Final Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement 8-1

8 Next Steps

FRA and ADOT considered public, resource agency, and tribal input during the Tier 1 process. If 

federal funding or approvals for the identified corridor alternative are needed, Tier 2 NEPA 

documentation would be completed before final design and construction of any passenger rail 

facility can occur. This chapter describes the additional analysis required for Tier 2 studies, 

NEPA documentation, and design needed to advance to the project level. 

8.1 Tier 1 Completion 

The Draft Tier 1 EIS was issued to solicit input on the corridor alternatives from the public, 

resource agencies, and tribes. Comments FRA and ADOT received on the Draft Tier 1 EIS during

the comment period are addressed in the Final Tier 1 EIS. In part, the Moving Ahead for 

Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) (Public Law 112-114) streamlined the NEPA process

by allowing DOT agencies to issue a combined Final EIS/Record of Decision (ROD). After the 

Draft EIS was published, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Public Law 

114-94) (Section 1304) was signed into law by President Obama on December 4, 2015 which 

also allows DOT agencies to issue a combined Final EIS/ROD. The ROD documents the agency’s 

decision and identifies any applicable mitigation measures to be implemented and further 

studied in subsequent phases. 

8.2 Tier 2 Operable Corridor Sections

As funding becomes available, Tier 2 studies and NEPA documentation would be advanced for

logical operable sections of a passenger rail system within the preferred corridor alternative. In 

other words, one or more operable corridor sections that together make up the complete 

passenger rail system could be developed as individual projects. Any such section would be 

required to have independent utility with or without construction of other sections. The specific 

class of NEPA document for more detailed analysis of any Tier 2 section has not yet been 

defined. Preliminary design and environmental studies would be conducted in support of a 

Tier 2 analysis. No individual section of a passenger rail system has been identified for 

implementation, but the following proposed corridor sections, or any other functional 

configurations deemed viable, could be evaluated as logical, independent sections subject to 

available funding and the source of that funding. These corridor sections could also be 

combined, modified, or revisited in the future based on available funding. 

Figure 8-1 illustrates a number of possible implementation phases within the preferred corridor 

to be further studied at Tier 2 as follows:
Florence

Marana

Tucson

Mesa

Gilbert

Phoenix

Oro 

Valley

PIMA COUNTY MARICOPA COUNTY PINAL COUNTY

GILA COUNTY

PINAL COUNTY

Tohono O'odham Nation

Ak-Chin

Indian 

Community

Gila River

Indian 

Community

Salt River 

Pima-Maricopa

 Indian Community

Santa Cruz River

Salt River

Gila River

Queen Creek

Verde River

Superior

Glendale

Peoria

Scottsdale

Goodyear

Sky Harbor International

Airport Phoenix-Mesa

Gateway

Airport

Tucson

International

Airport

MARICOPA COUNTY

Coolidge

Eloy

Casa

Grande

Surprise

Buckeye

Tohono O'odham

Nation San Xavier

District

Tempe

San

Tan

Valley

Guadalupe

Catalina

Foothills

8 Next Steps

Figure 8-1. Possible Implementation Phases

Final Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement 8-2

Commuter Service

Regional Commuter Service

Intercity Service

Airport

Railroad

Major Drainage

Conceptual Station

System Hub

Station

Interstate

State or US Highway

Federal Land

National Forest

Tribal Land

State Trust Land

City Boundary

Le g e nd

0 5 10

Miles

Sources: Esri 2014; Arizona Department of Transportation 2013; Arizona Land Information System 2013
8 Next Steps

Final Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement 8-3

 Amtrak Connection– Potential service can be initiated by Amtrak, using existing freight 

track. 

 Tucson to Marana – Commuter service within the Tucson metro area.

 Queen Creek/Santan Valley to Phoenix – Commuter service within the Phoenix metro 

area.

 Coolidge to Phoenix – Regional commuter service between Pinal County and Maricopa 

County.

