FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 1 

 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 2 

ATLANTA to CHARLOTTE 

Passenger Rail Corridor Investment Plan 

TIER 1 COMBINED 

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 

STATEMENT AND RECORD OF DECISION 

(TIER 1 FEIS/ROD) 

Prepared by: 

Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) 

Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) 

June 2021 

Grant No. FR-HSR-0109-12-01-00 

PI No. T004193 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
6/30/2021
6/30/2021
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 5 

ABSTRACT

The United States Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Georgia 

Department of Transportation (GDOT), in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation 

(SCDOT) and the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), have prepared a Tier 1 Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Atlanta to Charlotte Passenger Rail Corridor Investment Plan (PRCIP) 

(hereinafter referred to as the Project) in accordance with the following: 

 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and its implementing regulations (40 Code of Federal 

Regulations [CFR] Parts 1500-1508); 

 National Historic Preservation Act (16 USC § 470); 

 Advisory Council on Historic Preservation NHPA-implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800); 

 Clean Air Act, as amended (42 USC § 7401); 

 Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC § 1531-1544); 

 Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 USC § 4601); 

 Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice); 

 Executive Order 11900 (Protection of Wetlands); 

 Executive Order 13988 (Floodplain Management); 

 Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU); 

 49 U.S.C. § 304a and 40 CFR § 1503.49(c); 

 FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts (64 Federal Register 28545).1 

In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009,2 Congress appropriated $8 billion to help create 

a national network of high-speed rail corridors. As authorized under the Passenger Rail Investment and 

Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA), FRA distributed those funds through the High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail 

(HSIPR) program. Congress appropriated an additional $2.5 billion in Fiscal Year 2010 for the HSIPR program and 

on April 1, 2010, FRA issued a Notice of Funding Availability soliciting applications for this funding. The USDOT 

Secretary of Transportation selected the Atlanta to Charlotte PRCIP to receive HSIPR funding based on the 

corridor’s “... utility and... potential for future development”.3 The Project is a comprehensive planning effort to 

identify a corridor for new high-speed intercity passenger rail service connecting Atlanta, Georgia and Charlotte, 

North Carolina. 

Due to the likelihood of federal involvement and cooperating states receiving federal financial assistance to fund 

the implementation and construction of the Project, FRA and GDOT determined that a Tier 1 EIS is the appropriate 

class of action for this Project. A Tier 1 EIS is part of a staged environmental review process applied to complex 

projects covering large geographic areas. The Tier 1 EIS establishes the Purpose and Need for the Project; provides 

a broad assessment of the potential transportation, social, economic, and environmental impacts of “Corridor 

Alternatives” (generalized areas of travel); and presents the outcomes of public and agency coordination that were 

considered during the Tier 1 assessment and decision-making processes. 

In the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), FRA and GDOT identified six Corridor Alternatives, of which 

three were advanced for detailed analysis: 1) the Southern Crescent Corridor Alternative; 2) the I-85 Corridor 

Alternative; and 3) the Greenfield Corridor Alternative. The DEIS also analyzed the No Build Alternative, which is 

the future condition of the Project area if the Project is not built. In accordance with Council on Environmental Quality 

regulations, in the DEIS, GDOT analyzed the three Corridor Alternative against the No Build Alternative.4 This 

document presents a combined Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD) 

1 In November 2018, FRA joined the Federal Highway Administration’s and Federal Transit Administration’s NEPA-implementing 

regulations found at 23 C.F.R. Part 771. Because FRA issued the Notice of Intent for the Project before FRA joined 23 C.F.R. Part 771, the 

EIS for the Project was developed using FRA’s NEPA Procedures. 2 Public Law 111-5, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 3

 FRA’s website, https://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/details/L02692 (accessed on 10/29/15) 4 40 CFR Part 1502(c). 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 6 

(hereinafter referred to as Tier 1 FEIS/ROD) to identify and select one of the three Corridor Alternatives from the 

DEIS as the “Preferred Corridor Alternative” and respond to comments received during the public and agency review 

and comment period on the DEIS. Responses to comments are included in the FEIS and, where FRA and GDOT 

determined that the EIS should be revised based on a comment, references an entry in the errata table where the 

changes are documented in the Tier 1 FEIS/ROD.5 

This Tier 1 FEIS/ROD summarizes the environmental, transportation, and economic impacts of a No Build 

Alternative and the three Corridor Alternatives for a new high-speed intercity passenger rail service on the human, 

built, and natural environments within the Project Study Area. In this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD, FRA has identified and 

selected the Greenfield Corridor Alternative as the Preferred Corridor Alternative based on analysis presented in 

the Tier 1 DEIS, and input received from the public, stakeholders, agencies during the public meetings and the 

comment period.

Following the publication of this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD, the FRA will hold a 30-day waiting period to allow the public, 

stakeholders, Native American Tribes, coordinating agencies and other interested parties the opportunity to review 

and provide input on the Preferred Corridor Alternative and the contents of the Tier 1 FEIS/ROD. This will not be a 

formal review and comment period, and the FRA and GDOT will not respond to individual comments as was required 

for the Tier 1 DEIS. However, these comments will be considered for any subsequent phases of the Project. 

As detailed in the DEIS, due to the size and complexity of the Project, FRA and GDOT will defer the following 

decisions to future Tier 2 analysis: 

 The alignment of the corridor (including the approach into Atlanta, Georgia and validate the route into 

Charlotte, North Carolina); 

 Locations of stations and facilities; 

 Operating equipment; 

 Propulsion technology type; and 

 Detailed operating characteristics. 

Separate Tier 2 NEPA documentation could be pursued for the Atlanta Approach, which could also consider other 

intercity passenger rail corridors and planned commuter rail corridors in the Atlanta area.6 A Tier 2 analysis will also 

validate the assumptions made here regarding the approach into Charlotte to the Charlotte Douglas International 

Airport (CLT) and the terminal Charlotte-Gateway Station. Concerning equipment technology, a Tier 2 analysis may 

explore a phased approach that could initially use diesel technology with the option to electrify the corridor over 

time, as funding allows. Tier 2 EIS work could also explore phasing construction for the preferred alignment. The 

Tier 2 process will continue the public involvement and agency coordination that began during this Tier 1 EIS. The 

Tier 2 process will further document a more detailed environmental analysis, including identifying applicable permits 

and defining specific avoidance and mitigation measures. 

 

5 In the FEIS/ROD, GDOT will acknowledge receipt of all comments, but provide responses to only the comments that raised substantive 

issues. In the attached comment response matrix (included in Appendix B) GDOT responded to all comments. 6

 See Section 2.2.2.2 Phase 2 – Refinement of Corridor Alternatives of the DEIS for detailed descriptions of the Atlanta Approach for each 

of the three Corridor Alternatives. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 7 

CONTENTS 

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 9

1.1 Readers Guide ......................................................................................................9

How to Use This Document ............................................................................................... 9

Consistency between Tier 1 DEIS and the FEIS ................................................................... 9

Key Concepts and Terminology ......................................................................................... 9

Content of this Combined Tier 1 FEIS/ROD ...................................................................... 11

1.2 About the Project ............................................................................................... 12

1.3 Errata sheets and combined FEIS/ROD ................................................................ 13

Use of Errata Sheets ........................................................................................................ 13

Combined Tier 1 FEIS/ROD ............................................................................................ 13

1.4 Tiered NEPA Process ......................................................................................... 14

2. TIER 1 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ............. 17

2.1 Preferred Corridor Alternative ............................................................................. 17

2.2 Overview of Public and Agency Outreach and Coordination Since Release of the Tier 

1 DEIS .............................................................................................................. 18

Distribution of the Tier 1 DEIS ........................................................................................ 18

Public Meetings .............................................................................................................. 19

Comments and Responses on the Tier 1 DEIS ................................................................... 20

2.3 Tier 1 DEIS Errata Table .................................................................................... 21

3. TIER 1 ROD ..................................................................................... 23

3.1 Purpose and Need for the Project ......................................................................... 23

3.2 Alternatives Considered in the Tier 1 DEIS .......................................................... 24

3.3 Description of the Preferred Corridor Alternative .................................................. 24

Preferred Corridor Alternative Attributes .......................................................................... 28

Environmental Benefits, Consequences, and Potential Mitigation for the Preferred Corridor 

Alternative ..................................................................................................................... 29
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 8 

TABLES 

Table 2-1: DEIS Public Meetings ......................................................................................................................... 19

Table 2-2: Tier 1 DEIS Errata Table ..................................................................................................................... 22

Table 3-3: Comparative Summary of the Corridor Build Alternatives .................................................................. 27

FIGURES 

Figure 1: Project Study Area Map ........................................................................................................................ 15

Figure 3-2: Preferred Corridor Alternative – Greenfield Corridor Alternative ...................................................... 26
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 9 

1. Introduction 

1.1 READERS GUIDE 

The following sections explain how to navigate this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD, define important concepts, provide a 

comparison between the Tier 1 DEIS and the FEIS/ROD, provide an overview of the project history, and explain 

the Tiered NEPA process, which is presented in Section 1.4. 

 How to Use This Document 

In this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD, FRA identifies and selects the Greenfield Corridor Alternative as the Preferred Alternative 

(referred to in the DEIS and in this document as the Preferred Corridor Alternative, which is defined below) described 

and evaluated in the Atlanta - Charlotte PRCIP Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (September 2019), 

and includes all technical reports and supporting documentation, incorporated by reference. This Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 

is a “condensed” document which includes clarifications, errata-style edits, and specific comments related to 

information provided in the Tier 1 DEIS and is presented in a table format referencing sections of the Tier 1 DEIS 

where the changes appear. The entire Tier 1 DEIS, including appendices, is presented here as Appendix A and is 

updated to reflect changes noted during the public and agency review and comment period based on the information 

noted in the Tier 1 DEIS Errata Table and Sheets (Section 2.3). 

 Consistency between Tier 1 DEIS and the FEIS 

The FRA and the GDOT used the same key concepts presented in the Tier 1 DEIS for this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD to 

maintain consistency between the evaluation of the No Build Alternative, Corridor Alternatives, and the identification 

and selection of the Preferred Corridor Alternative. There have been no major technical changes to the data that 

was presented in the Tier 1 DEIS. 

 Key Concepts and Terminology 

The following key concepts remain consistent between the Tier 1 DEIS and this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD: 

Atlanta Approach: The options to accommodate the approach of the three Corridor Alternatives for rail transition 

into the City of Atlanta’s downtown area. 

Corridor Alternatives: The Corridor Alternatives are those areas that are under consideration as the proposed 

action during the Tier 1 EIS process. The Corridor Alternatives are approximately 600 feet wide along their routes 

of travel. 

