USA Banner
  U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Here's how you knowOfficial US Government Icon
              **Official websites use .gov**A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
            Secure Site Icon
              **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                  A **lock** ( A locked padlock ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. 
 U.S. Department of Transportation Icon United States Department of Transportation
 Search DOT
            Search
                        About FRAAbout FRA
  

        
              Overview
                Organization
                Program Offices
                Resource Center
                Web Policies and Notices
                Contact Us
                Communications
                Governmental AffairsFeatured
  

        
              Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Information from FRA
                Careers
                Leadership Profiles
                Organizational Chart
                Newsroom
                Press Releases
                Speeches
                Fact Sheets
                TestimonyRailroad SafetyFeatured
  

        
              Train Horn Rule/Quiet Zones
                Public Blocked Crossings Incident Reporter
                Drug & Alcohol
                Safety Data
                C3RS
                High-Hazard Flammable Train Route AssessmentRailroad Safety
  

        
              Overview
                Railroad Crossing Safety & Trespass Prevention
                Accident Data & Reporting, Investigations
                Divisions
                Partnerships & ProgramsRail Network DevelopmentFeatured
  

        
              High-Speed Rail
                Amtrak
                Environmental Reviews
                GIS Maps
                RuralRail Network Development
  

        
              Overview
                Passenger Rail
                Freight Rail
                Environment
                Planning
                International
                Maps & Data
                Training & GuidanceResearch & DevelopmentFeatured
  

        
              R&D Current Projects
                Positive Train Control
                Hazardous Materials
                Highway-Rail Grade Crossing
                Close Call Reporting
                Broad Agency AnnouncementResearch & Development
  

        
              Overview
                Program Areas
                R&D ReportsLegislation & RegulationsFeatured
  

        
              FAST Act
                National Rail Plan
                Proposed State Rail Plan
                Civil PenaltiesLegislation & Regulations
  

        
              Overview
                Legislation
                Regulations & Rulemaking
                Buy AmericaGrants & LoansFeatured
  

        
              FRA Discretionary Grant Program Tool
                Discretionary Grant Calendar
                Railroad Capital Project Guidance
                FRA Webinars
                DOT GrantsGrants & Loans
  

        
              Overview
                Grant Programs
                Applying for Grants
                Resources for Grant Recipients
                Training & GuidanceFRA eLibraryeLibrary
  

        
              Accidents & Fatalities
                Compliance
                Conferences & Presentations
                Emergency & Safety
                Enforcement & Litigation
                Publications & Policy
                Reports
                OtherMenu Home
                        Rail Network Development
                        Environment
                        Environmental Reviews
                        Washington Union Station Expansion Project


            
            In This Section
        Washington Union Station Expansion Project
                                Overview
                Project Area
                Purpose and Need
                Environmental Impact Statement
                                Overview
                Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD)
                Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS)
                Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
                FAQs & Helpful Links
                                FAQ's
                Helpful Links
                Public Engagement
                                Public Hearings: June 2023 - Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS)
                Telephonic Public Hearing: July 14, 2020
                Focused Public and Stakeholder Engagement: Fall 2018 – Winter 2019
                Updated Action Alternative Diagrams: November 2019
                Public Meeting #4: March 22, 2018
                Concept Development Report: August, 2017
                Public Meeting #3: October 19, 2016
                Public Meeting #2 (Info Forum): March 30, 2016
                Public Meeting #1 (Project Scoping): December 7, 2015
                Historic Properties
                
                Washington Union Station Expansion Project: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
    

    
    
    
      

            Expand All
      Collapse All
        **About the Project**
        **What is the Washington Union Station Expansion Project (Project)?**
The Project reconstructs and realigns tracks and platforms; develops new passenger concourses; improves multimodal transportation facilities; and improves and expands other supporting facilities at Washington Union Station (Station).

**Who is the Project Sponsor?**
Union Station Redevelopment Corporation (USRC) is the Project Sponsor responsible for implementing the Project through final design and construction, in coordination with Amtrak. USRC is also responsible for implementing the Project mitigation measures.

**What is the purpose of the Project?**
The purpose of the Project is to support current and future growth in rail service and operational needs; achieve compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and emergency egress requirements; facilitate intermodal travel; provide a positive customer experience; enhance integration with the adjacent neighborhoods, businesses, and planned land uses; sustain Union Station’s economic viability; and support continued preservation and use of the historic Station building.

**Why is the Project needed?**
The Project is needed to improve rail capacity, reliability, safety, efficiency, accessibility, and security, for both current and future long-term railroad operations at the historic Station. Many Station facilities are currently at or exceed their practical capacity. Additional growth in rail service and ridership will quickly push the Station beyond its capacity unless substantial efforts are made to accommodate the growth. Washington Union Station’s passenger facilities, including platforms, waiting areas, and customer support services, are not adequate to serve existing or projected future passenger demand for Amtrak and commuter rail. Multimodal operations and access are frequently constrained today and will be more so in the future. The layout and siting of the Station restrict connectivity with neighbors and need to be enhanced. Finally, to provide for a sustainable future for Washington Union Station’s preservation and maintenance, the Station needs to remain financially viable.

**What is Union Station Redevelopment Corporation (USRC)?**
USRC is a non-profit organization that acts as the landlord for Washington Union Station and is its public steward. USRC is committed to working closely with FRA, which owns the Station building, to ensure the preservation of this essential historic transportation facility. For more information, visit USRC’s website.

