APPENDIX B6

RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AND

GROUPS COMMENTS
B-430 

RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AND 

GROUPS COMMENTS

This Appendix Section B6 provides detailed responses to Other Organization and Group letters, 

presented in the below order: 

 Randolph Macon College ..................................................................................................... B-431 

 Sierra Club ............................................................................................................................. B-437 

 Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) ................................................................... B-440 

 Preservation Virginia ............................................................................................................ B-446 

 Hampton Roads Chamber ................................................................................................... B-450

 Virginia Chamber of Commerce ......................................................................................... B-452 

 Virginia Maritime Association ............................................................................................ B-453 

 Virginians for High Speed Rail (VHSR) ............................................................................. B-454 

Appendix B6 
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

RANDOLPH MACON COLLEGE 1. FRA and DRPT have evaluated the 

the mechanism of an Environmental satisfy the requirements of the NatioAct (NEPA), and provide the pu

understand and comment on the beProject. As part of the NEPA process Chapter 2 of the Draft EIS and thReport (Appendix A of the Draft rigorous analysis of Project alternaimpacts on the natural and/or builimpacts to Randolph Macon CAlternative through the Ashland/H5A, minimizes adverse impacts on thenvironments; refer to DRPT-numdetails. 
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-432 

RANDOLPH MACON COLLEGE (contin2. FRA recognizes the importance of Ra

the Town of Ashland, the CommonwCollege’s many students, employhistory, current status, and expansiodescribed and considered in the Draf3.11 Community Resources and Secand Aboveground Cultural and Commonwealth’s recommendation requests that the DC2RVA Project bthat avoids and/or minimizes permathe College, as indicated in Transportation Board’s (CTB) ResoDecember 6, 2017 (which is Appendix to DRPT-numbered statements #3 an
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

RANDOLPH MACON COLLEGE (contin(Response to comment 2 on previous page) 3. The Randolph Macon College Mast

Ashland Comprehensive Plan were bthe Project’s planning process. The Area 5, Alternative 5A, would not afcampus and, pursuant to the CTB r2017 (Appendix H of the Final EISproperty acquisition from the Colleg

4. DRPT acknowledges the College’s pr

all impacts to the College. In accord2017 recommendation of the TowCounty Community Advisory Commof the Final EIS) and with the DecembCommonwealth Transportation BoFinal EIS), Build Alternative 5A was Alternative, as detailed in Section 4.3

The Preferred Alternative main

infrastructure through the Town of Macon College campus. Moreover, would not include any roadway within downtown Ashland. Any pthe Ashland Station would be negotiAshland and Amtrak, separate from changes under the DC2RVA Project. no roadway improvements (includexisting at-grade crossing treatments(Archie Cannon Drive) and Ashcake Project, including College Avencrossing, which would remain open wunder the DC2RVA Project. 
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-434 

RANDOLPH MACON COLLEGE (contin(Response to comment 4 on previous page) 5. The DC2RVA Project will increase 

frequencies through the Town of Aintercity passenger round-trip trains Existing intercity passenger servicontinue to operate at the current letrains (20 total trains per day) (i.e., tha result, under the Project (i.e., thintercity passenger train operationsthrough Ashland are expected to intrip trains (38 total), which DRPT exoperate at the restricted speed of 35 has also developed a forecast of CSXT estimates operations to nearly doublreaching approximately 40 to 55 daregardless of implementation of the same for both 2045 No Build and conditions are clarified in Section 4.2 

 DRPT acknowledges the Town’s safe

frequent daily pedestrian and vehcorridor in Ashland, and that any occur in locations other than at desigand in contradiction to State law (it code §18.2-159) and CSXT policonstruction of two new grade separVaughan Road (Archie Cannon DAshcake Road south of town in Alteralternate means for vehicular pascorridor, allowing for a potential reutilizing the at-grade crossings Commonwealth of Virginia recognizneed to improve railroad and rAshland, independent of the DCcommitted to working with the FRandolph Macon College, CSXT, animproving crossing safety in the Tofrom the DC2RVA Project, as indicatfor the Project on December 6, 2017. 