Data Sources, References, and Geographic Information System (GIS) Tools: Secondary source data (GIS 

data; published reports; technical analyses from USDOT, GDOT, and other government agencies; and U.S. Census 

Bureau data) readily available from federal, state, and local agencies and governments were analyzed as part of 

this Tier 1 EIS process. No fieldwork or subsurface testing of any kind occurred as part of this Tier 1 EIS process. 

A GIS database using desktop analysis was developed to define the characteristics of the Corridor Alternatives, 

such as existing environmental conditions, existing and future transportation facilities, and existing and future 

information used to create GIS shapefiles or layers. The interaction of the GIS shapefiles defined the affected 

environmental areas and was used to assess the environmental consequences in the Tier 1 DEIS desktop analysis. 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies 

to assess the environmental effects of their proposed actions prior to making decisions. FRA determined that a 

tiered NEPA process is appropriate for a project of this scale, as tiering involves a staged environmental review 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 10 

process applied to complex projects covering large geographic areas. This Tier 1 EIS establishes the Purpose and 

Need for the project, provides a broad assessment of the potential transportation, social, economic, and 

environmental impacts of Corridor Alternatives, and the outcomes of public and agency coordination. The Final EIS 

(FEIS) responds to comments on the Tier 1 DEIS, discusses any changes made since the release of the DEIS, and 

in the ROD FRA selected a Preferred Corridor Alternative that could be evaluated further in a Tier 2 EIS study. 

Decisions that are discussed in this Tier 1 EIS but will be deferred to a Tier 2 EIS Analysis include: station locations, 

the rail alignment within the Preferred Corridor Alternative, airport connections, train technology, other operational 

characteristics, and the Atlanta and Charlotte approaches. Tier 2 EIS studies focus on the analysis of project and 

alignment specific impacts, whereas the Tier 1 EIS focuses on defining broader, corridor-wide impacts. Other future 

NEPA steps following this Tier 1 EIS/ROD could also include the following: (1) Preliminary Engineering (could be 

concurrent with Tier 2 EIS study); (2) Service Development Plan (could be concurrent with Tier 2 study); (3) 

Identification of Project Funding; (4) Final Design; (5) Right-of-way (ROW) acquisition; and (6) Construction. 

Environmental Screening Area: Refers to the geographic areas that GDOT evaluated for environmental 

resources. The Tier 1 EIS generally utilizes a 600-foot wide “environmental screening area” to identify and evaluate 

impacts to environmental resources; however, the Tier 1 EIS can define environmental screening areas as narrow 

as 100 feet where such areas are constrained by known resources, such as in developed urban areas, or as wide 

as 1,000 feet, depending on the resource. 

High Speed Rail (HSR): High Speed Rail is a mode of transportation that travels at greater speeds than traditional 

rail technology. FRA defines “high-speed rail” as having the ability to travel at speeds between 90 miles per hour 

(mph) and 150 mph, or even higher.7 For the purposes of this Project, HSR is defined as having the ability to travel 

at speeds of at least 90 mph. 

Level of Detail: The level of detail presented in the Tier 1 EIS is consistent with FRA’s tiered environmental review 

process. FRA’s guidance suggests that a tiered NEPA process is appropriate for FRA projects where broad 

decisions for large expansive corridor programs are 1) too complex to be addressed in one document; 2) are phased 

over time; 3) where future phases are not fully defined; or 4) when major routing or service alternatives need to be 

evaluated. 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): Requires federal agencies to consider the environmental impacts of 

major federal projects or decisions, to share information with the public; to identify and assess reasonable 

alternatives; and to coordinate efforts with other planning and environmental reviews taking place. 

No Build Alternative: The No Build Alternative is the future condition of an area in the absence of a project; 

assumes that no improvements will be made with the exception of periodic maintenance and minor enhancements 

to existing facilities, as needed to maintain safe operation and those minor enhancements already designated in an 

approved plan. 

Notice of Intent (NOI): A formal announcement of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 

Preferred Corridor Alternative: The Preferred Corridor Alternative is the best performing corridor alternative based 

on the performance measures or criteria defined in the Tier 1 DEIS. The Preferred Corridor Alternative is 

documented in Section 2.1 of the Tier 1 FEIS/ROD and is also referred to as the Preferred Corridor Alternative in 

Section 3.3 of the Tier 1 FEIS/ROD to be consistent with Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) requirements for 

Tier 1 EIS documents. Should a Project proponent be identified and additional funding be secured, the Preferred 

7

 FRA’s High Speed Rail Strategic Plan April 2009 website, https://cms8.fra.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/1468/hsrstrategicplan.pdf 

(accessed on 3/3/17)
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 11 

Corridor Alternative may be the subject of additional planning work or Tier 2 NEPA studies during subsequent 

phases of the Project. The Tier 1 FEIS identifies the Preferred Corridor Alternative and in the ROD, FRA selects 

this Alternative. 

Record of Decision (ROD): In accordance with CEQ regulations, the Record of Decision must: 1) state the 

agency’s decision; 2) identify all alternatives considered by the agency in reaching its decision; and 3) state whether 

all practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm from the selected alternative have been adopted, 

or, if not, why not.8

Southeast High-Speed Rail (SEHSR) Corridor: The SEHSR is one of eleven USDOT-designated high-speed rail 

corridors. The FRA plans to develop an integrated passenger rail transportation solution for the Southeast with highspeed rail from Washington, D.C. through Richmond, VA and Charlotte and Raleigh, NC, and from Charlotte, NC 

to Atlanta, GA. 

Study Area (see Section 1.4 DEIS): The area containing all reasonable Corridor Alternatives connecting the logical 

termini under study for the Project, for purposes of evaluating environmental impacts. The Study Area generally 

follows the area bound by Interstate 20 (I-20) (between Atlanta, GA and Columbia, SC) to the south and east, I-77 

(between Columbia, SC and Charlotte, NC) to the east, and the Norfolk Southern rail line (between Charlotte, NC 

and Atlanta, GA) to the north and west. The Study Area also contains the I-85 Corridor between Charlotte, NC and 

Atlanta, GA as well as parts of surrounding metropolitan areas. 

 Content of this Combined Tier 1 FEIS/ROD

This Tier 1 FEIS/ROD contains the Tier 1 FEIS, Tier 1 ROD, and corresponding appendices, including the Tier 1 

DEIS. This is a condensed FEIS, which re-issues the DEIS and identifies any changes to the DEIS resulting from 

public/agency comment and reviews. 

 Appendix A: Tier 1 DEIS and corresponding appendices. 

 Appendix B: Tier 1 DEIS Public and Agency Involvement Summary Report; includes a comment matrix 

and response letter for all comments received during the Tier 1 DEIS public involvement period. 

 Appendix C: NCDOT/SCDOT Correspondence 

The individual segments of the FEIS are summarized below. 

1.1.4.1 TIER 1 FEIS

The Tier 1 FEIS discloses all environmental effects associated with the Project, whether they are adverse or 

beneficial, and identifies the Preferred Corridor Alternative. The Tier 1 FEIS includes all comments received on the 

Tier 1 DEIS and responds to those comments. Responses are in the form of factual corrections or clarifications and 

are presented as errata-style edits in a table format attached to the Tier 1 DEIS, which documents the changes 

made to the DEIS that are now reflected in the Tier 1 FEIS/ROD. The preparation of an FEIS by errata sheets 

attached to the DEIS if certain conditions are met is set forth in 23 USC Section 139(n). As a result of the FAST 

Act, 23 USC § 139 and 49 USC § 304 require, to the maximum extent practicable, and unless certain conditions 

exist, that the lead USDOT agency expeditiously develop a single NEPA document that combines the FEIS and 

ROD. The use of a Tier 1 DEIS Errata Table and Sheets attached to the Tier 1 DEIS and presented as Section 2.3 

of this combined Tier 1 FEIS/ROD comply with the requirements of 23 USC §139 and 49 USC § 304.

8 40 CFR 1505.2. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 12 

1.1.4.2 TIER 1 ROD 

Section 4.6: Next Steps in the Tier 1 DEIS noted that after the FRA publishes the DEIS and the public comment 

period is complete, GDOT will prepare a combined Tier 1 FEIS/ROD. The ROD provides a written public record of 

the FRA’s decision to select the Preferred Corridor Alternative. It includes the alternatives considered during the 

DEIS process and discusses the reasons why the Preferred Corridor Alternative was selected by the FRA, which 

includes public and stakeholder input. This ROD completes the Tier 1 EIS NEPA process and provides for the 

opportunity of a future Tier 2 NEPA study or studies that may occur in subsequent phases of the Project, should 

funding become available. 

1.1.4.3 TIER 1 DEIS AND DEIS APPENDICES 

The Tier 1 DEIS considered all significant issues related to the Project identified during scoping, established the 

Purpose and Need for the Project, disclosed the alternatives considered and evaluated the alternatives against the 

Purpose and Need. Additionally, the Tier 1 DEIS disclosed all environmental effects potentially associated with the 

Corridor Alternatives, both adverse and beneficial. The Tier 1 DEIS process included a public and agency review 

and comment period on the document, including public meetings as detailed in Section 2.2.2. Appendices A 

through E in the Tier 1 DEIS provide technical documentation of findings, as well as supporting information such 

as coordination materials. 

1.2 ABOUT THE PROJECT 

The FRA is working with states to improve high-speed and intercity passenger rail corridors via projects that range 

from upgrading existing services to developing entirely new rail lines and services. The FRA defines “high-speed 

rail” as having the ability to travel at speeds between 90 mph and 150 mph, or even higher.9 The FRA is 

implementing this high-speed rail initiative through the High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Program (HSIPR), 

created to address the nation’s transportation challenges by making strategic investments in an efficient network of 

passenger rail corridors connecting the growing population across the country. 

In October 1992, the U.S. Secretary of Transportation announced the designation of five high speed high rail 

corridors, including the SEHSR, which originally stretched from Charlotte, NC to Washington, DC. In 1999, the 

Secretary of Transportation extended the SEHSR from Charlotte to Greenville, SC and to Atlanta, GA.10 In 2013, 

FRA and GDOT initiated the Tier 1 EIS for the extension of the SEHSR corridor from Charlotte to Atlanta, including 

the preparation of the Atlanta to Charlotte Passenger Rail Corridor Investment Plan (PRCIP). The PRCIP consists 

of an environmental analysis of the proposed routes along the Project Corridor as well as a Service Development 

Plan (SDP).11 

The FRA is using a tiered process, as provided for in 40 CFR 1508.28, to complete the NEPA environmental review 

of the Project. This Tier 1 EIS establishes the purpose and need for the Project; provides a broad assessment of 

the potential transportation, social, economic, and environmental impacts of Corridor Alternatives for the Project; 

and presents outcomes of public and agency coordination that were considered in the Tier 1 assessment and 

decision-making processes. 

