1
NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING COMMISSION
+ + + + +
COMMISSION MEETING
+ + + + +
OPEN SESSION
+ + + + +
THURSDAY, MAY 6, 2021
+ + + + +
The meeting convened via Videoconference, at 1:00 p.m. EDT, Beth White, Vice Chairman, presiding.
NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
VICE CHAIR BETH WHITE, Presidential Appointee LINDA ARGO, Mayoral Appointee EVAN CASH, Office of the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia LENA CHANG, U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs ARRINGTON DIXON, Mayoral Appointee WENDY GINSBERG, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform PETER MAY, Department of the Interior PAUL McMAHON, Department of Defense JENNIFER STEINGASSER, Office of the Mayor of the District of Columbia ANDREW TRUEBLOOD, Office of the Mayor of the District of Columbia MINA WRIGHT, General Services Administration DIANE SULLIVAN, Director of Urban Design and Plan Review
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 2
NCPC STAFF PRESENT:
MARCEL C. ACOSTA, Executive Director JULIA KOSTER, Secretary to the Commission ANNE SCHUYLER, General Counsel
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 3
CONTENTS
Commission Roll Call ...... 4
Elect Commissioner to Run the Open Session . . . . 8
Report of the Vice Chair ...... 10
Report of the Executive Director ...... 12
Legislative Update ...... 14
Consent Calendar Items - No Presentation . . . . .15
Smithsonian Institution Museum Support Center - Pod 6
Jamie L. Whitten Federal Building Public Gathering Area Security Plan Modification
Action Item - With Presentation
National Capital Planning Commission Submission Guidelines Update ...... 18
Presentation - Matthew Flis...... 18
Information Presentations
National Capital Region Facilities Outreach Initiative...... 35
Baltimore-Washington Superconducting Maglev ...... 58
Adjourn...... 98
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 4
1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S
2 1:01 p.m.
3 VICE CHAIR WHITE: So, good afternoon,
4 everyone, and welcome to the National Capital
5 Planning Commission's May 6th, 2021 public
6 meeting.
7 COMMISSION ROLL CALL
8 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Our first order of
9 business, Ms. Koster, could you please take the
10 roll call?
11 SECRETARY KOSTER: Certainly.
12 Commissioner Steingasser?
13 COMMISSIONER STEINGASSER: Here.
14 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner
15 McMahon? Commissioner McMahon?
16 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: I am here. I'm
17 here.
18 SECRETARY KOSTER: Thank you.
19 Commissioner May?
20 COMMISSIONER MAY: Yes. Here.
21 SECRETARY KOSTER: Thank you.
22 Commissioner Argo?
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 5
1 COMMISSIONER ARGO: I am here.
2 SECRETARY KOSTER: Thank you.
3 Vice Chairman White?
4 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Present.
5 SECRETARY KOSTER: Thank you.
6 Commissioner Wright?
7 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: Here.
8 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Dixon?
9 COMMISSIONER DIXON: Here.
10 SECRETARY KOSTER: Thank you.
11 Commissioner Cash?
12 COMMISSIONER CASH: Here.
13 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Chang?
14 (No response.)
15 All right. And, Commissioner
16 Ginsberg?
17 COMMISSIONER GINSBERG: Here. I'm
18 here.
19 SECRETARY KOSTER: Okay.
20 COMMISSIONER GINSBERG: Trying to be
21 here.
22 (Laughter.)
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 6
1 SECRETARY KOSTER: Trying to be here.
2 All right.
3 COMMISSIONER GINSBERG: Trying.
4 (Laughter.)
5 COMMISSIONER CHANG: Lena is here,
6 too. Lena Chang.
7 SECRETARY KOSTER: Oh. Thank you.
8 COMMISSIONER CHANG: Sorry, I'm just
9 not used to being called "Commissioner".
10 (Laughter.)
11 SECRETARY KOSTER: All right.
12 COMMISSIONER CHANG: I'm like, Who is
13 that?
14 (Laughter.)
15 SECRETARY KOSTER: All right. So,
16 Vice Chairman White, you have a quorum.
17 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
18 Well, noting the presence of a quorum,
19 I'd like to call this meeting to order.
20 Today's meeting is, of course,
21 livestreamed and will be available in a few days
22 as a video on NCPC's website.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 7
1 If there's no objection, the agenda is
2 adopted as the order of business.
3 And at this time, we would like to
4 play a short video clip of the Pledge of
5 Allegiance.
6 (Video played.)
7 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
8 I would also like to pause for a
9 moment of silence for all of those affected by
10 COVID-19 in our nation and around the world.
11 (Moment of silence.)
12 VICE CHAIR WHITE: In response to the
13 COVID-19 guidance on public gatherings, NCPC will
14 conduct its meetings online until circumstances
15 change.
16 And I want to share how we will be
17 conducting Commission business today. Votes by
18 the Commission will be conducted by roll call.
19 When Commissioner's wish to be recognized, they
20 should unmute, turn on their web cams, and
21 request to be recognized.
22 During Commission deliberations, I
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 8
1 will use a round-robin format to ask each
2 Commissioner if they have any questions or
3 comments.
4 During deliberations, all
5 Commissioners should be on video during that
6 time, if you're able, unless you're experiencing
7 technical issues, of course.
8 When you wish to put forward a motion,
9 a second, or an amendment, please unmute,
10 identify yourself, and make the motion.
11 ELECT COMMISSIONER TO RUN THE OPEN SESSION
12 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Before we proceed
13 with the rest of the agenda, in the absence of a
14 Chair, the Commission must nominate and vote on
15 who should run the meeting, which is the second
16 agenda item. Is there a motion to nominate a
17 Chair?
18 COMMISSIONER MAY: Madam Chair, I
19 would nominate -- I'm sorry -- Madam Vice Chair,
20 I would nominate you to chair the meeting.
21 COMMISSIONER DIXON: I second.
22 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 9
1 There's a motion and a second.
2 Secretary Koster, do you want to call
3 the roll?
4 SECRETARY KOSTER: You bet.
5 The motion was made by Commissioner
6 May and seconded by Commissioner Dixon, I
7 believe.
8 So, with that, Commissioner
9 Steingasser?
10 COMMISSIONER STEINGASSER: Yes.
11 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner
12 McMahon?
13 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Yes.
14 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner May?
15 COMMISSIONER MAY: Yes.
16 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Argo?
17 COMMISSIONER ARGO: Yes.
18 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner -- or
19 excuse me -- Vice Chairman White?
20 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Yes.
21 SECRETARY KOSTER: Okay. Commissioner
22 Wright?
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 10
1 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: Yes.
2 SECRETARY KOSTER: Okay. Commissioner
3 Dixon?
4 COMMISSIONER DIXON: Yes.
5 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Cash?
6 COMMISSIONER CASH: Yes.
7 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Chang?
8 COMMISSIONER CHANG: Yes.
9 Okay. And, Commissioner Ginsberg?
10 COMMISSIONER GINSBERG: Yes.
11 SECRETARY KOSTER: I believe that was
12 all affirmative.
13 COMMISSIONER GINSBERG: That was
14 definitely a "yes," yes.
15 (Laughter.)
16 SECRETARY KOSTER: Okay.
17 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Well, the ayes have
18 it. Thank you, Fellow Commissioners, for
19 electing me to run this online meeting.
20 And welcome, Commissioner Chang, to
21 the meeting. We're happy to have you today.
22 REPORT OF THE CHAIR
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 11
1 VICE CHAIR WHITE: So, Agenda Item 3
2 is the Report of the Vice Chair.
3 And I want to let everyone know, at
4 its meeting of October 3rd, 2019, NCPC reviewed a
5 proposed addition to the Korean War Memorial
6 consisting of a Wall of Remembrance inscribed
7 with the names of the American Armed Forces and
8 Korean Augmentation Troops who died during the
9 Korean War.
10 Mr. Hal Barker provided testimony to
11 the Commission on the extensive research
12 conducted by Mr. Barker and his brother to ensure
13 a complete and accurate list of names for the
14 wall. Unfortunately, during the Commission
15 meeting, comments were made that called into
16 question the motives for the work undertaken by
17 Mr. Barker and his brother.
18 The Commission values the comments it
19 receives from the public, and it is our
20 responsibility as Commissioners to treat the
21 public with dignity and respect. And on behalf
22 of the Commission, I want to apologize to Mr.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 12
1 Barker and his brother for the comments made
2 publicly regarding the motives for their work.
3 In so doing, I want to note that Mr.
4 Barker and his brother have been working on this
5 project as private citizens for a long time. And
6 as he has made clear in his communications with
7 NCPC staff, he and his brother never had any
8 intend to receive financial remuneration for the
9 work.
10 I commend Mr. Barker and his brother
11 for their civic contribution to the Korean
12 Memorial, and on behalf of the Commission, I want
13 to thank them for their work as well.
14 REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
15 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Agenda Item No. 4
16 is the Report from the Executive Director, Mr.
17 Acosta.
18 MR. ACOSTA: Thank you, Madam Chair.
19 Looking to future Commission meetings,
20 our June and July meetings look very busy.
21 For June, the Commission will likely
22 review NASA's Goddard Space Center Master Plan;
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 13
1 the Park Service's Wolf Trap Performance Arts
2 Master Plan; the FDR Prayer Plaque at the World
3 War II Memorial, and information presentations on
4 the status of the Hirshhorn Sculpture Garden
5 design and the Pennsylvania Avenue Initiative.
6 We also expect that the Commission will conduct
7 its federal review of the District's
8 Comprehensive Plan, once the D.C. Council
9 transmits the amendments to NCPC.
10 The facility has also installed a
11 mockup to the proposed stacked stone wall to the
12 Hirshhorn Sculpture Garden for public viewing.
13 If possible, we encourage Commissioners to see
14 the wall in person before our June meeting.
15 Staff will create a short video of the mockup for
16 those who cannot view it in person. We'll follow
17 up with details in an email.
18 Finally, depending on local COVID
19 guidance at that time, we are planning on a
20 Commission field trip for Wednesday, September
21 1st, to visit the Beltsville Air Postal Center,
22 the proposed site of the Bureau of Engraving and
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 14
1 Printing, and the FDA Muirkirk Campus. So, more
2 information will be provided in the coming
3 months.
4 And that concludes my presentation.
5 You have a report in your packets, and I'll be
6 happy to answer any questions that you might
7 have.
8 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you, Mr.
9 Acosta. It does sound like a busy summer.
10 Does the Commission have any questions
11 for Mr. Acosta?
12 (No response.)
13 LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
14 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Hearing none,
15 Agenda Item No. 5 is the Legislative Update. Ms.
16 Schuyler?
17 MS. SCHUYLER: Thank you, Madam Vice
18 Chair. I have nothing to report today.
19 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
20 Does the Commission have any questions
21 for Ms. Schuyler?
22 (No response.)
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 15
1 CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
2 SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION MUSEUM
3 SUPPORT CENTER - POD 6
4 JAMIE L. WHITTEN FEDERAL BUILDING PUBLIC
5 GATHERING AREA SECURITY PLAN MODIFICATION
6 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Hearing none,
7 Agenda Item No. 6, Consent Calendar.
8 There are two Consent Calendar items
9 on this month's agenda.
10 The first is for approval of final
11 site and building plans for the Smithsonian's
12 Institution Museum Support Center - Pod 6 --
13 that's a mouthful -- submitted by the Smithsonian
14 Institution.
15 The second is for approval of
16 preliminary and final site development plans for
17 the Jamie L. Whitten Federal Building Public
18 Gathering Area Security Plan Modification,
19 submitted by the United States General Services
20 Administration.
21 Are there any questions from the
22 Commissioners regarding the Consent Calendar
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 16
1 items?
2 (No response.)
3 Hearing none, is there a motion to
4 approve the Consent Calendar?
5 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: So moved. This
6 is Commissioner Wright.
7 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you,
8 Commissioner Wright.
9 Is there a second?
10 COMMISSIONER ARGO: I second. This is
11 Commissioner Argo.
12 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Commissioner Argo,
13 thank you for seconding the motion.
14 Ms. Koster, can you please confirm the
15 motion and the second, and take the vote by roll
16 call?
17 SECRETARY KOSTER: Yes. Commissioner
18 Wright made the motion. Commissioner Argo
19 seconded.