(Responses are continued on next page)
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

RANDOLPH MACON COLLEGE (contin6. DRPT recognizes Randolph Macon’

bypass alternative AWB 1 (a varipresented in the Draft EIS), aAshland/Hanover CAC as the lewestern bypass alternatives. Howevparticular bypass option during thphase due to its impacts to propenatural resources. Alternative 5Athrough Ashland was selected as the Area 5 (refer to Section 4.3.5 of the Fi

 The Preferred Alternative 5A pro

roadway infrastructure required toperations proposed in the DC2RVA Chapter 5 of the Final EIS, Alternativzero historic properties in downadditional infrastructure would be Town of Ashland or outside of the Cthrough Hanover County. The exce

construction of new highway-rail Vaughan Road (Archie Cannon Dcross the corridor to the north and soproperties in the area of potential effintersection. There is one historic pRoad (Archie Cannon Drive) interHistoric District. The FRA has deteDepartment of Historic Resources (DProject will have an adverse effecresource. Stipulations to mitigate tforth in the Section 106 Draft Mem(Appendix K of the Final EIS). 

 Where all other alternatives 

Ashland/Hanover County Area whistoric or protected resources; NEPA the “avoidance” alternative, which Alternative 5A (Maintain Two Track
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-436 

RANDOLPH MACON COLLEGE (contin(Response to comment 6 on previous page) 7. Comments noted; refer to DRPT-n

through #6. 
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

SIERRA CLUB 1. Transportation priorities for the Co

are set by the Commonwealth Transpdescribed in Virginia’s Statewid(Vtrans2040) and the 2017 Virgin

DC2RVA Project is listed as a Commonwealth. 

2. Section 4.2 of the Final EIS provides 

existing and proposed service at MStreet Station currently serves 2 rointercity passenger trains. Under DC2RVA Project, the S-Line will existing and proposed new intercity at Richmond to serve both Staples MStations. As a result, Main Street Staround trips (36 total daily) intercity pan increase of 16 round trips (32 total trains above the current service level those, the DC2RVA Project will:  Add 9 new daily intercity passen

total trains per day) 

 Also reroute 7 existing daily interc

(14 existing total trips per day) 

 Thus, the Preferred Alternative for 

increase access to passenger rail stravelers within the City’s Centraproposed routing of all of the existing trains (excluding the Auto Train) to 

Road Station and Main Street Station passenger rail service to Richmproposed improvements to accomMain Street Station are consistent wiplans for the station and surroundin

(Responses are continued on next page)
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-438 

SIERRA CLUB (continued) 3. The Federal Railroad Administr

Department of Rail and Public recognize the need to improve the achieve the full goals and benefits of Speed Rail (SEHSR) Program and thThe DC2RVA Project proposes track Arlington and Centralia, VA, and t(R2R) Tier II EIS/ROD identimprovements between Centralia, through Petersburg, VA. Section 7.7 obeen added since the Draft EIS, coordination with previous and ongthat are within and/or adjacent to thare critical to Project success. 

4. DRPT acknowledges the Sierra Clu

station approach, which aligns with for Richmond: Alternative 6F: Full SStation and Main Street Station)Alternative, all of the existing and p(excluding the Auto Train) serve Station and Main Street Station. Adda two-station alternative in Richmonof ridership, parking, and automstations. 

5. Specific sediment and erosion co

developed during final design as fufinal design, permitting, and coimplement comprehensive Best Man

for sediment and erosion controls oduring construction and on a long-teProject. 

(Responses are continued on next page)
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

SIERRA CLUB (continued) 6. Comment noted. The decision to est

a separate and distinct action from passenger rail service under the 

Policy Act (NEPA). During Project received public comments in supbicycle/walking path or greenway corridor. FRA and DRPT considgreenway, but determined such a bnot required to meet the Project’s providing a greenway does not supprail service, nor is it a transportation travel. CSXT does not allow recreatiofor safety reasons, and therefore any require additional right-of-way to corridor. This Project does not precluor development of such a greenway project in the future. 
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-440 

SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW C1. Chapter 7 of the Final EIS, which h