The Project did not involve any fieldwork, preliminary engineering or design, final effects evaluations on impacts to 

environmental resources, selection of propulsion technology, specific locations of HSR alignments, or potential 

9 https://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/Details/L02833 (accessed 5/9/19) 10 https://www.ncdot.gov/divisions/rail/projects/southeast-corridor/Pages/default.aspx (accessed 5/9/19) 11 In May 2018, FRA and GDOT agreed to defer the SDP portion of the PRCIP. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 13 

locations of station facility sites. The Tier 1 EIS defined a 600-foot wide Preferred Corridor Alternative route for most 

of the corridor, but a specific alignment within the corridor is deferred to a Tier 2 study. Selection of both the corridor 

and a specific alignment for the Atlanta Approach and validation of the Charlotte Approach is also left to a Tier 2 

study. Upon completion of this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD, additional Tier 2 studies would be needed for subsequent phases 

of the project where additional technical reporting and detailed screening processes will be prepared. 

1.3 ERRATA SHEETS AND COMBINED FEIS/ROD 

 Use of Errata Sheets 

The use of errata sheets in lieu of writing a Final EIS that repeats a large amount of information already published 

in the DEIS is appropriate when comments received on a DEIS are minor and the responses to those comments 

are limited to factual corrections or explanations of why the comments do not warrant further response.12 The 

comments received on the Project required only factual corrections and minor clarifications to the DEIS. No 

comments resulted in further response in the form of additional alternatives or consideration of undisclosed 

environmental consequences or impacts. As a result, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. §304a(a), FRA and GDOT 

have prepared an errata sheet that lists the comments received and the revisions to the DEIS that resulted from the 

comments. 

The errata sheets are being made available to the public to the same extent as the DEIS. Continued availability of 

the DEIS is also being ensured. The DEIS is currently available to the public in hard copy at GDOT headquarters 

at 600 W Peachtree Street NW in Atlanta and electronically on the GDOT website at 

http://www.dot.ga.gov/IS/Rail/AtlantatoCharlotte. 

The errata sheets are included in this FEIS/ROD in Section 2.3 and will also be provided with the DEIS on GDOT’s 

Project website (FRA’s Project website13 links to the GDOT website). The revised DEIS sections are included in 

Appendix A to this FEIS/ROD.

 Combined Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 

In accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations, FEIS and ROD documents are traditionally 

issued separately with a minimum 30-day period between the FEIS and ROD (40 CFR § 1506.11(b)(2)). However, 

49 U.S.C. § 304a(b) directs the lead agency to expeditiously develop a single, combined FEIS and ROD, to the 

maximum extent practicable, unless: 

• The FEIS makes substantial changes to the proposed actions that are relevant to environmental or safety 

concerns. 

• A significant new circumstance or information relevant to environmental concerns bears on the proposed 

action or the impacts of the proposed action. 

This combined FEIS/ROD document does not include substantial changes to the proposed action in terms of 

environmental or safety concerns, nor are there significant new circumstances or information relevant to 

environmental concerns of the proposed action or its impacts. 

In accordance with USDOT Guidance this combined FEIS/ROD includes the following: 

12 See 49 USC §304a and 40 CFR §1503.4(c). 

13 https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/southeast-high-speed-rail-atlanta-charlotte-passenger-rail 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 14 

• Identification of the Preferred Alternative (included in Section 2.1 of this FEIS and described in this Tier 1 

FEIS/ROD as the Preferred Corridor Alternative). 

• List of commitments for mitigation measures for the Preferred Alternative (included in Section 3.3.2 of the 

ROD). 

• Summary of the public outreach efforts, comments received on the DEIS, public meeting information, and 

public and agency coordination activities that have taken place since the issuance of the DEIS (included in 

Section 2.2 of this FEIS). Appendix B includes more information on the public involvement process and 

includes the comments on the Project and FRA/GDOT’s responses to those comments. Appendix C 

includes correspondence from NCDOT and SCDOT received after the publication of the DEIS. 

1.4 TIERED NEPA PROCESS 

The tiered NEPA process begins when the lead Federal agency publishes a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an 

EIS in the Federal Register. It is then followed by a public involvement scoping phase that guides the environmental 

review process for participating agencies, stakeholders, and the general public. “Tiering” is a staged environmental 

review process applied to complex projects covering large geographic areas. This Tier 1 EIS establishes the 

Purpose and Need for the Project; provides a broad assessment of the potential transportation, social, economic, 

and environmental impacts of Corridor Alternatives for the Project; and presents the outcomes of public and agency 

coordination that were considered during the Tier 1 EIS assessment and decision-making processes. See Figure 

1 below to view the Project Study Area Map that was used for the Tiered Environmental Screening process. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 15 

FIGURE 1: PROJECT STUDY AREA MAP 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 16 

In early 2013, GDOT submitted to FRA a Public Involvement and Coordination Plan (PIP/CP), which FRA approved 

on February 20, 2013. The PIP/CP provided structure for coordination and communication among the lead federal 

and state, cooperating, and participating agencies, including tribal governments, and was intended to guide the 

agency coordination process, make reviews more efficient, and streamline the project decision-making process. 

The PIP/CP also outlines the activities that occurred during the NEPA process through the coordination and agency 

participation and comment stages. 

On May 16, 2013, FRA published in the Federal Register the NOI to prepare a Tier 1 DEIS for the Project. In the 

NOI, FRA also announced the agency scoping process. Thirty-one state and federal environmental regulatory and 

review agencies, Native American tribal councils, municipalities, counties, and other government organizations and 

officials were notified. Agency scoping meetings were held on June 4, 2013 and June 24, 2013 via webinar and in 

person, respectively. During these scoping meetings, GDOT provided an overview of the Project, the NEPA 

process, and the scope of the Project. After the presentation concluded, GDOT opened the floor for discussion and 

provided the opportunity for the agencies to ask questions and/or specify analysis for consideration in the Tier 1 

EIS process. 

Interagency coordination meetings among federal and state lead agencies took place throughout the development 

of the Tier 1 DEIS, which provided an opportunity for ongoing coordination and discussion of the Project process, 

products, and issues. Additionally, FRA sent coordination letters to the state historic preservation officers (SHPO) 

of GA, SC, and NC, and other historic preservation-focused agencies and organizations, along with tribal 

governments, to request information on known eligible historic properties and any other natural or cultural resources 

within the Project Study Area.14 

Stakeholders were engaged on an ongoing basis to provide timely and ongoing feedback. Stakeholders were 

identified as any agency, organization, or group with an interest in the Project that was not designated as a 

participating agency, such as Norfolk Southern Corp. (NS), CSX Transportation (CSX), Hartsfield-Jackson 

International Airport, Greenville–Spartanburg International Airport, and others. 

Lastly, public involvement activities included three public scoping open houses (one each in Georgia, South 

Carolina and North Carolina) as well as virtual outreach including a PowerPoint presentation that was available on 

the Project website, electronic comment cards, and input solicitation, which were able to provide information to a 

larger group than the public meetings alone. 182 individuals attended the three public scoping meetings, and 139 

comments were submitted (94% in favor of the Project). The scoping comment period began on June 4, 2013 and 

ended on March 1, 2014. 

Appendix A, Tier 1 DEIS and Corresponding Appendices, provides additional detail and all correspondence 

transmitted and received during the agency scoping phase and the public involvement process mentioned above. 

Due to the size and complexity of the Project, GDOT and FRA will defer the following decisions and analysis to 

future Tier 2 NEPA document(s): 

 Alignment of the Preferred Corridor Alternative (including the approaches into Atlanta, GA and Charlotte, 

NC). 

 Locations of stations and facilities and interfaces with airports. 

 Operating equipment and type of propulsion technology. 

14 Because this is a Tier 1 EIS that will result in the selection of a Preferred Corridor Alternative, detailed Section 106 analyses, including 

identification of historic and cultural resources and determination of effects that the Project will have on those resources, was not done. 

Comprehensive Section 106 analyses, including negotiation and execution of Memoranda of Agreements, if necessary, will be done as part 

of any Tier 2 studies. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 17 

 Detailed operating characteristics. 

Should a project sponsor be identified and funding be secured, a future Tier 2 EIS will define an alignment within 

the broader Preferred Corridor Alternative. The Tier 2 NEPA documents could include any of the following NEPA 

Classes of Action, based upon the proposed action within the Preferred Corridor Alternative: 

 Categorical Exclusion (CE) is designated for actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a 

significant environmental impact. 

 Environmental Assessment (EA) is designated for actions in which the significance of the environmental 

impact is not clearly established. EAs can lead to the development of a Finding of No Significant Impact 

(FONSI) or EIS document. 

 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is designated for projects where it is known that the action will have 

significant environmental effects and comprehensive analysis is needed to determine the environmental 

consequences of the proposed action. 

Separate Tier 2 NEPA documentation could be pursued for the Atlanta Approach, which could also consider other 

intercity passenger rail corridors and planned commuter rail corridors in the Atlanta area. A Tier 2 analysis will also 

validate the assumptions made in the Tier 1 EIS regarding the approach into Charlotte, to CLT airport and the 

terminal Charlotte-Gateway Station. Concerning equipment technology, a Tier 2 analysis may explore a phased 

approach that would initially use diesel technology with the option to electrify the corridor over time, as funding 

allows. Tier 2 EIS work could also explore phasing construction for the preferred alignment. The Tier 2 process will 

continue the public involvement and agency coordination that began during this Tier 1 EIS. The Tier 2 process will 

further document a more detailed environmental analysis, including applicable permits and defining specific 

avoidance and mitigation measures. 

2. Tier 1 Final Environmental Impact Statement 

2.1 PREFERRED CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVE 

In this Tier I FEIS, FRA identifies the Greenfield Corridor Alternative, as defined in this Tier 1 FEIS and further in 

Section 3.3 and illustrated in Figure 3-2 of the ROD, as the Preferred Corridor Alternative. The Greenfield Corridor 

Alternative is a 274-mile route that connects Charlotte, NC (Charlotte Gateway Station) and Atlanta, GA (HartsfieldJackson Atlanta International Airport – H-JAIA) and generally follows a new dedicated alignment between the CLT 

airport and northeast Atlanta. Future Tier 2 study will define the specific alignment for the Greenfield Corridor 

Alternative, including the final approaches into Atlanta and Charlotte. GDOT assumes this Corridor Alternative could 

use either diesel or electric propulsion technology. Additional description of the corridor is provided below. 