**What is USRC’s role in the Project?**
USRC and Amtrak developed concept plans for the Station expansion. The concept plans were submitted to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to support the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process. USRC is also the Project Sponsor and responsible for implementing the Project through final design and construction, in coordination with Amtrak. USRC also has responsibility for implementing the Project’s mitigation measures.

**What is Amtrak?**
Amtrak operates a nationwide rail network, serving 500 destinations across the U.S. and portions of Canada. It is the operator of choice for state-supported corridor services in 15 states and for four commuter rail agencies. Amtrak owns the rail infrastructure (tracks, platforms, and supporting facilities) at Washington Union Station and is the majority owner of the Northeast Corridor (NEC) rail network between Washington, DC, and Boston, MA.

**What is Amtrak’s role in this Project?**
Amtrak, along with USRC, was a Project Proponent USRC and Amtrak developed concept plans for the Station expansion. The concept plans were submitted to FRA to support the EIS process.

Amtrak has responsibility for planning improvements to the tracks and platforms at the Station. Both Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC) and Virginia Railway Express (VRE) have maintenance and/or operating agreements with Amtrak to provide commuter rail service at Washington Union Station and along portions of the Northeast Corridor. For more information, visit Amtrak.

**What is the Federal Railroad Administration?**
FRA is one of ten agencies within the U.S. Department of Transportation focused on intermodal transportation. FRA’s mission is to enable the safe, reliable, and efficient movement of people and goods for a strong America, now and in the future. FRA is the owner of Washington Union Station. For more information about FRA, visit FRA’s website.

**What is FRA’s Role in this Project?**
FRA, as owner of Union Station, was the lead Federal agency preparing the EIS to evaluate the Project’s potential impacts to the human and natural environment.

Following the completion of the EIS process, if FRA provides financial assistance for the Project, the grant agreement would include a requirement to implement the mitigations identified in the ROD. In addition, FRA would conduct periodic monitoring in accordance with its established grant monitoring program throughout the period of performance of the grant. During monitoring, FRA would verify that a grantee complies with all applicable Federal requirements as laid out in the grant agreement, including the implementation of mitigation.

**What is the 2012 Union Station Master Plan?**
The 2012 Union Station Master Plan was a vision plan created by USRC, Amtrak, and Akridge (a private developer). USRC and Amtrak subsequently proposed the Project to address the intermodal transportation needs at Washington Union Station.

**How does the Project relate to the 2012 Union Station Master Plan?**
The 2012 Union Station Master Plan was an aspirational vision and planning effort, without public involvement, that helped Amtrak, Akridge, and USRC define goals for long-term expansion of the Station and near-term improvements to passenger facilities.

The Project was developed by USRC and Amtrak in a robust public EIS process led by FRA. The Project also was coordinated with numerous agencies and in accordance with applicable laws.

During the Project’s EIS process, certain elements of the 2012 Union Station Master Plan vision were determined to be impractical or inconsistent with other relevant policy and planning goals. Generally, the Project implements the 2012 Union Station Master Plan objective for an improved Station that meets multimodal transportation needs, enhances the customer experience, and facilitates future air rights development.

**What is Akridge?**
Akridge is a private development company that owns a portion of the air rights over the tracks and platforms at Union Station. The United States General Services Administration (GSA) administered and approved the sale of the air rights to Akridge in 2006. Through this transaction, Akridge owns an approximately 14-acre area starting 70 to 80 feet above sea level from north of the historic Station to K Street NE.

The areas currently occupied by the Claytor Concourse, vehicular ramps, and Union Station’s bus and parking facility remain in Federal ownership.

**What is Burnham Place?**
Burnham Place is a private development project, proposed by Akridge, to be built within the air rights Akridge owns over the tracks and platforms at Union Station. Burnham Place is a separate and independent project from the Project. It does not involve Federal funding or require Federal approvals that would subject it to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. Akridge is solely responsible for ensuring that Burnham Place undergoes any required review and regulatory process under applicable District of Columbia laws and regulations. For more information on the private development project please visit Burnham Place’s website.
  


      **Environmental Review Process**
        **What is the NEPA process?**
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) established a national policy and framework to ensure the potential human and natural environmental impacts of major Federal actions are evaluated prior to decision making. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)’s actions relating to the Washington Union Station Expansion Project (Project) may include issuing approvals or providing funding in the future for design or construction. The Project alternatives include the potential redevelopment of Federally owned air rights. If such development does occur in the future, FRA may be involved with the transfer, lease, or disposal of this property as a separate Federal action. Therefore, the Project must go through the NEPA process. As the Lead Agency, FRA prepared the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Project.

**What is an EIS?**
An EIS is prepared to document a Federal agency’s NEPA analysis for major actions. An EIS evaluates the reasonable range of alternatives and the potential impacts of those alternatives on the human and natural environment. As an essential part of this evaluation, an EIS takes into consideration input from the public and applicable Federal, state, and local agencies.

**What was the NEPA process for the Project?**
FRA published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS for the Project in the Federal Register on November 4, 2015. The NOI announced the beginning of the environmental review and scoping process for the Project. The scoping process ended on January 4, 2016.