Draft EIS, provides descriptions of fincluding funding, prioritization odesign, permitting, and constructiothe corridor and full implementimprovements (and realization of dependent on future state and anticipates the DC2RVA Project incrementally, as funding becomes athe Project is anticipated to come including federal, state, and local furevenue recovery and private sectothe Final EIS, DRPT is developDevelopment Plan that addressimprovements and Project benefits, iservice and improved reliability. Dfollowing priorities for adding track mile DC2RVA corridor: Areas 1, 2, Fredericksburg; Area 6 Richmond (in

Staples Mill Road Station); Area 4 C5 Ashland. This does not precludconstructing highway-rail grade crossing improvements, independProject, should federal, state, local, available. 
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW C(continued) 2. Comment noted. Additional mea

mitigate potential adverse effects w

final design, after incremental imprand funding is secured. 

3. In accordance with the September 20

Town of Ashland/Hanover CountCommittee (CAC) and with the Decethe Commonwealth Transportation 5A was selected as the ComAlternative, which maintains the exthrough the Town of Ashland anCollege campus. Preferred Alternrailroad and roadway infrastructure railroad operations proposed in the other alternatives/improvements irecommended as part of the Preferre

 A station stop would remain in Ash

Alternative. However, platform impStation would be negotiated betweand Amtrak, separate from and wi

under the DC2RVA Project. Similaroadway improvements (includinexisting at-grade crossing treatmentsand Ashcake Road under the DCCollege Avenue/Henry Clay Streeopen with no proposed changes und

 FRA and DRPT anticipate that train 

of Ashland, which are set by CSXT unwould remain restricted for safety (cthe number of at-grade vehicle awithin the Town. The frequency of service to the Ashland Station wou

during development of the Corrid

Plan following the Final EIS and Re

refer to Section 7.3 of the Final EIS fo

(Responses are continued on next page)
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-442 

SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW C(continued) 4. DRPT acknowledges SELC’s prefe

approach, which aligns with the PRichmond: Build Alternative 6F: FRoad Station and Main Street Alternative routes all of the existing trains (excluding the Auto Train) to Road Station and Main Street Statpassenger rail service to Richmond’Staples Mill area. 

5. DRPT confirms that the mis-identif

corrected in the Final EIS. All north-service on the corridor, with the excTrain, would be routed through MaiPreferred Alternative. 

(Responses are continued on next page)
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW C

(continued) 

6. As part of the Preferred Alternative in 

as described in DRPT-numbered statesouth intercity passenger service on the of Amtrak’s Auto Train, would be roStation. The Auto Train would bypass MLine, as it does not stop in Richmond ahistoric Triple Crossing rail structure iStreet Station. Operating some intercity Line (as suggested within the commentstopping at Main Street Station, and woPreferred Alternative. 

 DRPT performed detailed operation

network through the Richmond sectiowhich supported the advancement opassenger service to the S-Line through Appendix I (Operations Modeling) additional information on the operatregard to routing operations in and forecasted growth in freight traffic throBuild Alternative and all considdemonstrated increased demand for frewest of downtown Richmond; howeveincrease capacity on the A-Line due to ithe median of I-195 and across the Jamsurvey and continued operations analy

the S-Line can accommodate the constru

to support the reroute of existing apassenger rail service proposed in thbelieves that the A-Line does offer min the Richmond area’s passenger should unforeseen occurrences inhibvia the S-line. The infrastructure imthe DC2RVA Project do not preclupassenger trains in the event of unfwould prevent the use of the S-Line fdesired by Amtrak under its statuoperations analysis as part of the Finof the corridor as a whole to meet tNeed; refer to Final EIS Section 3.2 a
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-444 

SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW C(continued) (Response to comment 6 on previous page) 7. The FRA and DRPT fully unders

significance of the Shockoe Bottom are

slated for the Memorial Park. DRPT r

recorded and evaluated archaeological in this area, which have been ongoinShockoe Bottom, including the proposdiscussed in Chapters 3, 5, and 6 of the Freports in its Appendix D (cultural rThroughout the studies and agencyhistoric places in this area have been including Lumpkins Jail/Devil’s Half Aamong others. The Preferred Alternaknown boundaries of these sites. Aconsulting parties, Lumpkins Jail site historic properties. The DHR determineno adverse effect on the site as no impaProject. A commitment to create a histBottom area and the slave trade is incluMemorandum of Agreement (Append