1) In North Carolina, the Greenfield Corridor Alternative follows the route of the NS Right-of-Way (ROW) for 

10 miles on dedicated passenger tracks, potentially operating at speeds of 80 to 110 mph, from Charlotte 

Gateway Station to the CLT airport station before transitioning to a new greenfield alignment just west of 

the Catawba River crossing. From the Catawba River, the greenfield alignment extends for approximately 

15 miles passing southeast of Belmont, NC to a station at South Gastonia near the state line. This route 

serves three stations in North Carolina: Charlotte Gateway, CLT airport, and South Gastonia. Once on 

greenfield alignment, this corridor can sustain speeds of up to 125 mph using diesel or 220 mph using 

electric propulsion. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 18 

2) In South Carolina, the Greenfield Corridor Alternative continues along a greenfield alignment for 65 miles 

passing east of Kings Mountain State Park to a route paralleling I-85, approximately 10 miles to the 

southeast, then diverging westward to a station near the Greenville-Spartanburg International Airport 

(GSP). From the GSP airport, this corridor returns eastward to a route paralleling I-85, approximately 15 

miles to the east, for 50 miles to the state line at the Savannah River with a station in Anderson, SC. This 

Corridor Alternative can support speeds of up to 125 mph (diesel) or 220 mph (electric) throughout most of 

South Carolina until reaching the first stop in Georgia. 

3) In Georgia, the Greenfield Corridor Alternative continues along a greenfield alignment for approximately 80 

miles with a station in Athens, GA. Due to the complex environment of the approaches to and through 

Atlanta and the nature of a tiered NEPA process, this Tier 1 EIS defers the selection of the preferred Atlanta 

Approach to a future Tier 2 EIS. In the Tier 1 EIS, GDOT considered two corridors for the segment of the 

Greenfield Alternative between Gwinnett County and Howell Junction in Atlanta, one with passengerdedicated tracks in a corridor generally alongside elements of I-85 and NS (with potential stations in 

Suwanee and Doraville) and the other alongside the CSX Abbeville Subdivision to the CSX Atlanta Belt 

Line (with potential stations at Lawrenceville and Tucker) as shown in Figure 3-2. From Howell Junction 

the route would be in passenger-dedicated tracks to H-JAIA in the existing railroad corridor (with a station 

proposed for downtown Atlanta (Georgia MMPT15). Within the shared ROW of the Atlanta Approach, 

speeds are generally between 70 mph and 110 mph for both diesel and electric options. In addition to the 

two potential Atlanta Approaches (NS and CSX), a future Tier 2 EIS could also identify additional feasible 

approaches or construction methods traversing the Atlanta area, such as use of public or private rights-ofway with at-grade, elevated (bridge or viaduct), or below-grade (tunnel) infrastructure, and could consider 

infrastructure shared with other planned intercity and commuter rail projects. 

For this Tier 1 EIS, a 600-foot wide buffer was used for the Greenfield Corridor Alternative, and it gives future 

potential project sponsors the flexibility to refine alignments during Tier 2 NEPA studies and to potentially avoid or 

minimize impacts to resources within the corridor. 

2.2 OVERVIEW OF PUBLIC AND AGENCY OUTREACH AND 

COORDINATION SINCE RELEASE OF THE TIER 1 DEIS 

This section provides an overview of the public and agency outreach coordination that has occurred since the 

publication of the Tier 1 DEIS. Appendix B contains a comprehensive public involvement summary report that 

includes information distributed to agencies, public meeting information, a comment and response matrix, and any 

correspondence received during the Tier 1 DEIS comment and review period. 

 Distribution of the Tier 1 DEIS 

The Tier 1 DEIS was included in the Environmental Protection Agency’s Notice of Availability (NOA) published in 

the Federal Register on September 20, 2019 (see Appendix B). The NOA initiated the public and agency review 

and comment period, which ran for 45 days, ending on November 4, 2019. The complete Tier 1 DEIS, including the 

appendices and supporting documentation, was made available for review on GDOT’s and FRA’s project websites 

15 This Tier 1 EIS considers the formerly proposed Georgia MMPT as one potential station location in Downtown Atlanta, although other 

opportunities may be explored during a Tier 2 analysis. The Georgia MMPT project was listed in the Atlanta MPO’s Long Range 

Transportation Plan (LRTP) while this Tier 1 EIS was being prepared; however, it has since been removed from the LRTP due to recent 

changes in property ownership in Downtown Atlanta. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 19 

and was displayed at the public meetings. Instructions for sending comments were included in Section 4.5.4 of the 

Tier 1 DEIS. 

Legal notices announcing the publication of the Tier 1 DEIS and the public meetings appeared in three newspapers 

for each state within the Project Study Area. Placement of legal notices and supporting proofs are referenced in 

Appendix B – Attachment 2. 

 Public Meetings 

GDOT advertised notice of public meetings and the availability of the Tier 1 DEIS as well as any other project 

information twice within the 45-day agency and public comment period. The advertisements were made thirty days 

in advance of each public meeting, and again two weeks prior to the date of each public meeting. These were 

advertised through three separate newspapers, state DOT (GDOT, NCDOT and SCDOT) social media outlets, and 

press releases. 

FRA and GDOT held three open-house style public meetings, one each in Atlanta, GA, Greenville, SC, and 

Charlotte, NC. The purpose of these meetings was to provide agencies and the general public with the opportunity 

to learn about the proposed project, ask questions, and provide verbal or written comments on the DEIS, the 

proposed alternatives, and other issues related to the development of the Project. Information was made available 

on FRA and GDOT project websites for those that could not attend the meetings. Opportunities to provide online 

comments were also made available via an online comment form on GDOT’s project website. Additionally, a court 

reporter was present at each meeting for those who wanted to dictate verbal comments. 

Written comments at the public meetings, including court reporter transcripts, and comments provided online 

through the comment form are included as part of the project record and are referenced in Appendix B – 

Attachment 3, Comment Matrix and Response Letter. 

Attendance numbers reported in Table 2-1 below are approximate and are based on the number of persons who 

registered on the sign-in sheets. Some attendees, possibly, did not provide their information into the sign-in sheet, 

therefore are not accounted for. Based on the sign-in sheets, a total of 276 attendees came to the three public 

meetings. 

TABLE 2-1: DEIS PUBLIC MEETINGS 

Public Meeting Location Date/Time Number of 

Attendees 

Atlanta, GA 

Georgia Department of Transportation 

One Georgia Center 

600 West Peachtree Street NW 

Atlanta, Georgia 30308 

Tuesday, 

October 22, 2019 

5:30 pm – 8:00 pm 

84 

Greenville, SC 

Greenville County Square 

301 University Ridge, Suite 400 

Greenville, South Carolina 29601 

Wednesday, 

October 23, 2019 

5:30 pm – 8:00 pm 

127 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 20 

Public Meeting Location Date/Time Number of 

Attendees 

Charlotte, NC 

Metrolina Transportation Management Center 

2327 Tipton Drive 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28206 

Thursday, 

October 24, 2019 

5:30 pm – 8:00 pm 

65 

Total 276* 

* Based on the number of individuals who registered on the sign-in sheets. Additional persons may have been 

present but did not choose to register. 

Meeting attendees received a project fact sheet and a comment card, which mirrored the online comment form. The 

public meetings were conducted in an open house format. No formal presentation was given; however, nine display 

boards were exhibited in the meeting rooms for the public to view and ask questions. The displays were staffed by 

Project team members. A hardcopy of the Tier 1 DEIS and the supporting map books (refer to Appendix A of the 

Tier 1 DEIS) were available for review at the public meetings. Representatives from the FRA and GDOT were also 

available to answer any questions. Meeting venues and materials were coordinated with SCDOT, NCDOT, and 

local jurisdictions. 

2.2.2.1 ADDITIONAL PUBLIC OUTREACH ACTIVITIES 

Following the three public meetings, representatives from the Gaston-Cleveland-Lincoln Metropolitan Planning 

Organization (MPO) requested an additional briefing to their constituents due to the proximity of all evaluated 

alternatives. A GDOT Project Manager provided a brief presentation to the Gaston-Cleveland-Lincoln MPO 

Technical Coordinating Committee (TCC) during the regularly scheduled TCC meeting on Wednesday, November 

13, 2019 to share information on the Project. 

 Comments and Responses on the Tier 1 DEIS 

FRA and GDOT encouraged public review and comment on the Tier 1 DEIS at each of the public meetings and 

through the various advertisements (i.e., legal ads, social media posts, and press releases). During the 45-day 

public review and comment period, GDOT received a total of 2,154 public and agency comments. Comments were 

submitted electronically via an online comment form, through written comment cards at the public meetings, and 

verbally to the court reporter at public meetings.16 

Of the 2,154 agency and public comments submitted, most were in support of the overall proposed project. 111 

comments (5%) expressed opposition to the project. 1,260 comments expressed clear support for one or more 

Preferred Corridor Alternatives, as follows: 

 Greenfield Preferred Corridor Alternative = 957 

 Southern Crescent Corridor Alternative = 173 

 I-85 Corridor Alternative = 130 

16 Given the number of comments submitted, FRA and GDOT are not including the original public comments in this FEIS/ROD. Instead, in 

accordance with 40 CFR §1503.4(b), the comments-response matrix in Appendix B includes reprints of all the public comments. All agency 

and public official comments are included in Appendix B. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 21 

Approximately 76% of commenters who expressed support for a Preferred Corridor Alternative chose the Greenfield 

Corridor Alternative, followed by the Southern Crescent (14%) and the I-85 Corridor Alternative (10%). 51 

respondents (4%) expressed support for more than one Preferred Corridor Alternative. Many comments expressed 

support for the fastest and most reliable travel times between major population areas along the corridor, which is 

consistent with the public’s preference for the Greenfield Corridor Alternative. Many commenters also expressed 

support for stations in their communities, or stations serving airports or universities. Commenters were also 

interested in the environmental benefits of non-vehicular modes, the economic benefits of passenger rail service, 

and potential connections between passenger rail and local transit systems. 

SCDOT and NCDOT also provided letters of support for the Preferred Corridor Alternative. On May 29, 2020 

SCDOT submitted a letter to GDOT stating that due to high potential impacts in five environmental categories and 

significant construction on Interstate 85, SCDOT concurred with selection of the Greenfield Corridor as the Preferred 

Corridor Alternative. On April 15, 2020, NCDOT submitted a letter of support to GDOT concurring with selection of 

the Greenfield Corridor Alternative as the Preferred Corridor Alternative, provided that additional studies are 

conducted as a part of the Tier 2 NEPA process to determine how the Greenfield Alignment can best access the 

Charlotte/Metrolina region. These letters are found in Appendix C of the FEIS. 

FRA and GDOT have reviewed the public and agency comments and have prepared responses while taking 

comments into consideration in the decision-making process for the Tier 1 EIS. Upon publication of this Tier 1 

FEIS/ROD, responses to comments will be provided online for public and agency reference. An additional 30-day 

waiting period will be held after the Tier 1 FEIS/ROD is issued to allow for public and agency input on the selection 

of the Preferred Corridor Alternative. The 30-day waiting period will not be a formal comment and review period. 