20 And with that, Commissioner
21 Steingasser?
22 COMMISSIONER STEINGASSER: Yes.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 17
1 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner
2 McMahon?
3 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Yes.
4 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner May?
5 COMMISSIONER MAY: Yes.
6 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Argo?
7 COMMISSIONER ARGO: Yes.
8 SECRETARY KOSTER: Vice Chairman
9 White?
10 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Yes.
11 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner
12 Wright?
13 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: Yes.
14 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Dixon?
15 COMMISSIONER DIXON: Yes.
16 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Cash?
17 COMMISSIONER CASH: Yes.
18 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Chang?
19 COMMISSIONER CHANG: Abstain.
20 Okay. And, Commissioner Ginsberg?
21 COMMISSIONER GINSBERG: Abstain.
22 SECRETARY KOSTER: All right. The
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 18
1 motion carries with 2 abstentions.
2 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
3 ACTION ITEM - WITH PRESENTATION
4 NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING COMMISSION
5 SUBMISSION GUIDELINES UPDATE
6 VICE CHAIR WHITE: The only action
7 item today is Agenda Item 7A, to approve an
8 update to submission guidelines for the National
9 Capital Planning Commission.
10 Presenting today will be Mr. Flis, and
11 we look forward to the presentation. I know this
12 has been a great deal of work, and I appreciate
13 what's gone into it. So, we're eager for your
14 presentation.
15 MR. FLIS: Great. Thank you.
16 Can you see my presentation?
17 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Yes.
18 MR. FLIS: Okay. Great.
19 Well, good afternoon, Members of the
20 Commission.
21 Today, staff is requesting your
22 approval of some updates to the Submission
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 19
1 Guidelines. These changes are really focused on
2 clarifying the requirements for concept reviews
3 of master plans and, also, providing some
4 additional details about the purpose of
5 information presentations.
6 So, after some recent discussions
7 about increasing Commission involvement in
8 coordination with our federal partners, we're
9 always looking at ways to improve the review
10 process by providing some better opportunities
11 for that early interaction to occur. This update
12 to the Guidelines is one step, and later today,
13 Ms. Free will talk about our new engagement and
14 outreach efforts with federal facilities as part
15 of another tool we're looking to use.
16 So, just a reminder, the applicant
17 agencies submit development proposals to NCPC
18 following the process that's laid out in the
19 Commission Guidelines. These Guidelines describe
20 the content of submissions, the submission
21 stages, along with the coordination and review
22 process.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 20
1 The current Guidelines were adopted by
2 the Commission in 2017, and we've had several
3 topic-specific updates since that time, including
4 those regarding transportation, tree protection
5 and replacement, and then, most recently, you'll
6 recall the Antenna Guidelines update just several
7 months ago.
8 So, the current Guidelines do refer to
9 a Concept Master Plan review stage today, but
10 they do not provide the details regarding the
11 submission requirements, similar to other review
12 stages. So, today's update will fill that gap in
13 information and provide additional clarification
14 about when a Concept Master Plan might be
15 appropriate to consider.
16 The concept review stage occurs before
17 the draft review. So, you can see that here on
18 the screen. In general, the concept review
19 enables the Commission to provide early input on
20 the general consistency of the plan with NCPC
21 policies and feedback on the general layout, the
22 type of development, land uses, et cetera. So,
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 21
1 at this stage, we're really talking about general
2 placement, basic height, circulation, and access
3 -- all at a relatively high level.
4 This stage of review, again, helps
5 identify potential issues as early as feasible
6 and prior to further development of that Draft
7 Master Plan. So, again, this is a way to help
8 support that early coordination.
9 So, at the concept review stage, the
10 Commission has focused on issues such as: is the
11 concept consistent with the NCPC Comprehensive
12 Plan and other policies? Are there particularly
13 unique or complex issues? And perhaps most
14 importantly, if more than one alternative is
15 under consideration, are there meaningful
16 differences or preferences from NCPC's
17 perspective?
18 This is really one of those key
19 aspects of the concept review when the Commission
20 can provide comments on these alternatives to
21 help provide guidance to the applicant.
22 This is also important when NCPC has
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 22
1 a NEPA responsibility, and both the applicant and
2 the Commission must ultimately align on the
3 preferred alternative. So, doing this early
4 before getting too far down the road is really
5 important.
6 So, the Commission has reviewed
7 several Master Plans at the concept review stage,
8 including the recent St. Elizabeths Master Plan
9 Amendment, as well as the South Mall Campus
10 Master Plan. These reviews were helpful in
11 allowing the Commission to provide comments early
12 on alternatives before more detailed Draft Master
13 Plans were prepared, and they were helpful to
14 sort out some of those bigger planning issues,
15 like placement, height, and massing, again,
16 earlier in the process.
17 Again, the current Guidelines do refer
18 to a Concept Master Plan stage, but they don't
19 have the details regarding the submission
20 requirements. So, that is what the purpose of
21 today's update is.
22 So, after we first drafted these
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 23
1 updates, staff did reach out to several applicant
2 agencies that have recently submitted Master
3 Plans, including GSA, the Navy, and the
4 Smithsonian. In general, their major comments
5 related to understanding the purpose of concept
6 reviews and how to determine if such a review is
7 necessary. In particular, the agencies asked
8 that the Guidelines provide better parameters for
9 determining when to use the concept review to
10 provide more certainty in the process, to avoid
11 surprises, particularly to the schedule or
12 budget.
13 So, based on these comments, staff did
14 revise the proposed language, and it's the
15 language that's before you today. In particular,
16 we clarified that the Concept Master Plan review
17 stage is not mandatory. In addition, NCPC staff
18 will work with the applicant during the pre-
19 submission stage to jointly determine if a
20 concept review would be helpful or not. Again,
21 this is to help allow applicants to plan ahead.
22 We've also added examples of plans
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 24
1 where a concept review may be suggested and/or
2 beneficial. These, again, give applicants an
3 idea about what might qualify for a concept
4 review. So, for example, this might include new
5 or greenfield sites where there's no existing
6 Master Plan; plans that are substantially out-of-
7 date or where there are substantial changes in
8 the program, or situations where applicants,
9 again, are seeking Commission feedback on
10 distinct alternatives. Again, we think these all
11 might benefit from a concept review, but we will
12 work with applicants to discuss that at the pre-
13 submission stage.
14 So, moving on to another topic of this
15 update, we've also added a description of
16 information presentations as part of this update.
17 This is intended to provide some clarification as
18 to the purpose of information presentations,
19 which are distinct from the formal review stages,
20 which are described in the rest of the
21 Guidelines. So, again, this is not a
22 requirement. This is just to provide some
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 25
1 information to the applicant and the staff, and
2 also, to provide some guidance to staff.
3 Generally, information presentations
4 are reserved for introducing larger, complex
5 projects before formal submission is made to the
6 Commission or to provide an update on specific
7 topics related to projects that the Commission
8 has already reviewed. I think the example of
9 Union Station would be a good one, where the
10 Commission had a concept review of that project,
11 and later, we did an updated information
12 presentation about parking. So, it was a
13 specific discussion about that issue.
14 These presentations occur at the
15 recommendation of NCPC staff, and the Commission
16 does not take an action. I will note that
17 information presentations are also used by staff
18 or other organizations to brief the Commission on
19 other planning-related topics. You can recall,
20 just last month, we had a presentation by COG
21 talking about the COVID-19 pandemic.
22 Staff may use information
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 26
1 presentations also to brief the Commission on the
2 preparation of comments related to NEPA,
3 particularly EA comment letters or EIS comment
4 letters. In these instances, staff will brief
5 the Commission on NEPA correspondence that's
6 pertinent to projects that are subject to future
7 review, but where there is no pending application
8 before the Commission.
9 So, you've heard briefings on EIS
10 comment letters in the past, most recently, for
11 the Managed Lanes Project. And later today,
12 you're going to hear another one regarding the
13 Maglev Project, which is also in the NEPA
14 process.
15 Again, this is really important to the
16 Commission because the NEPA process is another
17 point where NCPC can provide guidance, even
18 before a project is submitted for a formal
19 review.
20 And then, finally, just to wrap up,
21 we've also included some other minor changes for
22 clarification purposes in the document. They
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 27
1 don't alter the submission requirements for
2 Master Plans, but they do provide some clarity
3 regarding NEPA and the Historic Preservation
4 review process. Other changes are primarily for
5 kind of internal consistency within the document.
6 So, overall, we think the updates will
7 help, again, fill that gap in the Guidelines, but
8 also provide some clarity to both applicants and
9 staff in terms of the application of concept
10 reviews for Master Plans. And as such, it is the
11 Executive Director's recommendation to approve
12 the revisions for the Guidelines. We will make
13 any changes to the document, per the discussion
14 today, and then, also, include any minor
15 editorial updates. And these will go into effect
16 30 days after we publish a Federal Register
17 notice for the changes.
18 So, that concludes my presentation.
19 I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
20 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you, Mr.
21 Flis.
22 We'll now open it up to the Commission
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 28
1 for discussion. I'd like to start with
2 Commissioner May, and then, go in a round-robin
3 format, using our normal seating order. So,
4 please keep your web cams on during the
5 discussion, and let's turn to Commissioner May.
6 COMMISSIONER MAY: I don't have
7 extensive comments. I would just say that I
8 appreciate the clarifications in the update and
9 look forward to using the new submission
10 guidelines.
11 Thank you.
12 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
13 Commission Argo?
14 COMMISSIONER ARGO: I would -- can you
15 hear me? I'm frozen right now.
16 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Yes.
17 COMMISSIONER ARGO: Okay.
18 VICE CHAIR WHITE: We can hear you,
19 Commissioner Argo. If you would like, I could
20 move on and come back.
21 Julia, what's your advice here?
22 COMMISSIONER ARGO: Hello. I'm back.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 29
1 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Oh, good.
2 Commissioner Argo, welcome back.
3 (Laughter.)
4 COMMISSIONER ARGO: I have no idea.
5 It's the boogey monsters on Teams kicked me off.
6 (Laughter.)
7 All that to say, I have no additional
8 comments.
9 (Laughter.)
10 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
11 Commissioner Wright? Commissioner
12 Wright?
13 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: I am coming.
14 Sorry, I'm slow on the trigger.
15 I do actually have a question. Will
16 concept review be used in -- will it replace or
17 preclude information sessions? Because I know
18 we've tripped up over this a little bit, and I'd
19 be anxious to know about that. Because -- well,
20 I'll just leave it there. That's my question,
21 Mr. Flis.
22 MR. FLIS: Yes.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 30
1 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: I mean, let's
2 just imagine for St. Elizabeths another
3 amendment. So, would we use concept review
4 instead of the information session? That's what
5 we did last time, and this is a welcomed change
6 if the answer is yes. That's what we call "a
7 leading question".
8 MR. FLIS: I think we're trying to
9 make a differentiation here. When there are
10 alternatives on the table, staff thinks it's more
11 important to have that discussion as a concept
12 review --
13 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: Right.
14 MR. FLIS: -- because, that way, we
15 can actually capture the Commission's guidance.
16 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: Yes.
17 MR. FLIS: Yes, information
18 presentations, I think we're trying to make a
19 distinction that it is better to introduce a
20 project or a big issue versus talking about
21 alternatives, if that makes sense.
22 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: It does.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 31
1 MR. FLIS: I think that's where we
2 were getting a little bit confused from that
3 perspective.
4 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: Okay. All
5 right. Thank you.
6 That's it. It's a welcomed change for
7 us. Thank you.
8 VICE CHAIR WHITE: All right. Thank
9 you, Commissioner Wright.
10 Commissioner Dixon?
11 COMMISSIONER DIXON: I associate my
12 comments with Commissioner Argo, and no comment.
13 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
14 Commissioner Cash?
15 COMMISSIONER CASH: Thanks. No
16 comments here.
17 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
18 Commissioner Chang?
19 COMMISSIONER CHANG: Thank you. No
20 comments.
21 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Commissioner
22 Ginsberg?
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 32
1 COMMISSIONER GINSBERG: Thank you. No
2 comments.
3 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
4 Commissioner Steingasser?
5 COMMISSIONER STEINGASSER: Yes, I just
6 want to state that I agree. I think this will be
7 a pleasant and good change that will help
8 organize a lot of the thoughts and the way the
9 material comes to us. So, I appreciate it.
