cc: Laura Shick, FRA 

Valarie Kniss, FRA 

Katherine Zeringue, FRA 

Lydia Kachadoorian, FRA 

Dennis Wardlaw, DAHP 

Sandy Brown, Thompson Hine LLP 

Jeannie Beckett, The Beckett Group 
Allyson Brooks Ph.D., Director 

State Historic Preservation Officer 

June 18, 2019 

Ms. Victoria Rutson 

Environmental Section Chief 

Surface Transportation Board 

395 E Street S.W. Room 1110 

Washington, DC. 20423-0001 

In future correspondence please refer to: 

Project Tracking Code: 041007-02-STB 

Property: STB Docket No. 34936, Northern Columbia Basin Railway Project 

Re: NO Adverse Effect 

Dear Ms. Rutson: 

Thank you for contacting the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and Department of 

Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) regarding the above referenced proposal. This action 

has been reviewed on behalf of the SHPO under provisions of Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended) and 36 CFR Part 800. Our review is based upon 

documentation contained in your communication. 

First, we agree with the Area of Potential Effect (APE) as mapped in the survey report. We also 

concur that the current project as proposed will have "NO ADVERSE EFFECT" on historic properties 

within the APE that are listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic 

Places. As a result of our concurrence, further contact with DAHP on this proposal is not necessary. 

However, if new information about affected resources becomes available and/or the project scope of 

work changes significantly, please resume consultation as our assessment may be revised. Also, if 

any archaeological resources are uncovered during construction, please halt work immediately in the 

area of discovery and contact the appropriate Native American Tribes and DAHP for further 

consultation. 

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. If you have any questions, please feel free to 

contact me. 

Sincerely, 

Dennis Wardlaw 

Transportation Archaeologist 

(360) 586-3085 

dennis.wardlaw@dahp.wa.gov 

State of Washington • Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 

P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 

www.dahp.wa.gov