 Alternative 6F (Full Service Staples Mil

was selected as the Preferred AlternRichmond. Through review and invesconsultation with consulting parties and knowledge of this area, and in commenand SELC, DRPT has reduced thconstruction at Main Street Station to tnecessary to deliver the service proposincluding: a reduction in the design leneast and west sides of the station to rStreet and to the minimum width feasiblevel of ridership and services providremoval of the proposed parking decstation alternative in Richmond alloridership, parking, and automobile trafTherefore, the Preferred Alternative mrequired and potential impacts associat

and nearby historic properties. 

(Responses are continued on next page)
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW C(continued) 8. FRA and DRPT are committed to con

to improve intercity passenger rail corridor, and have a long and successwith CSXT to improve passenger, coservice in the Commonwealth. FRA that CSXT owns and operates the Dhas a responsibility to its sharehoprovide efficient freight rail servicemovements through the CSXT Richm

at Acca Yard are an existing issue, currently underway to allow throuonto the A-Line while reducing 

operations. The Preferred AlternativAlternative 6F, also includes provisiobypass Acca Yard to the east while Mill Road Station and Main Street Sfuture conflicts. 
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-446 

PRESERVATION VIRGINIA

1. The FRA and DRPT fully unders

significance of the Shockoe Bottom aarea slated for the Memorial Parkstudies that recorded and evaluaarchitectural properties in this area, since 2006. Resources in Shockoe proposed Memorial Park area are dand 6 of the Final EIS and within sevD (cultural resource technical reportsand agency and public consultation, in this area have been taken into conplanning. This includes Lumpkins Jathe Burial Ground, among others. designed, does not impact the knosites. At the request of several Lumpkins Jail site was added to the The DHR concurred that the Project won the site as no impacts will occuHowever, a commitment to create Shockoe Bottom area and the slave Section 106 Draft Memorandum of Athe Final EIS). Alternative 6F (FRoad/Main Street Station) was seAlternative in Area 6 through Richminvestigation of historic records, cconsulting parties and individuals wthis area, and in comments receivPreservation Virginia, DRPT has proposed for construction at Maiminimum infrastructure necessary proposed in the DC2RVA Project. Ththe length of the platforms on the estation to remain south of East Bminimum width feasible to supporridership and services provided at thof the proposed parking deck. The palternative in Richmond allows for a parking, and automobile traffic aTherefore, this minimizes the infrpotential impacts associated with M

(Responses are continued on next page)
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

PRESERVATION VIRGINI

A (continue

2. The DC2RVA limits of disturbance h

Phase IA archaeological reconnaissaand a Phase IB survey, which increcorded sites and recording new resground-disturbing activities may committed to conducting full archaarea where disturbance cannot be numbered statement #4 for additionArea of Potential Effects. 

3. The Shockoe Valley and Tobacco Row 

in the NRHP. Refer to Chapters 3, 5, additional data on this resource. As DHR has concurred, that the Project won the district, the resource is also diDraft Memorandum of Agreement EIS) to outline mitigations to resolve a possible archaeological district aindividuals as a future study, should such a district, Chapter 3 presents a includes concepts for future study inc

4. DRPT and FRA focused on minim

required and the limits of proposed order to avoid subsurface impacts DRPT is fully committed to condustudies on any significant site wheavoided per Section 106 of the NatioAct of 1966. DRPT has conversed eregarding archaeological study odisturbance, and the DHR has conclplace is the priority, as archaeoloscience. As such, no excavations havProject limits of disturbance. For anlimits of disturbance where avoidancdetermined that the Project will hathese resources. The Section 106 Agreement (Appendix K of the Finthat will be taken to mitigate the resources. 