Individual responses to comments submitted will not be provided. However, the FRA and the GDOT and any other 

future project sponsors will consider input received on this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD in subsequent phases of the Project, 

which may include a Tier 2 NEPA process.17 

2.3 TIER 1 DEIS ERRATA TABLE 

Table 2-2 presents changes that have been made to the Tier 1 DEIS released on September 20, 2019. Appendix 

A of this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD contains the edited Tier 1 DEIS based on the actions listed. In the DEIS, changes that 

were made to the text, tables, and/or figures are highlighted in yellow. The edited Tier 1 DEIS combined with the 

Tier 1 DEIS Errata Table is re-issued as the Tier 1 FEIS for the Project under this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD. 

17 Please submit any input to the FRA and/or GDOT points of contact listed on the FEIS-ROD signature page. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 22 

TABLE 2-2: TIER 1 DEIS ERRATA TABLE 

ID Chapter Page(s) in 

Tier 1 

DEIS 

Description of Action Page(s) in 

Tier 1 

FEIS 

Comment Addressed 

(see Appendix B – 

Attachment 4) 

1 Chapters 1 

and 4 

Pg. 1-19; 

Pg. 4-3 

1. A footnote was inserted to 

clarify the number of MPOs in 

the Study Area. 

2. The name for the 

Mecklenburg-Union 

Metropolitan Planning 

Organization was revised to 

the ‘Charlotte Regional 

Transportation Planning 

Organization (CRTPO)’. 

Pg. 1-19; 

Pg. 4-3 

City of Charlotte 

Comments, November 1, 

2019 

“The document refers to 

five MPOs being located 

with the study area. There 

are seven. Please ensure 

the Gaston-ClevelandLincoln MPO (GCLMPO) 

and the Rock Hill/Ft. Mill 

Area Transportation Study 

(RFATS) are identified in 

the final EIS.” 

“The document refers to 

the Mecklenburg-Union 

Metropolitan Planning 

Organization. The MPO 

for the Charlotte region 

was renamed the 

Charlotte Regional 

Transportation Planning 

Organization (CRTPO) in 

2013. The final EIS 

should make the 

correction.” 

2 N/A N/A 

Parameters for high, medium, and 

low impacts would be discussed in 

a Tier 2 EIS. 

N/A EPA, November 1, 2019 

3 N/A N/A Cumulative Impacts would be 

discussed in a Tier 2 EIS. N/A EPA, November 1, 2019 

4 N/A N/A 

Environmental Justice (EJ) 

evaluation would be done in Tier 2 

EIS; Preferred Corridor Alternative, 

compared to the other alternatives, 

would have the lowest impacts on 

EJ communities. 

N/A EPA, November 1, 2019 

5 N/A N/A Air Analysis would be done in Tier 

2 EIS. N/A EPA, November 1, 2019 

6 N/A N/A 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Conformity would be done in Tier 2 

EIS. 

N/A EPA, November 1, 2019 

8 Chapter 1 Pg. 1-18 

Typo: Seven ‘Needs’, described, 

but there are actually eight ‘Needs’ 

listed. Text has been revised. 

Pg. 1-18 N/A – Error identified by 

Project Team 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 23 

ID Chapter Page(s) in 

Tier 1 

DEIS 

Description of Action Page(s) in 

Tier 1 

FEIS 

Comment Addressed 

(see Appendix B – 

Attachment 4) 

9 Chapter 2 Pg. 2-34 

Typo: The text on page 36 

describing the travel time for the 

Southern Crescent (2:34) does not 

correspond to the travel time listed 

on page 42. Therefore, the text on 

page 36 has been revised to 

match Exhibit 2-20 (pg. 42) (“2:34” 

should be “5:34”). 

Pg. 2-34 N/A – Error identified by 

Project Team 

10 Chapter 3 Pg. 3-39 

Typo: The Table on pg. 3-39 titled 

“Exhibit 3.3-12: Comparison of 

Existing Travel Modes and 

Proposed Corridor Alternatives” 

has been revised to have the 

correct number of round trips for 

each of the Corridor Alternatives. 

Pg. 3-39 N/A – Error identified by 

Project Team 

3. Tier 1 ROD 

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has determined that pursuant to National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 USC Section 4321 et seq.), and implementing regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), Section 4(f) of the 

U.S. Department of Transportation Act (49 USC 303) ;the Federal Railroad Administration’s Procedures for 

Considering Environmental Impacts (64 Federal Register 28545); the National Historic Preservation Act (54 USC 

306101 et seq.) and implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800); the Clean Air Act as amended (42 USC 7401 et 

seq.) and implementing regulations (40 CFR Parts 51 and 93); the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC 1531-

1544) and implementing regulations (50 CFR Part 402); the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1251-1387) and 

implementing regulations (33 CFR Parts 320 to 324 and 40 CFR Part 230) and Section 6(f) of the Land and Water 

Conservation Fund Act (36 CFR Part 59), all obligations for completing a Tier 1 NEPA environmental review process 

for the Project have been met. 

In this Tier 1 ROD, FRA selects the Greenfield Corridor Alternative described and evaluated in the Atlanta to 

Charlotte Tier 1 DEIS as the Preferred Corridor Alternative. This Tier 1 ROD includes all technical reports and 

supporting documentation, incorporated by reference. Should a project sponsor be identified and funding be 

secured, a subsequent Tier 2 analysis will determine the specific alignment within the Greenfield Corridor 

Alternative, as well as the alignment for the Atlanta Approach, locations of stations and maintenance facilities, the 

type of locomotive propulsion technology, and other operating characteristics. 

3.1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT 

FRA and GDOT developed the Purpose and Need for the Project during the scoping process following the issuance 

of the NOI (refer to Section 1.4). The Purpose and Need remained consistent between the DEIS and FEIS and is 

the basis for the development of the Project objectives and goals and performance measures or criteria for which 

the FRA has based its decision in selecting the Preferred Corridor Alternative for the Project. The Purpose of the 

Project is to improve intercity passenger travel between Atlanta, GA and Charlotte, NC by expanding the region’s 

transportation system capacity and improving trip time and reliability through high-speed passenger rail services. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 24 

The Project will provide the transportation system capacity necessary to accommodate current and projected 

population and economic growth occurring along the SEHSR Corridor network, including the following metropolitan 

areas in the Piedmont Atlantic Megaregion: Atlanta, GA; Charlotte, NC; Greenville, SC; and Spartanburg, SC. 

GDOT identified eight transportation system needs relevant to the Project Study Area, each corresponding to the 

anticipated population and employment growth with increasing travel demand. The Project addresses the following 

needs: population and employment growth; improve regional transportation system connectivity; increase 

transportation system capacity; improve travel times and reliability; provide an alternative travel mode; improve 

traveler safety; improve energy efficiency and air quality; and maintain and enhance economic growth and vitality. 

3.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN THE TIER 1 DEIS 

The Alternatives considered remain consistent between the DEIS and FEIS. The Alternatives include the No-Build 

Alternative and the three Corridor Alternatives that scored the highest in the Phase I screening evaluation (more 

detail provided in Chapter 2 of the DEIS) – the Southern Crescent Corridor Alternative, the I-85 Corridor Alternative, 

and the Greenfield Corridor Alternative. GDOT evaluated the Corridor Alternatives on performance measures or 

criteria developed for the Tier 1 EIS process and their effectiveness in meeting the Purpose and Need for the Project 

as presented in Exhibits 2-4 through Exhibits 2-6 of the Tier 1 DEIS. The Phase 2 alternatives analysis introduced 

some new considerations and refined some of the components of the three remaining Corridor Alternatives. Phase 

2 concludes with a comparison of the three Corridor Alternatives’ potential service characteristics, including the 

following metrics: daily round trips, travel time, ridership, revenue, capital cost, operating and maintenance (O&M) 

cost, operating ratio,18 and benefit-cost ratio. 

3.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED CORRIDOR 

ALTERNATIVE 

FRA is selecting the Greenfield Corridor Alternative as the Preferred Corridor Alternative. The Greenfield Corridor 

Alternative is detailed in this Tier 1 FEIS Section 3 and illustrated in Figure 3-2 below. The Greenfield Corridor 

Alternative is a 274-mile route that connects Charlotte, NC (Charlotte Gateway Station) and Atlanta, GA (HartsfieldJackson Atlanta International Airport – H-JAIA) and generally follows a new dedicated alignment between the CLT 

airport and northeast Atlanta. Any future Tier 2 studies will define the specific alignment for the Greenfield Corridor 

Alternative, including the final approaches into Atlanta and Charlotte. GDOT assumes this Corridor Alternative could 

use either diesel or electric propulsion technology. Additional description of the corridor is provided below.19 

1) In North Carolina, this corridor follows the route of the NS Right-of-Way (ROW) for 10 miles on dedicated 

passenger tracks, potentially operating at speeds of 80 to 110 mph, from Charlotte Gateway Station to the 

CLT airport station before transitioning to a new greenfield alignment just west of the Catawba River 

crossing. From the Catawba River, the greenfield alignment extends for approximately 15 miles passing 

southeast of Belmont, NC to a station at South Gastonia near the state line. This route potentially serves 

three stations in North Carolina: Charlotte Gateway, CLT airport, and South Gastonia. Once on greenfield 

18 GDOT calculated the operating ratio for each Corridor Alternative by dividing the system revenues by the operating costs. 

19 See section 2.2.2.2 Refinement of Corridor Alternatives of the DEIS for details on the three alternatives, including potential operating 

speeds based on propulsion technology. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 25 

alignment, this corridor can sustain speeds of up to 125 mph using diesel or 220 mph using electric 

propulsion.20 

2) In South Carolina, this corridor continues along a greenfield alignment for 65 miles passing east of Kings 

Mountain State Park to a route paralleling I-85, approximately 10 miles to the southeast, then diverging 

westward to a station near the Greenville-Spartanburg International Airport (GSP). From the GSP airport, 

this corridor returns eastward to a route paralleling I-85, approximately 15 miles to the east, for 50 miles to 

the state line at the Savannah River with a station in Anderson, SC. This Corridor Alternative can support 

speeds of up to 125 mph (diesel) or 220 mph (electric) throughout most of South Carolina until reaching 

the first stop in Georgia. 