 Coolidge to Tucson – Regional commuter service between Pinal County and Pima

County.

 Tucson to Phoenix – Intercity service.

8.3 Additional Studies

During Tier 2, further NEPA analyses will occur to determine the potential impacts of the 

proposed project. Depending on preliminary design concepts, surveys for special status species 

and wildlife movement studies may be conducted prior to the initiation of Tier 2 NEPA analyses 

to inform the Tier 2 analysis. While specific studies and their timelines cannot be identified at 

this time, coordination with AGFD and USFWS would occur during Tier 2 NEPA scoping to 

discuss potential effects to wildlife and habitat, and determine the need for preliminary studies 

and/or surveys. 

In addition, coordination and outreach (as needed) would occur during preparation of a Tier 2 

analysis to engage the public more fully regarding the effects on property and issues such as 

design for stations and other railroad facilities. Input from the outreach effort would be 

incorporated into the NEPA analysis and project design. 

Technical studies would be completed as part of the Tier 2 NEPA analysis and tier off of the 

work conducted in this Final Tier 1 EIS. These studies would provide additional detail regarding 

the nature and magnitude of potential impacts. The analyses would consider avoidance and 

minimization of impacts on sensitive environmental resources. For each Tier 2 NEPA analysis, 

the following project-level analyses may be required:

 Detailed local-level alternatives analysis, including route options identified in Tempe and 

Pinal County, as shown on Figure 7-1, Figure 7-2, and Figure 7-3;

 Wetland delineations and identification of Section 404 permitting requirements;

 Cultural resource surveys and Section 106 consultation;
8 Next Steps

Final Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement 8-4

 Threatened and endangered species surveys;

 Noise and vibration analysis;

 Section 4(f) evaluation;

 Section 6(f) analysis;

 Phase I Environmental Site Assessments;

 Air emissions analysis in nonattainment areas;

 Station-area traffic studies; and

 Engineering surveys.

8.4 Coordination with Other Studies

To ensure consistency in the planning of the transportation system and to provide alternative 

mode opportunities in future or expanding corridors under study, the ongoing APRCS will 

continue to be developed in coordination with other transportation planning studies whenever 

possible and appropriate. Applicable studies that are currently underway and warrant 

coordination with the APRCS include the I-11 Tier 1 EIS between Nogales and Wickenburg, and 

the Sonoran Corridor Tier 1 EIS between I-19 and I-10 south of TUS. In addition, AGFD has 

requested that ADOT coordinate the APRCS with their analysis of the North-South Corridor’s 

potential impacts, and incorporate those results into the cumulative impacts analysis for this 

study. As the studies associated with the APRCS continue, coordination of planning efforts with 

additional studies may also be warranted.

8.5 Mitigation Planning

In addition to the needed studies, site specific mitigation would also be developed during Tier 

2. Anticipated types of mitigation include wetland mitigation, seasonal construction restrictions 

for threatened and endangered species, implementation of stormwater pollution and 

prevention plans, implementation of best management practices, and documentation of 

historic structures and other properties. Specific mitigation during the Tier 2 process would be 

determined in consultation with the federal or state agency with jurisdiction over a given 

resource. As needed, formal consultation would occur with resource agencies to address 

obligations to minimize and mitigate impacts, such as those obligations under Section 7 of the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). 

Future phases to implement a passenger rail project would require further consultation 

between the federal agency, Native American tribes, ADOT, and the Arizona SHPO, as well as 

other consulting parties, for meeting historic preservation compliance requirements pursuant 
8 Next Steps

Final Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement 8-5

to Section 106. Depending on funding and phasing of the Tier 2 Projects, Section 106 

consultation could be conducted programmatically. The Tier 2 effort would also require analysis 

under both Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act and Section 6(f) of the Land 

and Water Conservation Act, and appropriate mitigation would be assessed.

