Table of Contents

1. Type of Action 1

2. The Proposed Action 1

2.1 Project Overview 1

2.2 Purpose and Need 2

3. Alternatives 3

3.1 Build Alternative/Preferred Alternative 3

3.2 No Build Alternative 5

4. Summary of Project Impacts 6

4.1 Project Impacts 6

5. Public Involvement and Agency Coordination 12

5.1 Circulation of the Environmental Assessment/Section 4(f) Evaluation 12

5.2 Summary of Public Comments 14

5.3 Agency Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment 14

6. 4(f) Determination - Applicability of Programmatic Evaluation 21

7. Basis for Finding of No Significant Impact 23

8. Project Commitments 24

Tables

1 Property Acquisitions and Easements

Figures

1 Vicinity Map

2 Study Area
Appendices

A Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement

B Agency Correspondence 
1. Type of Action

This document is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) 

administrative action, Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).

The FRA and FHWA in collaboration with the states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Maryland 

and CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSX) have determined that the Phase I National Gateway Clearance Initiative 

will have no significant adverse impact on the human or natural environments. This FONSI is based on the 

September 2010 Environmental Assessment (EA)1, which was independently evaluated by the FHWA and 

FRA and determined to adequately and accurately discuss the need, environmental issues, and impacts of 

the proposed project, and appropriate mitigation measures. The EA provides sufficient evidence and 

analysis for determining that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required. 

2. The Proposed Action

2.1 Project Overview

The National Gateway Clearance Initiative is a freight rail transportation improvement program to achieve a 

minimum of 21 feet of clearance along the CSX rail corridor so that double-stacked intermodal railcars can 

be transported between Mid-Atlantic States and their ports to Midwest markets (Figure 1). Phase I of the 

National Gateway Clearance Initiative includes federally funded clearance improvements and other rail 

improvements between Northwest Ohio and Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, as described below. The U.S. 

Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) awarded a Transportation Investment Generating Economic 

Recovery (TIGER) Discretionary Grant to the National Gateway Freight Rail Corridor. The FHWA and FRA

are partnering to administer the implementation of the TIGER grant on behalf of the U.S. DOT and in 

collaboration with the states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Maryland and CSX.

This grant award will be utilized by the four states and CSX for the proposed action to increase the vertical 

clearance at thirty (30) obstructions along Phase I of the rail corridor from the intermodal yard near North 

Baltimore, Ohio, to the intermodal yard at Chambersburg, Pennsylvania. The FHWA and FRA have 

concluded that these two railroad yards are logical termini, that the corridor has independent utility, and that 

completion of this Phase I will not foreclose reasonable alternatives for future phases of the National 

Gateway initiative. In addition to the TIGER grant, the State of Ohio has pledged state funds to increase the 

vertical clearance at four obstructions and American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds for eight 

other obstructions (six clearance obstructions and two interlockings). The proposed action, the rail corridor 

clearance improvements between these two intermodal yards, is referred to as Phase I. The forty (40)

clearance obstructions and proposed improvements included in the Phase I corridor are depicted in Figure 2. 

The work proposed for the Phase I federally-funded projects to achieve vertical clearance includes removing 

four bridges, raising four bridges, modifying four bridges, modifying the liners of eight tunnels and open 

cutting three tunnels, and lowering or realigning tracks at seven obstructions. One interlocking (rail 

crossover) will be constructed to facilitate the efficient movement of trains through various improvement 

1

FRA and FHWA. 2010. Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation for Phase I National Gateway 

Clearance Initiative. Signed September 16, 2010.
locations. Finally, in Pennsylvania where tunnels are proposed for open cutting, three CSX-owned 

properties will be utilized as excess material placement areas. It should be noted that the states’ TIGER 

federal funding request did not include the Northwest Ohio Terminal near North Baltimore, Ohio or the CSX 

Chambersburg Terminal in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania and that no federal funding was provided in the 

TIGER grant award for these facilities. The direct impacts of these facilities were considered in the 

permitting process for the facilities and these direct impacts are far removed in space from any direct 

impacts of the proposed action. 

The projected cost to complete the clearance improvements proposed for Phase I is $183 million. This cost 

will be covered by a combination of federal, state, and private funds (CSX). The U.S. DOT awarded the 

National Gateway Freight Rail Corridor $98 million in TIGER grant funding. As part of the National Gateway 

Clearance Initiative, the State of Ohio pledged $30 million ($20 million in ARRA funds and $10 million in 

state funds) in funding, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania pledged $35 million in a Transportation 

Assistance Program (TAP) grant. The state funds will be utilized for the proposed clearance improvements 

in Phase I, in each respective state. In addition, CSX has approved up to $20 million in capital funding to 

cover the remaining portion of the clearance work, if needed. 

It should be noted that Ohio has separately advanced improvements to ten obstructions and two track 

support locations (interlocking) with funding outside the proposed action supported by the TIGER grant 

award. Four bridge projects are moving forward under a $10 million state allocation. The improvements will 

be permitted in accordance with state and federal requirements. Additionally, in Ohio, improvements to six 

obstructions and the two interlockings have received a $20 million commitment of Ohio ARRA funds. These 

eight improvements were approved by FHWA and Ohio Department of Transportation as Categorical 

Exclusions (CEs). The ten Ohio bridges are structurally deficient and therefore their replacement or 

removals possess independent utility. The two interlocking projects were necessitated by adjoining projects. 

Moreover, they do not constrain the decision to build or not build the remainder of National Gateway Phase 

1. These projects are not included in this FONSI.

2.2 Purpose and Need

The need for the project is to improve the existing rail transportation capacity and is demonstrated by the 

following:

• The Freight Rail Plans for the states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Maryland, which support the 

following:

o Estimated volumes of intermodal freight are projected to increase.

o The level of service along the major freight rail routes will decline if improvements are not 

completed.

o One key improvement to the rail infrastructure identified is removing chokepoints such as low 

clearance obstructions that impede the use of double-stack containers.

• Other issues that intersect with the noted need to improve the existing rail transportation capacity 

include:
o Freight transportation capacity, especially highway capacity, is expanding too slowly to keep up 

with projected demand.

o The U.S. is increasingly dependent on foreign oil; freight trains are three times more fuel 

efficient than long haul trucks.

o Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from freight transportation are tied closely to freight energy 

use. Both are growing because energy efficiency improvements in the truck freight sector have 

not kept pace with growth in demand.

• Completion of the project will result in incremental benefits that address the projected increasing 

freight capacity demands, as well as providing other gains for the U.S., such as:

o Improving railroad capacity, thus providing a cost-effective alternative to long-haul trucking. 

o Improving U.S. economic competitiveness by reducing the use of inefficient long-haul trucking 

and increasing use of the more efficient existing rail corridor, which will reduce GHG emissions 

and the nation’s dependence on oil.

o Saving in shipper and logistics costs by increasing existing freight capacity.

o Reducing long-haul congestion on the highway system and thus improves highway safety for 

the traveling public.

o Creating short-term construction jobs, over half of which are in economically distressed areas.

The purpose of the proposed action is to remove obstacles to vertical clearance and complete other 

necessary improvements to provide for safe passage of double-stacked intermodal containers between the 

Northwest Ohio Terminal and the CSX Chambersburg Terminal. Completion of the proposed action will 

double intermodal capacity on the existing corridor without increasing noise, emissions, or the number of 

trains. Instead, completion of the proposed action allows any given train to more efficiently carry freight. 

3. Alternatives 

3.1 Build Alternative/Preferred Alternative

The CSX Clearance Improvement Feasibility Study between Greenwich, Ohio and Chambersburg, 

Pennsylvania; Baltimore, Maryland and Weldon, North Carolina (AECOM 2007) details obstructions in the 

corridor that prohibit the use of double-stacked freight trains and potential alternatives to clearing the 

identified obstructions and describes a proposed action at each individual project location. The identified 

goal in the feasibility study was to achieve vertical clearance improvements by providing a minimum 21-foot 

vertical clearance standard to allow for unimpeded passage of second generation, domestic double-stacked 

containers. The obstructions identified in the feasibility study can generally be separated into two categories: 

bridges and tunnels. There are four general methods for increasing the vertical clearance of a bridge: raise 

the existing bridge; modify the bridge superstructure (modify or replace); remove the bridge; or lower the 

tracks beneath the bridge. For tunnels, there are two general methods for increasing the vertical clearance: 

open cutting the tunnel (remove the overburden over the tunnel) or modifying the tunnel liner. Track 

lowering within existing tunnels was considered, however this method was dismissed as it would involve 

interrupting existing railroad service for extended periods during construction. Except for open cutting a 
tunnel, these improvements are generally minor in nature, will consist of reconstructing existing 

infrastructure, and will generally occur within an existing right-of-way (ROW). The Build Alternative is the 

Preferred Alternative for this proposed action.

The following four obstructions have been recommended for bridge removal:

• Ohio, Youngstown, Mahoning County, Abandoned Railroad Bridge 

• Pennsylvania, Coraopolis, Allegheny County, Overhead Walkway Bridge 

• Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, Allegheny County, West End J&L Tunnel, Bridge Removal 

• Maryland, Mexico Farms, Allegany County, CSX Railroad Bridge

The following four obstructions have been recommended for bridge raising:

• Ohio, Kent, Portage County, Abandoned Railroad Bridge and ABCR Railroad Bridge (obstructions 

share abutment) 

• Pennsylvania, McKees Rocks, Allegheny County, Ohio Central Railroad Bridge (A track lowering is 

still being assessed at this location.) 

• Pennsylvania, Sand Patch, Somerset County, Blue Lick Truss 

The following four obstructions have been recommended for bridge modification:

• Pennsylvania, Garrett, Somerset County, Church Street Bridge (SR 2037) (This bridge will be 

replaced.)

• Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, Allegheny County, Chartiers Creek Bridge (The superstructure of this 

bridge will be modified.)

• Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, Allegheny County, East End J&L Tunnel, Bridge Modification (Portions of 

the structure will be removed.) 

• Pennsylvania, Hyndman, Bedford County, Railroad Bridge (The superstructure of this bridge will be 

modified.)

The following eight obstructions have been recommended for tunnel liner modification:

• Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, J&L Tunnel 

• Pennsylvania, Confluence, Somerset County, Brook Tunnel

• Pennsylvania, Sand Patch, Somerset County, Sand Patch Tunnel 

• Pennsylvania , Fairhope, Somerset County, Falls Cut Tunnel 

• West Virginia, Paw Paw, Morgan County, Carothers Tunnel

• Maryland, Allegany County, in the vicinity of Magnolia, West Virginia, Graham Tunnel

• West Virginia, Hansrote, Morgan County, Stuart Tunnel 

• West Virginia, Hansrote, Morgan County, Randolph Tunnel

The following three obstructions have been recommended for tunnel open cutting:

• Pennsylvania, Confluence, Somerset County, Benford Tunnel
• Pennsylvania, Confluence, Somerset County, Shoo Fly Tunnel 

• Pennsylvania, Pinkerton, Somerset County, Pinkerton Tunnel (Tunnel liner modifications are also 

being assessed at this location.) 

The following three areas have been recommended for excess material placement from tunnel open 

cutting operations:

• Pennsylvania, Confluence, Somerset County, Excess Material Placement Area

• Pennsylvania, Rockwood, Somerset County, Black Township Excess Material Placement Area 

• Pennsylvania, Sand Patch, Somerset County, Excess Material Placement Area

Any excess materials generated during the tunnel liner modifications and grading/cut activities that cannot be 

used within the CSX ROW or at the three CSX-owned excess material placement areas will be managed 

appropriately in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations.

The following seven obstructions have been recommended for grade adjustment (track lowering):

• Ohio, Akron, Summit County, Thornton Street 

• Ohio, Akron, Summit County, Overhead Walkway 

• Ohio, Kent, Portage County, W&LE Railway Bridge 

• Ohio, Kent, Portage County, Main Street Bridge

• Ohio, Ravenna, Portage County, NS Railroad Bridge

• Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, Allegheny County, Smithfield Street Bridge 

• Pennsylvania, McKeesport, Allegheny County, Walnut Street (SR 0048) Bridge (Boston Bridge)

No public at-grade crossing closures or modifications to existing grade crossings are proposed under the 

Preferred Alternative. 

