FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

 New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

April 2015 1 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Railroad Administration 

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

NEW HAMPSHIRE CAPITOL CORRIDOR RAIL PLANNING STUDY 

BOSTON, MA to CONCORD, NH 

(State Project Number 63037 A) 

July 2015 

Introduction

The New Hampshire Department of Transportation (NHDOT) is the recipient of grant funding for the 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor Rail Planning Study (Study) under the Federal Railroad 

Administration’s (FRA) High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program. FRA must comply with the 

National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq.), applicable regulations and agency 

procedures (40 CFR Parts 1500 - 1508; 64 FR 28545; 78 FR 2713), and other applicable environmental 

review requirements. NHDOT in coordination with FRA prepared a Tier 1 Environmental Assessment 

(EA) to analyze and document whether intercity rail expansion in the Capitol Corridor (the focus of the 

Study) would have significant effects on the environment. This Finding of No Significant Impact 

(FONSI) is made based on the information in the Tier 1 EA. 

Statement of Purpose and Need 

The Study included preparation of a Service Development Plan (SDP) and accompanying environmental 

analysis, and was developed by a team of transportation planning, engineering, and environmental experts 

from FRA, NHDOT, and their respective consultants (Study Team). The overarching purpose of the 

Study was to identify and implement the intercity passenger rail investment strategy that will best 

leverage existing transportation infrastructure to improve connectivity to and from Boston, the region’s 

largest economic hub; diversify options and reduce the primarily single-mode reliance on roadways for 

the movement of people and goods; support mobility options that match emerging demographic trends 

and preferences in the corridor; and maintain the region’s high quality-of-life through strategic 

infrastructure investments. More specifically, the purpose of the Study was to evaluate options for 

introducing intercity passenger rail service between Boston, Massachusetts (MA) and Concord, New 

Hampshire (NH) over existing transportation infrastructure, namely the portion of the New Hampshire 

Mail Line (NHML) owned by Pan Am Railways (PAR), which is currently used for freight rail only. 

There are a number of reasons why investment in an improved transportation strategy within the Capitol 

Corridor is needed, including: 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 2

 Increased roadway congestion: Projected population growth will result in increased congestion on 

the existing roadway network; 

 Gaps in Connectivity: New Hampshire’s existing transportation network does not effectively 

connect existing modes of transportation; 

 Lack of Transportation Options: The regional economy is singularly dependent on automobile 

travel/roadways for movement of goods and passengers; 

 Stagnant Economic Growth & Brain Drain in the Capitol Corridor: Multi-modal transportation 

investment is necessary to link New Hampshire’s Millennial and Generation X workforce with 

the knowledge-based employment found in and near Boston. Without it, these employees will 

continue to move closer to these jobs rather than remaining New Hampshire residents and driving 

to work. Young New Hampshire professionals are leaving the area to be closer to employment 

and cultural/social opportunities associated with larger urban centers; 

 Aging Population: New Hampshire’s growing senior population needs more “car-light” mobility 

options; 

 Sustainability: Multi-modal transportation investment is necessary to sustainably accommodate 

increases in traffic volume and development pressure associated with projected population 

growth; and 

 Insufficient Capacity: The existing transportation network cannot accommodate increased levels 

of demand without negative environmental consequences. 

Study Area

The Capitol Corridor extends 73 miles from Boston, MA to Concord, NH. The geographic area of the 

corridor encompasses the existing track alignment that runs north from Boston, through Lowell, Nashua 

and Manchester to Concord. The portion of the alignment within Massachusetts is owned by the 

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) and the portion within New Hampshire is owned 

by PAR. The corridor also includes US Route 3 and I-93 highway corridors, as well as Boston Logan 

International Airport and Manchester Airport. The corridor connects Boston with the three largest cities in 

New Hampshire: Concord, Manchester, and Nashua. These cities, as well as the other communities on the 

corridor, represent nearly 39 percent of the population and just over 41 percent of the employment in the 

entire State of New Hampshire. Manchester is the largest city in the northeast currently without passenger 

rail service.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 3

Study Corridor Dynamics 

The Capitol Corridor’s transportation network includes roadways, highways, transit services, intercity 

passenger rail service (in Massachusetts), freight railroads, airports, and pedestrian and bicyclist facilities. 

Despite the multi-modal nature of this transportation network, demand is exceeding capacity (particularly 

within the highway network) and there are opportunities to encourage shifts to less congested and more 

efficient modes of transportation. 

Metropolitan Boston, like most large American cities, has been continuously extending its reach and 

geographic scope for decades. With a 20th Century highway network and 21st Century communication 

links, the economies of Boston, Nashua, Manchester, and Concord have never been more closely 

intertwined. Boston’s zone of influence first moved beyond the I-95/Route 128, then I-495 in 

Massachusetts, and now clearly extends into southern New Hampshire. It is expected to continue 

expanding northward, in addition to westward and southward. 

The roadway congestion resulting from heavy north-south travel along the corridor is exacerbated by 

sprawl-type suburban residential development patterns throughout parts of southern New Hampshire. 