(Responses are continued on next page)
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-448 

PRESERVATION VIRGINIA (continue

5. Discussion of direct, indirect, and 

surviving resources at Main Street Stawere addressed in the Draft EIS. Hhave included additional informatioFinal EIS which helps the reader ucontext and the studies performed Bottom area. 
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

PRESERVATION VIRGINI

A (continue

6. FRA and DRPT are committed to a

impacts to historic properties—bground—throughout the DC2RVA s
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-450 

HAMPTON ROADS CHAMBER

1. The DC2RVA Project proposes to 

movement of rail freight traffic in thProject’s stated Purpose is to inbetween Washington, D.C. and Ricdeliver improved passenger rail serthe planned expansion of Virginia commuter rail service and accomgrowth of freight rail service by dereliable multimodal rail corridor. Imoperations in the corridor would adevelopment by increasing freight ports, and present an opportunity freight transport from congested hig

2. The Department of Rail and Publi

recognizes that the Port of Virgineconomic growth for the Commonwyears, containerized cargo volume States is expected to triple, far suexisting United States ports. Much owould be transported by rail, includiDC2RVA corridor. 

(Response to comment 3 on next page) 
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

HAMPTON ROADS CHAMBE

R (contin

3. DRPT conducted preliminary operat

to estimate rail performance in the coto freight rail. The preliminary modeling has focused on verifying thproposed rail capacity improvemDC2RVA Project’s Purpose and Neemeet intercity passenger train and frgoals established in the PassengeImprovement Act (PRIIA). 

 The operations simulation modeling 

freight train frequencies projected thdetermine projected freight train gsimulations, DRPT used CSXT inpuDepartment of Transportation’s Frei(FAF) to forecast how rail freight traincrease and change through the yactual freight growth may be greater growth rates based on market demaFederal Railroad Administration (FFAF provided a reasonable basis for movement. 

Refer to Section 3.2 of the Final EIS 

details of the operations modeling p
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-452 

VIRGINIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 

1. The DC2RVA Project proposes to 

movement of rail freight traffic in thProject’s stated Purpose is to increas123-mile corridor between WashingVA, not only to deliver improved palso to support the planned expanExpress (VRE) commuter rail servicforecasted growth of freight rail sefficient and reliable multimodal raito freight rail operations in the corrideconomic development by increasinVirginia’s ports, and present an diversion of freight transport from co

2. The Department of Rail and Publi

conducted preliminary operations estimate rail performance in the corrfreight rail. The preliminary operatihas focused on verifying that the DCrail capacity improvements would mPurpose and Need, and specificalpassenger train and freight servestablished in the Passenger Improvement Act (PRIIA). 

 The operations simulation modeling 

freight train frequencies projected thdetermine projected freight train gsimulations, DRPT used CSXT inpuDepartment of Transportation’s Frei(FAF) to forecast how rail freight traincrease and change through the yactual freight growth may be greater growth rates based on market demaFederal Railroad Administration (FFAF provided a reasonable basis for movement. 

Refer to Section 3.2 of the Final EIS 

details of the operations modeling p
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

VIRGINIA MARITIME ASSOCIATION 

1. The DC2RVA Project proposes to 

movement of rail freight traffic in thProject’s stated Purpose is to increas123-mile corridor between WashingVA, not only to deliver improved palso to support the planned expanExpress (VRE) commuter rail servicforecasted growth of freight rail sefficient and reliable multimodal raito freight rail operations in the corrideconomic development by increasinVirginia’s ports, and present an diversion of freight transport from co

 The Department of Rail and Publi

conducted preliminary operations estimate rail performance in the corrfreight rail. The preliminary operatihas focused on verifying that the DCrail capacity improvements would mPurpose and Need, and specificalpassenger train and freight servestablished in the Passenger Improvement Act (PRIIA). 

 The operations simulation modeling 

freight train frequencies projected thdetermine projected freight train gsimulations, DRPT used CSXT inpuDepartment of Transportation’s Frei(FAF) to forecast how rail freight traincrease and change through the yactual freight growth may be greater growth rates based on market demaFederal Railroad Administration (FFAF provided a reasonable basis for movement. 

Refer to Section 3.2 of the Final EIS 

details of the operations modeling p
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-454 

VIRGINIANS FOR HIGH SPEED RAIL 

(No comments on this page) 
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

VIRGINIANS FOR HIGH SPEED RAIL 

1. Comment noted. The Draft Environ

(EIS) recommendations for the ArlinFredericksburg, and Central Virgincorridor were selected as the PreferreEIS. 