To maintain rail traffic during improvements at the tunnels in West Virginia and Maryland, rail traffic must be 

shifted from one track to another. To facilitate this movement of rail traffic, one new interlocking (rail 

crossovers) is proposed:

• West Virginia, Magnolia, Morgan County, Magnolia Interlocking 

3.2 No Build Alternative

This alternative has been studied, and it does not correct the situation that creates chokepoints to the efficient 

movement of double-stacked freight containers through the corridor. The No Build Alternative does not meet 

the purpose and need of the proposed action. The No Build Alternative assumes normal track maintenance 

retaining the existing conditions along the National Gateway Phase I corridor. This alternative was analyzed to 

provide a baseline condition for comparison and evaluation of the proposed action. 
4. Summary of Project Impacts

4.1 Project Impacts

This section presents a summary of the potential impacts of the Preferred Alternative. 

Land Use and Right-of-Way

• The majority of the individual improvement locations occur within CSX railroad ROWs. For a few 

individual obstruction improvements, minor land acquisition is necessary and/or temporary 

construction easements are necessary; however, local land use patterns will not change as a result 

of the implementation of this action. The proposed action will not change the cohesion of the 

neighborhoods in the specific states or communities along the route. 

• All acquisition activities will be conducted in accordance with the Uniform Relocation and Real 

Property Acquisitions Policy Act, as amended. Table 1 notes the property acquisitions and 

easements required for the proposed action.

• The Preferred Alternative will not result in significant impacts to Land Use within or around the 

project area. 

Table 1: Property Acquisitions and Easements

Project Name State Temporary 

Easement 

Area (acres)

Permanent 

Right-of-Way 

(acres)

Main Street Bridge, Kent - BG117.30 Ohio -- 0.631 

BG 115.80/115.67 - Kent Hike & Bike Trail/ 

ABCR RR Bridge 

Ohio 2.01 --

NS Railroad Bridge, Ravenna - BG110.80 Ohio 0.57 0.39

BG 76.60 Abandoned Railroad Bridge Ohio 3.83 --

Church Street Bridge, Garrett - BF 220.00 Pennsylvania -- 0.50

Benford Tunnel, Confluence - BFJ 5.00 Pennsylvania -- 1.65

Shoo Fly Tunnel, Confluence - BF 236.80 Pennsylvania -- 4.65

Pinkerton Tunnel, Pinkerton - BF 235.40 Pennsylvania -- 20.16

CSX Railroad Bridge in Mexico Farms Maryland -- 3.12
Environmental Justice - At two obstruction locations, Thornton Street and the Overhead Walkway Bridge 

both in Akron, Ohio, minority and/or low-income populations were identified in the obstruction vicinity. The 

proposed action at these two obstructions is track lowering that will be completed within the rail ROW and 

will not result in any significant adverse impact to the adjacent residents. The proposed action will improve 

the existing infrastructure within its existing alignment and thus will not change the cohesion of the 

neighborhoods and communities within the vicinity. To minimize construction impacts to the communities at 

these two locations, work will be completed during daylight hours, and the contractor will follow standard 

control measures that minimize fugitive dust.

Socio-Economics

• Job creation for the proposed action has been estimated using metrics established by the White 

House Council of Economic Advisors in which $92,136 of government spending creates one jobyear. Using these metrics, it is estimated that by the end of 2013, Phase I of the National Gateway 

Clearance Initiative will create more than 3,600 jobs, including nearly 1,300 jobs in economically 

distressed areas. 

• Phase I of the National Gateway Clearance Initiative is projected to have the beneficial impact of 

reducing highway congestion by allowing for double-stacked freight trains and reducing the need for 

long-haul trucks on the region’s highways. Completion will allow more freight to move on any given 

train, which will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 1.19 million tons and save nearly 102 million 

gallons of fuel. 

• The proposed action will provide relief to congested rail and highway corridors by enabling trains to 

more efficiently carry freight. This will directly reduce highway congestion and reduce highway 

maintenance costs. Benefits associated with reduced truck traffic over the next 20 years include 

public roadway congestion cost savings of nearly $33.6 million and public roadway pavement cost 

savings of over $59 million. 

Maintenance of Traffic - The majority of work is limited to rail projects with no vehicular traffic detours or 

maintenance of traffic required. Two Pennsylvania obstructions will have traffic detours: J&L Tunnel in 

Pittsburgh and Church Street (SR 2037) in Garrett. Traffic plans (e.g., detours and traffic management 

measures) will be developed and coordinated with state and local representatives to help manage traffic 

interruptions during the construction period. No significant rail traffic impacts are anticipated.

Air Quality - The General Conformity Rule applies to all federal actions not addressed by the transportation 

conformity rule. Therefore, in accordance with 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 93.153 and 93.158, 

emissions of ozone precursor compounds nitrogen oxide (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and 

particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) and PM2.5 precursor compounds 

(sulfur dioxide [SO2] and nitrogen oxides [NOx]) were analyzed in a General Conformity analysis, for 

obstructions within non-attainment areas. Results of the air analysis were compared to the de minimis 

thresholds. The worst case for emissions is expected to be the first year of operation. The estimated 

releases of CO (carbon monoxide), PM2.5, NOx, SO2, and VOCs are well below the general conformity 
thresholds of 100 tons per year. Based on the air analysis, the proposed action meets the requirements of 

the Clean Air Act and will not result in any significant impacts to air quality.

Noise - The proposed action will not cause an increase in rail traffic noise levels because it will not provide 

additional mainline tracks on new alignment, it will not change the maximum operating speed of the track,

and it will not substantially change the shielding effects of the surrounding area. At one obstruction, Church 

Street (SR 2037) in Garrett, Pennsylvania, a minor change of less than 3 feet will be made to the vertical 

alignment of the roadway. At a second obstruction, J&L Tunnel in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 26th Street will 

be shifted to better align two skewed intersections (with Tunnel Boulevard and South Water Street). No 

changes will be made to the roadway capacity. These minor changes to alignment do not meet FHWA’s 

Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance (1995) - Type I, project criteria. Traffic 

noise levels will not change as a result of the proposed improvements at these two roadway locations. The 

project will not result in any significant noise impacts.

Vibration - Vibration from freight trains is generally dominated by the diesel locomotive, which is the 

prevailing weight on most trains and considerably heavier than most of the rolling stock. For example, 

locomotives weigh approximately 200 tons and container stack railcars weigh approximately 73-110 tons at 

a maximum or only 56 percent of the weight of a locomotive. Other factors contributing to elevated vibration 

levels from freight train passbys, other than weight, include travel speed, stiffness of the suspension system, 

condition or trueness of the wheels, condition or type of rail, track type, and type of ground. Therefore, the 

potential vibration effects resulting from the introduction of double-stacked container cars along the existing 

corridor are minimal based on the lower weight of the container cars compared to other cars or the 

locomotive engine, and the project will not result in the introduction of any significant vibration impacts.

Hazardous Materials - The vast majority of the individual improvements are contained within the CSX 

ROW, and based on a records review, no hazardous materials should be encountered during construction of 

these improvements. No significant impacts related to the use or discovery of hazardous materials is 

anticipated. Should hazardous materials be encountered prior to or during the construction phase of the 

proposed action, any identified waste will be managed according to applicable federal, state, and local laws, 

ordinances, and regulations. 

• In Ohio, based on Ohio Department of Transportation - Office of Environmental Services (ODOTOES) Guidelines, further environmental site assessments or special material management may be

warranted at the W&LE Railway Bridge track lowering at Kent and the Abandoned Railroad 

Bridge/ABCR Railway Railroad Bridge superstructure raising also at Kent. Both of these Portage 

County projects had stained soil. A Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, limited to soil 

characterization, will be conducted on the stained soils found in these projects prior to the project bid 

letting to determine if a plan note for special material management and proper disposal is required in 

the construction plans. 

• In addition, the construction plans for the W&LE Railway Bridge will have a plan note for special 

management for contaminated groundwater, which is known to occur 5 feet below the surface, and 

the project will lower the tracks 1.5 feet, potentially encountering this contaminated water.
Excess Materials - Any excess materials generated during the grading/cut activities that cannot be used 

within the current CSX-owned ROW or within designated excess material placement areas will be managed 

appropriately in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations. 

Materials excavated during construction are expected to be considered nonhazardous. 

Floodplains - Based on a review of the National Flood Insurance Program Mapping, portions of individual 

obstruction work locations are within the 100-year flood boundary; however, no fill material will be placed in 

the regulated floodplain at any of the proposed work locations, and there will be no significant impacts to 

floodplains under the Preferred Alternative.

Jurisdictional Wetlands - The proposed action at CSX Railroad Bridge, Mexico Farms, Maryland, will 

require a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (U.S. ACE) 404 permit, and corresponding 401 Water Quality 

Certification from the State of Maryland, for impacts to wetlands and jurisdictional streams. It is expected 

that the proposed action at CSX Railroad Bridge will permanently impact approximately 0.26 acre of 

wetlands and temporarily impact 0.37 acre of wetlands and affect 1.0 to 1.5 acres of wetland buffer. 

Engineering designs to minimize these impacts are ongoing. Coordination regarding potential mitigation for 

the impacts at CSX Railroad Bridge will be completed as part of the permitting process. There are no other 

impacts to streams or wetlands at any of the other individual obstruction locations. Based on the mitigation 

to be completed as part of the permitting projects, the Preferred Alternative is not anticipated to cause 

significant impacts to wetlands.

Water Quality 

• For those clearance improvements with earth disturbance over 1 acre, a Storm Water Pollution 

Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be implemented during construction to reduce the potential for 

erosion and sediment runoff during construction activities. Best management practices for erosion 

control during construction will be implemented at all improvement locations to minimize pollutants 

entering waterways. The contractors shall follow best management practices.

• At all locations requiring a SWPPP, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 

construction storm water permit, verified by the State Environmental Protection Agency, will be 

included with the contract plans for adherence during construction. All conditions and terms 

associated with these permits will be fulfilled. Because requirements set forth in the SWPPPs and 

NPDES permits will be followed at applicable sites, no signification impacts to water quality as 

anticipated as a result of the Preferred Alternative.

Threatened and Endangered Species - All improvement locations were reviewed for potential impacts to 

federally listed threatened and endangered species. Coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

(U.S. FWS) in Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Maryland resulted in a ‘no effects’ conclusion in the 

states. However, trees suitable for use as Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) summer roosting habitat have been 

identified in the vicinity of several Pennsylvania and West Virginia clearance improvement locations. 

Removal of these trees has been coordinated with the U.S. FWS in accordance with their seasonal 

restrictions. No significant impacts to threatened or endangered species are anticipated as a result of the 

Preferred Alternative.
Aesthetics - The degree to which proposed action area aesthetics and visual character may be impacted 

depends upon the specific activities being undertaken. Overall, Phase I of the National Gateway Clearance 

Initiative proposed action will create changes to the visual and aesthetic character of the rail corridor and 

surrounding area. Most improvements to aesthetics will occur in areas where the public will have an 

opportunity to realize the improvements. Conversely, the negative effects expected from certain activities will 

be in areas where the general public will not be affected by them. However, because most of the changes 

will be to existing infrastructure within an existing corridor, the majority of these changes will likely be 

perceived as aesthetically and visually neutral. As such, significant impacts to visual resources related to 

aesthetics are not anticipated.

Parks and Recreational Resources

• There will be no permanent impacts to parks or recreational resources; hence there is no 4(f) use of 

these resources.

• Portions of the proposed action are in the immediate vicinity of two bicycle/pedestrian paths (Kent 

Hike and Bike Path, Kent, Ohio and the Somerset County Rails to Trails Path Allegheny Highland 

Trail, Keystone Viaduct, Sand Patch, Pennsylvania) and a publicly owned area designated for open

space (Open Space over the J&L Tunnel, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania). Memorandums of 

Understanding (MOUs) have been completed with the public officials having jurisdiction of these 

resources. 

o The City of Kent owns the bike path at the Abandoned Railroad Bridge Superstructure 

Raising in Kent, Portage County, Ohio. The trail will be kept open during construction. Work 

will be minimal, with no permanent adverse physical impacts or interference with use of the 

trail, and the trail will be fully restored in accordance with the owner’s stipulations.

o The J&L Tunnel in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, is owned by CSX. The land over the J&L 

Tunnel is owned by the URA of Pittsburgh and is open space that the public is permitted to 

use for community events. FHWA and FRA have concluded that this open space is not a 

public park or recreation area under Section 4(f). There will be no permanent adverse 

physical impacts. The area will be fully restored in accordance with the owner’s stipulations 

and replaced in kind or better at the end of construction.

o The Blue Lick Truss, Sand Patch, Pennsylvania is currently functioning as a 

bicycle/pedestrian bridge for the Somerset County rails to trails, which is part of the 

Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail. Based on Somerset County’s request, the path 

will be maintained and kept open during construction. Work will be minimal, with no 

permanent adverse physical impacts or interference with use of the trail, and the trail will be 

fully restored in accordance with the owner’s stipulations. Coordination with the National 

Park Service has been initiated and will be ongoing through the duration of the proposed 

action.
• Graham Tunnel in Maryland (vicinity of Magnolia, West Virginia) runs through an unnamed hill in the 

Green Ridge State Forest within the CSX-owned ROW. There are no recreational features of the 

State Forest near the Graham Tunnel project activity. 