On June 4, 2020, FRA made the Draft EIS (DEIS) for the Project available for public review. The DEIS evaluated the impacts of the No-Action Alternative and six Action Alternatives (Alternatives A through E and Alternative A-C, with Alternative A-C identified as the Preferred Alternative). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a Notice of Availability of the DEIS in the Federal Register on June 12, 2020, with a comment period ending on July 27, 2020. Prior to the expiration of the comment period, FRA received multiple requests for an extension. In response to these requests, FRA extended the comment period through September 28, 2020 (for a total of 116 days). EPA published an amended notice announcing the extended comment period in the Federal Register on July 2, 2020.

After the closing of the DEIS public comment period and following review of the agency and public comments received, FRA decided to pause the EIS process to allow the Project Proponents (Union Station Redevelopment Corporation [USRC] and Amtrak) to further coordinate with stakeholders regarding the Project elements. The pause lasted from October 2, 2020, through July 11, 2022. During that time, FRA and the Project Proponents developed Alternative F to address the public and agency comments received on the DEIS Action Alternatives.

In July 2022, FRA identified Alternative F as the new Preferred Alternative and re-initiated the NEPA process. FRA determined that, relative to the Action Alternatives analyzed in the DEIS, the new Preferred Alternative included significant changes with potential to alter the Project’s environmental impacts. Therefore, FRA initiated the preparation of a Supplemental DEIS (SDEIS) in accordance with Paragraph 13 Section (e) of the *Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts*.

FRA released the SDEIS for public review on May 12, 2023. EPA published a Notice of Availability of the SDEIS in the Federal Register on May 19, 2023, with a comment period ending on July 6, 2023. The SDEIS described the process through which FRA and the Project Proponents developed the new Preferred Alternative and evaluated its impacts. The SDEIS also identified USRC as the Project Sponsor.

Consistent 23 USC 139 (n)(2), on March 12, 2024, FRA signed a single document consisting of the Final EIS (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD) for the Project. 23 USC 139 (n) (2) directs that “to the maximum extent practicable, the lead agency shall expeditiously develop a single document that consists of a final environmental impact statement and a record of decision, unless (A) the final environmental impact statement makes substantial changes to the proposed action that are relevant to environmental or safety concerns; or (B) there is a significant new circumstance or information relevant to environmental concerns that bears on the proposed action or the impacts of the proposed action.”

There were no substantial changes to the Project or the Preferred Alternative since the issuance of the SDEIS. There were no significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns on the Project or its impacts. Because FRA and the Project Proponents developed the Preferred Alternative (Alternative F) to address substantive agency and public comments on the Action Alternatives presented in the DEIS, the FEIS considers two alternatives only: the No-Action Alternative and the Preferred Alternative.

The ROD documents and explains FRA’s decision to select the Preferred Alternative (Alternative F) for implementation.

**Who is the Project Sponsor?**
USRC is the Project Sponsor, responsible for implementing the Project through final design and construction in coordination with Amtrak. As Project Sponsor, USRC has responsibility for implementing the measures defined in the FEIS/ROD to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the adverse impacts of the Project.

**What were the Cooperating Agencies?**
As Lead Agency, FRA invited other agencies having jurisdiction by law, or agencies with special expertise on resources potentially affected by the Project, to be Cooperating Agencies for the EIS. Those agencies that accepted cooperating agency status included:

National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC): NCPC is the Federal government’s central planning agency for the National Capital Region. NCPC provides overall planning guidance for Federal land and buildings in the region by reviewing the design of Federal and certain local projects, overseeing long-range planning for future development, and monitoring capital investment by Federal agencies.
	Federal Transit Administration (FTA): FTA is a modal administration within the United States Department of Transportation. FTA’s purview is public transportation and transit systems.
	District Department of Transportation (DDOT): DDOT manages and maintains the District of Columbia’s (District’s) publicly owned transportation infrastructure and is the owner of the District’s street network. DDOT has jurisdiction over rights-of-way in the District, including travel lanes, on-street parking, sidewalk space, and public space between the property line and the edge of the sidewalk nearest to the property line. DDOT is leading projects to replace the H Street Bridge, creating a need for coordination between DDOT and FRA as part of planning for the Project.Through the publication of the 2020 DEIS, the National Park Service (NPS) was also identified as a Cooperating Agency. On January 24, 2023, NPS notified FRA that it would no longer serve as a Cooperating Agency. The Project would not affect any resources under the jurisdiction of NPS.

**How did the EIS address impacts on nearby neighborhoods?**
The EIS considered and evaluated the Project’s potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on the areas adjacent to and surrounding Washington Union Station. The resource topic areas addressed included: air quality; water resources and water quality; natural ecological systems; noise and vibration; energy resources; greenhouse gas emissions and resilience; solid waste disposal and hazardous materials; aesthetics and visual quality; transportation; land use, land planning, and property; social and economics; environmental justice; public health, the elderly, and persons with disabilities; public safety and security; parks and recreation; and cultural resources. For each of these main resource topic areas, FRA defined appropriate local and regional study area(s) to ensure that the potential impacts were fairly and accurately described in the EIS.