3) In Georgia, this corridor continues along a greenfield alignment for approximately 80 miles with a potential 

station in Athens, GA. Due to the complex environment of the approaches to and through Atlanta and the 

nature of a tiered NEPA process, this Tier 1 EIS defers the selection of the preferred Atlanta Approach to 

a future Tier 2 NEPA study. In the Tier 1 EIS two corridors were considered for the segment of the 

Greenfield Alternative between Gwinnett County and Howell Junction in Atlanta, one with passengerdedicated tracks in a corridor generally alongside elements of I-85 and NS (with potential stations in 

Suwanee and Doraville) and the other alongside the CSX Abbeville Subdivision to the CSX Atlanta Belt 

Line (with potential stations at Lawrenceville and Tucker) as shown in Figure 3-2. From Howell Junction 

the route would be in passenger-dedicated tracks to H-JAIA in the existing railroad corridor (with a station 

proposed for downtown Atlanta (Georgia MMPT). Within the shared ROW of the Atlanta Approach, speeds 

are generally between 70 mph and 110 mph for both diesel and electric options. In addition to the two 

potential Atlanta Approaches (NS and CSX), a future Tier 2 NEPA study could also identify additional 

feasible approaches or construction methods traversing the Atlanta area, such as use of public or private 

rights-of-way with at-grade, elevated (bridge or viaduct), or below-grade (tunnel) infrastructure, and could 

consider infrastructure shared with other planned intercity and commuter rail projects. Examples of intercity 

routes that might share tracks include multiple planned routes radiating from Atlanta northwest to 

Chattanooga and Nashville, TN; west to Birmingham, AL; southwest to Columbus, GA and Montgomery, 

AL; east to Columbia, SC; and southeast to Macon, GA and Jacksonville, FL. FRA and GDOT defer the 

definition and evaluation of any additional approaches to the Tier 2 analysis .For this Tier 1 EIS, a 600-foot 

wide buffer was used for the Greenfield Corridor Alternative, and it gives future potential project sponsors 

the flexibility to refine alignments during Tier 2 NEPA studies and to potentially avoid or minimize impacts 

to resources within the corridor. 

20 For more information on operating speeds and how GDOT determined speed ranges for the alternatives, see the Alternatives 

Development Report, which is Appendix B to the Draft EIS. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 26 

FIGURE 3-2: PREFERRED CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVE – GREENFIELD CORRIDOR 

ALTERNATIVE 

In comparison to the other Corridor Alternatives, the Greenfield Corridor Alternative performed better overall in 

meeting the Project’s Purpose and Need. This is also true for other relevant metrics, illustrated in Table 3-3. The 

environmental impacts illustrated in Table 3-3 are based on the respective CSX and NS Atlanta Approaches. 

Preferred Corridor Alternative 

 with Atlanta Approach via NS 

 with Atlanta Approach via CSX 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 27 

TABLE 3-3: COMPARATIVE SUMMARY OF THE CORRIDOR BUILD ALTERNATIVES 

Performance 

Measure 

(Criteria/Resource) 

Definitions/ Description Southern 

Crescent 

Corridor 

Alternative 

I-85 Corridor 

Alternative 

Greenfield 

Corridor 

Alternative 

(Preferred 

Corridor 

Alternative) 

Top Operating 

Speed (MPH) 

Diesel shared track 79 - - 

Diesel shared and dedicated track 79 to 110 - - 

Diesel dedicated track - 125 125 

Electric dedicated track - 180 220 

End to End 

Travel Time 

(hrs:min) 

Diesel shared track 5:34 - - 

Diesel shared and dedicated Track 4:35 - - 

Diesel dedicated track - 2:50 2:44 

Electric dedicated track - 2:42 2:06 

2050 Annual 

Ridership Projected ridership in 2050 0.94M to 1.18M 

5.50M to 

5.62M 

5.38M to 

6.30M 

Capital Cost Cost to build the Project $2.0B to 

$2.3B 

$13.3B to 

$15.4B 

$6.2B to 

$8.4B 

2050 Annual 

O&M Cost 

Project cost to operate and maintain 

high speed rail passenger service 

$63.17M to 

$66.1M 

$192.9M to 

$169.9M 

$205.7M to 

$211.9M 

Revenue/O&M 

Cost Ratio 

Helps measure the financial 

solvency of a corridor alternative 

(i.e. self-sustaining)

0.66 to 0.82 2.05 to 2.30 2.08 to 2.32 

Potential Environmental Impacts 

% Diverted Trips* Projected Automobile, Air, and Bus 

Trips Diverted to Rail 20% 30% 29% 

Socioeconomic and 

Environmental 

Justice 

Percentage of Census Block Groups 

Meeting EJ Criteria for Minority and 

Low-Income Populations

30% to 34% 23% to 27% 19% to 23% 

Noise Number of Potential Noise Receptor 

Impacts

11,310 to 

11,872 

6,963 to 

7,163 

9,246 to 

9,628 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 28 

Performance 

Measure 

(Criteria/Resource) 

Definitions/ Description Southern 

Crescent 

Corridor 

Alternative 

I-85 Corridor 

Alternative 

Greenfield 

Corridor 

Alternative 

(Preferred 

Corridor 

Alternative) 

Vibration Number of Potential Vibration 

Receptor Impacts 29 to 37 21 to 26 145 to 149 

Parklands and 

Wildlife Refuges 

Acres of Parklands and Wildlife 

Refuge Sites 28 to 33 21 to 26 17 to 22 

Cultural and Historic 

Resources 

Number of Known Cultural 

Resources 110 to 117 49 to 52 37 to 44 

Threatened and 

Endangered Species 

Habitats 

Number of Known Threatened and 

Endangered Species Habitats 38 to 41 38 to 41 35 to 38 

Wetlands Acres of Wetlands 45 to 100 148 to 194 130 to 169 

Waterbody 

Crossings 

Number of Waterbody Crossings 

(Rivers, Streams, Lakes) 169 to 270 462 to 525 566 to 629 

Floodplains Acres of Floodplains 494 to 918 762 to 1,181 738 to 1,129 

Community Facilities Number of Known Community 

Facilities 354 to 366 185 to 187 116 to 120 

* Figure represents cumulative percentage of trips diverted for automobile, air, and intercity bus trips

 Preferred Corridor Alternative Attributes 

The Greenfield Corridor Alternative will be fully separated from the existing roadway and railroad transportation 

systems. The high-speed passenger rail corridor will be on a new dedicated ROW between CLT airport and a point 

west of Athens, GA before potentially following existing railroad ROW approaching the Charlotte and Atlanta termini. 

Dedicated, passenger-only tracks would be provided throughout; however, these might be shared with trains of 

other proposed intercity or commuter rail routes. Station opportunities for the Greenfield Corridor Alternative include: 

Charlotte Gateway, CLT airport, South Gastonia, GSP airport, Anderson, Athens, Suwanee, Lawrenceville, 

Doraville, Tucker, downtown Atlanta (Georgia MMPT), and H-JAIA. Exact alignment configurations and station 

locations would be dependent on the existing terrain, land use, land cover, roadway and railroad networks, and 

environmental conditions along the route and would be further defined during a Tier 2 NEPA analysis. 

Due to the size and complexity of the Project, FRA and GDOT will defer the following decisions to future Tier 2 

analysis: alignment of the corridor (including the approaches into Atlanta, Georgia and validating the route into 

Charlotte, North Carolina); locations of stations and facilities; operating equipment; propulsion technology type; and 

detailed operating characteristics. Separate Tier 2 NEPA documentation could be pursued for the Atlanta Approach, 

which could also consider other intercity passenger rail corridors and planned commuter rail corridors in the Atlanta 

or Charlotte area. A Tier 2 analysis will also validate the assumptions regarding the approach into Charlotte to CLT 

and the terminal Charlotte-Gateway Station. Concerning equipment technology, a Tier 2 analysis may explore a 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 29 

phased approach that would initially use diesel technology with the option to electrify the corridor over time, as 

funding allows. Tier 2 analysis could also explore phasing construction for the preferred alignment. The Tier 2 

process will continue the public involvement and agency coordination that began during this Tier 1 EIS. Should a 

project sponsor be identified and funding be secured, the Tier 2 process will further document a more detailed 

environmental analysis, including applicable permits and defining specific avoidance and mitigation measures. 

 Environmental Benefits, Consequences, and Potential Mitigation for the 

Preferred Corridor Alternative 

The FRA has selected the Greenfield Corridor Alternative as the Preferred Corridor Alternative in this Tier 1 

FEIS/ROD. A summary of key findings, including potential benefits and consequences for the Preferred Corridor 

Alternative are referenced in Section 3 in this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD and Chapter 3 and Exhibit 3.2-1 of the Tier 1 

DEIS. General mitigation and avoidance minimization strategies for potential impacts of the Preferred Corridor 

Alternative are discussed at the end of each affected environment section in the Tier 1 DEIS (refer to Sections 3.3-

3.10 of the Tier 1 DEIS). A table summarizing the potential environmental impacts of the Preferred Corridor 

Alternative are presented in Table 2-1: DEIS Public Meetings. Potential impacts to environmental resources 

analyzed include: 

 Transportation 

 Air Quality 

 Noise and Vibration 

 Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice 

 Parklands, Wildlife Refuges, and Recreational Areas 

 Cultural Resources 

 Water Resources 

 Biological Resources 

TABLE 3-2: SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 

Measures Greenfield Corridor Alternative 

Percentage of automobile trips diverted to rail (2050, rounded) 4% 

Percentage of air trips diverted to rail (2050, rounded) 10% 

Percentage of intercity bus rips diverted to rail (2050, rounded) 15% 

Number of potential noise receptor impacts 9,246-9,628 

Number of potential vibration-receptor impacts 145-149 

Percentage of Census Block Groups meeting EJ criteria for 

Minority Population 37.2%-37.7% 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 30 

Percentage of Census Block Groups meeting EJ criteria for LowIncome Population 19.02%-22.7% 

Parklands and Wildlife Refuges Sites (number) 17-22 

Parklands and Wildlife Refuges (acres) 48.01-66.18 

Known Historic Resources (number) 37-44 

Community Facilities (number) 116-120 

Wetlands (acres) 130-169 

Waterbody Crossings (number) 566-629 

Floodplains (acres) 738-1,129 

Known Threatened and Endangered Species Habitats (number) 35-38 

Natural Terrestrial Habitat (acres) 10,520-10,854 

*Table 3-2 presents the Greenfield Corridor Alternative’s environmental impacts as a range to represent the impacts of selecting 

either the NS or CSX Atlanta Approach. In future Tier II studies, this range will be refined based on the selection of the Atlanta 

Approach. 

During a Tier 2 NEPA study, field verification and a detailed preliminary design would be required to assess direct, 

indirect, and cumulative impacts of the Preferred Corridor Alternative (more than one preliminary design will need 

to be prepared for the Atlanta Approach corridor since this Tier 1 study has not selected the route for the Atlanta 

Approach in the Preferred Corridor Alternative). Background and desktop research, fieldwork, assessment of effects 

reporting for all special studies, and continued public involvement would also be included as part of the Tier 2 NEPA 

process. 

The Greenfield Corridor Alternative also best meets the Purpose and Need of the Project in the following ways: 

 The Greenfield Corridor Alternative would improve overall regional connectivity by providing an intercity 

passenger rail linkage between Atlanta and Charlotte and other proposed SEHSR locations, enhance 

multimodal transportation connections, improve capacity and travel times by decreasing travel times 

between major urban centers compared to auto and air time travel. 

 The Greenfield Corridor Alternative would provide a safe and reliable alternative mode resulting in 

improved energy efficiency and decreasing greenhouse gas emissions. 