Sprawl-type development contributes to increased vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) throughout the corridor. 

Denser development also exists within the corridor, particularly in Nashua, Manchester, and Concord. 

Business development and job creation in the northern half of the corridor has not kept pace with 

residential growth, especially in the high-technology sectors that are flourishing in the southern half of the 

corridor. This residential/employment disconnect is exacerbating the transportation issues that 

necessitated the Study. 

Alternatives

The Study team identified and screened three intercity passenger rail alternatives, and selected one of 

them (Intercity 8, which stands for eight trains per day) as the Build Alternative to be carried forward for 

analysis in the Tier 1 EA. The Build Alternative was selected because it was found to be the lowest cost 

of the three intercity alternatives (the other two being 12 and 18 trains per day) and maintains all existing 

bus service on I-93 and US Route 3. The Build Alternative performs about the same in terms of ridership, 

is slightly less favorable for land use and economic development, and has no significant difference in 

overall environmental impact. During the alternatives development process, the Study team considered a 

wide range of alternatives for many different factors of the project. In addition to the New Hampshire 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 4

Main Line (NHML), which is the preferred route alternative in the Study, the Manchester and Lawrence 

(M&L) Branch and the I-93 Corridor alternatives were evaluated and eliminated because each would 

require extensive upgrades, or entirely new rail infrastructure to accommodate future rail use. The NHML 

is the only corridor that has intact and maintained rail infrastructure along its entire length; therefore, it 

was chosen by NHDOT as part of the Build Alternative. Use of the existing NHML achieves the project 

purpose and need objectives at a reasonable cost. The main difference between the alternatives was 

operations cost, as the six and nine round trip alternatives would require an additional train set to 

accommodate the level of service. In addition to the service level alternatives analysis, the Study team 

performed a layover facility alternatives analysis and a passenger station location alternatives analysis. 

No-Build Alternative 

NEPA requires that the No-Build Alternative be evaluated as a baseline for comparing build alternatives’ 

impacts. Under the No Build Alternative, the existing condition of the rail corridor would remain 

unchanged. There would be no intercity passenger rail service and there would be no other rail 

improvement projects planned for the corridor. Freight traffic would continue to serve the existing 

customers located on the NHML, and intercity bus service would continue to serve passengers between 

Concord, Manchester, Nashua and Boston. It is assumed that population growth in the region and the 

demand for jobs in the greater Boston market would further negatively impact corridor traffic conditions. 

The No Build Alternative does not satisfy the project’s purpose and need for several reasons: 

 It fails to improve connectivity to and from Boston, the region’s largest economic hub; 

 It maintains single-mode reliance on roadways for the movement of people and goods; 

 It does not increase mobility options that match emerging demographic trends and preferences in 

the corridor; and 

 The region’s high quality-of-life may deteriorate without strategic infrastructure investments. 

Build Alternative 

After evaluating three intercity passenger rail build alternatives and consulting with stakeholders, 

primarily on the fiscal constraints faced by the State of New Hampshire, NHDOT in consultation with 

FRA selected the Intercity 8 alternative as the preferred Build Alternative because of its low net operating 

cost and mobility benefits. The Build Alternative is best able to achieve the project purpose and need 

without significant environmental impacts and by minimizing project costs. The number of additional 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 5

riders attracted by more frequent service under the other two alternatives did not justify the additional 

capital and operating costs. 

The Build Alternative would operate eight trips per day between Boston North Station and Concord. This 

duplicates the level of service first used on the Amtrak Downeaster, which is a model for the proposed 

Capitol Corridor service. The four daily round trips 

over the 73-mile route would stop at five 

intermediate stations (Manchester, 

Bedford/Manchester Airport, Nashua, Lowell 

and Woburn) as shown in Figure 1. The end-toend trip time would be approximately 96 minutes 

and the service would operate 584 daily train 

miles. 

In order to add intercity passenger rail service, a 

variety of work would be necessary. This 

includes the construction of new stations, 

improvements to infrastructure such as track, 

bridges, grade crossings, and positive train 

control and signal systems. The Build 

Alternative is composed of one layover facility 

and four passenger station locations. 

Under the Build Alternative, the new intercity 

passenger rail service could connect to private bus service to reach North Country destinations. The Build 

Alternative would not likely result in any substantial changes in express bus service for commuting to 

Boston via US Route3/Everett Turnpike or I-93. Decisions to make any changes in express bus service 

would be considered and made later if the rail project moves forward. Local bus service to the intercity 

rail stations could be offered but is not integral to the rail service design. The FRA considers local bus 

connection critical to supporting intercity travel, but determining the nature of local bus service is outside 

the scope of the Study. A Boston Express/Concord Coach/Intercity Rail fare integration scheme similar to 

Figure 1 - Build Alternative
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 6

that employed by the Downeaster at Portland, Maine could be employed at the Concord and Manchester 

stations that would be shared by both intercity rail and coach bus services. 