8.6 Project Commitments

This Final Tier 1 EIS identifies potential mitigation measures for each relevant resource section 

in Chapter 5, Existing Conditions and Environmental Consequences. During the Tier 1 EIS 

process, the primary commitments have been to work with the public, public agencies, 

resource agencies, and tribes to identify the need for specific mitigation measures to be 

developed during the Tier 2 process that would be implemented during construction and 

operation of a passenger rail system. 

8.7 Phased Implementation

Based on experience with other passenger rail projects, preliminary service development 

planning as part of the APRCS, and coordination with other transportation agencies, ADOT 

anticipates that the passenger rail system would be incrementally funded and that construction 

and operations would be implemented in phases. Within the approximate 20-year planning 

horizon specified in the Service Development Plan (SDP), initial and successive phases would be

considered through the interim implementation phase, which is the last phase that would be 

implemented using existing SDP information. 

Various potential phases and strategies defined by logical operating segments could be 

considered to introduce passenger rail services. Some of the options could overlap or be 

introduced incrementally, building on earlier phases and helping to fund the project 

progressively. 

No individual section of a passenger rail system has been identified for implementation, but the 

following proposed corridor sections, or any other functional configurations deemed viable, 

could be evaluated as logical, independent sections subject to available funding and the source 

of that funding. These corridor sections could also be combined, modified, or revisited in the 

future based on available funding. 

Figure 8-1 illustrates possible implementation phases.

 Amtrak Connection Strategy –Arizona working with Amtrak could introduce limited 

passenger service using Amtrak’s existing statutory access to operate passenger rail 

operations over track owned by the freight railroads. This would require an agreement 
8 Next Steps

Final Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement 8-6

with UP and a commitment to fund the necessary improvements (i.e., stations, sidings, 

parking, etc.). Because the service would rely largely on existing freight track, it would 

be subject to coordination with UP freight activity to minimize impacts on freight 

movement, which could limit passenger operations. Improvements would be limited to 

station construction at select locations and ensuring a safe operating environment for 

passengers at those locations (e.g., double tracking, shelters).

This configuration, extending from Surprise to TUS, would cost approximately $1.1 

billion to plan and build, then implement.

 Growing the Service Strategy – This approach would introduce passenger service 

between the two major metropolitan areas using existing UP track north of Picacho (in 

cooperation with UP) and constructing new track in the ADOT ROW along I-10 south of 

Picacho to support more frequent passenger service. This option would require 

coordination with freight activities north of Picacho to minimize conflicts with freight 

traffic, but would offer transportation benefits at a much higher level of service. This 

approach to implementation of passenger rail service between the two major 

metropolitan areas would cost $2.2 billion and could carry about 15,000 passengers 

once planned and built.

 Metro Phoenix Phase – The highest potential level of service in the short term is 

commuter service from Santan Valley to the Phoenix hub, connecting the major East 

Valley communities with the potential to carry major passenger loads along the UP 

freight line in a corridor as yet unserved by passenger rail. This phase could be divided 

into additional subsections to reduce capital and operating commitments in the short 

term or to provide additional time to develop solutions to constraints within the 

corridor. This is the most challenging of the phases from a construction perspective, due 

to the urban nature of the corridor, as reflected by the estimated cost of $1.5 billion for 

the 45-mile segment. It is also the most likely to generate ridership and effectively 

complement other transportation options. 

Connections to Surprise (on BNSF infrastructure) and Buckeye (on UP infrastructure) 

west of the Phoenix hub would provide access to an additional potential ridership base. 

These approximately 52 additional miles of service would add about $1.3 billion to the 

total capital cost. The total could be reduced in the short term by building no 

connections, only one of the connections, or limiting service only to stations that 

generate significant ridership.

Phoenix Metro 1 proposes to connect the Santan Valley with both Surprise and Buckeye. 

Phoenix Metro 2 would initially connect downtown Phoenix with Surprise only, 
8 Next Steps

Final Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement 8-7

deferring a connection to Buckeye until a later time. Metro Phoenix phases have not 

been subject to many of the studies conducted for the Tucson to Phoenix proposal and 

would require all necessary design work, evaluation of rights of way and utilities, 

preliminary engineering, etc. These phases are assumed to be considered in any future 

regional transportation funding source initiatives, in addition to any federal funding for 

which they might qualify or private funding they might attract. 