 The Greenfield Corridor Alternative would promote economic development through increasing economic 

activity and employment opportunities via transportation connectivity resulting in a more productive and 

competitive economy with an expansion of the labor market along the corridor. 

 The Greenfield Corridor Alternative would potentially have fewer impacts on community facilities, parks, 

wildlife refuges and recreational areas, cultural resources, and biological resources identified in the Tier 1 

DEIS. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 31 

A brief description of the benefits, consequences, and mitigation to be further evaluated for each resource during 

any subsequent phases of work for the Project, including Tier 2 NEPA studies, are summarized below: 

Transportation (Section 3.3 of the DEIS) 

This section discusses the potential network-wide effects of the Greenfield Corridor Alternative on existing 

transportation facilities within the Study Area, and identifies potential measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate these 

effects. The potential effects include effects on ridership, travel time, level of service (LOS), connectivity, and 

operations. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 32 

TABLE 3-3: SUMMARY OF TRAVEL TIMES BY MODE 

Travel Mode Frequency of Trips 

(Round Trips)

Average Travel Time between 

Atlanta and Charlotte 

Automobile 

I-85 N/A 3 hours, 45 minutes21

I-20, I-77 N/A 4 hours, 43 minutes22

Intercity Bus 14 5 hours, 14-16 minutes, depending on carrier

 

Intercity Rail 

Amtrak Crescent 1 5 hours, 17 minutes23

 

Air 36 

American 18 1 hour 17 minutes (direct flight time only)24

Delta 18 1 hour, 10 minutes (direct flight time only)25

 

Passenger Rail Preferred 

Corridor Alternative 

 

Greenfield 8-11* 2 hours, 6 minutes** to 2 hours, 44 minutes 

* With electric high-speed technology, 11 round trips can be supported 

** Potential travel times for electric high-speed technologies 

Sources: HNTB Revenue and Ridership Results, May 2013; Websites of Greyhound, Megabus, and 

Amtrak; Google maps 

Effects on Auto Trips 

Regionally, rider choice to use passenger rail service instead of the existing highways could impact traffic near 

potential station locations. The local and regional effect on roadways due to the Preferred Project Alternative would 

be analyzed in the Tier 2 analysis. In general, the change in driving patterns would potentially affect roadway LOS, 

particularly in places where roadways already experience some congested time periods. 

Locally, the Preferred Corridor Alternative would change travel patterns near proposed stations as people travel to 

and from the stations. Localized roadway improvements may be required to accommodate roadway impacts 

resulting from the Project. Such improvements would relate to managing circulation, accommodating added traffic 

21 Travel times reflect start/end points from city-centers of Charlotte and Atlanta Google Maps Driving Directions, assumes vehicles are 

driving the posted speed limits 

22 Travel times reflect start/end points from city-centers of Charlotte and Atlanta. Google Maps Driving Directions, assumes vehicles are 

driving the posted speed limits 

23 Amtrak, http://www.amtrak.com/home (accessed on 1/31/18) 24 Estimate based on information provided by searching for weekday flights between Atlanta and Charlotte 25 This number is dependent on which rail alternative is preferred. However, The Volpe Center in their “Evaluation of High-Speed Rail 

Options in the Macon-Atlanta-Greenville-Charlotte Rail Corridor.” (2008) provides this estimate 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 33 

volume, and considering safety of pedestrians and bicyclists. Stations have the potential to induce re-zoning and 

development in the area around stations. For example, transit-oriented development (TOD), which increases the 

density of residential and commercial land uses, can change vehicular, transit, pedestrian and bicycle travel 

patterns. In coordination with local and state planning officials, each proposed station location will be examined 

during a Tier 2 analysis. Necessary improvements will be identified and recommended as warranted and reasonably 

feasible. 

The Tier 2 analysis will determine if roadway crossings are required and evaluate potential road closures and/or 

realignments. GDOT will coordinate with local governments to resolve rail- roadway design concerns. Roadway 

crossings would be guided by FRA’s 2009 Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Guidelines for High Speed Passenger Rail

which focuses on safety issues such as warning systems and traffic controls, train controls, barriers, and requires 

grade separations for high speed operation. GDOT anticipates that the Greenfield Corridor Alternative will not have 

any at-grade crossings. 

In 2025, the Greenfield Corridor Alternative remaining auto trips is estimated to be just over 104 million, therefore 

demonstrating the Greenfield Corridor Alternative as diverting close to four million auto-trips, or 3.5%. In 2050, 

GDOT estimates remaining auto trips at just over 114 million and diverting 4.3 million, or 3.6% of auto trips. 

Effects on Existing Rail 

Within the approaches to Atlanta and Charlotte, the Greenfield Corridor Alternatives would transition to dedicated 

passenger rail tracks in a shared-use freight corridor to access the stations including the Georgia MMPT, H-JAIA, 

CLT and Charlotte Gateway Station. GDOT anticipates that existing freight railroads will maintain the track and 

ROW that they own, and that the cost of track maintenance will be resolved through negotiations with the railroads.

Effects on Existing Transit 

Trip diversion from intercity bus travel is larger than automobile trip diversion. In 2025 and 2050, the Greenfield 

Corridor Alternative would divert 40,000 inter-city bus trips, or 17.4% and 15.4% respectively. 

Existing intercity bus travel is expected to provide a viable travel option in future years, but faster passenger rail 

service would divert some intercity bus travelers. The projected travel time for the Greenfield Corridor Alternative 

would be competitive with intercity bus service. The Greenfield Alternative would be significantly shorter than 

existing inter-city bus trip travel time. Table 3-3 shows a comparison of the travel times between Atlanta and 

Charlotte for existing modes and the Greenfield Corridor Alternative. 

Connectivity of the Project with existing transit services is an important need. Potential linkages will be studied 

during a Tier 2 analysis, including connections to Atlanta’s MARTA heavy rail system and Charlotte’s transit system. 

In addition, the Greenfield Corridor Alternative may introduce new stations that could affect local and regional bus 

transit routes. Some bus routes may also change to accommodate changes in traffic patterns resulting from the 

locations of stations. During construction, surface transit operations on roadways within the construction area could 

experience delays which would affect existing bus service. 

Effects on Air Transportation 

The introduction of a high-speed rail service with one or more stations at hub airports can produce changes in 

levels and patterns of commercial air travel. 

Table 3-3 provides the total number of trips, both for air and the Greenfield Corridor Alternative high-speed 

passenger rail service, occurring at the three primary airports in the Study Area. These trips are categorized by 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 34 

mode in order to illustrate the number of trips diverted from the air service to high-speed passenger rail service. 

The chart provides the potential diverted trips for each airport as well as for the entire corridor. For the Greenfield 

Corridor Alternative, the trip diversion was the greatest at the Greenville-Spartanburg Airport, diverting over 30 

percent in 2025 and 2050. As a result of a high-share of connecting air traffic and short travel distances (ATL to 

GSP is around 150 miles; CLT to GSP is around 100 miles), air trips may be diverted from GSP as travelers consider 

Atlanta or Charlotte as a possible alternate origin/destination of their air trips if high-speed rail offers competitive 

travel times to the hub airports. 

At H-JAIA and CLT, the projection of the Greenfield Corridor Alternative is 4 and 7 percent diversion of trips to a 

high-speed passenger rail service in 2025 and 2050. GDOT expects this lower diversion compared to GSP due to 

higher volume of annual riders. 

Potential Mitigation 

In future Tier 2 studies, the Project sponsor will make an effort to avoid and minimize negative impacts on 

transportation facilities as the Preferred Corridor Alternative advances. The Project sponsor will consider a number 

of strategies to mitigate impacts. Strategies that would mitigate the Project’s impacts on highways, local roads, 

transit operations, and parking will vary depending on the nature of the impact. For example, near stations or where 

the Preferred Corridor Alternative intersects with existing roadways, improvements may be required at intersections 

or roadway cross-sections to facilitate access and safe circulation Mitigation strategies may also include 

improvements to accommodate existing and growing freight traffic on shared rail right-of-way, such as bypass 

routes, additional tracks, signalization, and coordination with the host railroad. 

Station, parking, and maintenance facility designs could include operational and geometric improvements that 

maintain, wherever reasonably feasible, vehicle traffic conditions at acceptable levels of service. Mitigation could 

include the realignment of local traffic patterns and the creation of additional parking. Examples of roadway 

improvements to facilitate station access include turn lanes at intersections, local roadway capacity improvements, 

traffic control measures, coordination with local transit operations, and improvements in pedestrian and bicycle 

access. Landscape and streetscape enhancements could improve integration of stations with adjacent land uses. 

Air Quality (Section 3.4 of the DEIS) 

Operations Impacts 

Regardless of the rail technology selected, it is reasonable to assume that the Greenfield Alternative will not cause 

or contribute to an increase in criteria pollutants emissions. The Greenfield Corridor Alternative could result in net 

reduction of criteria pollutants within the Study Area and so would have positive long-term health benefits for the 

region. As noted above in the Transportation discussion, the Greenfield Corridor Alternative has the potential to 

positively affect regional air quality by attracting riders to rail service from other modes of transportation, particularly 

the widely-used automobile. The Greenfield Corridor Alternative has the greatest potential to attract riders from 

automobile use (4 percent), thereby reducing emissions within this area as compared to the No-Build alternative. 

Air quality impacts were assessed as a result of the overall potential reduction in emissions of the criteria air 

pollutants, based on the forecasted trips transferred from the highway system to HSR ridership, thereby potentially 

reducing the number of vehicles on the highway systems within the Project Study Area from which mobile emissions, 

including emissions from the criteria air pollutants that are the subject of the EPA’s National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) under the Clean Air Act (49 USC § 7409, et seq.). This Tier 1 EIS methodology does not 

include an analysis of greenhouse gases (GHG). The FRA anticipates that a project-level conformity analysis would 

be performed during Tier 2 NEPA studies. All regulations for the determination of the Project’s impact on air quality 

within the nonattainment regions in the Project Study Area and potential air quality impacts to neighborhoods and 

communities adjacent to HSR facilities, including stations and vehicle storage and maintenance facilities, would be 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 35 

assessed at that time. An assessment of the Project’s air quality impacts to populations protected by Executive 

Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks and Executive Order 12898, 

Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations would occur 

during Tier 2 NEPA studies. 

Construction Impacts 

GDOT anticipates minor, temporary localized construction impacts. The Project would adhere to the GDNR-EPD 

2010 Fugitive Dust regulation 391-3-1-02(2)(n) and the APC Regulation for Fugitive Dust (Chapter 1200-3-8). 

Construction activities can result in short-term, localized effects on ambient air quality and generate a temporary 

increase in Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT) emissions. These potential effects include direct emissions from 

construction equipment and trucks, increased emissions from motor vehicles on the streets due to disruption of 

traffic flow, and fugitive dust emissions. Emissions from construction equipment and trucks are expected to be much 

less than the total emissions from other industrial and transportation sources in the region, and therefore, are not 

expected to cause a violation of the NAAQS. Fugitive dust emissions could occur during demolition, ground 

excavation, material handling and storage, movement of equipment at the site, and transport of material to and from 

the site. 