The Build Alternative would make four stops in New Hampshire (Concord – Stickney Avenue, 

Manchester – Granite Street, Bedford-Manchester Airport – Ray Wieczorek Drive, and Nashua – Crown 

Street), in addition to three existing Massachusetts commuter rail stops (Lowell – Gallagher Intermodal 

Terminal, Woburn – Anderson Transportation Center, and Boston – North Station). Four new passenger 

stations with high-level platforms would be constructed in New Hampshire. 

Historically the NHML had two tracks along the entire length between Boston and Concord. Today, aside 

from sidings, the rail line is single tracked north of the Stony Brook wye in North Chelmsford, MA. In 

order to balance the need to achieve maximum allowable speed with an acceptable level of capital and 

operating expense, NHDOT determined that the existing track, bridges, crossings, and signals would be 

upgraded, and enough second track would be provided to accommodate both passenger rail and freight on 

the same line. These improvements would be entirely contained on the existing alignment. Double track 

would not need to be installed along the entire length of the corridor. No improvements south of MBTA’s 

Lowell Gallagher Terminal would be required. North of Lowell the railroad would be upgraded to allow 

safe, reliable operation of eight daily passenger trains at speeds of up to 75 mph. 

Ridership Projections 

Ridership estimates are presented as station boardings. The Study team assumed that travel patterns 

would be symmetrical and each station would have an equal number of alightings, thus total system 

ridership would be two times the estimated boardings. The estimates are all present day forecasts and do 

not assume any changes in regional socioeconomics, travel demand, or auto congestion. Ridership 

estimates for the Build Alternative are based on the Fiscal Year 2013 Amtrak Downeaster 

ridership/revenue data. Each station under the Build Alternative is associated with a Downeaster 

“surrogate” station with similar travel time, station demographics, and train service characteristics. 

Anticipated ridership responses to the proposed intercity rail service initiative would include new riders 

attracted to the new service. The Study team assumed that few current MBTA passengers living in New 

Hampshire would shift from using the MBTA Lowell and North Billerica Stations to the proposed new 

intercity rail service. Some Boston Express and Concord Coach customers might shift to intercity rail 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 7

service from Nashua, Manchester, and Concord. The overall increase in the quality and frequency of 

transit options to Manchester and Concord may also have the effect of stimulating bus ridership. 

Table 1: Ridership Demand Forecast (Start of Service)

Station Annual Boardings Average Daily Boardings

Concord – Stickney Avenue 28,470 78

Manchester – Granite Street 67,890 186

MHT Airport – Ray Wieczorek Drive 28,105 77

Nashua – Crown Street 48,180 132

Total 172,645 473

Benefits of the Selected Alternative 

The Build Alternative would leverage the existing transportation infrastructure to improve connectivity to 

and from Boston, the region’s largest economic hub. It would diversify options and reduce single-mode 

reliance on roadways for the movement of people and goods, would support mobility options that match 

emerging demographic trends and preferences in the corridor, and would maintain the region’s high 

quality of life through strategic infrastructure investment. 

Environmental Consequences

Based upon the Tier 1 EA, included by reference with its appendices in this FONSI in its entirety, FRA 

has concluded that the Build Alternative, including any mitigation measures for unavoidable impacts, 

would have no foreseeable significant impact on the quality of the natural and human environment. 

 FRA concurs with the preference of NHDOT, and finds the Build Alternative is best able to 

achieve the project purpose and need without significant environmental impacts and by 

minimizing project costs. 

 This FONSI focuses only on those resources that have a reasonable likelihood to be affected by 

the proposed rail project. 

 The potential of the rail project to result in an environmental impact is summarized in the 

following sections. 

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENAL IMPACTS 

This section describes the potential impacts resulting from the Build Alternative for the following 

resources: Air Quality, Noise and Vibration, Hazardous Waste Sites, Water Quality, Wetlands, 

Threatened and Endangered Species, Floodplains, Energy Resources, Visual and Aesthetic Resources, 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 8

Accessibility, Property Acquisition, Land Use, Environmental Justice, Public Safety, Cultural Resources, 

Parks and Recreation, Socioeconomics, Transportation, Indirect Effects, Cumulative Impacts and 

Construction Period Impacts. The EA for the Study is a Tier 1, or “Service-Level,” EA undertaken to 

identify and evaluate potential environmental impacts of service alternatives that meet the purpose and 

need. Because rail planning studies may include numerous alternatives and extend over long corridors, 

project implementation may ultimately be through a series of smaller projects at a later date that are 

reviewed in more detail at the project level ("Tier 2").1 The Tier 1 EA identifies the potential impacts of 

the preferred service alternative, based on conceptual identification of infrastructure improvements and 

railroad operations. Impacts were identified and assessed with regard to the anticipated level of intensity 

based on a review of scientific literature, previously prepared documentation, data and information 

available on websites maintained by state and federal environmental agencies, and the professional 

judgment of environmental and transportation planners and resource specialists. 

Air Quality 

Mobile source dispersion models and hotspot analyses are not required for this Service-level NEPA 

analysis, as the results of the local scale emissions for the proposed project are below the federal general 

conformity de minimis levels for all applicable criteria pollutants in every nonattainment or maintenance 

area in New Hampshire and Massachusetts. Local impacts to air quality from implementation of the 

project are not expected to be significant. 