Cultural Resources

• No districts or resources eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) will 

be adversely affected in the State of Ohio. However, due to the proximity of the Portage Main Street 

improvements to the NRHP boundaries of the Kent Industrial Historic District, the Ohio Historic 

Preservation Office will be provided an opportunity to review and comment on detailed design for the 

project once available, per the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) (Appendix A). 

• In Pennsylvania, portions of proposed action include two historic railroad corridors, which are eligible 

for listing in the NRHP: Pittsburgh and Lake Erie (P&LE) Railroad and Baltimore and Ohio (B&O) 

Railroad Pittsburgh Division, which are in the immediate vicinity of three historic bridges of national 

significance: Smithfield Street Bridge (National Engineering Landmark), Pittsburgh; Walnut Street 

(SR 0048) Bridge (Boston Bridge), McKeesport; and Blue Lick Truss, Sand Patch. 

o The following contributing resources to the P&LE Railroad are in the immediate vicinity of or 

will be improved by the proposed action: Chartiers Creek Bridge, Pittsburgh & Lake Erie 

Station, and J&L Tunnel, all located in Pittsburgh. Through coordination with the 

Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (PHMC) it has been determined, under 

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), that there will be no adverse 

effects by the proposed action on the P&LE Railroad, including elements such as the 

railroad’s vertical and horizontal alignment, tunnels and bridges, signal equipment, rock and 

slide fencing, drainage, stations/stops, cut and fill slopes, sidings, switches, right of 

way/ownership limits, vegetation as well as the noted contributing resources: Chartiers 

Creek Bridge, Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Station, and J&L Tunnel. 

o The B&O Railroad Pittsburgh Division stretches from McKeesport, Pennsylvania to 

Cumberland, Maryland. This historic railroad corridor includes the following contributing 

resources: Wills Creek Bridge at Hyndman, six tunnels in Somerset County, and the two 

unnamed bridges over Wills Creek, which are the approaches to Falls Cut Tunnel. Due to 

proposed vertical clearance improvements at the six tunnels in Somerset County, the 

PHMC determined that there would be an adverse effect by the proposed action on the 

B&O Railroad Pittsburgh Division. There will be no adverse effects on many of the other 

B&O Railroad Pittsburgh Division elements, such as Wills Creek Bridge at Hyndman; the 

two unnamed bridges over Wills Creek, which are the approaches to Falls Cut Tunnel; and 

the railroad’s vertical and horizontal alignment, various unnamed bridges, signal equipment, 

rock and slide fencing, drainage, stations/stops, cut and fill slopes, sidings, switches, right of 

way/ownership limits, and vegetation. On-going efforts, after publication of the EA, to 

minimize impacts at the six affected tunnels have resulted in a change in the alternative 

selected for Sand Patch Tunnel in Somerset County. Based on new design modifications, 
this tunnel is currently proposed for liner and portal notching. Sand Patch Tunnel, as noted 

in the EA, was proposed for total liner replacement. 

o The Smithfield Street Bridge in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the Walnut Street Bridge in 

McKeesport, Pennsylvania, and the Blue Lick Truss located in Somerset County, 

Pennsylvania are historic bridges of national significance. Through coordination with the 

PHMC it has been determined that there will be no adverse effects by the proposed action 

on the Smithfield Street Bridge, the Walnut Street Bridge or the Blue Lick Truss, nor will any 

property within a historic boundary be acquired. 

• In West Virginia and Maryland, the B&O Railroad Magnolia Cutoff has been determined eligible of 

listing on the NRHP. The B&O Railroad Magnolia Cutoff is a twelve-mile-long, double-track and 

includes four tunnels (Carothers, Graham, Stuart, and Randolph), a long cut at Doe Gully, two 

bridges over the Potomac (Kessler and Magnolia bridges), and a concrete retaining wall west of 

Paw Paw, all of which are contributing resources. Due to the proposed vertical clearance 

improvements at the four tunnels, it was determined that there would be an adverse effect by the 

proposed action on the B&O Railroad Magnolia Cutoff. The proposed action will have no impact 

on, and therefore will not affect, the Kessler or Magnolia bridges, the long cut at Doe Gully or the 

concrete retaining wall west of Paw Paw and the railroad’s vertical and horizontal alignment, various 

unnamed bridges, signal equipment, rock and slide fencing, drainage, stations/stops, cut and fill 

slopes, sidings, switches, right of way/ownership limits, and vegetation.

• Coordination with each State’s Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has been concluded. The 

SHPOs in the four states have concurred with the submitted Eligibility and Effects for Section 106 

resources. A MOA has been prepared for the proposed action outlining the results of the Section 

106 process and the agreed to mitigation, and signed by all parties and is included in Appendix A. 

Section 4(f) Resources - A Net Benefit Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation has been prepared for the 

Phase 1 corridor, for the use of the significant historic resources with input from the FHWA, FRA, and the 

States. (Chapter 5 of the EA document)

5. Public Involvement and Agency Coordination

The following section provides a summary of the agency coordination and public involvement efforts that 

were carried out after approval of the EA (September 2010). 

5.1 Circulation of the Environmental Assessment/Section 4(f) Evaluation

The EA was approved on September 15, 2010 by the FHWA and FRA. The 4(f) evaluation was approved by 

FHWA and concurred with by FRA. Notices of Availability were published in nineteen (19) newspapers 

covering the four-state region in the project vicinity. The document was circulated to the following agencies, 

entities, and public viewing locations: 
Federal Agencies

U.S. FWS – West Virginia Field Office

National Park Service – Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail

National Park Service – National Capital Region

National Park Service – Northeast Region

State Agencies

Ohio Department of Transportation – Office of Environmental Services (ODOT-OES) 

Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (Penn DOT)

Pennsylvania Department of Community & Economic Development

Pennsylvania Department of Health*

Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture

Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission

Pennsylvania Game Commission - Southwest Region

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection - Southwest District*

Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission*

West Virginia Division of Highways

West Virginia Division of Natural Resources

Eastern Panhandle Regional Planning & Development Council (West Virginia)

West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection 

West Virginia Department of Transportation (WVDOT) - Program Planning & Administration 

West Virginia Division of Culture and History*

Maryland State Highway Administration

Maryland Historical Trust*

Public Viewing Locations

National Gateway Webpage

(http://www.nationalgateway.org/content/resources/EA_document_downloads.cfm)

Akron Summit County Public Library, Akron, Ohio

Kent Free Library, Kent, Ohio

Public Library of Youngstown and Mahoning County, Youngstown, Ohio
Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Somerset County Library, Somerset, Pennsylvania

WVDOT Webpage (http://www.transportation.wv.gov/highways/engineering/comment/ngciphase1)

Town of Paw Paw (Mayor’s Office), Paw Paw, West Virginia

Paw Paw Public Library, Paw Paw, West Virginia

Morgan County Clerk's Office, Berkeley Springs, West Virginia

Morgan County Public Library, Berkeley Springs, West Virginia

Maryland Department of Transportation Webpage (http://www.mdot.maryland.gov/OFL/Freight)

Allegany County Public Library, Cumberland, Maryland

Written comments were received from agencies after the publication of the EA noted with an asterisk (*). 

Comments are listed in Section 6.3.1 and copies of the comment letters are included in Appendix B.

5.2 Summary of Public Comments 

A request for feedback and comments on the EA was included with the published Notices of Availability and 

with all viewing locations, including webpages. Comments were requested to be submitted by October 18, 

2010. No public comments were received after the EA was signed.

5.3 Agency Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment 

The comments received from agency personnel on the EA are recorded below along with responses. 

Copies of the comment letters are included as Appendix B. 

1. Chambersburg, Pennsylvania Town Council; email of September 8, 2010

Comment 1: I would like to request that an additional copy of the Environmental Assessment and the 

Section 4(f) Evaluation be forwarded to the Borough of Chambersburg where they would be available 

for public inspection.

Response: A copy of the Environmental Assessment was provided on September 23, 2010 to the 

Borough of Chambersburg, as requested. 

2. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection – Southwest Regional Office, letter 

of October 6, 2010

The following comment/ response section governs only projects located in the Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania.
Comment 1: The applicant should contact the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 

Bureau for Historic Preservation, Box 1026, Harrisburg, PA 17108-1026, telephone number 

7717.782.8946, to determine if the project will pass through or otherwise impact historic or 

archaeological sites. Any review comments by the commission should be included with the 

appropriate DEP permit applications.

Response: Historic and archaeological sites within the project area have been identified as discussed 

on pages 54 to 56 of the EA and consultation with the PHMC has been documented in the 

memorandum of agreement (MOA) presented in EA Appendix C. Coordination with PHMC will 

continue, as committed in the MOA.

Comment 2: The Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) list should be cross-checked 

against the site locations to determine if any resources of special concern are located within the 

project area.

Response: Review of PNDI list was completed, as noted on pages 49 and 50 of the EA for this action

which was signed September 16, 2010.

Comment 3: Any utility company with transmission lines within the project area should be contacted 

at least 30 days prior to work start by the contractor. The applicant or contractor should call 

1.800.242.1776 before beginning any excavation. 

Response: Noted coordination with utility companies is on-going and will be completed. As 

applicable, this requirement will be placed in the contractor bid packages so the contractor is aware of 

the stipulation and appropriate measures will be included in contract management language.

Comment 4: Demolition waste cannot be burned. 

Response: Demolition waste will not be burned. As applicable, this requirement will be placed in the 

contractor bid packages so the contractor is aware of the stipulation and appropriate measures will be 

included in contract management language.

Comment 5: Fugitive dust emissions must be controlled according to 25 Pa. Code Section 123.1.

Response: Noted regulation regarding fugitive dust emissions will be complied with. As applicable, 

this requirement will be placed in the contractor bid packages so the contractor is aware of the 

stipulation and appropriate measures will be included in contract management language.

Comment 6: If you encounter contaminated soil during excavation contact the Southwest Region’s 

Waste Management representative at 412.442.4125, and Environmental Cleanup Program 

representative at 412.442.6217, for proper management. 
Response: Noted coordination regarding potentially impacted soil will be completed. As applicable, 

this requirement will be placed in the contractor bid packages so the contractor is aware of the 

stipulation and appropriate measures will be included in contract management language.

Comment 7: If above or below-ground storage tanks are to be removed, contact the Department’s 

Storage Tank Program representative at 412.442.4091 to ensure that the requirements of 25 Pa. 

Code Chapter 245 are met. If existing or new storage tanks will be used to store material, contact our 

Division of Storage Tanks at 717.772.5599 regarding requirements for tank registration. 

Response: No above or below-ground storage tanks have been identified, therefore removal of tanks 

is not part of this action. No new storage tanks are planned to be used as part of this action. If 

unknown above or below-ground storage tanks are encountered, coordination as suggested in 

comment 7 will be completed. As applicable, this requirement will be placed in the contractor bid 

packages so the contractor is aware of the stipulation and appropriate measures will be included in 

contract management language.

Comment 8: The proposed project may be over abandoned underground mines. In general, any 

section of this project which would lie above or near an abandoned underground mine would be at 

some risk of mine subsidence, with the level of risk dependent on a number of factors.

The California District Mining Office has an extensive repository of underground mine maps, some of 

which undoubtedly are in the vicinity of the project. For an appointment to research these maps, 

please contact:

Bureau of District Mining Operations

California Office

25 Technology Drive

California Technology Park

Coal Center, PA 15423

James P. Welsh

Phone 724.769.1100

Response: Noted coordination regarding abandoned mines will be completed, as applicable.

Comment 9: The applicant or contractor should contact DCNR’s Bureau of Topographic and Geologic 

Survey at 412.442.4236, 500 Waterfront Drive, Pittsburgh, PA 15222, in order to determine whether 

any existing or abandoned oil and gas wells are known to exist within the project boundary. Adequate 

plugging of such wells is required.