10 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
11 Commissioner McMahon?
12 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Yes. No
13 comments. Thank you.
14 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Well, thanks,
15 everyone.
16 I would just like to add, I think it's
17 really important to acknowledge the work that it
18 takes on behalf of staff to go back through these
19 Guidelines and really think hard about not just
20 making it easier and more clear for the
21 applicant, but keeping it robust enough, so that
22 we're addressing issues and catching them in the
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 33
1 process as they go along. And I just want to
2 acknowledge the great work that's been done, and
3 I think it will help us all with greater
4 coordination between us and our applicants.
5 So, with that, is there a motion to
6 approve the final Guidelines?
7 COMMISSIONER STEINGASSER: So moved.
8 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you,
9 Commissioner Wright.
10 Is there a second?
11 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: This is
12 McMahon. I second.
13 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Commissioner
14 McMahon seconded.
15 Ms. Koster, can you please confirm the
16 motion and the second, and take the vote by roll
17 call?
18 SECRETARY KOSTER: Certainly.
19 Commissioner Wright, I just wanted to make sure,
20 made the motion. I think it was Commissioner
21 Steingasser then.
22 COMMISSIONER STEINGASSER: Oh, I'm
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 34
1 sorry. Yes, that's correct.
2 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Excuse me. I
3 didn't recognize the voice.
4 COMMISSIONER STEINGASSER: Okay.
5 SECRETARY KOSTER: Yes, and
6 Commissioner McMahon made the second.
7 And with that, Commissioner
8 Steingasser, if you can lead us off?
9 COMMISSIONER STEINGASSER: Yes.
10 SECRETARY KOSTER: Thank you.
11 Commissioner McMahon?
12 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Yes.
13 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner May?
14 COMMISSIONER MAY: Yes.
15 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Argo?
16 COMMISSIONER ARGO: Yes.
17 SECRETARY KOSTER: Vice Chair White?
18 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Yes.
19 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner
20 Wright?
21 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: Yes.
22 SECRETARY KOSTER: Thank you.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 35
1 Commissioner Dixon?
2 COMMISSIONER DIXON: Yes.
3 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Cash?
4 COMMISSIONER CASH: Yes.
5 SECRETARY KOSTER: Commissioner Chang?
6 COMMISSIONER CHANG: Abstain.
7 And, Commissioner Ginsberg?
8 COMMISSIONER GINSBERG: Yes.
9 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you. The
10 motion is carried.
11 So, that covers our agenda action
12 item.
13 INFORMATION PRESENTATIONS
14 NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
15 FACILITIES OUTREACH INITIATIVE
16 VICE CHAIR WHITE: And now, we have
17 two information presentations.
18 Agenda Item 8A is an information
19 presentation on NCPC's Facilities Outreach
20 Initiative in the National Capital Region.
21 So, Ms. Free, welcome.
22 MS. FREE: Thank you.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 36
1 Can we you see my screen?
2 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Yes. Thank you.
3 MS. FREE: Okay. Great.
4 Well, good afternoon, Commissioners.
5 I will take a few minutes today to
6 brief you on the outreach program for federal
7 facilities in the Region that the NCPC plan
8 review staff will initiate this summer. We think
9 this is a timely briefing in conjunction with the
10 previous action item on the Submission Guidelines
11 Update and given the discussion at last month's
12 Commission meeting regarding how NCPC can weigh
13 in on important site selection decisions which
14 clearly have urban planning implications, but are
15 not required to be reviewed by the Commission.
16 This program currently focuses on
17 federal facilities located within the environs of
18 Maryland and Virginia. For purposes of this
19 initiative, we define "federal facilities" as
20 federally owned property located in the National
21 Capital Region, to include installations,
22 campuses, Master Plans, and individual sites and
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 37
1 buildings. Please note that the program does not
2 currently include NPS, or National Park Service,
3 Park properties at this time. The Park
4 properties will be incorporated as a later phase
5 of this initiative.
6 So, the outreach program builds upon
7 NCPC's previous and ongoing outreach work,
8 including annual coordination meetings with the
9 Department of Defense; the biannual Federal
10 Capital Improvements Program, or FCIP, data
11 calls; the Master Planning Training Workshop,
12 which we held in January of 2020, and the less
13 regular, but effective staff outreach on new
14 guidelines and resource guides that's conducted
15 as necessary.
16 So, given our prior success in
17 outreach with the Department of Defense, and
18 other venues, we saw the next logical step was to
19 formalize the outreach to include civilian
20 agencies.
21 While coordination regarding projects
22 within the District is robust and includes
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 38
1 monthly Coordinating Committee meetings, there
2 are currently a number of challenges in
3 coordinating with applicant agencies of the
4 facilities and the environs. NCPC's review of
5 projects in the environs is extremely important
6 because local and state governments do not have
7 the authority to review development on federal
8 land, and NCPC is the only planning agency
9 providing that oversight for these facilities.
10 A good example of the current
11 challenges is our recent experience with the
12 Humphreys Engineering Center, which in many ways
13 touches on all of the issues we need to address.
14 First, a change in staff and/or
15 infrequent submissions results in a loss of
16 institutional knowledge of NCPC and its
17 requirements.
18 Secondly, even if applicants are aware
19 of NCPC's authorities, they often approach NCPC
20 staff too late in the planning process.
21 And third, there is not a process in
22 place to directly update applicants on NCPC's
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 39
1 work and how it may impact their projects. A
2 good example of this would be the recently
3 adopted Tree Preservation and Replacement
4 Policies or the Antenna Submission Guidelines.
5 So, there are three ways that we're
6 addressing these challenges. The previous
7 presentation by Mr. Flis already discussed two
8 solutions to address these issues, including
9 bringing Master Plans in earlier to the
10 Commission at a conceptual level, and having the
11 Commission advise on NEPA comments for projects
12 in the environs.
13 The third solution is through a new,
14 annual outreach initiative that NCPC staff is
15 beginning in June. I will summarize the goals,
16 findings, and next steps related to the
17 initiative on the next series of slides.
18 So, the primary goal of this
19 initiative is to establish an annual coordination
20 schedule with applicant agencies that will result
21 in coordination earlier on in individual
22 projects' Master Plans and ensure that the
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 40
1 projects are submitted at the appropriate stage
2 for review.
3 We will also integrate the
4 Transportation Management Plan, or TMP,
5 monitoring schedule into this outreach and look
6 to coordinate this effort with the FCIP process,
7 wherever possible.
8 On the information management side of
9 things, we are currently working to create a
10 visual interactive map-based platform to keep
11 track of and manage the information about each
12 facility, including primary applicant contact
13 information, TMP reporting, the date of the last
14 coordination meeting, and the meeting notes.
15 The next series of slides will cover
16 the work we've done so far in support of this
17 initiative.
18 And a key aspect of establishing the
19 program began last October, which required staff
20 to take inventory of the federal facilities
21 within NCPC's jurisdiction; identify where within
22 the environs these facilities are located; who
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 41
1 the associated applicant, occupant, and owner
2 agencies are for those facilities, and their
3 contact information.
4 In many cases, the applicant,
5 occupant, and owner agency differ for a single
6 facility. The applicant agencies are those that
7 oversee a facility, but may not occupy or even
8 own it. A good example of this is the
9 Intelligence Community Campus in Bethesda, where
10 the Army Corps of Engineers is the applicant, the
11 Defense Intelligence Agency is the occupant, and
12 the owner is the Department of Defense. NCPC
13 staff typically coordinates most directly with
14 the applicant agencies in the review of facility
15 projects, while the occupant and owner agencies
16 may have varying degrees of participation.
17 So, this data was collected from
18 various sources, including GIS, project
19 submission records, former internal inventory
20 efforts, and agency and department websites. I
21 will review a summary of the data we collected on
22 the next series of slides.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 42
1 So, once we gathered the data we
2 needed, we started looking at how we should
3 structure the outreach to ensure it's effective.
4 We looked to resolve that the outreach should
5 target facilities based on their location or by
6 the applicant agency, and also, when the outreach
7 should occur.
8 So, I'll go through these next few
9 slides pretty quickly, but the idea here was to
10 use the data we collected to understand where the
11 facilities are located and how many facilities
12 each applicant agency oversees in Maryland and
13 Virginia, to help us make an informed strategy
14 for structuring the outreach.
15 Here we have the total number and
16 percentage of facilities across D.C., as shown in
17 light blue; Maryland, in dark blue, and Virginia,
18 shown in orange. Again, these figures exclude
19 the National Park Service Park properties.
20 Now, just looking at facilities in
21 Maryland and Virginia, which is the focus of the
22 current study, the distribution of facilities is
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 43
1 about equal, with 47 percent of federal
2 facilities in Virginia, shown in orange, and 53
3 percent in Maryland, as shown in blue.
4 And then, we broke down the
5 information even further by jurisdiction. Within
6 Maryland, you can see, outlined in blue, that the
7 majority of the facilities are located in Prince
8 George's County, followed by Montgomery County,
9 which is outlined in purple, and only one federal
10 facility is located within the City of Rockville.
11 And in Virginia, you can see Fairfax
12 County, which is outlined in blue, leads with 41
13 percent of the total facilities; Arlington
14 County, shown in purple, follows with 23 percent
15 of the facilities; Loudoun County, shown in
16 orange, and Prince William County, shown in
17 yellow, have a similar amount with 15 and 12
18 percent, respectively. And the City of
19 Alexandria, shown with the green outline, has 9
20 percent of the total facilities. While the City
21 of Manassas and the City of Fairfax fall within
22 our review authorities, there are no federal
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 44
1 facilities currently located within these
2 jurisdictions.
3 And here, we have the facilities, as
4 shown with the purple shapes, overlaid on a map
5 of the region. A few facilities this Commission
6 may not be familiar with are the U.S. Coast Guard
7 Station in Fairfax County, the USPS William F.
8 Bolger Management Academy, the Department of
9 Energy Germantown Campus, the Adelphi Laboratory
10 Center in Montgomery County, and the Global
11 Communications Receiver Site in Prince George's
12 County, amongst others.
13 And once we had an idea of where the
14 facilities were located, we looked at who the
15 applicant agencies are and the number of
16 facilities that each of them manage. The Army
17 Corps of Engineers, the Department of the Army,
18 the Department of the Navy, and the General
19 Services Administration lead with four or more
20 facilities. Five other agencies have three or
21 more facilities, and the rest of the agencies
22 have one or two.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 45
1 And the next few slides compile a list
2 of the facilities overseen by each of the
3 applicant agencies. Again, these are agencies
4 that oversee a facility, but may or may not
5 occupy or own the facility.
6 A good example of this is the General
7 Services Administration, who leads with the most
8 facilities of those inventoried. GSA owns and is
9 responsible for oversight of several facilities
10 that other federal agencies occupy. And all of
11 the facilities listed are subject to NCPC's
12 review authorities.
13 So, what we have here is a look at
14 those four leading agencies with the most federal
15 facilities and where their facilities are
16 located. We find that those facilities are
17 primarily located in Prince George's, Montgomery,
18 Fairfax, and Arlington Counties.
19 And in summary, this analysis did not
20 prove to show a strong reason to structure the
21 facility outreach one way or the other, meaning
22 by jurisdiction or by agency, applicant agency,
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 46
1 but we had reason that, if our goal of the
2 outreach initiative is to improve and maintain
3 more consistent outreach with applicant agencies,
4 it would make the most sense to then organize the
5 outreach by applicant agency.
6 So, with regard to the outreach
7 schedule, NCPC staff will hold annual outreach
8 meetings that occur just prior to the beginning
9 of the next fiscal year. So, that would be over
10 the summer and into September. That would give
11 us the best understanding of the projects that
12 are in the pipeline for the forthcoming fiscal
13 year.
14 NCPC staff will brief the applicant
15 agencies on NCPC's recent plan review and policy
16 updates and initiative, and hear from the
17 applicant agencies about the projects planned for
18 their facilities over the coming year. We also
19 use these annual meetings as an opportunity to
20 collect the new TMP reporting data on a biennial
21 basis.