2. The Town of Ashland/Hanove

Advisory Committee (CAC) considthrough Ashland and identified tobjectionable” below-ground alternaof Ashland did not support the trencto local businesses and the commuand impacts to the character of the placed in operation. 

 Subsequently, in accordance wit

recommendation of the CAC (Appeand with the December 2017 resolutiTransportation Board (CTB) (AppenAlternative 5A (the “3-2-3” optioPreferred Alternative, which maiinfrastructure through the Town of A

3. The Federal Railroad Administrati

discussed in Section 4.3.5 of the FAlternative 5A (the “3-2-3” option) proadway infrastructure required toperations proposed in the DC2RVA Chapter 5 of the Final EIS, Alternativzero historic properties, as no additiobe constructed within the Town of ACSXT railroad right-of-way through the exception of two new highwawhere Vaughan Road (Archie CanRoad cross the corridor. Whereaconsidered in the Ashland/Hanovincur impacts to historic or prorequires the selection of the “avoidanthis case would be Alternative 5A Through Town). 

(Responses are continued on next page)
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-456 

VIRGINIANS FOR HIGH SPEED RAIL 

4 and 5. DRPT Performed detailed op

railroad network through the RiDC2RVA Corridor, which supported alternatives shifting passenger servRichmond. The forecasted growth in 

corridor in the No Build Alternative Alternatives as evaluated in the increased demand for freight capacidowntown Richmond; however, thincrease capacity on the A-Line alignment in the median of I-195 anThrough physical survey and continDRPT determined that the S-Line construction of additional capacity existing and expansion of intercitproposed in the DC2RVA Project. Ch(Operations Modeling) of the Drafinformation on the operations modeto routing in and around RichmondEIS and its Appendix F provides detmodeling that has occurred since thEIS. 

 DRPT agrees with Virginians for 

assertion that the CSXT A-Line redundancy in the Richmond area’s network should unforeseen occurrenof trains via the S-line. The infraincluded in the Preferred Alternativpreclude use of the A-Line by passenunforeseen occurrences that would Line for passenger service, or if desstatutory authority. Under the PreferAuto Train would continue to use th
 RESPONSES TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS / GR

VIRGINIANS FOR HIGH SPEED RAIL 

(Response to comment 5 on previous page) 6. Build-out of the proposed DC2RVA 

implementation of proposed intercdependent on future state and federaChapter 7 of the Final EIS (which hDraft EIS) to present information on fOperating agreements for train slotLine and S-Line, and along the entplanned future intercity passenger trof future negotiations between CSXVirginia, and Amtrak, after the Projefunding is available to support incrconstruction. DRPT recognizes Amtto operate over any route desired, suthe Surface Transportation Board (SDRPT have defined the Preferred AltProject to provide the most feasible deliver, and sustain intercity passoperations for the foreseeable future

7. DRPT agrees that an incorrect summ

6F with regard to service at Main Strin the “Recommended Preferred ADraft EIS Executive Summary (the provided in Chapters 2 and 7 of the The Draft EIS Executive Summary refer to the errata table for the Draft of the Final EIS. Additionally, DRdescriptions of Alternative 6F are co

 The Build Alternative 6F and Build 

Draft EIS Table 2.6-2 were inadvershowing for Build Alternative 6F in and accurate for Build Alternative correction has been made in the Fintable for the Draft EIS, which is App

(Response to comment 8 on next page) 
TIER II FINAL ENVIRONMEN TAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

B-458 

VIRGINIANS FOR HIGH SPEED RAIL 

8. Complete build-out of the corridor a

the DC2RVA improvements (and benefits) is dependent on future fundDC2RVA Project would be implem

funding becomes available. The fuanticipated to come from multiple sstate, and local funds, plus passengand private sector sources. Subsequeis developing a Corridor Service DeSection 7.3 of the Final EIS for detaphasing of improvements and Pradditional train service and improvnot preclude upgrading stations, or cgrade separations or at-grade independently of the DC2RVA Projlocal, or other funding become availa