Response: No known oil or gas wells are within the vicinity of the proposed action. No new oil or gas 

wells are planned to be installed as part of this action. If unknown abandoned oil or gas wells are 

encountered proper abandonment of said wells will be completed. As applicable, this requirement will 

be placed in the contractor bid packages so the contractor is aware of the stipulation and appropriate 

measures will be included in contract management language.
Comment 10: Work in and along streams and wetlands requires a Water Obstruction and 

Encroachment Permit from the Permitting & Technical Services Section. The area regulated is the 

stream and any area within the 100-year flood boundaries of any Federal Flood Insurance Study or 50 

feet from the top of each stream bank if no flood insurance study exists. All wetland impacts are 

regulated. Please contact the Permitting & Technical Services representative at 412.442.4315. 

Response: As noted on pages 48 and 49 in the EA for this action, signed September 16, 2010, no 

jurisdictional waters or the regulated floodplains will be impacted within the Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania.

Comment 11: The following table outline the requirements for (1) Erosion and Sedimentation (E&S) 

Control Plans, (2) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits for Storm Water 

(SW) associated with Construction Activities be it either a General Permit (PAG-2) or an individual 

permit, and (3) Post Construction Storm Water Management Plans (PCSMP) as required by the U.S. 

EPS’s NPDES Phase II Storm Water Program. 

When required, the NPDES permit will typically be General Permit PAG-2 unless the project is located 

in a High Quality (HQ) or Exceptional Value (EV) Watershed as classified in DEP’s 25 Pa. Code 

Chapter 93 Regulations. If located in a HQ or EV Watershed an individual permit will be required.

For specific guidance on your project please contact the County Conservation District Office for the 

county in which you project is located. The Conservation District will approve all E&S plans, review 

and approve all general permits PAG-2 and review all individual permits in HQ & EV Watersheds. 

Individual permits, however, will be issues by DEP’s Regional Office.

Disturbed Area Written E&S Plan Approved E&S 

Plan

NPDES W+SW

Construction 

Permit

PCSMP

0-5000 sq. ft. Yes No No N/A

5000 sq. ft to less 

than 1 acre

Yes Not required by 

may be a 

municipal 

requirement

No N/A

1 to <5 acres w/o 

point source to 

surface waters

Yes Not required by 

may be a 

municipal

requirement

No N/A

1 to <5 acres with 

point source to 

Yes Not required by 

may be a 

municipal 

Yes Yes
surface waters requirement

5 acres or more Yes Required Yes Yes

If the permitted activity is in an MS4 municipality, the municipality must approve the PCSMP. The 

applicant should send the PCSMP to the MS4 municipality along with the municipal notification. Even 

where the approval of the PCSMP is not required, the permittee must develop and implement the 

PCSMP and will certify that the BMPs were implemented in accordance with the PCSMP when the 

Notice of Termination (NOT) is submitted. 

A point source is a discharge from the disturbed area or the erosion control facilities through a pipe, 

ditch, swale or stream. A non-point source typically applies only to sites with sheet flow discharges or 

complete infiltration.

Consider the use of pervious pavement and/or “water gardens” for stormwater management. Utilizing 

these measures could eliminate the need for an NPDES permit. For additional information, contact 

the Watershed Management Program’s Permitting and Technical Services Section, Stormwater 

Engineers, at 412.422.4315.

Response: Noted permits regarding erosion and sedimentation control and storm water management 

will be obtained, as applicable.

Comment 12: Any remaining solid waste including non-usable construction and demolition waste, 

asbestos, and other materials must be properly stored and disposed promptly at an approved facility. 

For further information, call 412.442.4256.

Response: Noted regulation regarding the potential disposal of solid waste will be complied with. As 

applicable, this requirement will be placed in the contractor bid packages so the contractor is aware of 

the stipulation and appropriate measures will be included in contract management language.

Comment 13: All downstream public water supplies which may potentially be affected by 

sedimentation or stream flow changes must be directly contacted by the contractor at least 30 days 

prior to work start. Any public water supply problem resulting from the project must immediately be 

reported to DEP’s Bureau of Water Standards & Facility Regulation at this address.

Response: Noted municipal coordination regarding public water supplies will be completed. As 

applicable, this requirement will be placed in the contractor bid packages so the contractor is aware of 

the stipulation and appropriate measures will be included in contract management language.

Comment 14: If this project impacts any public drinking water source, both the public water supply 

and the appropriate DEP District Office or DEP’s Bureau of Water Standards & Facility Regulation 
must be notified at least 30 days prior to work start. (Contact addresses are provided in the comment 

letter.) 

Response: Noted municipal coordination regarding public drinking water sources will be completed.

As applicable, this requirement will be placed in the contractor bid packages so the contractor is 

aware of the stipulation and appropriate measures will be included in contract management language.

Comment 15: Any activity utilizing pollutants are required by Section 91.34 of Title 25 to take all 

necessary measures to prevent the substances from reaching waters of the Commonwealth. A 

Preparedness, Prevention and Contingency Plan (PPC Plan) must be developed and maintained on 

site for this project in accordance with the “Guidelines for the Development and Implementation of 

Environmental Emergency Response Plans” which can be found at 

“http://www.depweb.state.pa.us/dep/site/default/asp” and click on “Technical Guidance” and type 400-

2200-001 into the search field. 

Response: Noted guidelines regarding the potential use of pollutants will be complied with, as 

applicable. As applicable, this requirement will be placed in the contractor bid packages so the 

contractor is aware of the stipulation and appropriate measures will be included in contract 

management language.

Comment 16: Any discharge to a waterway or the ground surface requires either an NPDES 

discharge permit, Water Quality Management Part II Permit or temporary discharge approval. 

Temporary discharge approvals must meet the current guidelines. If treatment facilities are needed to 

meet the effluent limitations imposed by the NPDES permit, a Part II permit is required for the 

construction of those treatment facilities. If wastewater from an industrial process is 

recirculated/reused, an NPDES permit would not be needed. Contact DEP’s Water Management 

Program representative at 412.442.4038. 

Response: Noted permit for wastewater discharges will be obtained, as applicable. As applicable, this 

requirement will be placed in the contractor bid packages so the contractor is aware of the stipulation 

and appropriate measures will be included in contract management language.

Comment 17: The applicant or contractor should contact local municipal officials through whose 

jurisdiction the project passes in order to determine whether or not public sanitary sewers will be 

impacted. Relocation of sewerlines may require issuance of a Part II Permit from DEP’s Water 

Management Program. 

Response: Noted municipal coordination regarding public sanitary sewers will be completed. As 

applicable, this requirement will be placed in the contractor bid packages so the contractor is aware of 

the stipulation and appropriate measures will be included in contract management language.

Comment 18: Waste concrete and concrete truck wash downs can be harmful to aquatic life. Care 

should be taken to keep waste concrete and concrete truck wastewater from reaching storm drains, 

streams, drainage ditches and catch basins. 
Response: Appropriate BMPs will be implemented for the waste concrete and concrete truck wash 

downs. As applicable, this requirement will be placed in the contractor bid packages so the contractor 

is aware of the stipulation and appropriate measures will be included in contract management 

language.

3. Pennsylvania Department of Health; email of November 4, 2010

Comment 1: In recent years, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the United Nations, and 

other international agencies have focused concern on the environmental health impact of green house 

gases, such as carbon dioxide, and their contribution to global warming. The U.S. presently produces 

about 19.1% of the global total production of carbon dioxide. 

According to Arcadis U.S., Inc., implementation of Phase I National Gateway Clearance Initiative will 

reduce carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere by 1.19 million tons. The PADOH supports 

efforts by industry to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide. 

Response: Letter is acknowledged. 

4. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission; letter of November 9, 2010

Comment 1: We concur with the findings of the agency that the significant resources involved in this 

project are the National Register eligible railroad lines. We understand that to keep these 

transportation corridors viable and functioning as they did historically, incremental changes to these 

resources area sometimes necessary to continue their usage and function as a railroad serving the 

transportation of goods across the United States. 

Response: Letter is acknowledged.

5. West Virginia Division of Culture and History; letter of October 7, 2010

Comment 1: We are in receipt of the Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation CD. 

You have requested our comments on this document. After review of this document, it is our opinion 

that it accurately reflects the Section 106 consultation process for this project to this point. 

Response: Letter is acknowledged. 

6. Maryland Historical Trust; letter of October 28, 2010

Comment 1: The Maryland Historical Trust (Trust) received on 26 October 2010 a copy of the 

Environmental Assessment and Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation for the Phase I National 

Gateway Clearance Project for our review. We are writing to acknowledge that the report accurately 

represents the Section 106 consultation process and outcomes in Maryland. 

Response: Letter is acknowledged.
6. 4(f) Determination - Applicability of Programmatic Evaluation

The Net Benefit 4(f) Programmatic has been prepared by the FHWA for federally funded transportation 

projects, which in the view of the Administration and official(s) with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) property, 

the use of the Section 4(f) property will result in a net benefit to the Section 4(f) property. In order to satisfy 

these criteria the following requirements must be met: (Italicized text spells out how the programmatic criteria 

are met for this project.)

• The proposed transportation project uses a Section 4(f) park, recreation area, wildlife or waterfowl 

refuge, or historic site. The project will adversely affect the tunnel features which are contributing 

elements of the historic B&O Railroad Pittsburgh Division in Pennsylvania and the historic B&O 

Railroad Magnolia Cutoff in West Virginia and Maryland.

• The proposed project includes all appropriate measures to minimize harm and subsequent 

mitigation necessary to preserve and enhance those features and values of the property that 

originally qualified the property for Section 4(f) protection. Measures to minimize harm and 

subsequent mitigation measures are documented in the Memorandum of Agreement (Appendix A).

• For historic properties, the project does not require the major alteration of the characteristics that 

qualify the property for the NRHP such that the property would no longer retain sufficient integrity to 

be considered eligible for the listing. For archaeological properties, the project does not require the 

disturbance or removal of the archaeological resources that have been determined important for the 

preservation in-place rather than for the information that can be obtained through data recovery. The 

determination of a major alteration or the importance to preserve in-place will be based on 

consultation consistent with 36 CFR Part 800.

The project will involve open-cutting of three historic tunnels in Pennsylvania and the liner 

replacement or portal notching of seven historic tunnels in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and 

Maryland, which are contributing features to two of the three historic railroads in the three states. 

The project will not adversely affect the alignment, grade, bridges, signal equipment, rock and slide 

fencing, drainage, cut and fill slopes, sidings, slopes or right of way limits of the historic P&LE 

Railroad in Pennsylvania, and B&O Railroad Pittsburgh Division in Pennsylvania and the historic 

B&O Railroad Magnolia Cutoff in West Virginia and Maryland. All three historic properties will retain 

sufficient integrity to be considered eligible for their listing on the National Register.

• For historic properties, consistent with 36 CFR Part 800, there must be agreement reached amongst 

the SHPO and/or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, as appropriate, the FHWA and the Applicant 

on Measures to minimize harm when there is a use of Section 4(f) property. The Memorandum of 

Agreement is included in Appendix A, which was signed by all parties.

• The officials with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) property agree in writing with the assessment of 

the impacts; the proposed measures to minimize harm; and the mitigation necessary to preserve, 

rehabilitate, and enhance those features and values of the Section 4(f) property; and that such 

measures will result in a net benefit to the Section 4(f) property. The State Historic Preservation 
Officers for Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Maryland (The proposed action does not adversely 

affect any historic features in Ohio, therefore the Ohio SHPO did not comment.) reviewed the 

EA/Section 4(f) Evaluation for the project and provided their comments in writing, agreeing with the 

assessment of impacts, the proposed measures to minimize harm and the mitigation necessary to 

preserve, rehabilitate and enhance the features and values of the eligible properties, and concurring 

in the assessment provided. The Pennsylvania SHPO had expressed concerns about the impacts 

to the tunnels, but ultimately accepted the analysis provided. Adversely affected elements will be 

recorded and documented and interpretive histories of the historic railroads will be produced for 

posting on public websites.

• The Administration determines that the project facts match those set forth in the Applicability, 

Alternatives, Findings, Mitigation and Measures to Minimize Harm, Coordination, and Public 

Involvement sections of this programmatic agreement. FHWA has found and FRA concurs the 

project meets the expressed criteria for the Net Benefit Programmatic Agreement and is appropriate 

for adoption by FRA for the proposed undertaking.