**What is Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act?**
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.), along with its implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800), requires that Federal agencies, like FRA, consider the effects of the projects they fund or approve on historic properties and afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), other consulting parties, and the public opportunity to comment. The Section 106 process assesses the potential effects of the Project on historic properties. An adverse effect is found when a project may alter the characteristics of a historic property that qualify it for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), affecting both the significance and integrity of the property. The goal of Section 106 is to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to historic properties from Federal projects. For additional information on the Section 106 process see the ACHP website.

**Would the Project affect any historic properties?**
Due to the potential for the Project to affect historic properties, FRA conducted an extensive review in compliance with the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and 36 CFR Part 800.

On March 10, 2023, in accordance with 36 CFR § 800.5, FRA determined that the Preferred Alternative (Alternative F) would have an adverse effect on the following historic properties: Washington Union Station, the Washington Union Station Historic Site, and the Railway Express Agency (REA) Building. The Preferred Alternative could also have a potential adverse effect on the  City Post Office (Postal Museum). For more information on the Project’s effects to historic properties, see the Supplemental Assessment of Effects.

To resolve the adverse effects of the Project, FRA developed a Programmatic Agreement (PA) among FRA, the District’s State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), ACHP, NCPC, FTA, USRC, and Amtrak (the Signatories). FRA made the draft PA available for public and consulting party review, along with the SDEIS, from May 12 through July 6, 2023. FRA worked with the Signatories to the revise the PA and provided consulting parties a final opportunity to review the PA in early 2024. After considering the comments received, FRA finalized and executed the PA on February 26, 2024. The executed PA is included in the FEIS as Appendix F4.

**What is Section 4(f)?**
Section 4(f) of the United States Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 USC 303) protects public parks and recreational lands; wildlife refuges; and historic sites that are eligible for or listed in the NRHP from acquisition or conversion to transportation use. A United States Department of Transportation agency, including FRA, may approve a transportation project that uses these resources only if there is no feasible and prudent avoidance alternative and the project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the resources, or the use meets the requirements for a de minimis impact. A Draft 4(f) Evaluation of the Preferred Alternative was made available for public review as Chapter 6 of the SDEIS from May 12 through July 6, 2023. Chapter 6 of the FEIS presents the Final Section 4(f) Evaluation.

**What were the findings of the Final Section 4(f) Evaluation?**
In the Final Section 4(f) Evaluation, FRA found that the Preferred Alternative results in the use of three Section 4(f) properties:

Washington Union Station: The Preferred Alternative would physically impact Washington Union Station and permanently incorporate it into the expanded multimodal transportation hub the Project would construct. Physical impacts would include the removal of the Claytor Concourse and the construction of a new passenger concourse and train hall on the north side of the historic station building, as well as the removal of original columns in the portion of the First Street Tunnel below the historic Retail and Ticketing Concourse.
	Washington Union Station Historic Site: The Preferred Alternative would physically impact the WUS Historic Site and permanently incorporate it into the expanded multimodal transportation hub the Project would construct. The Preferred Alternative would cause extensive physical impacts within the rail terminal, including the reconstruction of all tracks, platforms, and associated infrastructure.
	REA Building: The Preferred Alternative would permanently incorporate some land within the REA Building historic property boundary into the expanded multimodal transportation hub the Project would construct.FRA found that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of Section 4(f) properties for the Project and that the Preferred Alternative includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the Section 4(f) properties resulting from such use.

USRC would minimize or mitigate the impacts on these three resources by implementing the measures specified in the Project’s Final PA prepared in accordance with 36 CFR § 800.14(b)(1)(ii). The PA is included in Appendix F4 of the FEIS.
  


      **Preferred and Selected Alternatives**
        **What was FRA’s Preferred Alternative?**
A “preferred alternative" is the alternative that the lead Federal agency believes would best fulfill the purpose and need for a project while balancing impacts on the natural and human environment. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) require Federal agencies to identify the agency’s Preferred Alternative in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) if one exists.

In advance of the publication of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Project in 2020, FRA, working with the Project Proponents (Union Station Redevelopment Corporation [USRC] and Amtrak), developed six Action Alternatives (Alternatives A through E and Alternative A-C) through a multi-step alternative development process. All six Action Alternatives included the following elements: preserving the historic station; reconstructing the tracks and platforms; a new bus facility; a new train hall; parking; concourses and retail; for-hire vehicles access; and bicycle and pedestrian access. The DEIS Action Alternatives differed in the size and location of the train hall, bus facility, and parking facility.

In the 2020 DEIS, FRA identified Alternative A-C as the Preferred Alternative. Alternative A-C featured an east-west train hall north of the historic Station building; an above-ground, 1,600-space parking facility; and a 40-slip bus facility. Both the parking facility and the bus facility were sited in a new structure to be built approximately where the existing Washington Union Station (WUS) parking garage stands, primarily within the Federally-owned property.

After public review of the 2020 DEIS, FRA paused the NEPA process to consider comments. During the pause, FRA worked with the Project Proponents to develop a new Action Alternative (Alternative F) to address the DEIS comments.

In July 2022, FRA identified Alternative F as the new Preferred Alternative. The potential impacts of the new Preferred Alternative were evaluated in a Supplemental DEIS (SDEIS) issued on May 12, 2023. The SDEIS was available for public review and comment through July 6, 2023.

Following the SDEIS public review period, FRA considered all substantive comments received on the DEIS and SDEIS, which were addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). Because FRA developed Alternative F to address substantive agency and public comments on the Action Alternatives presented in the DEIS, the FEIS considered only two alternatives: the No-Action Alternative and the Preferred Alternative (Alternative F). Along with the FEIS, FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) documenting and explaining which alternative FRA selected for implementation.