For the regional context, the emission increases show the Build Alternative would not only be below the 

federal general conformity de minimis levels, but would create net emission reduction benefits by saving 

vehicle trips for some pollutants (CO and SO2). Therefore, the project is presumed to conform to the 

applicable SIPs and would not require a full conformity analysis and conformity determination. The Build 

Alternative is expected to create fewer emissions in Greenhouse Gases (GHG) by saving vehicle trips 

and, therefore, it would have less environmental and global climate change impact and be more beneficial 

to the environment. 

Because this is a Tier 1NEPA analysis, the details of project design, construction, and operation are not 

yet fully known. If the Study moves to the project level, potential measures to reduce the project’s energy 

 

1 FRA. 2009. High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program. Docket No. FRA-2009-0045, and Compliance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act in Implementing the High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program. 

http://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/Details/L02855
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 9

and GHG footprint would be further investigated, and, if found to be practicable, incorporated in the 

project’s design, construction, and operation. 

Noise and Vibration 

The Build Alternative was analyzed for impacts to noise and vibration related to operations, stations, 

traffic, and construction. 

Operations Noise Impacts: The Build Alternative would have predicted unmitigated noise impacts due 

exclusively to the added warning horns. Hillsborough County, New Hampshire has the most parcels with 

severe noise impacts with 58 single-family residential units and 13 multi-family residential units 

impacted. Installation of stationary wayside horns at the 10 grade crossings where severe, unmitigated 

noise impacts exist for the Build Alternative would mitigate noise and result in no adverse noise impact 

on the surrounding communities. 

Operations Vibrations Impacts: Due to the distance between the rail activities and the closest vibrationsensitive locations, no vibration-related impacts are anticipated with the Build Alternative. None of the 

residential buildings in the Study area would experience levels exceeding the FTA limits of 80 Vibration 

Velocity Level (VdB) for ground borne vibration and 43 decibels (dBA) for ground-borne noise. 

Likewise, no institutional buildings in the Study area would experience levels exceeding the FTA limits 

of 83 Vibration Velocity Level (VdB) and 48 dBA. 

Station Noise Impacts: The dominant noise source near each station would be the train horn, if warning 

is needed. When a train slows down near a station, train pass-by noise would be reduced. There are no 

noise- or vibration-sensitive parcels within 500 feet of any of the proposed station sites to be impacted by 

the station noise, including horn soundings. Therefore, station noise is considered negligible and not 

included in the impact calculation. 

Traffic Noise Impacts: While traffic conditions would change for the roadways around the proposed 

stations, there are no new major roadways or roadway expansions anticipated under the Build Alternative. 

Because the proposed stations are located in the developed areas of Nashua, Bedford, Manchester, and 

Concord, the existing traffic volumes around the proposed station sites are already high. Traffic noise 

produced by the Build alternative is not anticipated to cause significant impacts because of the already 

existing high-ambient noise environment and lack of sensitive receptors in the impact range of the Build 

Alternative. 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 10

Construction Noise Impacts: Four potential daytime impacts and up to 324 potential nighttime impacts 

have been identified as a result of the noise analysis. However, any such impacts would be addressed 

through mitigation measures implemented during construction. 

Construction Vibration Impacts: The Build Alternative is not expected to result in impacts exceeding 

FTA limits for residential buildings or for institutional buildings in the Study area. Some equipment may 

cause perceptible ground-borne vibrations. For example, construction equipment can produce vibration 

levels at 25 feet that range from 58 VdB for a small bulldozer to 112 VdB for heavier equipment. Any 

potential impacts would be mitigated during construction. 

Hazardous Waste Sites 

The Build Alternative may have short term adverse impacts during rail and station construction activities 

due to the potential for disturbance or movement of contaminated soils or material. However, the Build 

Alternative would likely have a long term beneficial impact on the corridor as construction activities 

would provide final solutions for some contaminated sites, lowering potential exposure in the future. 

During Tier 2, Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs) would be completed as necessary for each 

property acquired in order to be eligible for Landowner Liability Protections (LLPs). If Recognized 

Environmental Conditions (RECs) are identified during the Phase I ESA process, the RECs should be 

addressed through clean-up or further investigation through a Phase II assessment. Based on the 

development histories of the properties and surrounding areas, the Nashua – Crown Street, Manchester – 

Granite Street, and Concord – Stickney Avenue properties should be assessed for the presence of 

petroleum or hazardous substances that might require management or disposal, regardless of the findings 

of a Phase I ESA. Given the history and settings of these properties, assessment of subsurface conditions 

for the presence of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), 

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 8 metals in 

soils is recommended. Assessment for asbestos should be considered for the Nashua – Crown Street 

property. 

Water Quality 

The Build Alternative would not adversely impact water quality within the corridor as it is an existing rail 

line and improvements to drainage and stormwater management would be part of the project. The upgrade 

to culverts and associated stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) along the entire length of the 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 11

corridor, as well as at potential station locations, would have a net beneficial impact to water quality. The 

site design for each station, including where new parking is being proposed, would be designed to meet 

applicable state stormwater standards and guidelines. 