To demonstrate that there is no feasible and prudent alternatives to the use of Section 4(f) property, the Net 

Benefits programmatic evaluation analysis must address the following alternatives:

• Do nothing;

• Improve the transportation facility in a manner that addresses the project’s purpose and need 

without a use of the Section 4(f) property; and

• Build the transportation facility at a location that does not require the use of the Section 4(f) property.

This list is intended to be all-inclusive. The Net Benefits programmatic evaluation does not apply if a feasible 

and prudent alternative is identified that is not discussed in this document.

The Section 4(f) Evaluation and Approval for Transportation Projects That Have a Net Benefit to a Section 

4(f) Property is appropriate as all of the avoidance alternatives require the use of Section 4(f) property. The 

project is a rail infrastructure enhancement project. Completion of the proposed action will directly improve 

and maintain the long-term viability of the historic rail corridors. Completion of Phase I of the National 

Gateway Clearance Initiative is being developed to enhance the historic rail corridors, resulting in a net 

benefit to these resources from implementation of the proposed action. FHWA has determined and FRA 

concurs, that a “net benefit” has been achieved since the transportation use, the measures to minimize 

harm, and the mitigation incorporated into the project result in an overall enhancement of the Section 4(f) 

property when compared to both the future do-nothing or avoidance alternatives and the present condition of 

the Section 4(f) property, considering the activities, features, and attributes that qualify the property for 

Section 4(f) protection.
7. Basis for Finding of No Significant Impact

Based upon a detailed study of the proposed project as documented in the EA and upon comments received 

from federal, state, and local agencies, along with the public, it is the finding of the FHWA and the FRA that 

this project will not have a significant adverse impact upon the human or natural environment. 

The project will remove obstacles to vertical clearance and complete other necessary improvements to 

provide for safe passage of double-stacked intermodal containers between the Northwest Ohio Terminal and 

the CSX Chambersburg Terminal. Completion of the project will allow any given train to more efficiently 

carry freight while reducing dependence on foreign oil, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, reducing 

highway maintenance cost and highway congestion, and creating jobs. Completion of the project will assure 

that CSX and the areas served by the National Gateway remain economically competitive due to the ability 

to virtually double existing railroad capacity and enhance efficiency.

The project will result in some minor land acquisition, and impacts to wetlands and historic resources.

However, every effort has and will be made to avoid and/or minimize adverse impacts using avoidance, 

minimization, and mitigation techniques. No significant impacts to natural, ecological, cultural, or scenic 

resources are anticipated. 

In consideration of the above evaluation, it has been determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is 

applicable for this project. Therefore, neither an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) nor further 

environmental analysis will be required.
8. Project Commitments

Phase I National Gateway Clearance Initiative

CSX Transportation, Inc. Clearance Improvements between Northwest Ohio and Chambersburg, 

Pennsylvania.

Commitments and Mitigation Identified in the Environmental Assessment

Corridor Wide

1. CSX will manage unexpected hazardous material encountered during construction according to 

applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations.

2. CSX will manage excess materials that will be placed outside of current CSX-owned ROW or

designated excess material placement areas according to applicable federal, state, and local laws, 

ordinances, and regulations.

3. CSX will obtain approved NPDES permits as needed and use of best management practices for 

erosion control during construction.

Ohio

4. CSX will add groundwater plan note to design plans for W&LE Railway Bridge, Kent.

5. CSX will complete soil sampling for potential material management at W&LE Railway Bridge, Kent; 

and Abandoned Railroad Bridge/ABCR Railway Railroad Bridge superstructure raising, Kent.

6. CSX will maintain construction activity limitations for Thornton Street and the Overhead Walkway 

Bridge both in Akron.

Pennsylvania

7. CSX will maintain traffic detour: J&L Tunnel in Pittsburgh and Church Street in Garrett.

8. CSX will comply with demolition activity limitations for J&L Tunnel in Pittsburgh.

9. CSX will coordinate with the National Park Service through the duration of the proposed action

regarding the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail.

10. There are no adverse effects by the proposed action on the historic P&LE Railroad and its general 

elements, as well as, the noted contributing resources: Chartiers Creek Bridge, Pittsburgh & Lake 

Erie Station, and J&L Tunnel.

11. There are no adverse effects by the proposed action on the historic Smithfield Street Bridge, the 

Walnut Street Bridge or the Blue Lick Truss, nor will any property within their historic boundaries be 

acquired.

12. There are no adverse effects by the proposed action on the noted historic B&O Railroad Pittsburgh 

Division elements such as Wills Creek Bridge at Hyndman; the two unnamed bridges over Wills 

Creek, which are the approaches to Falls Cut Tunnel; and the railroad’s other general elements not 

associated with the improvements at the noted tunnels. 
West Virginia

13. There are no adverse effects to the noted B&O Railroad Magnolia Cutoff elements such as, the 

Kessler or Magnolia bridges, the long cut at Doe Gully or the concrete retaining wall west of Paw 

Paw and the railroad’s other general elements not associated with the improvements at the noted 

tunnels.

Maryland

14. CSX will complete mitigation coordination for wetland impacts at CSX Railroad Bridge, Mexico 

Farms, Maryland.

Commitments and Mitigation Identified in the Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement

Corridor Wide

1. CSX, with FHWA and FRA will complete proper coordination for any historic properties or 

discoveries inadvertently discovered during construction.

2. CSX, with FHWA and FRA will complete coordination with National Park Service National Capital 

Region, if needed, for the eastward expansion of the National Gateway Initiative through Harper’s 

Ferry.

3. CSX, with FHWA and FRA will notify Native American Tribes if artifacts or human remains are 

inadvertently discovered during construction.

4. CSX, with FHWA and FRA will complete proper coordination if human remains are discovered.

5. CSX, with FHWA and FRA will complete proper coordination for design modifications that alter the 

potential effects to below-ground resources.

Ohio

6. CSX will provide FHWA and Ohio SHPO detailed design plans for Main Street Bridge, Kent to 

document the proposed action’s effect on the Kent Industrial Historic District.

7. CSX will prepare and submit recordation documentation and photos completed by a Qualified 

Historic Preservation Consultant to the Ohio SHPO prior to demolition of historic bridges.

8. CSX will advertise availability of historic bridges.

9. CSX will produce a plaque for each historic bridge that is reused.

Pennsylvania

10. CSX will prepare and submit recordation documentation and photos of historic resources that will be 

affected to the Pennsylvania SHPO.

11. CSX will explore feasibility of tunnel notching and the potential in-place preservation of dates and 

identity markers for the affected resources. 
12. CSX will offer salvageable materials (date plaques and identification markers) for reuse.

13. CSX will develop materials for a State hosted website.

West Virginia

14. CSX will prepare and submit recordation documentation and photos of historic resources that will be 

affected to the West Virginia SHPO.

15. CSX will develop a brief narrative for State hosted website.

16. CSX will complete research for original plans and historic photographs of affected resources.

17. CSX will explore feasibility of tunnel notching and the potential in-place preservation of dates and 

identity markers for the affected resources. 

Maryland

18. CSX will prepare and submit recordation documentation and photos of historic resources that will be 

affected to the Maryland SHPO. 

19. CSX will complete research for original plans and historic photographs of affected resources.

20. CSX will explore feasibility of tunnel notching and the potential in-place preservation of dates and 

identity markers for the affected resources. 
Figures
National Gateway Figure

1 Source: CSX 2009

Memphis

St. Louis

Chicago

Boston

New York

Baltimore

Suffolk

Wilmington

Charlotte

North

Baltimore

Columbus

Buffalo

Pittsburgh

Chambersburg

CSX

National Gateway

Phase 1
Cherry

Run

Chambersburg

Pittsburgh

Greenwich

OHIO

WEST VIRGINIA

PENNSYLVANIA

North Baltimore

VIRGINIA

1, 2

3, 4

5 6-8 9-13

14 17

18 15, 16

19

20, 21

22

23-25

26

27-30

E-2

31

32

34

35

36 39, 40

MARYLAND

I-1

I-2

E-1

E-3

33

I-3

37, 38

0 14 28 56

Miles

1 inch = 28 miles

Prepared By: ARCADIS

Date: May 2010 CSX

National Gateway Clearance Initiative

Phase I

Legend

Clearance Location

Interlocking Location

Excess Materials Placement Area

Railroad

National Gateway Clearance Initiative - Phase I

Number Name

1 TR 391

2 TR 150

3 River Corners Road

4 Pawnee Road

5 Mud Lake Road

6 Thornton Steet

7 Overhead Walkway

8 Park Street

Number Name

I-1 New Interlocking

9 W&LE Railroad Bridge

10 Main Street

11 Crain Avenue

12 W&LE Railroad Bridge

13 Recreational Trail

14 NS Railroad Bridge

15 Knapp Road

Number Name

16 Rock Spring Road

I-2 Complete Existing Interlocking

17 5th Street

18 Abandoned Railroad Bridge

19 Overhead Walkway

20 Ohio Central Railroad

21 Chartiers Creek

22 Smithfield Street

Number Name

23 West End of J&L Tunnel

24 J&L Tunnel

25 East End of J&L Tunnel

26 Walnut Street

E-1 Confluence EMPA

27 Brook Tunnel

28 Benford Tunnel

29 Shoo Fly Tunnel

Number Name

31 Pinkerton Tunnel

E-1 Black Township EMPA

32 Church Street

33 Blue Lick Truss

E-2 Sand Patch EMPA

34 Sand Patch Tunnel

35 Falls Cut Tunnel

36 Railroad Bridge

Number Name

36 CSXT Railroad Bridge

37 Carothers Tunnel

38 Graham Tunnel

I-3 Magnolia Interlocking

39 Stuart Tunnel

40 Randolph Tunnel

Figure

2
Appendix A

Section 106 Memorandum of 

Agreements
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 1

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT 

AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (FHWA), 

THE FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION (FRA) 

THE OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, WEST VIRGINIA, AND 

MARYLAND STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICES (SHPOs), AND THE 

OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, WEST VIRGINIA, AND 

MARYLAND STATE DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION (DOTs) 

ALONG WITH CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. (CSX) 

REGARDING THE NATIONAL GATEWAY CLEARANCE INITIATIVE, 

ASHLAND, MEDINA, SUMMIT, PORTAGE, AND MAHONING COUNTIES, OHIO;

ALLEGHENY, SOMERSET, AND BEDFORD COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA; 

HAMPSHIRE AND MORGAN COUNTIES, WEST VIRGINIA; and ALLEGANY 

COUNTY, MARYLAND 

WHEREAS, the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) 

Discretionary Grant program of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009, 

PL No. 111-5 allocated funds to be utilized to provide increased vertical clearance through 

existing tunnels and bridges for domestic container rail traffic cars on the existing CSX rail 

network along the National Gateway initiative corridor between North Baltimore, Ohio and 

Chambersburg, Pennsylvania; and 

WHEREAS, the undertaking consists of modifications to existing railroad infrastructure to 

provide sufficient vertical clearance for CSX to operate double-stacked domestic container rail 

traffic cars on CSX’s existing rail network along the National Gateway initiative corridor between 

North Baltimore, Ohio and Chambersburg, Pennsylvania; and 

WHEREAS, the undertaking will modify existing tunnels, bridges, and tracks and does 

not include construction of intermodal facilities, stations, sidings, or other rail facilities; and 

WHEREAS, CSX has the authority to design and construct renovations along its 

corridor and has received Federal funding for this undertaking; and 

WHEREAS, the Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and West Virginia DOTs have formed a 

coalition to sponsor this project with CSX; and 

WHEREAS, the DOTs are the sponsors of the undertaking, and the FHWA and the FRA 

are serving as lead Federal agencies for the implementation of this undertaking pursuant to the 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 2

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, codified at 42 United States Code [U.S.C.] 4321 et 

seq.); and

WHEREAS, the FHWA, and the FRA are the Federal agencies responsible for 

compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (codified at 16 U.S.C. 