What alternative did FRA select for implementation?
FRA selected Alternative F (the Preferred Alternative) for implementation after considering purpose and need; the potential short-term and long-term benefits and impacts on the human and natural environment; and public and agency comments.

In the Selected Alternative (Alternative F):

The rail terminal is reconstructed to replace the existing tracks and platforms with 19 new tracks: 12 stub-end tracks on the west side and seven run-through tracks on the east side, along with associated platforms.
	Four new concourses are provided to facilitate public access and circulation, and accommodate new retail.
	An east-west train hall is constructed just north of the historic station building, replacing the existing, non-historic Claytor Concourse.
	Parking would be a one-level, below-ground parking facility shared with the pick-up and drop-off facility. The parking facility provides between 400 and 550 spaces and is accessible via ramps on G Street NE and First Street NE. In addition, an exit ramp on the east side of WUS allows taxis to drive to the front of the station to pick up passengers.
	A 39-slip bus facility integrated into the H Street deck and connecting directly to the train hall is constructed, with available overflow space on the H Street deck capable of accommodating approximately 15 buses in times of very high demand, for a total capacity of 54 buses.
	Bicycle access is facilitated by two ramps, one on the west side and one on the east side of the station. Bicycle parking and storage would be provided beneath the ramps and in the H Street Concourse near the entrances on First and Second Streets NE. Additional Bikeshare spots would also be provided near WUS.
	New pedestrian access is provided under the H Street Bridge, on the sides of the train hall, and via headhouses at the deck level on both sides of the H Street Bridge.
	A “Visual Access Zone” (area free of Project elements between H Street and the train hall) and a “Daylight Access Zone” (area in which skylights would be installed to provide the new station concourse underneath with natural light) enable the establishment of a centralized civic space on the H Street deck. The private air rights developer would have primary responsibility for the design of the civic space and implement it in coordination with the Project Sponsor for the shared elements supporting the Project.
	Federal air rights are made available by the demolition of the existing parking garage. While this is not part of the Project, these air rights could be available for potential future transfer and development.The Selected Alternative was estimated to cost approximately $8.8 billion and take approximately 13 years to construct. There is currently no funding for further design and construction of the Selected Alternative.

**What is the Environmentally Preferable Alternative?**
The CEQ regulations implementing NEPA require that an agency identify the Environmentally Preferable Alternative in its ROD. The Environmentally Preferable Alternative is the alternative that, on balance, causes the least harm to the natural and physical environment and that best protects, preserves, and enhances historical, cultural, and natural resources, after consideration of relevant factors and national policy. FRA weighed and balanced the environmental effects associated with the alternatives considered, including the No-Action Alternative and the Preferred Alternative (Alternative F), and found that the Selected Alternative (Alternative F) is the Environmentally Preferable Alternative.

In the No-Action Alternative, the Project would not be implemented. While smaller projects by USRC and Amtrak would address some of the shortcomings of the existing station over time, they would not address these shortcomings in a comprehensive manner. Without the reconstruction of the rail terminal included in the Selected Alternative, the capacity of WUS to accommodate anticipated future growth in rail travel would remain substantially constrained, with effects on the availability of rail service along the entire Northeast Corridor. Without the substantial improvements included in the Preferred Alternative, the anticipated growth would exacerbate crowded conditions at the Station and result in a deterioration of user experience.

In the short term, the No-Action Alternative would have fewer impacts on the environment than the Selected Alternative. The difference is mitigated by the potential development of the privately owned air rights above the rail terminal, which would generate impacts comparable to those of the Selected Alternative, including on the cultural resources affected by the Project.

By supporting long-term growth in rail travel, the Selected Alternative would better fulfill long-term transportation needs than the No-Action Alternative. The *U.S. National Blueprint for Transportation Decarbonization* notes that the transportation sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States and identifies the expansion of affordable, efficient, and reliable options like public transportation and rail as one of three key strategies to improve environmental efficiency.
  


      **Transportation Improvements**
        **How does the Project support and relate to regional rail planning?**
The Washington Union Station Expansion Project (Project) improves a critical piece of rail infrastructure to accommodate increased intercity and commuter rail service into the future. By reconstructing all tracks and platforms, as well as providing new internal circulation space and amenities, the Project accommodates the levels of train service envisioned in FRA’s NEC FUTURE plan and supports new service, such as Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC) - Virginia Railway Express (VRE) through-running trains and the Metropolitan (Metro) intercity service.

The Project complements the expansion of intercity passenger service south of Washington, DC (District), which includes the Long Bridge and DC2RVA Projects on the Southeast Corridor. The Project allows Amtrak, MARC, and VRE to achieve the higher levels of service outlined in their long-term plans.