22 The annual meetings are also an
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 47
1 opportunity to supplement intergovernmental
2 coordination with the local jurisdictions. While
3 we already refer Master Plans and individual
4 projects in the environs that are not associated
5 within an approved Master Plan to these agencies
6 for intergovernmental review, NCPC staff will
7 include local planning agency contacts in the
8 annual meetings to further support coordination
9 and understand local agency perspectives prior to
10 the projects being submitted to NCPC.
11 I will also note that NCPC conducted
12 preliminary outreach meetings earlier this spring
13 with applicant agencies that we have not had much
14 contact with over the past several years, but may
15 have good potential for new projects. This
16 coordination was done directly between the
17 applicant agencies, the ones listed here on the
18 slide, and the UDPRD Director. And it's a unique
19 outreach to this first year of the program.
20 Moving forward, all outreach meetings will be
21 conducted over the summer, as I had just
22 previously described.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 48
1 The outreach is designed to have a
2 facility-specific approach by coordinating
3 directly with applicant agency contacts that are
4 knowledgeable about the planning and oversight of
5 each individual facility. An NCPC project
6 officer will also be assigned to each of the
7 applicant agencies and will serve as the primary
8 point of contact for that agency as it relates to
9 projects for the facilities that they manage.
10 Staff finds that this approach will
11 support a greater understanding of the planned
12 improvements for each facility and enhance
13 coordination and dialog between NCPC staff and
14 applicant agency staff throughout the year.
15 And also as part of this initiative,
16 staff drafted a new Plan Review Resource Guide
17 and a Resource Guide for Controlled Unclassified
18 Information Master Plans to assist applicants
19 with preparing applications for NCPC's review.
20 In terms of next steps, NCPC staff
21 will be working to confirm applicant contact
22 information, schedule the outreach meetings, and
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 49
1 to finalize our work on the information
2 management side of things. We will also begin to
3 incorporate data collected for the NPS Park
4 properties into this initiative.
5 So, this concludes my presentation.
6 I look forward to your discussion, and I am happy
7 to answer your questions. Thank you.
8 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you so much,
9 Ms. Free.
10 I will now open it up to the
11 Commission for discussion, starting with
12 Commissioner Dixon, and then, go in a round-robin
13 format. Please keep your web cams on during the
14 discussion.
15 Commissioner Dixon?
16 COMMISSIONER DIXON: First of all, I
17 want to thank the staff for the presentation, for
18 it's very thorough, and I have no questions at
19 this time. But thank you very much.
20 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
21 Commissioner Cash?
22 COMMISSIONER CASH: I also want to
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 50
1 thank staff for the very informative
2 presentation. I don't have any other comments or
3 questions. Thanks.
4 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Commissioner Chang?
5 COMMISSIONER CHANG: Thank you for the
6 presentation. It was very informative, and I
7 have no comments.
8 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
9 Commissioner Ginsberg?
10 COMMISSIONER GINSBERG: I think my
11 internet's back on. So, I'm very excited.
12 Thanks for having me.
13 I think this data is really excellent,
14 and I would just be curious if there is a way to
15 break down federal buildings by Congressional
16 District for the Members that are represented on
17 my Committee, but we can talk about that later.
18 Because I think it would be really useful for
19 those Members to understand the facilities better
20 in their Districts.
21 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
22 Commissioner Steingasser?
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 51
1 COMMISSIONER STEINGASSER: I'd also
2 just like to thank the staff for the
3 presentation, and I have no comments.
4 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
5 Commissioner McMahon?
6 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: Yes, I'll echo
7 everybody else. Great work by the Commission and
8 good recommendations and a good study. I support
9 the organizing by agency versus geography. I
10 think that's a much better way, at least from my
11 perspective, to do it. But thanks again.
12 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
13 Commissioner May?
14 COMMISSIONER MAY: Yes, I do have a
15 couple of quick comments.
16 First of all, I appreciate the fact
17 that you did not try to fold in the National Park
18 Service in this initial go-round because it would
19 be very complicated, and it would slow the whole
20 thing down tremendously, I think, if you tried to
21 do it all from the very beginning.
22 And we look forward to working with
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 52
1 the staff when you actually do start talking
2 about Park Service facilities. We have a lot of
3 facilities and we have a lot of staff in
4 different Parks, and a complicated structure,
5 organizational structure, for dealing with them.
6 So, it will be a challenge for all of us, I
7 think, to get something useful out of that, but I
8 look forward to that prospect.
9 I look at this effort as a step toward
10 better understanding more holistically the needs
11 of the various agencies in the Washington area.
12 And I'm hoping that, as a result of this, NCPC
13 will be able to better understand or anticipate
14 the needs for new facilities that will come. So
15 that, when it comes to some of the siting of
16 federal facilities in the National Capital Area,
17 NCPC can play a stronger role in evaluating that
18 and providing input and guidance.
19 I think there have been a couple of --
20 well, I won't go into the most famous example
21 that I have of perhaps flawed agency siting
22 decisions that have been made in the past. But I
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 53
1 will say that I really think that, for example,
2 the most recent decision with regard to the
3 Bureau of Engraving and Printing and their
4 decision on where to locate their printing
5 facility is something where the NCPC could have
6 been helpful in that process, if we had been
7 involved earlier on, and not just at the point
8 where we were trying to evaluate that facility.
9 So, hopefully, we will inch toward
10 that. It is a bit of a Holy Grail, but,
11 hopefully, we will be able to get there.
12 (Laughter.)
13 VICE CHAIR WHITE: That's a great
14 point. So, planning's Holy Grail, right,
15 generally?
16 COMMISSIONER MAY: Exactly, yes.
17 Well, I mean, these locational decisions,
18 particularly given the way commuting patterns,
19 and such, will continue to evolve in the near
20 future, I think these things are incredibly
21 important, as well as other important principles
22 like living near where you work, and things like
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 54
1 that, that are hard to grapple with, but that
2 doesn't mean we shouldn't try.
3 Thank you.
4 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you so much.
5 Commissioner Ago?
6 COMMISSIONER ARGO: There we go.
7 Just to say, you know, in a former
8 business, we call this "client management" in the
9 businesses I've been in.
10 (Laughter.)
11 And being proactive and thoughtful is
12 a preliminary way, an anticipatory way is, in my
13 opinion, a great way to do business. So, I'm
14 very supportive.
15 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
16 Commissioner Wright?
17 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: Well, I'm
18 impressed with my fellow Commissioners' ability
19 to speed read, because I couldn't keep up. So,
20 I've been pinged by some OPDQ staff members who
21 are noting some inaccuracies, or at least one.
22 So, we'll look at this in-depth and make any
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 55
1 edits that are warranted.
2 I would associate myself with
3 Commissioner May's remarks, particularly around
4 the Bureau of Printing and Engraving site
5 location. Yes, we just get into it too late.
6 And this is a particularly good time
7 to do it, I think, because commuting patterns,
8 and everything else, is going to be, you know,
9 has been put into a MixMaster by COVID, and we're
10 kidding ourselves if we think we understand the
11 full net effect of what has happened to us over
12 the last 14 months. So, this is particularly
13 timely to undertake an analysis like this.
14 I should quickly add, that's not a
15 diss on the staff work that there's a couple of
16 possible errors because we have complicated --
17 sometimes it's very difficult to know who owns
18 what. I mean, we've had, at least in the decade-
19 plus that I've been doing this at GSA, we
20 sometimes have difficulty figuring out -- we have
21 delegated properties, and they've been delegated
22 for so long that sometimes it takes a little bit
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 56
1 of research to figure out exactly who owns what.
2 So, we will correct, if there's any
3 correction to be made, forthwith, but I think
4 we're right on time with this, for all the
5 reasons that Mr. May commented.
6 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you so much.
7 I would like to add, and really echo
8 Commissioner Wright's comments and Commissioner
9 May, and everyone, that what you've put together
10 is really yeoman's work, and I love how you
11 presented in different ways, ways that we can
12 look at the breadth and scope of the work that we
13 do, both the earlier efforts on the application
14 or submittal process, you know, getting earlier
15 reviews, more consistent outreach. It can only
16 help with greater coordination, not just between
17 NCPC and federal facilities, but also improved
18 coordination with the local jurisdictions. And
19 we all have very similar goals in what we're
20 trying to achieve.
21 And I so appreciate the Holy Grail of
22 planning, you know, trying to be proactive,
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 57
1 trying to find synergies among these projects;
2 that the coordination through our review is
3 really important because we're the only entity
4 that really focuses on federal lands in the
5 National Capital Region. So, coordination with
6 the local jurisdictions will not only result in
7 better projects, but also among the agencies.
8 And the example that was given I think
9 is one of those that, had we been able -- and no
10 fault of our staff or our previous efforts -- but
11 being proactive is difficult when you have such a
12 broad array of departments and facilities.
13 So, I think the way you've put the
14 data together -- I love the suggestions about
15 sorting them in different ways. Whether by
16 District or by agency or by geography, I think
17 all lend itself to ways to manage that data. So,
18 my compliments to Mr. Flis, Ms. Free, Ms.
19 Sullivan, Ms. Koster, and especially the part
20 that I've seen while I've been on the Commission
21 for more and more robust engagement and outreach
22 with the public, so they understand our work, I
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 58
1 think has really grown tremendously and is
2 becoming more and more effective each day.
3 And the pivot to virtual on top of all
4 of that, while you're trying to move this
5 forward, is a really great achievement. So, I
6 just wanted to add those comments and thank the
7 staff for the great work.
8 So, with that, thank you, Ms. Free.
9 BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON SUPERCONDUCTING MAGLEV
10 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Our next item is
11 Agenda Item 8B. It's also an information
12 presentation on the Baltimore-Washington
13 Superconducting Maglev.
14 Mr. Weil, welcome.
15 MR. WEIL: Thank you very much.
16 Okay, Madam Vice Chair, can you see
17 the presentation?
18 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Yes. Thank you.
19 MR. WEIL: Good afternoon, Madam Vice
20 Chair White and Members of the Commission.
21 Today, I am here to brief the Commission on the
22 Baltimore-Washington Maglev NEPA study and to
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 59
1 seek support for our proposed staff comments and
2 recommendations on the Draft Environmental Impact
3 Statement, which we will send to the Federal
4 Railroad Administration prior to the end of the
5 public comment period on May 24th. In addition
6 to our preliminary staff comments, we will also
7 include any other comments that we hear today
8 from Commission members in our letter.
9 The first part of my presentation will
10 be a high-level overview of the Maglev Project,
11 which is short for magnetic levitation, and then,
12 I will summarize our comments related to the
13 study's purpose and need, the range of study
14 alternatives, and impacts to federal and District
15 property.
16 So, here's the general Maglev Corridor
17 and its relationship to the National Capital
18 Region, situated partially within our review area
19 within the District of Columbia and Prince
20 George's County, Maryland. The proposed guideway
21 alignment would span between 33 and 36 miles in
22 length between downtown Washington, D.C., and
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 60
1 Baltimore, Maryland.
2 The Maglev would operate as a
3 frictionless train held within its guideway by a
4 series of powerful magnetics with a capability of
5 achieving a top speed of 311 miles per hour,
6 which would enable a one-way, 15-minute trip
7 between Baltimore and Washington, D.C.
8 Here's the purpose for the study: to
9 evaluate and ultimately construct and operate a
10 safe, revenue-producing, high-speed ground
11 transportation system that achieves the optimum
12 operating speed of the Maglev technology. And
13 this is to significantly reduce travel time, to
14 meet the capacity and ridership needs of the
15 Baltimore-Washington Region. In addition, the
16 Draft EIS shows a number of objectives relating
17 to transportation redundancy, connectivity,
18 economic growth, and complementary service within
19 the Region.
20 As described in the EIS, the project
21 is intended to address issues and challenges with
22 increasing population and employment, growing
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 61
1 demands on the existing transportation network,
2 increasing travel times and decreasing mobility,
3 and maintaining regional economic viability.
4 The Federal Elements of the
5 Comprehensive Plan include policies that support
6 transportation, as well as policies that
7 encourage preservation and protection of our
8 Region's park network, forested areas, historic
9 cultural resources, and parkways, all of which
10 relate to the Maglev Project.