Section 470f, and herein “Section 106”); and 

WHEREAS, the FHWA’s respective Division Offices in the four states have been 

involved in the early coordination and shall assist the FHWA Eastern Federal Lands Office, who 

shall provide oversight for the design and construction of the projects; and 

WHEREAS, the FHWA and DOTs have consulted with the Ohio, Pennsylvania, West 

Virginia, and Maryland SHPOs; and 

WHEREAS, in Ohio, the FHWA and the Ohio DOT have determined in coordination 

with the Ohio SHPO that the Kent Industrial Historic District, listed on the National Register of 

Historic Places is within the area of potential effects; and 

WHEREAS, in Ohio, three historic bridges that would have been part of this 

undertaking were found to be structurally deficient and the replacement of those bridges were 

advanced as separate undertakings and were funded in part by the ARRA. The FHWA, the Ohio 

SHPO, and the Ohio DOT have consulted regarding the adverse effect finding for the ARRAfunded portion of the project within Ohio and notified the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation (ACHP) of the adverse effects. Individual memoranda of agreement were executed 

on December 9, 2009 for each adversely affected bridge: Mud Lake Road Bridge in Medina 

County, Knapp Road Bridge in Portage County, and Fifth Street Bridge in Trumbull County; and 

WHEREAS, in Ohio, four historic properties are within the portion of the National 

Gateway initiative corridor to be funded entirely by the Ohio Department of Development 

(ODOD) and are not part of the Federal undertaking. These projects, identified as ASD-TR 391, 

Sullivan, BG 175.70, bridge replacement; ASD-TR 150, Sullivan, BG 175.30, bridge removal; 

MED-River Corners Rd., Pawnee, BG 169.70, bridge replacement; and MED-Pawnee Rd., 

Pawnee, BG 168.70, bridge removal are separate undertakings and shall be advanced separately 

by ODOD in consultation with the Ohio SHPO; and 

WHEREAS, in Pennsylvania, the FHWA and the Pennsylvania DOT have determined in 

consultation with the Pennsylvania SHPO that the following properties are eligible for listing in 

the National Register: the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Pittsburgh Division; the Pittsburgh and 

Lake Erie Railroad; the Chartiers Creek Bridge; Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Railroad Complex, 

Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Station, J&L Tunnel, Walnut Street/ Boston Bridge, the Blue Lick Truss 

(also known as Keystone Viaduct), and Wills Creek Bridge, Smithfield Street Bridge is a 

National Historic Landmark; and 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 3

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

WHEREAS, in Pennsylvania, the FHWA and the Pennsylvania DOT have determined in 

consultation with the Pennsylvania SHPO that the proposed action may have an adverse effect 

on resources contributing to the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, Pittsburgh Division, including 

Brook, Benford, Shoo Fly, Pinkerton, Sand Patch, and Falls Cut tunnels, and have consulted with 

the SHPO pursuant to 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 800 of the regulations 

implementing Section 106. It has also been determined that the undertaking will have no 

adverse effect on the Pittsburgh and Lake Erie Railroad, the Chartiers Creek Bridge, and the 

Blue Lick Truss (also known as Keystone Viaduct); and 

WHEREAS, in West Virginia, the FHWA and West Virginia DOT have determined in 

consultation with the West Virginia SHPO that the following properties are eligible for listing in the 

National Register: the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad and the Magnolia Cutoff, which includes 

Carothers, Stuart, and Randolph tunnels,; and 

WHEREAS, in West Virginia, the FHWA and the West Virginia DOT have determined 

in consultation with the West Virginia SHPO that the undertaking may have an adverse effect on 

contributing resources to the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad and the Magnolia Cutoff, which 

includes Carothers, Stuart, and Randolph tunnels, and have consulted with the SHPO pursuant to 

36 CFR part 800 of the regulations implementing Section 106; and 

WHEREAS, in Maryland, the FHWA and the Maryland DOT have determined in 

consultation with the Maryland SHPO that the following properties are eligible for listing in the 

National Register: Graham Tunnel (part of the Magnolia cutoff of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad); 

and 

WHEREAS, in Maryland, the FHWA and the Maryland DOT have determined in 

consultation with the Maryland SHPO that the undertaking may have an adverse effect on 

Graham Tunnel and have consulted with the Maryland SHPO pursuant to 36 CFR part 800 of the 

regulations implementing Section 106; and 

WHEREAS, in accordance with 36 CFR part 800.6(a)(1), the FHWA has notified the 

ACHP of its adverse effect determination with specified documentation, and the ACHP has not 

chosen to participate in the consultation pursuant to 36 CFR part 800.6(a)(1)(iii); and 

WHEREAS, the FHWA has invited Federally recognized Indian Tribes (Tribes) that 

may attach religious and/or cultural significance to any affected property within the area of 

potential effect pursuant to 36 CFR part 800.3(f)(2), listed in Attachment1, to participate in the 

consultation. Attachment 1 identifies those Tribes who declined to participate in this 

consultation but have asked to be notified of any Native American artifacts or human remains 

that are inadvertently discovered; and 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 4

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

WHEREAS, the FHWA and the DOTs have invited organizations to participate as 

consulting parties regarding the effects of the undertaking on historic properties, and the Pittsburgh 

History and Landmarks Commission and the City of Pittsburgh Department of Planning have agreed 

to consulting party status; and 

WHEREAS, the public has been notified of the undertaking through a combination of 

newspaper advertisements, media releases, and public meetings; and 

WHEREAS, the FHWA and the DOTs have determined that the effects of the 

undertaking cannot be avoided and that all reasonable measures have been taken to minimize 

adverse effects on historic properties; and 

WHEREAS, the plans are to restrict ground disturbance and associated direct 

construction impacts to the previously disturbed limits of the railroad bed, track, bridges, parking 

lots, roadways, and tunnels; however, the possibility exists that historic properties could 

inadvertently be discovered during construction activities, and these will be governed by the 

inadvertent discovery clauses in 36 CFR part 800.2 and stipulations of this MOA; 

WHEREAS, if additional future Federal funding becomes available for eastward expansion 

of the National Gateway Initiative through Harper’s Ferry, the FHWA or the FRA shall invite the 

National Park Service, National Capital Region, to participate as a consulting party in that 

undertaking; and 

NOW, THEREFORE, the FHWA, the DOTs, and the SHPOs agree that the undertaking 

shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account 

the effect of the undertaking on historic properties. 

STIPULATIONS

The DOTs agree to the following stipulations, and the FHWA shall ensure that these measures 

are carried out: 

I. MITIGATION 

A. Ohio 

1. Prior to the start of construction that could adversely affect the Kent Industrial Historic 

District, CSX shall provide FHWA documentation of the proposed action’s effect on the 

Kent Industrial Historic District, including measures to minimize harm. The FHWA shall 

ensure CSX submits the documentation to the Ohio SHPO for review and comment. The 

Ohio SHPO shall have thirty (30) calendar days upon receipt of the documentation of affect 

to comment. If the Ohio SHPO does not comment within the 30 days, the FHWA shall 

assume concurrence and proceed. 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 5

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

2. Immediately upon execution of the MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT and prior to 

demolition of the historic bridges within the area of potential effects of the ODOD portions 

of the National Gateway Clearance Initiative, known as the ASD-TR 391 Bridge, BG 175.70; 

ASD-TR 150 Bridge, BG 175.30; MED-River Corners Road Bridge, BG 169.70; and MEDPawnee Road Bridge, BG 168.70, CSX shall retain a qualified historic preservation 

consultant who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards (36 

CFR Part 61) in history, architecture, architectural history, or historic architecture to 

document the historic bridges. 

3. Prior to demolition of the historic bridges, CSX shall ensure the Preservation Professional 

prepares narrative reports documenting the significance of each historic bridge. The reports 

will be equivalent in content to that required by the Historic American Engineering Record 

(HAER) Documentation Level II. The Preservation Professional shall produce a series of 

photographs that documents each historic bridge. Photographs from the following vantage 

points are expected: both approaches, both sides, and view of the bridge from the level of 

the rail corridor. Following the guidelines in the National Register of Historic Places and 

National Historic Landmarks Survey Photo Policy Expansion, March 2005, or later updates 

of this document, the Preservation Professional shall take digital photographs and produce 4-

inch by 6-inch prints and a CD of the photographs. The prints shall be labeled and packaged 

according the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Architectural and 

Engineering Documentation: HABS/HAER Standards (National Park Service 1990). A list 

of photo captions (Photo Index) and a site plan showing the location and direction of the 

photographs (Photo Key) shall be included. A maximum of ten (10) new photographs shall 

be produced. The Preservation Professional shall consult with the CSX to find original plans 

and historic photographs. If available, the Preservation Professional shall digitally reproduce 

the plans and photographs by creating high-quality scans in tagged image file format (*.tiff) 

at a resolution of at least 300 dots per inch (dpi). The *.tiff files shall be burned to an 

archival gold CD-R or DVD-R to be included in the documentation package and made into 

prints that shall be processed, labeled, and packaged according to the Secretary of the 

Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Architectural and Engineering Documentation: 

HABS/HAER Standards (National Park Service 1990). Captions for reproduced historic 

photographs shall be included in the Photo Index and entries showing the location and 

direction of these photographs should be included in the Photo Key. 

4. Prior to the demolition of the historic bridges, CSX shall ensure the Preservation Professional 

submits drafts of the documentation to the Ohio SHPO for review and comment. The phrase 

“Submitted to the Ohio Historic Preservation Office” must appear on the title page of each 

documentation package. This allows the State Library of Ohio, the designated regional 

archive, to process for entry into the collections. A byline for the report’s author(s) on the 

title page is acceptable. CSX shall distribute the approved documentation as detailed below: 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 6

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

i. One (1) unbound original and two (2) bound, high-quality, photocopies with printed 

photographs, and one (1) CD of the complete report and photographs will be provided 

to the State Library of Ohio at the following address: Ms. Audrey L. Hall, 

Government Information Services, The State Library of Ohio, 274 E. First Ave., 

Columbus, OH 43201. 

ii. Ten (10) bound, high-quality, photocopies of the unbound original and eleven (11) 

CDs of the complete report and photographs will be made available to the agency 

officials, the consulting parties, and others as identified. 

5. Prior to demolition of the historic bridges, CSX shall advertise (for a 60-day period) the 

availability of the bridges for reuse by outside parties in an effort to preserve the historic 

significance of the resources. The outside parties shall be responsible for removal of the 

bridges from the CSX right-of-way and relocating them to a new location. If multiple parties 

express interest in any of the bridges, CSX shall consult with the Ohio SHPO in the selection 

of new owner(s) for the bridges. CSX shall remove and retain the bridges along the 

construction site for 30 days after the advertisement period. If outside parties do not respond 

or do not remove the bridges from the construction site within 30 days, CSX shall properly 

dispose of the bridges. 

6. Prior to removal and relocation of the historic bridges, CSX shall produce a plaque for each 

historic bridge to be reused. The Preservation Professional shall submit a draft of the plaque 

text and rendering to the Ohio SHPO for review and comment for each bridge to be reused. 

CSX shall request the Preservation Professional revise the plaque text and rendering pursuant 

to the Ohio SHPO comments. Upon receipt of the revised plaque text and rendering from the 

Preservation Professional, CSX shall forward the revised documentation to the Ohio SHPO 

for a 30-day review and comment period. This process will be repeated until a final approval 

is received from the Ohio SHPO. Upon the Ohio SHPO approval of the final plaque text(s) 

and rendering(s), CSX shall ensure the plaque is displayed on or near the relocated bridge. 

B. Pennsylvania 

1. Prior to the start of construction that could adversely affect them, the Brook, Benford, Shoo 

Fly, Pinkerton, Sand Patch, and Falls Cut tunnels, contributing features to the Baltimore & 

Ohio Railroad, Pittsburgh Division, will be documented by CSX to State-level standards 

established by the Pennsylvania SHPO. The documentation of each tunnel will include 

photographic recordation, a brief description, and a historical narrative. The photographic 

documentation will include archival quality, 35 millimeter (mm) black-and-white 

photographs printed in a 5-inch by 7-inch format, with each print labeled in pencil with the 

name and location of the resource, date of photograph, and view shown. The photographic 

documentation will also include digital photographs prepared to National Register standards. 

The photographs will be keyed to site plan/maps. The historical narrative of each tunnel will 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 7

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

include a discussion of the significance of the tunnel as part of the Baltimore & Ohio, 

Pittsburgh Division. The documentation package will also include archival copies of 

previous documentation and historic photographs. A copy of the approved documentation 

will be made available to the Pennsylvania SHPO and the consulting parties in digital and 

hard copy formats. 

 The Pennsylvania SHPO and consulting parties shall have thirty (30) calendar days upon 

receipt of the documentation packages in which to comment. If the Pennsylvania SHPO and 

the consulting parties do not comment within the 30 days, the FHWA shall assume 

concurrence and proceed. 