**How does the Project support multimodal transportation at Washington Union Station?**
The Union Station Redevelopment Act of 1981 calls for the Station to be a multimodal transportation center. The Project enhances multimodal connections at the Station with:

New concourses that would improve internal passenger circulation among transportation modes, including enhanced connections to the Union Station Metrorail Station;
	More direct Station access to the DC Streetcar;
	Additional bicycle parking and storage;
	Improvements around the Station to enhance pedestrian and bicycle access;
	A purpose-built facility for the District’s principal hub for intercity and tour/charter buses; and
	Below-ground parking and pick-up/drop-off facility.**Why is a bus facility included in the Project and what services would be provided?**
Buses provide an important transportation service at the multimodal Washington Union Station. Tour/charter buses have operated in the bus facility since it opened in the 1980s, and intercity buses were brought into the facility as part of a cooperative agreement in 2012. The bus facility provides convenient access for scheduled intercity travel and connections for visitors to the District of Columbia.

All Action Alternatives replaced the bus facility to serve both tour/charter and intercity buses with a modern facility designed to accommodate their future growth. The new bus facility includes new and expanded waiting areas for passengers and eliminates conflicts between pedestrians and buses within the facility. It would provide better connections to other modes of travel at the Station.

The Selected Alternative (Alternative F) features an east-west facility integrated into the deck that provides direct passenger access to the adjacent east-west train hall. The bus facility has 39 slips. In times of particularly high demand, the H Street deck-level pick-up and drop-off area adjacent to the train hall could be used by buses, providing the equivalent of 15 additional slips.

**How is pick-up and drop-off distributed throughout the Project?**
Like all major transportation hubs, Union Station is expected to see continued growth in pick-up and drop-off demand, including “for-hire” services like Uber or Lyft. Providing multiple pick-up and drop-off locations can reduce the existing challenges at the front of the Station and better manage spillover of pick-up and drop-off activity onto adjacent streets. Multiple locations are convenient to different directions from the Station and can also shorten the walking distance for Station passengers in accessing their ride. In the Selected Alternative, there would be pick-up and drop-off locations on First Street NE, Second Street NE, and at the H Street deck level next to the new train hall.

In response to comments received on the 2020 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), the Selected Alternative also includes a below-ground pick-up and drop-off facility that is expected to accommodate approximately half of the pick-up and drop-off activity generated by Washington Union Station. The below-ground facility is accessed via ramps on G Street NE and First Street NE. A ramp on the east side of the Station provides taxis with access from the facility to the front of the Station. Taxis would be able to queue in the facility before moving up to the front of the Station to pick up waiting passengers.

**How much parking is provided in the Project?**
Parking provides multimodal access and connectivity for intercity rail and bus passengers, in addition to visitors to the Station, and analysis indicated there is future demand for parking at WUS.

In the 2020 DEIS, the Action Alternatives included parking for approximately 1,600 vehicles (a 38 percent reduction from existing conditions). Comments on the 2020 DEIS showed a strong public concern with the amount of parking included in the Project as well as with the location of the parking facility. FRA considered these comments and refined the Project’s parking program when developing Alternative F.

The Selected Alternative (Alternative F) features a one-level below-ground facility used both for parking and for pick-ups and drop-offs. Because of this dual purpose, the facility accommodates approximately 400 to 550 parking spaces. This represents approximately a 77% reduction in parking capacity relative to existing conditions.

**How was the Project coordinated with DDOT?**
DDOT was a Cooperating Agency for the EIS. Cooperating Agencies are agencies that have jurisdiction by law or special expertise on resources potentially affected by a project. From the beginning of the Project, FRA met more than 50 times with DDOT staff on matters such as the H Street Bridge Replacement, the DC Streetcar, multimodal planning, vehicular circulation, the location of ramps to the below-ground facility, and bicycle and pedestrian access.

Coordination with DDOT continued through the issuance of the Record of Decision (ROD). FRA worked with DDOT on finalizing the measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts on the transportation network around Washington Union Station that are defined in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and the ROD. Most of these measures involve further coordination with DDOT during and after the completion of the Project.

**How does the Selected Alternative manage Station-related traffic?**
The Selected Alternative employs multiple approaches to manage traffic related to the Station. In particular, refinements to H Street-level circulation reduce the number of required intersections and improve expected traffic operations there relative to the 2020 DEIS Action Alternatives.

FRA and the Project Proponents found that the greatest generator of vehicular trips to and from Washington Union Station by 2040 would be cars picking up or dropping off passengers at the Station. To minimize the impacts of traffic, the Selected Alternative includes several designated pick-up and drop-off areas that distribute cars across several locations and help to keep pick-up and drop-off traffic away from residential streets. Approximately half of all pick-ups and drop-offs would occur in the below-ground facility featured in the Selected Alternative.

Additional strategies to reduce Station-related traffic through improved multimodal connections would be developed as Project design progresses in accordance with the minimization and mitigations measures defined in the ROD. For instance, the ROD specifies that Union Station Redevelopment Corporation (USRC), the Project Sponsor, may develop and implement a Performance Monitoring Plan in coordination with DDOT, consistent with DDOT’s Comprehensive Transportation Review (CTR) guidelines for Performance Monitoring.
  


      **Urban Design and Public Space**
        **How does the Project preserve and enhance the historic Station building?**
Like all the Action Alternatives the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) considered, the Selected Alternative (Alternative F) preserves and enhances the historic Washington Union Station (Station) building. In the Selected Alternative, the Washington Union Station Expansion Project (Project) maintains the historic Station building as the primary entrance and a grand welcoming space worthy of the nation’s capital. The proposed train hall retains the symmetrical orientation of the Station’s Beaux-Arts design. The Project removes the existing parking garage, which features an overhang that disrupts the profile of the Station and the view along First Street NE.