In addition, the existing corridor currently supports freight rail traffic, which does not contribute to the 

impairments of the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) that have been developed for the impaired 

water bodies in the corridor. It is not anticipated, based on the operating characteristics of the proposed 

passenger rail service, that the four round trips per day would contribute to the existing impairments in the 

corridor. There would be, however, negligible to minor, short-term, localized impacts during construction 

activities in the corridor, including replacing or rehabilitating bridges or culverts. At this Tier 1 stage, a 

small bridge just north of the Tyngsborough bridge is the only known bridge in the corridor that would 

need replacement in implementation of the project. The relatively short and temporary duration of these 

activities, combined with appropriate stormwater and drainage management and, construction BMPs, 

would ensure that any impacts are negligible to minor. 

Wetlands 

The Build Alternative would have no impact in most areas of the corridor and minor temporary and 

permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetland resource areas in a few discrete areas of the corridor. Minor 

temporary impacts may occur during construction activities, such as replacing or rehabilitating bridges or 

culverts, relocating utilities for track work, and grading work associated with station construction. These 

impacts would be mitigated during design and restored after construction has been completed. Minor 

permanent impacts may occur during these same activities in cases where temporary impacts cannot be 

restored in-place. In these cases, the project sponsor at the Tier 2 level would identify and be responsible 

for compensatory mitigation at the appropriate ratio for replication. As more detail is developed in the 

project’s next phase, these impacts will be defined in greater detail. Any wetland impacts would be 

subject to state and federal permitting requirements which would include compensatory mitigation for any 

unavoidable impacts. 

The following station sites are located in previously developed areas and no wetlands or watercourses are 

located within or adjacent to the site: Concord – Stickney Avenue, Manchester – Granite Street, and 

Nashua – Crown Street. The Bedford/Manchester Airport station has several wetlands and watercourses 

located at the site. North of Ray Wieczorek Drive, the majority of the site is forested wetland. South of 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 12

Ray Wieczorek Drive, there are two small forested wetlands and one emergent/scrub-shrub wetland. 

These three wetlands drain to Sebbins Brook, which flows into the Merrimack River. As currently 

designed and sited, this station would impact less than 1,000 square feet of wetland. 

Threatened and Endangered Species 

The Build Alternative has the potential to disturb or destroy habitat in some locations along the corridor. 

However, as currently designed, the project would require limited vegetation removal as stations are located 

in previously developed areas, and the existing rail right-of-way has been maintained to control vegetation 

in the past. Impacts to wildlife corridors, compared to existing conditions, are not anticipated because no 

new rail lines or other structures that could further restrict wildlife movement are proposed. Although the 

speed of the proposed passenger trains would be faster than the speed of the existing freight trains, the 

frequency of the passenger service (four round trips per day) is not anticipated to be at a level that would 

have a substantial adverse effect on wildlife movement across the tracks. 

During the next phase of the project, records of federal- or state- listed species would be confirmed with 

the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), New Hampshire Fish and Game Department (NHF&G), 

New Hampshire Natural Heritage Bureau (NHB), and Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered 

Species Program (NHESP) to determine if listed species or designated critical habitat are actually present 

within the rail corridor. Field surveys may also be necessary. If protected species or habitat are present in 

areas where project activities would occur, coordination with the appropriate agencies would be required 

to identify potential impacts and mitigation measures. 

Floodplains 

The Build Alternative would have minor to negligible impacts to floodplains in the project corridor. As 

the existing rail right-of-way runs adjacent to the Merrimack River and in many cases is less than 250 feet 

from the river bank, impacts to floodplains would be unavoidable in certain discrete sections of the 

corridor. However, within the existing right-of-way, the project corridor historically carried two tracks 

along its entire length, and the Build Alternative calls for restoring that second track on the existing 

embankment in certain locations. To the extent practicable, the design team has located station elements 

outside of floodplains. In locations where floodplain elevations would be altered, the project would 

provide compensatory floodplain storage and station designs would be modified to protect structures 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 13

and equipment. This would be potentially necessary in Concord, Bedford, and Nashua. Through 

mitigation, adverse impacts to floodplains would be kept to a minimum. 

Energy Resources 

The Build Alternative would introduce passenger rail operations, which currently do not exist in the 

corridor. This service is expected to divert trips from vehicles to passenger rail, reducing the overall VMT 

and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. However, the Build Alternative could potentially have a minor 

adverse impact on traffic operations around certain station locations. As described in the Air Quality and 

Greenhouse Emissions section, emission increases related to traffic for the Build Alternative are below 

the minimum threshold for a conformity determination and would create a net emission reduction benefit 

from the saving of vehicle trips for some pollutants, carbon monoxide (CO) and sulfur dioxide (SO2). 

During construction, the project would consume energy through the processing of materials and 

construction activities. All impacts during construction would be addressed in Tier 2. 