2. CSX shall explore, to the extent feasible using customary engineering practices and 

standards, opportunities to notch the Brook, Sand Patch, and Falls Cut tunnels so that the 

Date Plaques and identification markers may be preserved in place. 

3. If notching described in I.A.2 above is not feasible, the date plaques or identification markers 

of the adversely affected tunnels, as outlined in Attachment 2, will be salvaged and offered 

for reuse to appropriate organizations by CSX. Every effort will be made to remove the 

materials in a manner that is sensitive to the historic fabric. The organizations listed in 

Attachment 2 shall be contacted to determine their interest in receipt of the materials. In the 

case that more than one entity responds that they would accept receipt of the materials, the 

hierarchy of distribution will follow the order outlined in Attachment 2. Should any of the 

organizations accept the salvageable materials, the FHWA shall ensure the recipient shall 

accept full responsibility for the removed materials. If a recipient for the salvaged materials 

cannot be identified within nine months of the start of the solicitations of interest, then the 

FHWA shall notify CSX that they (CSX) shall assume ownership of the materials. 

4. CSX shall develop materials for a website on the history of the National Gateway initiative 

corridor through Pennsylvania for the information of the general public. The website will 

include a brief history and discussion of the technology of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, 

Pittsburgh Division, and the Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Railroad, those historic lines that make 

up the National Gateway initiative corridor. The history will highlight the impacts of the rail 

lines on local communities, industries, and regional and State transportation routes. The 

website will include a summary of the National Gateway initiative corridor improvements. 

The website will be illustrated using historic and current photographs and short video clips. 

The website will be developed in coordination with, hosted by, and maintained by the 

Pennsylvania SHPO. An article to be published in a popular historical publication will 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 8

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

 present the history of the National Gateway initiative corridor and publicize the release of the 

website. 

 The Pennsylvania SHPO shall have thirty (30) calendar days upon receipt of the first and 

second drafts of the website materials and article in which to comment. If the Pennsylvania 

SHPO does not comment within the 30 days, the FHWA shall assume concurrence and 

proceed. 

C. West Virginia 

1. Carothers, Stuart, and Randolph tunnels, contributing features of the Magnolia Cutoff of the 

Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, will be documented by CSX prior to the start of the proposed 

action. The documentation will include digital photographic recordation to National Park 

Service standards. The photographic documentation will be accompanied by updated 

Historic Preservation Inventory (HPI) forms. A digital copy of the approved documentation 

will be made available to the West Virginia SHPO, the West Virginia State Archives, West 

Virginia University, Morgantown, and the Historic Landmarks Commission of Morgan 

County. 

 The West Virginia SHPO shall have thirty (30) calendar days upon receipt of the 

documentation packages in which to comment. If the West Virginia SHPO does not comment 

on the documentation within the 30 days, the FHWA shall assume concurrence and proceed. 

2. A brief (approximately 10-page) history of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad’s Magnolia 

Cutoff will be prepared by CSX. The history will be used to provide information on the 

historic and engineering significance of the line and the Magnolia Cutoff to the general 

public. CSX shall develop materials for a website on the history of the Magnolia Cutoff for 

the information of the general public, which will include copies of historic photographs of 

the cutoff under construction and original tunnel plans. CSX will research the archives of the 

B&O Railroad Museum, West Virginia University West Virginia and Regional History 

Collection, and CSX holdings in an attempt to locate and copy any original photos, 

construction plans or “as-built” plans for the Magnolia Cutoff. The history will be developed 

in coordination with the West Virginia SHPO and will reuse information presented in the 

HPI form previously prepared for the Magnolia Cutoff. CSX shall provide the West Virginia 

SHPO with one initial and one final draft of the text, graphics, and layout of the history for 

comment. The brief history will be posted on a public website determined in coordination 

with the West Virginia SHPO. CSX will provide a hard copy of the history to the West 

Virginia SHPO, the West Virginia State Archives, West Virginia University, Morgantown, 

and the Historic Landmarks Commission of Morgan County. 

 The West Virginia SHPO shall have thirty (30) calendar days upon receipt of the history in 

which to comment. If the West Virginia SHPO does not comment within the 30 days, the 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 9

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

FHWA shall assume concurrence and proceed. 

3. CSX shall explore, to the extent feasible using customary engineering practices and 

standards, opportunities to notch the Carothers, Stuart and Randolph tunnels so that the date and 

identification markers may be preserved in place. 

D. Maryland 

1. CSX shall document the Graham Tunnel prior to any demolition activities and provide the 

documentation to the Maryland SHPO. The documentation shall include black-and-white 

photographs sufficient to portray the tunnel’s interior arch liner, exterior portals, its 

architectural details, and its surrounding context to provide an accurate record of the tunnel 

and its setting. The recordation shall follow the Maryland Historical Trust’s (MHT) 

Standards and Guidelines for Architectural and Historical Investigations in Maryland (MHT 

2000). The FHWA shall assure that CSX shall submit the documentation to the Maryland 

SHPO for review and comment. 

 The FHWA shall assure that CSX make a good faith effort to locate and copy original 

construction plans or “as-built” plans for the Graham Tunnel. Multiple repositories, 

including the CSX archives, shall be examined. If located, CSX shall produce 81⁄2-inch by 

11-inch black-and-white copies or photographs of the plans and submit the documentation to 

the Maryland SHPO for review and comment. If historic plans for the Graham Tunnel are 

not located, CSX shall inform the Maryland SHPO in writing of the methodology used to 

conduct the research and a list of repositories consulted. The Maryland SHPO shall 

determine if a good-faith effort was made and if any additional research is warranted. 

 The Maryland SHPO shall have a thirty (30) day review period to respond with comments. 

If the Maryland SHPO does not respond within a 30 day review period, then it can be 

assumed that the recordation package has been accepted by the Maryland SHPO. 

2. CSX shall explore, to the extent feasible using customary engineering practices and 

standards, opportunities to notch the Graham Tunnel so that the date and identification 

markers may be preserved in place. 

3. Per Coordination with the Maryland Historical Trust Act of 1985: The Maryland SHPO 

agrees that the fulfillment of the terms of this MOA will satisfy the responsibilities of the 

Maryland DOT and any other Maryland State agency under the requirements of Maryland 

State historic preservation law (§§ 5A-325 and 5A-326 of the State Finance and Procurement 

Article, Annotated Code of Maryland) for the components of the proposed action that require 

licensing, permitting, and/or funding actions from Maryland State agencies. 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 10

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

II. POST REVIEW DISCOVERIES 

A. The FHWA shall implement the following plan for discovery of historic properties should 

the proposed undertaking encounter a previously unknown historic property, or should the 

undertaking directly or indirectly affect a known property in an unanticipated manner. 

Initially, all work within 50 feet of the find that might adversely affect the historic property 

shall cease until the respective FHWA office, in consultation with the respective SHPO, can 

evaluate the historic property’s National Register eligibility and the probable effects to it. 

The respective FHWA office shall also consult with the respective SHPO and other 

consulting parties to evaluate the discovery and to determine whether avoidance, data 

recovery, or other mitigation measures should be undertaken. The respective FHWA office 

shall complete this consultation and evaluation no later than within seven days of the 

discovery. 

B. The respective FHWA office shall ensure that the design and initiation of data recovery or 

other mitigation measures shall be implemented as expeditiously as possible and with the 

respective SHPO’s approval. Mitigation measures shall be arrived at through consultation 

and agreed upon by all parties to the consultation. If data recovery is the selected treatment 

option, the respective FHWA office shall ensure that the plan is developed in consultation 

with the SHPO and other consulting parties and is consistent with the ACHP’s 

Recommended Approach for Consultation on Recovery of Significant Information from 

Archaeological Sites (April 2002). In the event a dispute arises with regard to appropriate 

mitigation measures, the respective FHWA office shall consult with the ACHP in accordance 

with Stipulation VII outlined herein to resolve the issue. 

III. DISCOVERY OF HUMAN REMAINS 

A. If human remains are discovered, the appropriate FHWA office shall ensure that further 

construction does not occur within 50 feet in any direction of the discovery until a qualified 

archaeologist arrives to assess the discovery. The FHWA office shall secure the area of the 

apparent human remains to ensure no further disturbance or removal of those remains and 

associated materials occurs. After arrival at the site, the archaeologist shall evaluate the 

discovery. If it does consist of human remains, the archaeologist shall follow the procedures as 

follows: 

• If human remains and cultural items, as defined by the Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), are encountered on Federal lands during 

construction activities, work within 50 feet of the discovery will cease. The 

appropriate State DOT shall immediately notify the respective FHWA office and 

respective SHPO of the discovery. The appropriate Federal land-managing agency 

shall then implement internal procedures for complying with NAGPRA. 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 11

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

• On non-Federal lands, or in the event that human remains not subject to NAGPRA 

are discovered on Federal lands, a permit for the archaeological removal of human 

remains may be required under applicable respective State law, together with 

assurances that any such remains will be treated with dignity and respect. 

• Notification of the finding of human remains will be provided to the Tribes so 

identified on Attachment 1. 

IV. UNDERTAKING MODIFICATIONS 

A. It may be possible that during construction, certain minor modifications to the undertaking 

may become necessary. Examples of these modifications include rerouting to avoid other 

environmental impacts, temporary construction, the establishment of construction camps or 

staging areas, minor changes in access route or rights-of-way, borrow areas, and other 

construction contractor-dependent actions. Should the undertaking be modified in a manner 

that alters its potential to affect below-ground resources, the respective FHWA office shall 

ensure that any area scheduled for surface disturbance will be inventoried for cultural 

resources prior to any disturbance of the area in a manner conforming to this agreement, as 

well as State and Federal regulations, pursuant to 36 CFR part 800.4. A separate cultural 

resource inventory may be necessary to cover additional surveys and will follow appropriate 

State regulations and guidelines. The documentation will be provided to the SHPOs and any 

interested Federally-recognized Tribes, as appropriate, for a 30-day review and comment. 

B. Should historic properties be identified during an additional inventory, the respective FHWA 

office shall follow the provisions of this agreement and applicable State and Federal regulations 

for assessment of effect, pursuant to 36 CFR parts 800.5. 

V. INITIATION OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 

A. The individual site surveys and documentation shall be completed and accepted by the 

respective SHPOs prior to the start of any construction work at the individual locations. 

Completion of all additional mitigation will be completed within 12 months of the signing of 

this MOA. Completion of this additional mitigation will not preclude initiating construction 

activities. The respective SHPOs shall have 30 days upon receipt of the complete 

documentation package in which to comment on the material. If the West Virginia SHPO, 

Pennsylvania SHPO, Ohio SHPO, or Maryland SHPO do not respond within the 30 days, the 

FHWA shall assume concurrence and proceed. 

B. These construction activities will be subject to the requirements in Stipulation II regarding 

post-review discoveries and Stipulation III regarding human remains. 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 12

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

VI. AMENDMENTS TO THIS AGREEMENT 

Any signatory to this MOA may propose to the FHWA that it be amended, whereupon the FHWA 

shall consult with the other parties to this MOA to consider such an amendment. 36 CFR part 

800.6(c) (7) shall govern the execution of any such amendment. 

VII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 

A. Should any signatory to this MOA object within 30 calendar days to any actions proposed 

pursuant to this MOA, the FHWA shall inform all signatories of the nature of the dispute and 

consult with the objecting signatory to resolve the objection. If the FHWA determines that 

such objection cannot be resolved, the FHWA shall forward all documentation relevant to the 

dispute to the ACHP. Within 30 calendar days after receipt of all pertinent documentation, 

the ACHP shall: 

1. Advise the FHWA that the ACHP concurs in the FHWA’s proposed response to the 

objection, whereupon FHWA shall respond to the objection accordingly; 

2. Provide the FHWA with recommendations, which the FHWA shall take into account in 

reaching a final decision regarding its response to the objection; or 

3. Notify the FHWA that the objection will be referred to comment pursuant to 36 CFR part 

800.7 and proceed to refer the objection and comment. The resulting comment shall be 

taken into account by the FHWA in accordance with 36 CFR part 800.13. 

B. Should the ACHP not exercise one of the above options within 30 calendar days after receipt of 

all pertinent documentation, the FHWA may assume the ACHP’s concurrence in its proposed 

response to the objection. 

C. Responsibilities to carry out all other actions subject to the terms of this MOA that are not 

the subject of the dispute remain unchanged. 