**How does the Project incorporate urban design, placemaking, and neighborhood integration?**
The Project’s conceptual design is intended to incorporate world-class architecture befitting the special location of Washington Union Station. The Project creates a great public train hall to complement the historic Station building and its architecture. The train hall and other major public concourses include active uses, amenities, and architectural features to enhance the public realm of the nation’s capital. The train hall seeks to transform the experience of passengers arriving at Washington Union Station and provide an attractive gateway to the District of Columbia.

The sides of the rail yard remain one level above First and Second Streets NE. The Project creates a new H Street Concourse, with entrances below the H Street Bridge punctuating the rail yard wall along First and Second Streets NE. This enhances and activates the urban setting and provides a friendlier pedestrian connection between the NoMa and Capitol Hill neighborhoods than the existing H Street Bridge. At the H Street Bridge level, the Project provides new connections to the Station through entrances to the new H Street Concourse below.

The Project is adjacent to a planned private air rights development (Burnham Place) located above the rail yard between K Street and the back of the Station. Burnham Place is a separate and independent project from the Washington Union Station Expansion Project; however, during the development of the Selected Alternative, FRA, Union Station Redevelopment Corporation (USRC), and Amtrak coordinated with the private air rights developer (Akridge) on opportunities to enable a civic space on the H Street deck level. This coordination effort is consistent with the Project’s purpose of integrating the Project with adjacent land uses and is responsive to comments from numerous agencies on the 2020 DEIS.

Coordination with Akridge focused on developing an approach to the Project elements at the H Street deck level that enhance opportunities for the creation of a civic space commensurate with Washington Union Station’s historic and architectural significance, centered on the historic Station building. Moving parking below ground and integrating the bus facility into the H Street deck makes it possible to establish a strong visual connection between the Station and H Street. It also allows for an overall site design respectful of the symmetry of Washington Union Station.

The private air rights developer would be primarily responsible for the design and construction of the civic space. The private developer and USRC, the Project Sponsor, would coordinate to design Project elements within the civic space, such as skylights to provide the passenger concourse below with daylight.
  


      **Implementation**
        **Who is responsible for implementing the Washington Union Station Expansion Project (Project)?**
Union Station Redevelopment Corporation (USRC) is the Project Sponsor responsible for implementing the Project through final design and construction. USRC is also responsible for mitigation measures specified in the Record of Decision (ROD).

USRC is a non-profit organization that acts as the landlord for Union Station and is its public steward. USRC would implement the Project in coordination with Amtrak, which owns the rail infrastructure (tracks, platforms, and supporting facilities) at the Station.

In the post NEPA-phase of the Project, USRC would continue to coordinate with Project stakeholders, including but not limited to, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Amtrak, Virginia Railway Express (VRE), the Maryland Transit Authority (MTA), the District Department of Transportation (DDOT), the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), and intercity bus operators, to implement the Project and the commitments identified in the ROD.

During the preparation of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), USRC participated in the Union Station Expansion Project Delivery and Governance Study (Study) that Infrastructure DC (IDC) led in partnership with the District of Columbia government. Starting in May 2023, IDC worked with an Advisory Group composed of representatives from FRA, USRC, Amtrak, the US Department of Transportation, the District of Columbia Office of Planning, and DDOT to identify delivery, financing, and governance mechanisms needed to realize the Project. At the time of the preparation of the ROD, the Study had not been finalized.

FRA anticipates that the Project may be implemented in phases. As funding is secured, USRC would initiate the engineering and design phase of the Project, which would further develop and refine the Station elements as well as the Terminal Infrastructure (TI) Plan outlined in the EIS. Amtrak may lead the TI portion of the Project in coordination with USRC. Along with this effort, USRC would develop a cost and constructability implementation study, a real estate site assembly framework, and stakeholder cost sharing agreements, as well as conduct geotechnical surveys.

In parallel and informed by these steps, USRC would identify funding sources and develop a capital funding plan. Reduced parking revenue and an expanded Station require new sources of revenue to maintain and operate the Station.

**What will be FRA’s role following the conclusion of the NEPA process?**
FRA may provide financial assistance with the Project. In such a case, the grant agreement includes a requirement to implement the mitigation identified in the ROD. In addition, FRA conducts periodic monitoring in accordance with its established grant monitoring program throughout the period of performance of the grant. During monitoring, FRA verifies that a grantee complies with all applicable Federal requirements as laid out in the grant agreement, including implementation of mitigation.

**What is the Project’s cost?**
During the EIS process, FRA estimated that the Selected Alternative would cost approximately $8.8 billion to construct. This is a rough-order-of-magnitude estimate, which is subject to future refinements as planning and design progress. The estimate includes escalation over the duration of construction.

**Is the Project funded for construction?**
At the time of the preparation of the ROD, the Project was not funded. In the post-NEPA phase of the Project, USRC will work to identify funding sources and develop a capital funding plan.

**What is the duration and nature of construction for the Project?**
Construction of the Selected Alternative is currently anticipated to take approximately 13 years. The Project would be built in four phases of unequal duration, starting from the east side of the rail terminal and moving toward the west side. Activities include the construction of support of excavation (SOE) walls around the rail terminal; excavation; drilled shaft construction; and construction of the various Project elements. The type of activity and resulting impacts would vary across the construction period and across each phase. Impacts, including construction-related traffic, would be greatest during SOE wall construction and excavation. The EIS included an analysis of the construction impacts of the Selected Alternative.  and presents proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate these impacts.