11 In addition, our Commission represents
12 the interests of a number of potentially affected
13 jurisdictions and federal properties, including
14 the U.S. Secret Service's Rowley Training Center;
15 the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, or
16 BARC; the Baltimore-Washington Parkway; Goddard
17 Space Flight Center, and the District of
18 Columbia.
19 Per the National Capital Planning Act,
20 our Commission would have approval authority for
21 future building and site development on federal
22 property within the District, an advisory
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 62
1 authority over District property and federal
2 property outside of the District.
3 The Draft EIS shows the temporary use
4 of several National Park Service reservations
5 along New York Avenue during the construction
6 phase with no permanent use. However, the new
7 Maglev facility would require permanent
8 development of several federal campuses in the
9 BWI Parkway, outside of the District in Prince
10 George's County, Maryland.
11 The Maglev Study is led by the Federal
12 Railroad Administration with a number of
13 participating, cooperating, and coordinating
14 District and federal agencies. And then, once in
15 place, the Maglev facility would be owned and
16 operated as a for-profit service by a private
17 firm known as Northeast Maglev.
18 This is the second Maglev presentation
19 of the Commission, with the first presentation
20 made to NCPC in January 2019 by the project
21 consultants.
22 As shown on the timeline, the Draft
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 63
1 EIS is currently available for public review and
2 comment, with all comments due to the Federal
3 Railroad Administration by May 24th. Once the
4 comment period concludes, FRA will review and
5 consider all comments; select a preferred
6 alternative, and publish a final EIS and record
7 of decision in early 2022. After that, the
8 Maglev would be constructed in sections over the
9 next seven years between 2023 and 2030.
10 Here is the proposed Maglev route
11 extending between downtown Washington, D.C., and
12 Baltimore, Maryland, with two fixed station
13 locations, one in downtown Washington, D.C., and
14 one at BWI Airport in Anne Arundel County,
15 Maryland.
16 And then, FRA will select a third
17 station location within the City of Baltimore,
18 either in the Cherry Hill neighborhood or Camden
19 Yard section of the city. And this Baltimore
20 location will be identified in the Final EIS as
21 part of the study's preferred alternative.
22 Here is a concept rendering of the
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 64
1 downtown Washington Station taken from the Draft
2 EIS. And this would be located, the Washington,
3 D.C., Station would be located under New York
4 Avenue with three different station entrances --
5 one in the new Headhouse Building constructed
6 between 5th and 6th Streets along the south side
7 of New York Avenue, and the two other entrances
8 would be along the north side of New York Avenue,
9 one near 4th Street and one near 1st Street. As
10 part of the new Headhouse Station development,
11 there would also be an underground garage with a
12 thousand spaces intended for use by Maglev staff
13 and riders.
14 From downtown Washington, the Maglev
15 guideway would extend to the northeast in an
16 underground tunnel for approximately 12 miles
17 until it reaches outside the Beltway in Prince
18 George's County, where it would gradually rise up
19 to ground level and emerge through a portal
20 facility on Baltimore-Washington Parkway
21 property. And then, once above ground, the
22 guideway would rise up into an elevated viaduct
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 65
1 that ranges in elevation between 125 and 165 feet
2 above ground level.
3 And here, I would like to point out
4 that there are currently different alignment
5 alternatives that are still under consideration.
6 One alignment, known as the J Alternative or
7 Parkway East Alternative, would align along the
8 east side of the BW Parkway, shown here in light
9 blue, and the other alignment, known as the J1
10 Alternative or West Alignment, would align along
11 the Parkway's west side, shown here in magenta.
12 The west alignment would run above the
13 ground for a distance of between 5 to 6 miles, or
14 17 percent of the guideway's entire length, and
15 the eastern alignment would run above ground for
16 8 to 9 miles, or 25 percent of its total length.
17 As the National Park Service's parkway
18 property ends at the Prince George's/Anne Arundel
19 County line, the elevated viaduct would span a
20 more limited distance of approximately 4 miles
21 along Park Service property.
22 In addition to the guideway, other
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 66
1 project elements would include one 170-to-200-
2 acre train maintenance facility site. And the
3 Draft EIS is currently considering three
4 potential sites for this, two of which would be
5 located on BARC Campus property within the
6 National Capital Region. And these are
7 identified here by the two yellow dots. The
8 third potential location is in Anne Arundel
9 County near the BWI Parkway interchange with
10 Maryland Route 198. And as the Maglev would only
11 need one of these sites to support its operation,
12 FRA will identify the preferred maintenance
13 facility site in the future Final EIS document.
14 Finally, the Maglev will require two
15 air intake emergency egress structures along the
16 tunneled guideway section, with one in the
17 District and the other in Prince George's County,
18 and then, several other air intake emergency
19 egress structures would locate along the tunnel
20 section closer to Baltimore as well, which is
21 outside of our area of review jurisdiction. Each
22 of these structures are anticipated to look like
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 67
1 50-foot-tall buildings, and the EIS indicates
2 that these structures would be designed for
3 compatibility to the surrounding environment.
4 And here's a slide that shows a
5 compilation of all the key project elements, both
6 within the National Capital Region, shown here in
7 color, and elements located outside of the
8 Region, which are shown here in gray.
9 The EIS includes 12 different build
10 alternatives, which are all reflected here in
11 this matrix. And this is based on the different
12 combinations of station locations, multiple
13 potential train maintenance facility sites, and
14 two different Parkway alignments still under
15 consideration. The Draft EIS contains numerous
16 matrices such as this to convey potential
17 temporary and permanent impact ranges, broken
18 down by topic area and some by property
19 ownership.
20 So, that concludes my overview of the
21 project. And now, I will highlight our staff
22 comments and draft recommendations, the majority
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 68
1 of which focus on federal property and District
2 impacts. However, we also remain unclear about
3 the real benefits of the project, given its
4 potential for significant impacts to a wide
5 variety of federal activities in the Region.
6 MR. WEIL: Starting with the project's
7 purpose, need and objectives, the draft EIS
8 appears to make the case for some of these that
9 relate to the Maglev's potential for positive
10 economic impacts. And the project's potential to
11 create another redundant transportation facility
12 in the region. Here is an EIS ridership forecast
13 table that shows a majority of Maglev's future
14 ridership as being from travelers who currently
15 drive between Baltimore and Washington, which is
16 positive.
17 However, in terms of the Maglev as a
18 more traditional complementary form of public
19 transportation, which is widely available to the
20 traveling public, we note that there are several
21 key differences between the Maglev and other
22 services such as Amtrak, MARC and commuter bus
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 69
1 including the Maglev's $60 average one-way fare,
2 which would make this high-speed service less
3 accessible than Amtrak, MARC and commuter bus.
4 We note that comparison sample one-way fares
5 average $30 for Amtrak's regional service with a
6 low of $15 for a one-way fare, as well as a one-
7 way fare of $8 for MARC rail.
8 In addition the draft EIS states that
9 the Maglev would reduce future MARC ridership
10 within the study area by over 30 percent, and the
11 Amtrak ridership by 94 percent. And these
12 declines would require Amtrak and MARC to lower
13 their service levels in response. Thus the
14 expectation that Maglev would compete with these
15 more traditional public transportation services
16 appear to be contrary to the intent of the Maglev
17 project as a complimentary public transportation
18 mode.
19 As shown here on this slide, Amtrak
20 currently has plans to improve its system through
21 future corridor improvements between Washington
22 D.C. and Boston, and these improvements could be
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 70
1 undertaken to improve service in the Baltimore-
2 Washington area in a much less disruptive way to
3 local, federal, and private property.
4 Finally, the current Maglev study
5 scope of between 33 and 36 miles is relatively
6 limited compared to a longer-distance facility
7 that would run up to New York City or Boston,
8 which may increase the utility of the high-speed
9 service. As federal planners we must consider
10 all of these factors when assessing the benefit
11 of the Maglev project, especially since the draft
12 EIS shows significant physical and planning costs
13 to federal properties in the region. And I will
14 highlight these in more detail throughout the
15 remainder of my presentation.
16 Regarding the study's alternative
17 alignment selection process we note that the
18 Federal Railroad Administration started with an
19 initial set of 16 alignment options for the
20 Maglev within the study area. And based on
21 general criteria and conceptual impact
22 information, FRA selected two alternative
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 71
1 alignments to carry into the ongoing more
2 detailed NEPA study, both of which rely heavily
3 on the permanent use of Baltimore-Washington
4 Parkway property, and other federal campuses in
5 the study area. Thus, no matter which
6 alternative is selected, federal planning,
7 security, research, and other uses -- as well as
8 the historic nature and setting of the Baltimore-
9 Washington Parkway -- would be permanently
10 affected.
11 In order to broaden the study should
12 neither of the build options prove to be
13 feasible, once federal facility and master plans,
14 programming, and mitigation are better
15 understood, we continue to recommend that FRA add
16 one or more additional Maglev alignments to the
17 NEPA study for greater planning flexibility.
18 Potential project impacts appear to be
19 significant both to federal properties within the
20 region, and other properties within the larger
21 study area outside of our area -- our area of
22 review jurisdiction. And these include the
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 72
1 Patuxent Wildlife Research Refuge, Fort Meade,
2 and National Security Administration Campus. Of
3 particular concern are physical impacts to
4 recreational facilities and parklands, viewsheds,
5 water resources, ecological resources such as
6 forests and farmland soils. And while it may be
7 possible to lessen these impacts to an extent,
8 their magnitude would likely make it impossible
9 to fully mitigate in a meaningful way.
10 So one of -- one key recommendation
11 that we have is that prior to the selection of
12 the preferred Maglev alternative, we urge FRA to
13 continue to work with affected federal and
14 district stakeholders to develop more specific
15 impact and mitigation information, to use this
16 information to resolve outstanding planning
17 issues related to federal and district property,
18 and to reflect this additional development and
19 coordination in the final EIS and record of
20 decision.
21 Next I will highlight more specific
22 impacts and concerns for each of the potentially
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 73
1 affected federal properties along the Maglev
2 corridor, as well as some specific concerns from
3 district planners as well. Starting with the
4 Baltimore-Washington Parkway, here are the
5 potential Maglev alignments along either side of
6 the parkway. And EIS materials show a range of
7 permanent impacts to the parkway's aesthetics,
8 visual quality, historic setting, and parkway
9 property's ecological resources such as its
10 linear, contiguous, forested areas.
11 In addition, tens of acres would also
12 be directly affected through construction
13 impacts. And although these activities would be
14 temporary, the land would be occupied for several
15 years and new trees of vegetation proposed as
16 mitigation could take up to 75 to 100 years to
17 fully mature according to the draft EIS. NCPC's
18 comprehensive plan recognizes visual and physical
19 encroachment as a threat to the scenic and
20 pastoral qualities of our region's parkways. And
21 the best way to protect BW Parkway land would be
22 to completely avoid its use altogether, either
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 74
1 through additional tunneling, or by using another
2 alignment that is completely outside of the
3 parkway property.
4 Moving on to BARC, both alignments
5 would significantly impact the campus with
6 greater impact should one of the BARC sites be
7 developed as a 200-acre train maintenance
8 facility. In particular there are concerns with
9 potential impacts to sensitive wetlands, storm
10 water management, multiple ongoing research
11 programs, and increased polluted storm water
12 runoff on BARC property -- which is especially
13 relevant considering the campus's agricultural
14 research mission. In additional the large size
15 and placement of the maintenance facility would
16 eliminate a number of potential future solar
17 array sites thereby threatening the BARC
18 Sustainable Energy program.
19 In particular the EIS states that the
20 air strip maintenance site east of the parkway
21 would impact the area's unique setting, which
22 could not be replaced elsewhere on BARC, with
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 75
1 research functions no longer available and years
2 of ongoing research possibly lost or altered for
3 a very long time. We note that while the EIS
4 does include a chapter that describes the
5 Maglev's compatibility to local county and
6 district planning and zoning, the EIS does not
7 currently include an assessment of how the
8 project would affect BARC's future planned land
9 uses, development, or programming.
10 So as shown on this slide, one of our
11 key recommendations is to -- is for FRA to
12 collect this more detailed planning information
13 for BARC and other potentially affected federal
14 properties, and to use this information to assess
15 these more defined impacts, to develop
16 mitigation, and then to base the preferred
17 alternative on minimizing disruption to federal
18 plans in the area to the maximum extent feasible.
19 But until we have this more detailed operational
20 planning information, we cannot see the selection
21 of a realistic preferred alternative.