VIII. TERMINATION 

A. Only the signatories may terminate this MOA. If any signatory proposes termination of the 

MOA, that party shall immediately consult with the other parties to attempt to develop an 

amendment per Stipulation VI, above. 

B. If within 30 calendar days (or another time period agreed to by all signatories) an amendment 

cannot be reached, any signatory may terminate the MOA upon written notification to the 

other signatories. Termination shall render this document null and void. 

C. When the MOA is terminated, and prior to work continuing on the undertaking, the FHWA 
National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 13

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

must either (a) execute an MOA pursuant to 36 CFR part 800.6 or (b) request, take into 

account, and respond to the comments of the ACHP under 36 CFR part 800.7. The FHWA 

shall notify the signatories as to the course of action it will pursue. 

IX. DURATION 

This MOA will be null and void if its terms are not carried out within 5 years from the date of its 

execution. Prior to such time, the FHWA may consult with the other signatories to reconsider the 

terms of the MOA and amend it in accordance with Stipulation VI above. Upon a determination 

by the FHWA that construction of all aspects of the undertaking have been completed and that 

all terms of this MOA have been fulfilled in a satisfactory manner, the FHWA shall notify the 

other signatories of this determination in writing, whereupon this MOA shall no longer be in 

effect. 

Execution of this MOA by the FHWA, the SHPOs, and the DOTs and implementation of its 

terms evidence that the FHWA has taken into account the effects of this undertaking on historic 

properties and afforded the ACHP an opportunity to comment.






 

National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 20

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

ATTACHMENT 1 

National Gateway Tribal Coordination List 

Tribal Organization Response 

Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma None received 

Cayuga Nation None received 

Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma None received 

Citizen Potawatomi Nation None received 

Community of Wisconsin Potawatomi Indians None received 

Delaware Nation Additional Information requested & providedDeclined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Delaware Tribe 

Delaware Tribe of Indians 

Additional Information requested & providedDeclined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of North Carolina Declined to participate – project beyond their 

area of traditional occupation 

Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma Additional Information requested & providedDeclined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, Lake Superior 

Chippewas 

None received 

Miami Tribe of Oklahoma Additional Information requested & providedDeclined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Oneida Indian Nation Additional Information requested & providedDeclined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Oneida Nation of Wisconsin None received 

Onondaga Nation Declined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered. Requested archaeological 

reports 
 

National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 21

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma Declined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma Declined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Prairie Band of Potawatomi Indians Declined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Seneca Nation of Indians None received 

Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma None received 

Shawnee Tribe 

Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma 

Declined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

St. Regis Mohawk Tribe None received 

Stockbridge-Munsee Band of the Mohican Nation of 

Wisconsin 

Declined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Tonawanda Seneca Nation Declined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Tuscarora Nation Declined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians None received 

United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians of Oklahoma None received 

Wyandotte Nation Declined to participate but wish to be notified 

if human remains are inadvertently 

discovered 

Youghiogheny River Band of Indians, Inc None received 
 

National Gateway Clearance Initiative Page 22

Ashland, Medina. Summit, Portage, and Mahoning Counties, Ohio 

Bedford, Somerset, and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 

Hampshire and Morgan County, West Virginia, and 

Allegany County, Maryland 

ATTACHMENT 2 

List of potential salvageable materials at tunnel locations in Pennsylvania: 

• Brook Tunnel – Stone block with name engraved and keystone with date engraved; 

both portals 

• Pinkerton Tunnel – Stone block with name engraved and keystone with date 

engraved; both portals 

List of organizations to be notified of salvaged material availability in Pennsylvania: 

1. Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania in Strasburg 

2. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Museum in Baltimore 

3. Baltimore & Ohio Historical Society in Baltimore 

4. Historical and Genealogical Society of Somerset County 

5. Allegheny Historic Preservation Society 

6. Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation 
Appendix B

Agency Correspondence Letters
1

Register, Martha

From: Register, Martha

Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 3:58 PM

To: Register, Martha

Subject: FW: National Gateway Clearance Initiative Phase I

Attachments: Figure 2 National Gateway Obstructions Phase1.pdf; RE: Public Notices

From: DanW.Johnson@dot.gov [mailto:DanW.Johnson@dot.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 10:15 AM

To: wfm1306@gmail.com

Subject: RE: National Gateway Clearance Initiative Phase I

Mr. McLaughlin,

Thanks for your interest in the National Gateway Clearance Initiative Phase I. I’ve requested that a CD 

containing the Environmental Assessment of the project be forwarded to the Borough of Chambersburg, at 100 S. 2nd 

Street, Chambersburg, PA 17201.

While the Chambersburg Intermodal yard is a terminus of this study, the closest physical construction of the 

Phase I of the project, which is to remove vertical clearance obstructions to the passage of double stack trains along CSX 

track and certain other related actions between Chambersburg, PA and the Northwest Ohio Intermodal yard in North 

Baltimore Ohio, is modification of tunnels west of Cumberland, MD. I’m attaching a figure from the document that 

illustrates the locations where construction will occur as a result of the proposed project.

A copy of the Environmental Assessment is also available online at 

http://www.nationalgateway.org/content/resources/EA_document_downloads.cfm

Thanks again for your interest.

Daniel W. Johnson

Environmental Program Specialist

FHWA Resource Center at Baltimore

10 S. Howard Street, Suite 4000

Baltimore, MD 21201

(tel) 410-962-0702

(fax) 410-962-3419

(cell) 443-829-9079

danw.johnson@fhwa.dot.gov

From: William McLaughlin [mailto:wfm1306@gmail.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:59 AM

To: Johnson, DanW (FHWA)

Subject: National Gateway Phase I

Daniel W. Johnson

FHWA Resource Center at Baltomore

10 S. Howard Street, Suite 4000

Baltimore, MD 21201

Dear Mr. Johnson:

As the President of Town Council in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, I was somewhat dismayed to read your 

Public Notice concerning the National Gateway Clearence Project.

It seems counter-intuitive to me that the Environmental Assessments documents for the Clearance Project 

would be located in Pittsburgh and Somerset, Pennsylvania but not in Chambersburg, one of the Gateways of 
2

the system. The most direct and dramatic impact of this project will be felt in the Chambersburg area, but the 

information that details the impact is located 95 miles away in Somerset.

For five generations, going back before the civil War, my family has been working on the railroad. I understand 

the importance and benefits that this project can have on our community, region and state. It is unfortunate that 

the documents that would give the members of our community a clearer picture of the advantages and 

challenges presented by the Gateway Project would be placed in such a remote location, away from the scrutiny 

of the population most affected by the project.

I would like to request that an additional copy of the Environmental Assessment and the Section 4(f) Evaluation 

be forwarded to the Borough of Chambersburg where they would be available for public inspection.

Sincerly,

Willial F. McLaughlin

President

Chambersburg Town Council





From: Podolak, Sunny [spodolak@state.pa.us]

Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 3:59 PM

To: Johnson, DanW (FHWA)

Subject: National Gateway Phase 1 comments

Response on behalf of the Pennsylvania Department of Health 

Good Afternoon Mr. Johnson,

Thank you for your letter requesting review of the Environmental Assessment (EA) and Section 

4(f) Evaluation for the Phase I National Gateway Clearance Initiative. 

The Pennsylvania Department of Health (PADOH) restricts its comments to section 4.1.2.4, 

Public Health and Safety of the EA and addresses the impact of the proposed actions on the human 

environment. Our comments follow:

In recent years, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the United Nations, and other 

international agencies have focused concern on the environmental health impact of green house gases, 

such as carbon dioxide, and their contribution to global warming. The U.S. presently produces about 

19.1% of the global total production of carbon dioxide.

According to Arcadis U.S., Inc., implementation of Phase I National Gateway Clearance Initiative 

will reduce carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere by 1.19 million tons. The PADOH supports 

efforts by industry to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide. 

Thank you for providing us the opportunity to review and comment on the EA and Section 4(f) 

Evaluation for the National Gateway Clearance Initiative.

Please call me with any questions.

Sunny D. Podolak

Acting Special Assistant | Secretary of Health

Executive Assistant | Health Planning and Assessment

7th & Forster Streets | Harrisburg, PA 17120

Phone: 717.783.8804 | Fax: 717.525.5515

www.health.state.pa.us

Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Settings\mregister\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Cont... 11/10/2010


1

Register, Martha

Subject: FW: National GatewayClearance Initiative Phase I

From: Johnson, DanW (FHWA) 

Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 12:16 PM

To: 'jecutler@state.pa.us'

Cc: 'Madden, Eric'

Subject: National GatewayClearance Initiative Phase I

Jean and Susan, (resent to Jean Cutler)

Thanks for your letter of November 1, 2010. Unfortunately the post office misrouted it to another office, so I only 

received it yesterday afternoon, after our phone conversation. I appreciate your clarification of your concerns. I do 

want to respond to respond to several points about our net benefit argument which I believe were misconstrued.

We agree that the proposed project will not adversely affect the P&LE Railroad portion of the track and will 

adversely affect the B&O Railroad Pittsburgh Division. With regard to the Pittsburgh Division, the Benford, Shoofly 

and likely the Pinkerton tunnels will be open-cut by the undertaking, and the Brook, Sand Patch and Falls Cut Tunnels 

will be altered in order to accommodate double stacking. These alterations are adverse to the six tunnels which are 

contributing elements to the historic railroad, however, the grade and alignment of the track at these locations 

remains, still symbolizing engineering accomplishments and refinements to conquer geological obstacles to 

transportation. History reveals the Benford Tunnel was part of the Fort Hill Low Grade realignment of the original line 

,built in 1903. Similarly, the 1897 Falls Cut Tunnel (as well as the B&O Railroad Magnolia Cutoff in West Virginia and 

Maryland, with its 4 tunnels and multiple bridges) reflects major reconstructions to realign the original track. The 

Shoofly, Pinkerton and Sand Cut tunnels were each reconstructed or modified several times in their history. Our 

argument has been that from the historical perspective, the current proposal maintains 100% of the alignment of the 

original historic railroad and maintains 100% of the contributing Railroad bridges in PA. Grade modifications are very 

minimal, and only necessary to avoid adverse effects to other contributing elements. Transportation facilities are 

linear, operating resources, and are best interpreted from this perspective. The B&O Railroad Pittsburgh Division is 

largely in very rural areas of the state and rarely seen as there are few roads that parallel its alignment. The history of 

the railroad as posted on your website as a mitigation and enhancement of this project will greatly increase the 

visibility and appreciation of this resource. It is upon this basis I contend the project will be a net benefit to the 

resource. The loss of some tunnels and modification of several others will be adverse, but does not diminish the 

eligibility of the resource as a whole.

I agree that abandonment of the railroad would not be a direct effect of a no-build alternative. However, the 

history of railroads in PA and in the country amply demonstrates that the business is highly competitive. The network 

that is CSX today was spawned from numerous companies that did not survive. Your point that CSX as a private 

entity is under no obligation to provide stewardship over the contributing elements that it owns is well taken. I will only 

observe that competitive thriving concerns can better afford to be good stewards than firms that can’t compete.

You note that the secondary benefits of removing trucks from the highways of PA cannot be verified or quantified. 

Our document certainly quantified that more long haul trucks will be on the roads than with the build. The bulk of 

trucks will stay on the main roads like the PA Turnpike. Relatively few will seek the back roads to avoid the tolls.

However, the point I attempted to explain to Susan by phone about diversion into the small historic towns of 

Pennsylvania was only in reference to those rare unfortunate occasions when accidents occur on the turnpike, 

causing local detours by through truckers who don’t know local routes well. Such incidents are infrequent, however 

the potential effect would be exacerbated if more through trucks are on the roads.

Finally you comment in your penultimate paragraph that it is difficult to see how this project will have long term 

benefit for jobs in your state, other than in Franklin County. The EA did note on page 59 that a new intermodal facility 

is planned in the future in the Pittsburgh region as a complement to the Gateway Clearance project. This facility is 

not part of the current undertaking, but will be subject to all applicable permit requirements.
2

Your prompt reconsideration would be appreciated. Thanks for your time and attention.

Daniel W. Johnson

Environmental Program Specialist

FHWA Resource Center at Baltimore

10 S. Howard Street, Suite 4000

Baltimore, MD 21201

(tel) 410-962-0702

(fax) 410-962-3419

(cell) 443-829-9079

danw.johnson@fhwa.dot.gov