Visual and Aesthetic Resources 

Impacts to visual resources, including natural and cultural resources, were not fully assessed at the Tier 1 

level. Visual impacts of the project would be better understood at the Tier 2 level when the project plans 

are more fully developed. However, based on current plans of work associated with the rail line, including 

infrastructure associated with upgrading the existing rail and adding double-track, it is expected that the 

Build Alternative would cause limited impacts on visual resources as the rail right-of-way historically 

accommodated double-tracking throughout corridor length. For the work associated with the stations and 

layover facility, it is also anticipated that the Build Alternative may cause limited impacts to visual 

resources as the stations would be built in underutilized, previously developed land and the stations would 

consist of high-level platforms, which are limited in scale and do not require building large pedestrian 

crossovers at each station. 

Accessibility 

The Build Alternative would have a beneficial impact on accessibility as it would meet all ADA design 

standards and applicable state and local codes. Station design would include level boarding between the 

platform and train. Ramps would be included from the parking lots to the raised station platforms. The 

proposed park-and-ride lots would provide handicap accessible parking spaces. All station facilities 

would be ADA accessible. 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 14

Property Acquisition 

The Build Alternative would have minor impacts on privately held property in the corridor, as the station 

development would only require acquisition of two privately-held parcels. The remaining land for 

development is owned by the state or by the municipality. All private property acquisitions would comply 

with the Uniform Act. Public Law 91-646, the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property 

Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, (Uniform Act) provides important protections and assistance for people 

affected by federally funded projects. These properties are generally underdeveloped/underutilized and 

would see substantial benefit with the development of stations at these locations (see Socioeconomics 

section). The one parcel with the most impact is located at the Bedford-Manchester Airport site, as it is 

currently developed and utilized as a natural gas storage location. This assessment of property impacts 

was based on conceptual design and impacts may change as more detailed design is completed in 

subsequent stages of the project. 

Land Use 

Based on a qualitative assessment, it is anticipated that the Build Alternative would have a moderate 

impact on the project’s sustainable land use goals. The Build Alternative would have a low-to-medium 

impact on catalyzing more compact, infill transit-supported land use and development patterns around the 

stations, and would reduce reliance on vehicles for trips and errands2

. The Build Alternative is compatible 

with the existing land use at all four of the proposed stations. In terms of the direct land use impacts of 

constructing and maintaining a rail station, the existing land use and proposed future land use plans 

support the development of a rail station. Indirect land use impacts, such as Transit Oriented 

Development (TOD) that may occur with the presence of a rail station, are also compatible with the 

existing and future land use plans from each of the municipalities. The overall land use plans and vision 

for the station areas and corridor are supportive of rail stations and many local plans directly call for the 

development of a rail station and associated development. 

Environmental Justice 

The Build Alternative would have a major beneficial impact for environmental justice populations in

proximity to proposed stations in Concord, Manchester, and Nashua, as the project provides increased 

access to transportation options within the corridor. Potentially minor adverse impacts to certain 

 

2 Capitol Corridor Land Use & Economic Development Analysis, January 2014, available under separate cover
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 15

populations include the noise impacts of horns within certain communities. Noise impacts and mitigation 

are addressed under the Noise and Vibration section. 

Public Safety 

The Build Alternative would have a beneficial impact in the project corridor through mitigation and 

upgraded safety features. The existing NHML railroad has a fully functioning Centralized Traffic Control 

(CTC) signal system in place between Lowell and Manchester that would be renewed and upgraded for 

the new passenger service. Existing block signals were identified by reference to PAR documentation. 

New and renewed interlockings (signal apparatus that prevents conflicting movements at junctions or 

crossings) were identified in the track configuration planning process. In addition, the project includes 

installing all new equipment for the Automatic Highway Warning Devices (AHWD). It is also assumed 

that the rail line would operate with Positive Train Control (PTC), which is in the process of being 

incorporated in PAR, Amtrak, and MBTA facilities around New England, and would be in-place by the 

time the proposed Capitol Corridor passenger rail route is operational. Lastly, public safety benefits 

would be realized from the travelling public switching from road to rail. 

Cultural Resources 

The majority of work proposed for this project would be located in previously disturbed track bed or in 

highly developed areas. Therefore, it is anticipated that impacts to archaeological resources would be 

minor to negligible. However, given the overall archaeological sensitivity of the project area, efforts to 

identify archaeological resources and assess and resolve impacts will be necessary once specific locations 

of ground-disturbing activities are known at the Tier 2 level. Project work that would occur in the existing 

ROW and consist of replacing second track in selected locations where it existed historically is not 

anticipated to have direct impacts to historic architectural properties, except for impacts to historic 

properties directly associated with the railroad itself, such as bridges and stone culverts. Indirect effects of 

the project to nearby historic architectural properties may include visual, noise, and vibration impacts; 

these would be identified and analyzed at the Tier 2 level. 