22 Moving to the south, potential impacts
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 76
1 to the Goddard Space Flight Center would be less
2 than those to NPS property or BARC, but with
3 greater impact should FRA select the BW Parkway
4 East alternative, and-or develop the air strip
5 train maintenance facility site, which would
6 directly affect ongoing NASA research.
7 Specifically there are concerns
8 related to potential vibrational,
9 electromagnetic, and lighting interference to
10 NASA's geophysical and astronomical observatory
11 and facility, which is located on land leased
12 from BARC adjacent to the air strip site. In
13 addition, campus access from the BW Parkway would
14 also be impacted during project construction.
15 So again, as previously stated, the
16 Federal Railroad Administration should use the
17 Goddard Space Flight Center Plan to assess
18 potential real impacts to campus operations and
19 future projects, and to develop appropriate
20 mitigation prior to selection of the preferred
21 alternative and prior to release of the final EIS
22 and record of decision.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 77
1 To the north of BARC, with its
2 location along the east side of the BW Parkway,
3 the U.S. Secret Service's Rowley Training Center
4 would experience greater impacts with the
5 selection of the Parkway East Alternative than
6 with the West Alignment. Based on the Secret
7 Service's security-related mission, its need for
8 training space on campus, and planned future
9 projects, there are concerns related to the
10 project's potential impacts to campus security,
11 as well as noise, vibration, and electromagnetic
12 interference and storm water runoff. Previous
13 coordination notes state that the center would
14 not be able to cede any land for the project,
15 which again reinforces the importance of
16 considering future federal plans as the study
17 continues.
18 Related to the District of Columbia,
19 District planners have expressed overarching
20 concerns based on the lack of detail provided in
21 the draft EIS, and related to the Federal
22 Railroad Administration's previous elimination of
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 78
1 other potential Maglev station locations within
2 the city. When these other station sites may
3 have been preferable to the current Mount Vernon
4 East location, and the EIS's consideration of
5 only one station site has made it more difficult
6 for planners to understand the real magnitude of
7 the potential project impacts on the city.
8 Other concerns include potential
9 operational impacts to New York Avenue during
10 construction as a major city transportation
11 corridor, the potential new 1,000-space garage --
12 despite other nearby -- other nearby potential
13 parking opportunities -- and the District's
14 effort to minimize parking in the city, and the
15 fact that there are no direct underground
16 connections to Metro Rail, which was one of the
17 reasons for eliminating previous NOMA station
18 locations.
19 NCPC staff are fully supportive of
20 these comments, and we will support these and
21 other District comments in our final letter as we
22 continue to coordinate with District planning
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 79
1 staff. Before I close, here are some key
2 recommendations that we will convey to the
3 Federal Railroad Administration in our comment
4 letter -- to continue to develop more specific
5 mitigation with specific locations since the
6 draft EIS does not currently contain this
7 information, to add one or more non-Parkway
8 alignments to broaden the study, should neither
9 of the two current options prove to be feasible
10 once federal plans, programming and mitigation
11 are better understood; and to collect more
12 detailed planning information before selecting
13 the preferred alternative since FRA should seek
14 to minimize the disruption to existing and future
15 federal plans and operations in the region.
16 Regarding next steps, NCPC staff will
17 finalize our comment letter based on today's
18 meeting and send that to the Federal Railroad
19 Administration prior to the end of the public
20 comment period. FRA will then review all public
21 and agency comments received, and then they plan
22 to select a preferred Maglev alternative and
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 80
1 release a final EIS and record of decision in
2 early 2022. In addition, over the next few
3 months, the FRA and the Maglev team have agreed
4 to come in and provide a follow-up information
5 presentation to our commission to address any
6 questions and concerns that members may express
7 at today's meeting. So that concludes my
8 presentation and I am now available to respond to
9 any questions from commission members at this
10 time. Thank you.
11 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you, Mr.
12 Weil. Such a thorough presentation. I will now
13 open it up to the Commission for discussion,
14 starting with Commissioner Cash and then going in
15 a round robin from that.
16 SECRETARY KOSTER: Can I also ask Mr.
17 Weil, thank you, to take the screen down? Yes.
18 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
19 Commissioner Cash, if you would like to offer any
20 comments or questions?
21 COMMISSIONER CASH: Well I am very
22 thankful for the staff's work on -- on addressing
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 81
1 these -- the District's concerns in here. I
2 think that there's a lot of outstanding questions
3 that need to be asked about this. I have a lot
4 of concerns about the impacts, especially here in
5 downtown, but on the project itself, I guess I'll
6 go for the old adage. If you don't have anything
7 nice to say, then don't say it at all. So --
8 (Laughter.)
9 VICE CHAIR WHITE: I'm sure your
10 mother would be proud of that statement,
11 Commissioner Cash.
12 (Laughter.)
13 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
14 Commissioner Chang?
15 COMMISSIONER CHANG: Thank you for the
16 presentation. I have no further comments.
17 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
18 Commissioner Ginsberg?
19 (No audible response.)
20 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Maybe we'll come
21 back. I'm not sure if Commissioner Ginsberg can
22 hear us.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 82
1 (Simultaneous speaking.)
2 COMMISSIONER GINSBERG: No comments --
3 no comments from me, I'm sorry.
4 VICE CHAIR WHITE: No problem, thank
5 you.
6 (Simultaneous speaking.)
7 COMMISSIONER GINSBERG: Thank you for
8 the presentation.
9 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you. I see
10 that Commissioner Trueblood joined us. So,
11 Commissioner Trueblood, welcome -- any comments?
12 COMMISSIONER TRUEBLOOD: Thank you.
13 I guess my -- maybe it's a question. And I think
14 -- thank you very much for the presentation.
15 It's summed up, I believe, many of our thoughts
16 so far. But my question -- you had mentioned
17 earlier NCPC's approval authority over New York
18 Avenue. And I'd love to hear a little bit more
19 about what that looks like and what we should be
20 anticipating our -- our role in that review and
21 approval in the future.
22 MR. WEIL: Well, yes, at this time it
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 83
1 looks like the only -- first of all, our
2 commission would have approval authority over
3 federal property within the District. And at
4 this time the draft EIS shows a number of
5 National Parks Service reservations along New
6 York Avenue as being temporarily impacted during
7 the construction phase. The draft EIS explains
8 that these -- these reservations would be
9 returned back to their existing state once the
10 construction phase was complete. So that --
11 that's where our approval authority would be.
12 COMMISSIONER TRUEBLOOD: Okay, thank
13 you -- I mean, you know, I guess I'll just say,
14 you know, I have a number of questions probably
15 better suited for the project sponsor. So I look
16 forward to that presentation.
17 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
18 Commissioner McMahon?
19 COMMISSIONER McMAHON: I appreciate
20 the staff's work. I enjoyed the presentation,
21 looking forward to future discussions on this
22 topic. Thank you.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 84
1 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
2 Commissioner May?
3 COMMISSIONER MAY: I have comments,
4 but I have a lot of background noise at the
5 moment. So if somebody else could go and I will
6 try to clear that up here.
7 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Okay. Commissioner
8 Argo?
9 COMMISSIONER ARGO: Hello, I -- I'm
10 kind of bowled over. It was -- it's a huge --
11 you know, it's a huge project with potentially
12 huge impacts, you know, that I think -- you know,
13 you clearly touched on. I appreciate -- it's a
14 huge amount of work, I'm sure, has gone into this
15 and will continue to go into this project and
16 really appreciate how the staff has dived in and
17 -- and given us, you know -- and given us the
18 overview. But also -- also being very clear
19 about where the key issues will be, not just for
20 the commission, but for other authorities as
21 well.
22 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 85
1 Commissioner Wright?
2 (Simultaneous speaking.)
3 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Okay, I keep
4 getting --
5 COMMISSIONER WRIGHT: I have no
6 questions or comments at this point. I -- what -
7 - did I go out of turn? Sorry. I don't have any
8 questions or comments. It's -- it's kind of
9 overwhelming. I remember seeing it the last time
10 -- you know, people talk a lot about how we are
11 not competitive in this realm with other
12 countries. And I don't know how they get it
13 done. Because there's so many things that --
14 that can impede the progress of a project like
15 this that was extremely thorough. It -- I find
16 it overwhelming to think about what would need to
17 happen to -- to -- to bring this project to
18 fruition. Wow. So I'll just leave it at that.
19 And I -- I guess -- I -- what -- what will be our
20 next -- what's the next step? And in the end --
21 this is a -- I said I wasn't going to comment or
22 ask a question. How -- who is the -- what entity
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 86
1 is the final decision maker when we really get to
2 mitigation and all this stuff? I mean, I'm sort
3 of unclear on the decision tree on this, which is
4 an unfair question, Mike, I'm sorry.
5 MR. WEIL: That's okay.
6 (Laughter.)
7 MR. WEIL: I believe this is fairly
8 similar to the -- the famous Managed Lanes
9 project where the Federal Railroad Administration
10 technically is the lead agency, but -- but they
11 are all also working very closely with the
12 Maryland Department of Transportation. And
13 basically, once they wrap up the study with a --
14 a selection of a preferred alternative, which
15 they will publish through the final environmental
16 impact statement and ROD, I believe mitigation --
17 the plan right now is to develop mitigation up to
18 a certain point and then to continue refine -- to
19 refine that mitigation as kind of the plans are -
20 - are developed into more detailed engineering
21 plans. And I would guess that would be done in
22 conjunction with -- with the Maglev firm who will
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 87
1 be operating the project and -- and who will own
2 the service.
3 So those are the next steps. One of
4 our recommendations is to kind of -- basically
5 slow the process down so that we can get as much
6 detailed information, not only on impacts but
7 also mitigation, before a preferred alternative
8 is -- is really selected. So again, we can make
9 more of these planning decisions before we get
10 into more detailed design.
11 MS. SULLIVAN: Madam Chair White, I'm
12 just going to add that those are next steps with
13 regard to the environmental impact statement
14 process, but then it's a -- maybe it's fairly
15 obvious, but you know, there's a lot of
16 discussions that have to happen with all the
17 landholding agencies as well. So -- I mean,
18 that's a good segue to Peter's comments.
19 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Yes, that's a very
20 important point. I am glad you added that.
21 Commissioner May, are you available to speak now?
22 Or should we move on to Commissioner Dixon?
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 88
1 COMMISSIONER MAY: No, I'm good. I
2 can talk now.
3 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Okay, thank you.
4 COMMISSIONER MAY: Okay, so I
5 appreciate the presentation. It is -- it was
6 very thorough, but boy, it only touches the
7 surface of what we're all grappling with on this
8 project. I mean, my history on this goes all the
9 way back to the very beginning. It's been more
10 than four years since we started having meetings
11 on this topic -- through all of the different
12 alternatives, and all of the potential impacts of
13 those. And I will note at that time that the
14 plan was to release the draft EIS in the winter
15 of 2018, and so -- I don't know if that meant
16 December of 2018, or January of 2018. In any
17 case, it's now 2021. It's several years behind
18 and I think it's going to continue to move more
19 slowly than scheduled. I'd be very surprised if
20 they can get all the way to a final EIS in -- in
21 the early next year. But, you know, we'll --
22 we'll see what happens.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 89
1 First of all I will say, you know, we
2 have been talking directly with FRA and have been
3 -- have reviewed earlier drafts of -- of what's
4 in the -- in the draft EIS. And so everything
5 that I am saying today is not news to FRA. They
6 already know what our concerns are. As noted in
7 the presentation, there are -- there are multiple
8 Parks Service properties and DOI properties that
9 are involved here. We have the two large Park
10 Service parks -- Greenbelt Park and of course the
11 Parkway. Fourteen L'Enfant reservations are
12 affected. And of course the Patuxent Research
13 Refuge is also a DOI property. And we are
14 coordinating the Park Service with DOI on all the
15 comments. And they'll receive a single comment
16 letter from -- from DOI.
17 We're concerned about the -- I think
18 in the biggest -- in the big picture, the concern
19 is that we're not sure how this can actually
20 happen given the constraints of federal agencies
21 involved -- particular Department of the
22 Interior, which is what we know. I'm not sure
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 90
1 what the path forward is because what's being
2 proposed is a set of impacts that are so
3 substantial -- I mean, more substantial than
4 anything that I have seen in my Park Service
5 career and that, at this point, includes the
6 Managed Lanes study which is -- you know, has
7 been throttled back to the point where the -- the
8 effects are more manageable on Park Service land.