**What are the temporary and long-term economic benefits associated with the Project?**
Construction of the Project creates thousands of jobs annually in several fields (construction, architecture and engineering, related service industries) for the duration of the construction period. These jobs generate income that can be spent in the local and regional economy, resulting in secondary job and income benefits.

In the long term, the expansion of Washington Union Station and the potential development of the Federally owned air rights above the rail terminal would bring new jobs to the area. Regionally, the increased intercity and commuter rail service that the expanded Station support would more efficiently connect the District of Columbia to the broader region and job and market opportunities along the east coast.
  


      **Public and Agency Participation**
        **How has the Project been shared with the public and with neighbors?**
Before the publication of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Washington Union Station Expansion Project (Project) in 2020, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) hosted four public meetings (December 2015, March 2016, October 2016, and March 2018). FRA and the Project Proponents—Union Station Redevelopment Corporation (USRC) and Amtrak— also attended many local public events, including festivals and markets, to provide information to nearby residents. FRA and USRC met with representatives of Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC) 6C and made a presentation at the March 2020 meeting of the Transportation and Public Space Committee.

FRA made the DEIS available for public review from June 4, 2020, through September 28, 2020, a 116-day period. On July 14, 2020, during the DEIS public review period, FRA hosted an online public hearing to receive comments on the document.

Following public review of the DEIS, FRA paused the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process from October 5, 2020, through July 11, 2022. During the pause, FRA and the Project Proponents worked with key stakeholders to develop a new alternative (Alternative F) that substantially addressed the comments received on the DEIS. FRA presented Alternative F at the Commission of Fine Art’s June 16, 2022, hearing and the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC)’s July 7, 2022, hearing.

In July 2022, FRA identified Alternative F as the new Preferred Alternative and initiated preparation of a Supplemental DEIS (SDEIS) to evaluate the impacts of this alternative on the environment. During the preparation of the SDEIS, in February 2023, FRA initiated a targeted outreach effort to engage minority and low-income communities in the vicinity of Washington Union Station. This effort focused on neighborhoods and communities along the North Capitol Street corridor, along which the Preferred Alternative would potentially generate additional traffic and congestion. A focused Community Communications Committee (CCC) consisting of 12 community leaders helped the Project team communicate with the community. Members of the Project team held several pop-up events to share information with, and received feedback from, community members on the Project and its potential impacts. Pop-up locations included the Northwest One Library, Ward 6 Community Cleanup Event, Union Station in Bloom event, NoMA in Bloom event, and 2M Apartments.

FRA made the SDEIS available for public comment and review from May 12 through July 6, 2023. During the review period, FRA hosted two public hearings to receive comments on the SDEIS: an in-person public hearing at Washington Union Station on June 27, 2023, and an online public hearing on June 28, 2023.

**How has the Project been coordinated with the Burnham Place development?**
The Project and Burnham Place have different purposes and objectives. The Project accommodates but does not require development of air rights for Burnham Place. In the period leading up to the 2020 DEIS, FRA and the Project Proponents met more than 40 times with Akridge, the developer of Burnham Place. Through the EIS process, Akridge comments have been considered in the development and refinement of the Action Alternatives.

FRA and the Project Proponents continued coordinating with Akridge through the development of Alternative F (the Selected Alternative). Coordination focused on developing an approach to the Project elements at the H Street deck level that would enhance opportunities for the creation of a civic space commensurate with Washington Union Station’s historic and architectural significance, centered on the historic Station building. Moving parking below ground and integrating the bus facility into the H Street deck would make it possible to establish a strong visual connection between the Station and H Street. It would also allow for an overall site design respectful of the symmetry of the Station.

The private air rights developer would be primarily responsible for the design and construction of the public space. The developer would be responsible for its construction. Project elements within the space (e.g., skylights to provide the passenger concourse below with daylight) would be designed in collaboration with the private air rights developer.

Coordination with Akridge is consistent with the Project’s purpose of integrating the Project with adjacent land uses and is responsive to comments from numerous agencies on the 2020 DEIS and the 2023 SDEIS. As the Project Sponsor, USRC will continue to coordinate with Akridge, as appropriate, during the design and construction phases of the Project.

    
          Last updated: Thursday, March 14, 2024 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

**Federal Railroad Administration**

1200 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, SE

WASHINGTON, DC 20590

202-366-4000Subscribe to email updates
                    About Us
  

        
              About FRA
                Careers
                Contact Us
                FRA Civil Rights
                Doing Business with FRA
                Grants and Financial Assistance
                Safety Management TeamsAreas of Interest
  

        
              Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
                Safety Data
                Buy America
                Operation Lifesaver
                Railroad Safety Advisory Committee
                FRA Secure Area
                Proactive DisclosureI Am A...
  

        
              Railroad Traveler
                Railroad Inspector
                Reporter
                Educator/StudentPolicies, Rights, Legal
  

        
              About DOT
                Budget and Performance
                Civil Rights
                FOIA
                Information Quality
                No FEAR Act
                Office of Inspector General
                Privacy Policy
                USA.gov
                Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
                Web Policies and Notices
                Web Standards