The background research conducted for the Tier 1 EA indicated there are previously identified National 

Register of Historic Places (NRHP)-listed and eligible properties present in the Study area, as well as 

resources that may require further evaluation to determine NRHP eligibility. However, no further 

identification of historic properties or evaluations of impacts to such properties occurred at this stage. 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 16

Such activities, as well as surveys, archaeological testing, any necessary mitigation, etc., would take place 

in the future at the Tier 2 level when project plans are more fully developed and when the nature and full 

extent of the project is known in order to be able to determine the Area of Potential Effect (APE); this 

future work would include appropriate Section 106 consultation with the Massachusetts and New 

Hampshire State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs), and other consulting parties as appropriate. 

Parks and Recreation 

Impacts of the Build Alternative on Section 4(f) resources in the corridor are not fully known at this Tier 

1stage. Based upon a desktop review of potential 4(f) resources in the Study area and owing to the nature 

of the proposed activities, it is not anticipated that any publicly owned wildlife or waterfowl refuges, 

parks, or recreation areas would be impacted by the Build Alternative. At this stage, a preliminary 

identification of historic and potentially historic properties has occurred in the Study area, but project 

details are not developed enough to be able to evaluate effects to historic properties or determine whether 

or not there would be a use of a Section 4(f) property. Additional efforts to identify Section 4(f) resources, 

evaluate impacts to these resources, and identify feasible and prudent alternatives if necessary, will occur 

at the Tier 2 level, once project details are further developed, including specific locations of proposed 

work. 

Socioeconomics 

The Build Alternative would have a beneficial impact on the economy of the State of New Hampshire. 

This alternative, with four trains per day serving Nashua, Manchester, and Concord, could potentially 

generate about 1,6003

 new residential units and 819,000 square feet of commercial space supporting 

2,500 new jobs by the year 2030. It has the potential to generate 350 new jobs over the construction 

period (2019-2022), 2,460 jobs related to new real estate development between 2021 and 2030, and 1,140 

new jobs annually in 2030 and beyond (with benefits beginning to accrue after 2021) due to reinvested 

worker earnings. Real estate development would add $750 million to the state’s output between 2021 and 

2030, with reinvested earnings adding $140 million per year beyond 2030. 

Transportation 

The Build Alternative would have a beneficial impact on mobility by introducing passenger rail 

operations, which currently do not exist in the corridor. The Build Alternative could potentially have a 

 

3 Rounded to the nearest 100th
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 17

minor adverse impact on traffic operations around certain station locations. As more detail is developed 

for the station alternatives and designs, traffic operations will be modeled in and around the proposed 

stations. Due to the inherent nature of train schedules, traffic in and around stations usually does not 

coincide with local rush hour traffic. Development in and around the stations would likely have a 

beneficial impact on accessibility and walkability in and around those areas. 

Indirect Effects 

The Build Alternative has the potential to do the following: 

 Enhance regional roadway transportation by reducing the number of vehicles on the regional 

highway network; 

 Improve overall air quality through reduction in regional vehicle miles traveled; 

 Improve accessibility and mobility by offering an alternative transportation option; 

 Result in the potential for additional economic value from induced TOD associated with new 

passenger rail stations; and 

 Result in an increase in property values and an increase in local and regional economic activity 

along the Capital Corridor through the generation of jobs, additional tax revenues, and associated 

direct and indirect spending. 

Induced development related to the Build Alternative would have the potential for a variety of 

environmental impacts, including impacts on wetlands, water quality, air quality, vegetation, and wildlife 

habitat, and increased traffic and noise. These effects would be mainly due to the indirect development 

that could follow from proposed new passenger rail stations. 

While there is a potential for environmental consequences from any potential change in planned land use, 

local land use controls are adequate to manage any potential development in the areas near stations. In 

addition, the station area communities would continue to participate in station area planning activities 

designed to ensure that station area development is carried out consistent with each community’s master 

plan and zoning requirements. While the Bedford-Manchester Airport station is designed to specifically 

be a park-and-ride style station, the Town of Bedford has planning documents that include mixed use 

TOD-style development if a station were built at this location. The remaining stations are each designed 

with TOD in mind, which would likely foster denser development and more walkable communities. This 

type of growth is generally favored over sprawl-type growth, and helps to protect the natural resources of 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 18

the state. In addition, as described in the EA’s Section 4.17 Socioeconomics, the Build Alternative is 

expected to increase gross regional productivity and jobs during construction and future operations. 

Indirect effects resulting from station development will be further addressed in the Tier 2 NEPA 

documentation to be prepared during project development. 

Cumulative Impacts 

Overall, the Build Alternative would have an incremental beneficial impact on the environment. The 

project would provide greater access to transportation options for people in the corridor and reduce VMT 

within the US Route 3 and I-93 travel corridors. Improved air quality could be expected as a result of 

improved multi-modal transportation options. In addition, the project is consistent with all local and 

regional plans and has been coordinated directly and transparently with the communities who would see 

the greatest impact from the addition of passenger rail service. 