9 I mean, this is the biggest thing.
10 And when you get to that scale, some of the tools
11 that are available for federal decision making
12 aren't necessarily available to you. So it's --
13 it's complicated. I'm not sure how this can
14 happen. We'll see as we, you know, move further
15 along and communicate further with FRA.
16 I will say, there are -- you know, the
17 way the alternatives have been eliminated up to
18 this point and we're down to basically both sides
19 of the Parkway, I think is problematic. And, you
20 know, the level of impact of those alternatives
21 has gotten more extensive as the design has been
22 -- has been refined. So I am grateful that NCPC
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 91
1 is speaking up for adding back some of the prior
2 alternatives, or just adding alternatives
3 generally because I think that that's necessary.
4 It's also an option conceivably that they could
5 put the entire structure underground. I mean,
6 most of it is already underground. So I don't
7 know if there's -- you know, how seriously the --
8 you know, how -- how viable it is to just keep
9 the entire thing underground, because then we're
10 talking about a much different set of impacts.
11 And frankly, more manageable.
12 The -- as it's envisioned right now,
13 the -- the -- the Maglev train will come out of
14 the ground along the Parkway and run parallel to
15 it for somewhere between six and ten miles. Now
16 the National Park Service operates 19 miles of
17 the Parkway, so conceivably half of the Parkway
18 will be substantially affected by this road -- by
19 this elevated viaduct. And I think you saw some
20 good images of what this thing is going to look
21 like. So this is -- you know, even though it's -
22 - it says 90 acres of impact, that's 90 acres of
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 92
1 construction and footprint. It is not 90 acres
2 out of the 1,400 that -- you know, where you can
3 see it. It is -- you know, 50 -- 30 to 50
4 percent of the Parkway and its viewsheds. The
5 things that make it a parkway and not just a
6 highway will be diminished by this construction.
7 I also think there -- I mean, I don't
8 know if it's -- it's not well covered within the
9 DEIS, but there are substantial below-grade
10 impacts as well. I don't know how they are
11 calculated in some of the acreage counts and
12 things like that, but I do want to make sure that
13 NCPC staff is fully aware and are raising the
14 appropriate questions when it comes to what's
15 accounted for within the EIS.
16 And, you know, frankly the -- a lot of
17 the -- looking beyond the Department of
18 Interior's perspective on this, I am very
19 concerned about the other impacts that this will
20 have with the -- you know, the large ventilation
21 structures, the stations at both ends, the -- I
22 mean, a 200-acre maintenance facility planted
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 93
1 within the Beltsville Agricultural Research
2 Center -- I mean, that's really a huge structure.
3 And if it's on the -- if the alignment chosen is
4 on the west side of the parkway, then that means
5 that the -- the Maglev train will be flying over
6 the parkway to get to the park -- conceivably.
7 So, I mean the -- there's just any
8 number of -- of concerns that we have. Again,
9 all of this stuff is information that we have
10 previously shared with FRA and will be putting
11 some version of this into writing before the end
12 of the comment period. And I do appreciate the
13 NCPC staff analysis on this and agree with the
14 comments that had been registered so far. Thank
15 you.
16 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you,
17 Commissioner May. Commissioner Dixon?
18 COMMISSIONER DIXON: Yes, I think it's
19 fascinating -- the technology. And I've been on
20 a Maglev from, I think, the airport into Hong
21 Kong. It's really special. But I guess the
22 question I have is, is the juice going to be
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 94
1 worth the squeeze? Or is the result going to be
2 worth the -- the damage of the -- what's going to
3 be done?
4 I also feel that there's a lot
5 happening with who's going to be the rider?
6 Who's going to be on this? There are fewer and
7 fewer -- more and more of us are doing work from
8 home. There's a lot of other transportation
9 options. Fifteen minutes is good to get to
10 Baltimore, but -- you know, whether that result
11 is really something that is going to mean
12 something to us in 20 years -- that -- that -- I
13 wish we could upgrade our existing rail where
14 there are right aways to be able to handle this
15 kind of thing, rather than have to build some
16 other new structure over the top and cause all
17 this disruption. If the time could be spend
18 trying to convert those right-aways into a faster
19 one -- maybe even Maglev -- rather than have to
20 build a whole new one.
21 Obviously there's going to be a lot
22 going -- thought going into this and I'm just --
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 95
1 I'm excited by it but it's -- you know, a lot of
2 things excite us, but do we really want to go
3 through the -- the intrusion to our -- to our
4 land and to our area? So, we'll have to wait and
5 see. Looking forward.
6 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you so much
7 for those comments. You know, hearing all this,
8 I just want to go back for a second and really
9 reflect on what our job is as the regional
10 planning commission for federal land. And the
11 thoughtful analysis by the staff and fellow
12 commissioners in really digging into the impacts
13 of this project, looking at it in a really
14 careful, critical way, and then asking the big
15 questions. I think that's our job and I think --
16 you know, I want to compliment the staff as
17 everyone has in putting this out there. And the
18 other part of this going back to our public
19 outreach and engagement efforts -- it's so
20 important for the public to have good visuals to
21 understand what this is going to mean to their
22 communities.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 96
1 So the visuals that you include on the
2 -- the visual vegetation impacts, what happens
3 along the parkway -- is really important for the
4 public to understand. So I so appreciate that we
5 not only do this work, but we do it in public --
6 in the spirit of helping analyze what these
7 trade-offs are. I mean, our comprehensive plan
8 policies encourage non-single occupancy vehicle
9 transportation systems. But with this one,
10 obviously, there are lots of trade-offs. I do
11 question -- I love the way Commissioner Dixon put
12 it -- is the juice going to be worth the squeeze?
13 And I think as a society that is what we have to
14 do in looking at these projects. As Commissioner
15 Wright noted earlier, COVID has an impact on
16 transportation and how we travel and use these
17 systems. The competition to public
18 transportation and the equity issues that are
19 involved in these decisions are serious and
20 really need careful review. Commissioner May, I
21 am really glad that you've shared with us what
22 the status of your conversations are with the
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 97
1 Federal Railroad Administration. This is -- this
2 is a really important project for -- for our
3 review. So thank you for that. And I look
4 forward to having the Federal Railroad
5 Administration and the Maglev team come back to
6 the commission to answer all these questions,
7 discuss the project further. And I hope everyone
8 who is in the public who is participating and
9 watching the meeting today will go and review the
10 presentation and the materials that our staff has
11 put together and -- and take a look at what this
12 will mean for your communities.
13 So if there are no other questions or
14 comments from the Commission members, we will
15 conclude our open session agenda. But I didn't
16 want to cut that off if someone had an additional
17 comment or question.
18 (No audible response.)
19 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Thank you, Mr.
20 Weil, for your presentation and good work. So
21 this --
22 (Simultaneous speaking.)
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 98
1 MR. WEIL: Thank you very much.
2 VICE CHAIR WHITE: -- completes --
3 Commissioner Argo, did you want to make an
4 additional comment?
5 (No audible response.)
6 VICE CHAIR WHITE: Okay, thank you.
7 This concludes our open session agenda. The
8 Commission will next meet on Thursday, June 3rd
9 at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time. And if there is no
10 other business, the open session is now
11 adjourned.
12 (Whereupon, the above-entitled matter
13 went off the record at 2:34 p.m.)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 99