 Metro Tucson Phase – Commuter service in the Tucson metro area between Marana 

and Tucson could follow the I-10 freeway from Marana to south of Grant Road, and UP 

from Grant Road into downtown Tucson. While relatively straightforward from a 

construction perspective, this phase would require a series of decisions related to local 

impacts to the existing transportation system along I-10 and downtown. Building a 

passenger rail system between Marana and Downtown Tucson is estimated to cost 

approximately $900 million. Depending on the approach taken to project phasing and 

funding, this segment is also included in the Growing the Service Phase as part of the 

new track south of Picacho. A connection to TUS would pass through a largely urban 

industrial community. This effort is estimated to bring the cost for the approximately 7-

mile connection to TUS estimated at $255 million.

The Metro Tucson Phase would require a local or private funding source in addition to 

any federal funding that may apply.

 Intercity Phase – This phase would join the two commuter phases in the Phoenix and 

Tucson Metro areas with a 58-mile link, allowing a high level of intercity service. This 

element of the project could be developed sooner, depending on how the region 

evolves over the next 10 to 15 years. Intercity rail service is a highly popular feature of 

the project and would afford a critical link in the system that could provide passenger 

rail access to many growing Pinal and Pima County communities. It is also the phase that 

could support the highest speed performance along the line. The Picacho to Tucson 

section of this phase is included in the Growing the Service Phase. The link between 

Santan Valley and Picacho would cost about $600 million.

As currently defined, the full Intercity Phase would cost about $1.5 billion, subject to 

available funding.

The specific phasing of a future passenger rail system would be determined as funding becomes 

available. Funding could be initially allocated for improvement of facilities to support higher 

speeds or to improve/construct particular stations and maintenance and layover facilities on 

existing freight railroads. Traditional and potential alternative funding sources include USDOT 

grant programs, federal loan programs, and public-private partnerships. Service could initially 
8 Next Steps

Final Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement 8-8

start with fewer stations and with fewer round trips. As more funding becomes available, 

further construction could be implemented to expand service. The specific phasing of the 

passenger rail system is not known at this time but would be determined as funding is allocated

and as part of Tier 2 NEPA review. 

8.7.1 Station Locations and Airport Access

Station Locations 

This Tier 1 EIS does not identify specific station locations for analysis. Conceptual locations were 

included in the AA to provide a basis for corridor definition and ridership forecasting. As part of 

the AA, various station typologies were developed to provide context for station decisionmaking and local commitments; however, the exact locations of stations would require more 

analysis and further agency and community input. These would be part of independent 

localized studies and a Tier 2 NEPA document for a passenger rail facility.

Airport Connections

Throughout the development of the Arizona Passenger Rail Corridor Study Tier 1 EIS corridor 

analyses, the public and stakeholder agencies identified airport access as an important 

consideration among their preferences as a feature of future passenger rail service.

All three major airports in the study corridor – Tucson International Airport (TUS), PhoenixMesa Gateway Airport (AZA), and Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX) – could have 

connections to a future passenger rail line, but a detailed evaluation of specific alignments, 

impacts, or other implications of how these connections would be accomplished was not a part 

of this study. These analyses would be undertaken as part of future studies. 

ADOT recommends the Yellow Corridor Alternative for future Tier 2 environmental studies. 

Likewise, ADOT and the FRA recommend studying passenger rail connectivity to TUS for future 

Tier 2 studies. 

As noted previously, ADOT anticipates that a Tucson-to-Phoenix passenger rail system would be 

funded incrementally, and that construction and operations would be implemented in phases. 

The specific phasing of a future passenger rail system is not known at this time but would be 

determined as funding is allocated and as part of the Tier 2 NEPA review.