Noise and Vibration (Section 3.5 of the DEIS) 

GDOT determined that, depending on the Atlanta Approach, the Greenfield Corridor Alternative has approximately 

9,246 and 9,628 noise receptors and between approximately 145 and 149 vibration receptors. Potential noise and 

vibration effects from the Project were identified and inventoried, comprising land use types that are noise- and 

vibration-sensitive, and the number of potential noise- and vibration-sensitive receptors within the Preferred 

Alternative. This Tier 1 EIS identifies potential receptors as a measure of potential impacts. This level of analysis 

does not indicate a negative noise or vibration impact, but the estimated number of possible noise and vibration 

receptors located within the Preferred Alternative. A Tier 2 analysis will conduct a detailed noise and vibration 

analysis of the Preferred Alternative and explore noise and vibration impacts related to construction activities and 

station areas. The Tier 2 analysis will also identify mitigation strategies for propulsion technology and station area. 

Potential Noise Mitigation 

Potential noise mitigation strategies include installing noise barriers, building sound insulation, source treatments, 

Quiet Zones (if pursued by local jurisdictions), grade separations, and routine maintenance. A Tier 2 analysis will 

include potential noise mitigation measures based on the specific area that would experience noise impacts. 

Potential Vibration Mitigation 

Potential vibration mitigation strategies include resilient track design, which can help control ground-borne vibration 

that exceeds FRA effect criteria. In addition, depending on the track design, there are different methods to control 

vibration. For direct fixation slab track, resilient fasteners are a mitigation option. For ballast and tie track, shredded 

tire aggregate or rubber ballast mats may be an appropriate mitigation. A Tier 2 analysis will potential vibration 

mitigation measures based on the specific area that would experience vibration impacts. 

Socioeconomic and Environmental Justice (Section 3.6 of the DEIS) 

Populations protected by Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income Populations were assessed for the Preferred Alternative based on the procedures 

and guidance included in USDOT Order 5610.2(a), Department of Transportation Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. GDOT determined that for the Greenfield Corridor 

Alternative with the NS Atlanta Approach, 37.7% of Census Block Groups meet Environmental Justice (EJ) criteria 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 36 

for Minority Populations, and for the Greenfield Corridor Alternative with the CSX approach, 37.2% of Census Block 

Groups meet EJ criteria for Minority Populations. GDOT determined that for the Greenfield Corridor Alternative with 

the NS Atlanta Approach 22.7% of Census Block Groups meet EJ criteria for Low-Income Populations and for the 

Greenfield Corridor Alternative with the CSX approach 19.02%% of Census Block Groups meet EJ criteria for LowIncome Populations. Additional analysis during subsequent phases of the Project, including Tier 2 NEPA, would 

evaluate potential impacts to the populations protected by the Executive Order and would provide additional 

opportunities for outreach and engagement of low-income and minority populations within the Preferred Alternative. 

Potential Mitigation 

Potential mitigation will depend on the nature and extent of impacts to the local communities, including 

displacements, noise and vibration, access, view-shed, and safety. Public and agency input will help to identify 

appropriate mitigation measures through a Tier 2 NEPA analysis. Potential site-specific mitigation strategies might 

include accommodation of pedestrian access at proposed station sites, measures to reduce the impacts of noise 

and vibration, coordination with localities to determine primary emergency routes, and construction Best 

Management Practices to lessen the temporary effects on area residents during construction. 

Parklands, Wildlife Refuges, and Recreational Areas (Section 3.7 of the DEIS) 

Based on parklands, recreational areas, and wildlife refuges resources identified during the desktop analysis of the 

GIS database, GDOT determined that several properties and resources potentially protected under Section 4(f) of 

the U.S. Department of Transportation Ace and Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act are 

located within the Preferred Corridor Alternative. GDOT identified 17 (48.01 acres) parklands and wildlife refuge 

sites on the Greenfield Corridor Alternative with the NS Approach and 22 (66.18 acres) parklands and wildlife refuge 

sites on the Greenfield Corridor Alternative with the CSX Approach. The potential use of these resources protected 

by Section 4(f) and Section 6(f) as a result of the Project will be further evaluated during Tier 2 NEPA studies and 

specific mitigation measures identified. 

Potential Mitigation

Using a tiered NEPA approach allows FRA to not preclude the ability to identify, evaluate and ultimately select a 

specific route within the Preferred Corridor Alternative that satisfies Section 4(f) and Section 6(f). The width of the 

Greenfield Corridor Alternative gives Tier 2 Project sponsors the flexibility to develop one of more alignments during 

Tier 2 NEPA studies and to potentially avoid or minimize impacts to 4(f) or 6(f) resources within the corridor. 

Opportunities to minimize harm to any Section 4(f) properties that may be used by the Project as evaluated during 

subsequent Tier 2 NEPA studies are not precluded by this Tier 1 FEIS/ROD. 

Cultural Resources (Section 3.8 of the DEIS) 

GDOT determined that the Greenfield Corridor Alternative with the NS Atlanta Approach has approximately 44 

known historic resources and the Greenfield Corridor Alternative with the CSX Corridor Alternative has 

approximately 37 known historic resources. Historic and archaeological resources identified during desktop analysis 

of the GIS database will be further evaluated during Tier 2 NEPA studies. Further consultation activities with the 

Georgia SHPO, South Carolina SHPO, North Carolina SHPO, Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPO), and 

other consulting parties as required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), will occur 

during Tier 2 NEPA studies. 

Potential Mitigation 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 37 

If potential adverse effects are determined through subsequent analysis, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), or 

multiple MOAs, with specific mitigation measures will be developed as warranted by the Project sponsor through 

consultation with the FRA, the SHPOs of Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina, other consulting parties and 

tribal partners in accord with NHPA Section 106 (ACHP 2004) and applicable state regulations. If NRHP-eligible 

archaeological sites cannot be avoided or protected, data recovery excavations could be conducted to mitigate the 

adverse impacts. Cemeteries and burial sites will be avoided to the extent feasible. Any effects to cemeteries that 

cannot be avoided will be treated in accordance with the federal and state requirements.26 

Water Resources (Section 3.9 of the DEIS) 

The Tier 1 DEIS identified numerous water resources within the Preferred Corridor Alternative. GDOT determined 

that the Greenfield Corridor Alternative with the NS Atlanta Approach contained approximately 130 acres of 

wetlands, 566 waterbody crossings, and 738 acres of floodplains; and the Greenfield Corridor Alternative with the 

CSX Approach contained 169 acres of wetlands, 629 waterbody crossings, and 1,129 acres of floodplains. An 

analysis of potential impacts to water resources, including 303(d) listed impaired waters, and general water quality 

issues within the Preferred Corridor Alternative would occur during Tier 2 NEPA studies. 

Potential Mitigation 

In accordance with the United States Army Corps of Engineers’ goal of no net loss of wetlands, the Project sponsor 

will aim to avoid and minimize impacts and use compensatory mitigation if necessary. As design progresses, the 

Project sponsor will examine reasonably feasible ways to avoid affecting wetlands, streams, and lakes that are 

appropriate to the scope and practicable in terms of cost. The Project sponsor will then examine appropriate and 

practicable steps to reduce the potential impacts to wetlands, streams, and lakes as Project design is refined. 

Minimization will typically focus on decreasing the footprint of the Project in and near these resources. Other 

examples of minimization that will be considered include: 

 Minimizing clearing and grubbing activity; 

 Decreasing or eliminating discharges into streams; 

 Minimization of activities within stream channels; and 

 Use of spanning structures and bottomless culverts over streams. 

As with wetlands, streams and lakes, the Project sponsor will examine reasonably feasible ways to avoid affecting 

floodplains that are appropriate to the scope and degree of the potential Project effects and practicable in terms of 

cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of the Project’s purpose. Minimization strategies could include design 

aspects such as right-angle crossings, typical section reductions, and increased numbers of bridge spans or longer 

span length. For water quality potential mitigation, surface waters would be reviewed to determine where it is 

possible and practical to avoid or minimize impacts to these resources and to water quality. Potential mitigation 

measures to be considered include the use of temporary and permanent Best Management Practices (BMPs) to 

avoid or minimize sediment pollution and water quality impacts through reductions in stormwater runoff from the 

site. Additionally, an Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plan would be prepared. Permanent BMPs, such as 

stormwater treatment or detention/retention facilities, or drainage channels/facilities, would be utilized where 

appropriate to improve stormwater management/flow and water quality. 

26 In 2016, FRA, NCDOT, the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and 

the State Historic Preservation Offices of North Carolina and Virginia signed a Programmatic Agreement (PA) detailing compliance with 

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for the SEHSR corridor between Richmond, VA and Raleigh, NC. That PA included 

provisions concerning adding other sections of the SEHSR and other signatories to the PA. 
FINAL EIS AND RECORD OF DECISION | June 2021 

Atlanta to Charlotte Tier 1 FEIS/ROD 38 

Biological Resources (Section 3.10 of the DEIS) 

GDOT determined that the Greenfield Corridor Alternative with the NS Atlanta Approach has approximately 35 

known threatened and endangered species habitats and the Greenfield Corridor Alternative with the CSX Corridor 

Alternative has approximately 38 known threatened and endangered species habitats. There is the potential to 

encounter numerous flora (plants) and fauna (bird, bat, fish, invertebrate, and vertebrate animal species) habitat 

and individual occurrences of species protected under state and federal laws in the Preferred Corridor Alternative 

based on information obtained during coordination activities with the Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

(GADNR), the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR), the North Carolina Wildlife Resources 

Commission and the Department of the Interior (DOI), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), during this 

Tier 1 EIS process. Further analysis of potential impacts to these resources, including a potential Section 7 

consultation process under the Endangered Species Act for potential adverse impacts to protected species within 

the Preferred Corridor Alternative, would occur during Tier 2 NEPA studies. 

Potential Mitigation

The Project sponsor will examine appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the potential effects of the Project on 

threatened and critical habitats. These steps will be implemented through design refinements in consultation with 

state and federal agencies as appropriate. Minimization will typically focus on decreasing the footprint of the Project 

in and near these critical habitats and alignment shifts to avoid populations and/or habitat areas. Potential mitigation 

and minimization strategies could include, but are not limited to, restricting construction activities during time of year 

that is sensitive to species (i.e., breeding, nesting, migration). Permanent BMPs, such as grassed channels, 

enhanced swales, infiltration trenches, stormwater ponds, and detention ponds, could provide measures to avoid 

or minimize impacts to biological resources.