Other foreseeable future actions along the Build Alternative corridor include development in the 

downtown areas of Nashua, Manchester and Concord; expansion of passenger and commuter rail and bus 

service; and track improvements to serve additional freight customers. These actions, combined with the 

addition of passenger rail service, including new station construction and related TOD, have the potential 

to impact the variety of resources identified in this EA. However, land development is guided by 

community master plans and zoning regulations. Local land use controls and permitting are adequate to 

manage the impacts of any potential development in or near the project corridor, minimizing the potential 

for cumulative effects. The addition of passenger rail service when combined with freight rail has the 

potential for a cumulative effect on wildlife mortality and public safety. Increases in freight rail and/or 

passenger rail operations would bring additional noise and vibration and has the potential to impact public 

safety. However, potential impacts would be mitigated with safety and communications improvements at 

grade crossings and improved train control. Construction of the new Bedford-Manchester Airport Station 

in New Hampshire would directly impact wetlands, thereby potentially contributing to a cumulative effect 

on this resource when combined with other projects. Any wetland impacts would be subject to state and 

federal permitting requirements which would include compensatory mitigation for any unavoidable 

impacts. During the Tier 2 stage, cumulative impacts to wetlands, noise, vibration, public safety, as well 

as any other resources would be more clearly identified. Any necessary mitigation measures would also 

be determined during Tier 2 analyses. 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 19

Construction Impacts 

Minor temporary impacts to wetlands and water quality may occur during construction activities, such as 

replacing or rehabilitating bridges or culverts, relocating utilities for track work, and grading work 

associated with station construction. These impacts would be mitigated during design and restored after 

construction has been completed. Minor permanent impacts may occur during these same activities in 

cases where temporary impacts cannot be mitigated. In these cases, compensatory mitigation would be 

identified at the appropriate ratio for replication. During construction, best management practices will be 

employed to control stormwater runoff, erosion, construction vehicle emissions and fugitive dust. Noise 

associated with the construction of the project is expected to have four potential daytime impacts and up 

to 324 potential nighttime impacts. As more detail is developed in the project’s next phase, these impacts 

will be better defined and mitigation identified as necessary. 

Public Involvement

Development of the Study included a robust public involvement program designed to solicit input from a 

broad and diverse range of stakeholders who have a stake in the future of passenger rail in New 

Hampshire. NHDOT conducted 91 stakeholder meetings, three Project Advisory Committee (PAC) 

meetings, and three public meetings (Concord, Manchester, and Nashua). The main objectives of the 

public and stakeholder outreach were as follows: 

 Build support for the Study, including the NEPA process, among different stakeholder 

groups; 

 Encourage stakeholders (appropriate Federal, State, and local authorities, and the public) to 

engage in the Study efforts at the earliest practicable time; 

 Provide clear and understandable information at each step of the Study; 

 Document and consider public and stakeholder opinion as part of the decision-making 

process concerning the consequences of the current and any future grant applications; and 

 Create a high-level of transparency regarding how the Study is conducted. 

The following is a compilation of the most frequent comments and concerns from stakeholders: 

 New Hampshire would benefit from a transportation system that provides multiple transit 

options, is less focused on single occupancy vehicles, and provides an increase in options that 

have the potential to ease traffic congestion and save commuting time; 

 The Manchester-Boston Regional Airport is an important cog in the New Hampshire 

economy and a rail connection to the airport should be part of the Study; 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 20

 The state needs to work to attract and retain young professionals, who are now leaving New 

Hampshire at a faster rate than they are moving to the state; 

 It is important to demonstrate the impacts and benefits of passenger rail to the state 

(economic, social, and environmental); 

 The project needs to have a solid financial plan; 

 State demographics are changing (the population is getting older), and the transportation 

system needs to address the needs of this changing demographic; 

 The location of potential rail stations is important to many of the communities, and they 

would like to be part of the discussion in identifying appropriate locations; 

 System safety needs to be analyzed; 

 The fare structure for any system needs to be competitive with other forms of transportation; 

 The frequency of operation needs to be competitive with other forms of transportation; 

 The Study has many implications for development in New Hampshire, which needs to be 

quantified; 

 Freight rail along the corridor is important, and the Study needs to examine the benefits to 

freight that could be realized by a passenger rail project; 

 The project needs to quantify environmental impacts, including emissions, air quality, 

noise/vibration, etc.; 

 An increase in transit options has the potential to ease traffic congestion or slow the increase 

in traffic congestion in the state; 

 Parking issues associated with potential rail stations is a concern in many communities. 

 Any transportation study needs to include connections between rail/bus and other parts of the 

state, i.e., local transit systems; 

 There is a concern among stakeholders that any proposed train service would negate the need 

for existing bus routes, which have been successful to date; 

 A transparent process for the Study is important with a high-level of stakeholder and public 

engagement; and 

 Many stakeholders are interested in how passenger rail would impact the state’s economy. 

Stakeholders were given the opportunity to comment on the project at stakeholder and public 

meetings and through the project website. 

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

New Hampshire Capitol Corridor 

Boston, MA to Concord, NH

July 2015 22

Laura A. Shick 

Environmental Protection Specialist 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Office of Railroad Policy and Development 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

(202) 366-0340 

The following organization assisted the Program Office in the preparation of the attached Environmental 

Assessment: 

NHDOT