A advise 39:11 American 11:7 95:4 ability 54:18 advisory 61:22 amount 43:17 84:14 area's 74:21 able 8:6 52:13 53:11 aesthetics 73:7 Amtrak 68:22 69:3,11 areas 61:8 73:10 57:9 77:14 94:14 Affairs 1:15 69:12,19 Argo 1:13 4:22 5:1 9:16 above-entitled 98:12 affect 75:8 76:6 Amtrak's 69:5 9:17 16:10,11,12,18 absence 8:13 affirmative 10:12 analysis 45:19 55:13 17:6,7 28:13,14,17,19 Abstain 17:19,21 35:6 afternoon 4:3 18:19 93:13 95:11 28:22 29:2,4 31:12 abstentions 18:1 36:4 58:19 analyze 96:6 34:15,16 54:6 84:8,9 Academy 44:8 agencies 19:17 23:2,7 and-or 76:4 98:3 access 21:2 76:13 37:20 38:3 39:20 41:2 and/or 24:1 38:14 Arlington 43:13 45:18 accessible 69:3 41:6,14,15 44:15,20 ANDREW 1:19 Armed 11:7 accounted 92:15 44:21 45:3,3,10,14 Anne 2:3 63:14 66:8 Army 41:10 44:16,17 accurate 11:13 46:3,15,17 47:5,13,17 annual 37:8 39:14,19 array 57:12 74:17 achieve 56:20 48:7 52:11 57:7 62:14 46:7,19,22 47:8 ARRINGTON 1:16 achievement 58:5 87:17 89:20 answer 14:6 27:19 30:6 Arts 13:1 achieves 60:11 agency 38:8 41:5,11,20 49:7 97:6 Arundel 63:14 65:18 achieving 60:5 42:6,12 45:22,22 46:5 Antenna 20:6 39:4 66:8 acknowledge 32:17 47:7,9 48:3,8,14 51:9 anticipate 52:13 asked 23:7 81:3 33:2 52:21 57:16 79:21 anticipated 66:22 asking 95:14 Acosta 2:2 12:17,18 86:10 anticipating 82:20 aspect 40:18 14:9,11 agenda 7:1 8:13,16 anticipatory 54:12 aspects 21:19 acre 66:2 11:1 12:15 14:15 15:7 anxious 29:19 assess 75:14 76:17 acreage 92:11 15:9 18:7 35:11,18 apologize 11:22 assessing 70:10 acres 73:11 91:22,22 58:11 97:15 98:7 appear 69:16 71:18 assessment 75:7 92:1 ago 20:7 54:5 appears 68:8 assigned 48:6 Act 61:19 agree 32:6 93:13 applicant 19:16 21:21 assist 48:18 action 3:12 18:3,6 agreed 80:3 22:1 23:1,18 25:1 associate 31:11 55:2 25:16 35:11 36:10 agricultural 61:15 32:21 38:3 39:20 associated 41:1 47:4 activities 68:5 73:13 74:13 93:1 40:12 41:1,4,6,10,14 astronomical 76:10 adage 81:6 ahead 23:21 42:6,12 44:15 45:3,22 audible 81:19 97:18 add 32:16 55:14 56:7 air 13:21 66:15,18 46:3,5,14,17 47:13,17 98:5 58:6 71:15 79:7 87:12 74:20 76:4,12 48:3,7,14,21 Augmentation 11:8 added 23:22 24:15 airport 63:14 93:20 applicants 23:21 24:2,8 authorities 38:19 43:22 87:20 Alexandria 43:19 24:12 27:8 33:4 38:18 45:12 84:20 adding 91:1,2 align 22:2 65:7,10 38:22 48:18 authority 38:7 61:20 addition 11:5 23:17 alignment 59:21 65:4,6 application 26:7 27:9 62:1 82:17 83:2,11 59:5 60:15 61:11 65:9,10,12,15 70:17 56:13 available 6:21 63:1 65:22 69:8 73:11 70:19 74:2 77:6 93:3 applications 48:19 68:19 75:1 80:8 87:21 76:13 80:2 alignments 67:14 71:1 Appointee 1:13,13,16 90:11,12 additional 19:4 20:13 71:16 73:5 74:4 79:8 appreciate 18:12 28:8 Avenue 13:5 62:5 64:4 29:7 71:16 72:18 74:1 Allegiance 7:5 32:9 51:16 56:21 64:7,8 78:9 82:18 74:14 97:16 98:4 allow 23:21 83:19 84:13,16 88:5 83:6 address 38:13 39:8 allowing 22:11 93:12 96:4 average 69:1,5 60:21 80:5 alter 27:1 approach 38:19 48:2,10 avoid 23:10 73:22 addressing 32:22 39:6 altered 75:2 appropriate 20:15 40:1 aware 38:18 92:13 80:22 alternative 21:14 22:3 76:19 92:14 aways 94:14 Adelphi 44:9 63:6,21 65:6,7,10 approval 15:10,15 ayes 10:17 adjacent 76:12 70:16,22 71:6 72:12 18:22 61:20 82:17,21 B Adjourn 3:19 75:17,21 76:4,21 77:5 83:2,11 adjourned 98:11 79:13,22 86:14 87:7 approve 16:4 18:7 back 28:20,22 29:2 Administration 1:20 alternatives 21:20 27:11 33:6 32:18 50:11 81:21 15:20 44:19 45:7 59:4 22:12 24:10 30:10,21 approved 47:5 83:9 88:9 90:7 91:1 62:12 63:3 70:18 72:2 59:14 65:5 67:10 approximately 64:16 95:8,18 97:5 76:16 79:3,19 86:9 88:12 90:17,20 91:2,2 65:20 background 84:4 97:1,5 altogether 73:22 area 3:10 15:5,18 52:11 Baltimore 60:1,7 63:12 Administration's 77:22 amendment 8:9 22:9 52:16 59:18 66:21 63:17,19 66:20 68:15 adopted 7:2 20:1 39:3 30:3 67:18 69:10 70:2,20 94:10 advice 28:21 amendments 13:9 71:5,21,21,21 75:18 Baltimore- 70:1 71:8
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 100
Baltimore-Washington briefing 36:9 carry 71:1 78:10,14 3:18 58:9,12,22 60:15 briefings 26:9 case 68:8 88:17 civic 12:11 61:16 64:20 71:3 73:4 bring 85:17 cases 41:4 civilian 37:19 BARC 61:16 66:5 74:4 bringing 39:9 Cash 1:14 5:11,12 10:5 clarification 20:13 74:6,12,17,22 75:13 broad 57:12 10:6 17:16,17 31:14 24:17 26:22 76:2,12 77:1 broaden 71:11 79:8 31:15 35:3,4 49:21,22 clarifications 28:8 BARC's 75:8 broke 43:4 80:14,19,21 81:11 clarified 23:16 Barker 11:10,12,17 broken 67:17 catching 32:22 clarifying 19:2 12:1,4,10 brother 11:12,17 12:1,4 cause 94:16 clarity 27:2,8 base 75:16 12:7,10 cede 77:14 clear 12:6 32:20 84:6 based 23:13 42:5 67:11 budget 23:12 center 3:9 12:22 13:21 84:18 70:20 77:6,20 79:17 build 67:9 71:12 94:15 15:3,12 38:12 44:10 clearly 36:14 84:13 basic 21:2 94:20 61:14,15,17 76:1,17 client 54:8 basically 86:13 87:4 building 3:10 15:4,11 77:3,13 93:2 clip 7:4 90:18 15:17 61:21 64:5 certain 86:18 close 79:1 basis 46:21 buildings 37:1 50:15 Certainly 4:11 33:18 closely 86:11 becoming 58:2 67:1 certainty 23:10 closer 66:20 began 40:19 builds 37:6 cetera 20:22 Coast 44:6 beginning 39:15 46:8 Bureau 13:22 53:3 55:4 chair 1:13 3:4 4:3,8 5:4 COG 25:20 51:21 88:9 bus 68:22 69:3 6:17 7:7,12 8:12,14 collect 46:20 75:12 behalf 11:21 12:12 business 4:9 7:2,17 8:17,18,19,20,22 9:20 79:11 32:18 54:8,13 98:10 10:17,22 11:1,2 12:15 collected 41:17,21 believe 9:7 10:11 82:15 businesses 54:9 12:18 14:8,14,18,19 42:10 49:3 86:7,16 busy 12:20 14:9 15:6 16:7,12 17:10 color 67:7 below-grade 92:9 BW 65:8 73:21 76:3,13 18:2,6,17 27:20 28:12 Columbia 1:14,19,20 Beltsville 13:21 61:15 77:2 28:16,18 29:1,10 31:8 59:19 61:18 77:18 93:1 BWI 62:9 63:14 66:9 31:13,17,21 32:3,10 combinations 67:12 Beltway 64:17 32:14 33:8,13 34:2,17 come 28:20 52:14 80:4 beneficial 24:2 C 34:18 35:9,16 36:2 81:20 91:13 97:5 benefit 24:11 70:10 C 2:2 49:8,20 50:4,8,21 comes 32:9 52:15 benefits 68:3 calculated 92:11 51:4,12 53:13 54:4,15 92:14 best 46:11 73:21 Calendar 3:7 15:1,7,8 56:6 58:10,16,18,20 coming 14:2 29:13 bet 9:4 15:22 16:4 80:11,18 81:9,13,17 46:18 Beth 1:10,13 call 3:2 4:7,10 6:19 7:18 81:20 82:4,9 83:17 commend 12:10 Bethesda 41:9 9:2 16:16 30:6 33:17 84:1,7,22 85:3 87:11 comment 26:3,3,10 better 19:10 23:8 30:19 54:8 87:19 88:3 93:16 95:6 31:12 59:5 63:2,4 50:19 51:10 52:10,13 called 6:9 11:15 97:19 98:2,6 79:3,17,20 85:21 57:7 71:14 79:11 calls 37:11 Chairman 1:10,14 5:3 89:15 93:12 97:17 83:15 Camden 63:18 6:16 9:19 17:8 98:4 beyond 92:17 campus 14:1 22:9 41:9 challenge 52:6 commented 56:5 biannual 37:9 44:9 66:5 72:2 74:5 challenges 38:2,11 comments 8:3 11:15,18 biennial 46:20 76:13,18 77:8,10 39:6 60:21 12:1 21:20 22:11 23:4 big 30:20 89:18 95:14 campus's 74:13 Chang 1:15 5:13 6:5,6,8 23:13 26:2 28:7 29:8 bigger 22:14 campuses 36:22 62:8 6:12 10:7,8,20 17:18 31:12,16,20 32:2,13 biggest 89:18 90:9 71:4 17:19 31:18,19 35:5,6 39:11 50:2,7 51:3,15 bit 29:18 31:2 53:10 cams 7:20 28:4 49:13 50:4,5 81:14,15 56:8 58:6 59:1,6,7,12 55:22 82:18 capability 60:4 change 7:15 30:5 31:6 63:2,5 67:22 78:20,21 blue 42:17,17 43:3,6,12 capacity 60:14 32:7 38:14 79:21 80:20 81:16 65:9 Capital 1:1,11 3:13,16 changes 19:1 24:7 82:2,3,11 84:3 85:6,8 Bolger 44:8 4:4 18:4,9 35:14,20 26:21 27:4,13,17 87:18 89:15 93:14 boogey 29:5 36:21 37:10 52:16 chapter 75:4 95:7 97:14 Boston 69:22 70:7 57:5 59:17 61:19 66:6 Cherry 63:18 commission 1:1,3,11 bowled 84:10 67:6 chosen 93:3 2:2 3:2,13 4:7 7:17,18 boy 88:6 capture 30:15 circulation 21:2 7:22 8:14 11:11,14,18 breadth 56:12 career 90:5 circumstances 7:14 11:22 12:12,19,21 break 50:15 careful 95:14 96:20 citizens 12:5 13:6,20 14:10,20 18:4 brief 25:18 26:1,4 36:6 carried 35:10 city 43:10,18,20,21 18:9,20 19:7,19 20:2 46:14 58:21 carries 18:1 63:17,19 70:7 78:2,7 20:19 21:10,19 22:2,6
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 101
22:11 24:9 25:6,7,10 compared 70:6 consistency 20:20 27:5 55:15 25:15,18 26:1,5,8,16 comparison 69:4 consistent 21:11 46:3 course 6:20 8:7 89:10 27:22 28:13 36:12,15 compatibility 67:3 75:5 56:15 89:12 39:10,11 44:5 49:11 compete 69:14 consisting 11:6 cover 40:15 51:7 57:20 58:20,21 competition 96:17 constraints 89:20 covered 92:8 59:8 61:11,20 62:19 competitive 85:11 construct 60:9 covers 35:11 80:5,9,13 83:2 84:20 compilation 67:5 constructed 63:8 64:5 COVID 13:18 55:9 95:10 97:6,14 98:8 compile 45:1 construction 62:5 96:15 Commission's 4:5 complementary 60:18 73:12 76:14 78:10 COVID-19 7:10,13 30:15 68:18 83:7,10 92:1,6 25:21 Commissioner 3:3 4:12 complete 11:13 83:10 consultants 62:21 create 13:15 40:9 68:11 4:13,14,15,16,19,20 completely 73:22 74:2 contact 40:12 41:3 criteria 70:21 4:22 5:1,6,7,8,9,11,12 completes 98:2 47:14 48:8,21 critical 95:14 5:13,15,17,20 6:3,5,8 complex 21:13 25:4 contacts 47:7 48:3 cultural 61:9 6:9,12 8:2,11,18,21 complicated 51:19 52:4 contain 79:6 curious 50:14 9:5,6,8,10,11,13,14 55:16 90:13 contains 67:15 current 20:1,8 22:17 9:15,16,17,18,21 10:1 compliment 95:16 content 19:20 38:10 42:22 70:4 78:3 10:2,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,13 complimentary 69:17 CONTENTS 3:1 79:9 10:20 16:5,6,8,10,11 compliments 57:18 contiguous 73:10 currently 36:16 37:2 16:12,17,18,20,22 comprehensive 13:8 continue 53:19 71:15 38:2 40:9 44:1 63:1 17:1,3,4,5,6,7,11,13 21:11 61:5 73:18 96:7 72:13 78:22 79:4 65:4 66:3 68:14 69:20 17:14,15,16,17,18,19 conceivably 91:4,17 84:15 86:18 88:18 75:7 79:6 17:20,21 28:2,5,6,14 93:6 continues 77:17 cut 97:16 28:17,19,22 29:2,4,11 concept 19:2 20:9,14 contrary 69:16 29:11,13 30:1,13,16 20:16,18 21:9,11,19 contribution 12:11 D 30:22 31:4,9,10,11,12 22:7,18 23:5,9,16,20 Controlled 48:17 D.C 13:8 42:16 59:22 31:14,15,18,19,21 24:1,3,11 25:10 27:9 convened 1:9 60:7 63:11,13 64:3 32:1,4,5,11,12 33:7,9 29:16 30:3,11 63:22 conversations 96:22 69:22 33:11,13,19,20,22 conceptual 39:10 70:21 convert 94:18 damage 94:2 34:4,6,7,9,11,12,13 concern 72:3 89:18 convey 67:16 79:2 dark 42:17 34:14,15,16,19,21 concerned 89:17 92:19 cooperating 62:13 data 37:10 41:17,21 35:1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 concerns 72:22 73:2 coordinate 40:6 78:22 42:1,10 46:20 49:3 49:12,15,16,21,22 74:8 76:7 77:9,20 coordinates 41:13 50:13 57:14,17 50:4,5,9,10,22 51:1,5 78:8 80:6 81:1,4 89:6 coordinating 38:1,3 date 24:7 40:13 51:6,13,14 53:16 54:5 93:8 48:2 62:13 89:14 day 58:2 54:6,16,17 55:3 56:8 conclude 97:15 coordination 19:8,21 days 6:21 27:16 56:8 80:14,19,21 concludes 14:4 27:18 21:8 33:4 37:8,21 deal 18:12 81:11,14,15,18,21 49:5 63:4 67:20 80:7 39:19,21 40:14 47:2,8 dealing 52:5 82:2,7,10,11,12 83:12 98:7 47:16 48:13 56:16,18 decade- 55:18 83:18,19 84:2,3,7,9 conduct 7:14 13:6 57:2,5 72:19 77:13 December 88:16 85:1,5 87:21,22 88:1 conducted 7:18 11:12 Corps 41:10 44:17 decision 53:2,4 63:7 88:4 93:17,17,18 37:14 47:11,21 correct 34:1 56:2 72:20 76:22 80:1 86:1 96:11,14,20 98:3 conducting 7:17 correction 56:3 86:3 90:11 Commissioner's 7:19 confirm 16:14 33:15 correspondence 26:5 decisions 36:13 52:22 commissioners 8:5 48:21 corridor 59:16 69:21 53:17 87:9 96:19 10:18 11:20 13:13 confused 31:2 73:2 78:11 declines 69:12 15:22 36:4 95:12 Congressional 50:15 costs 70:12 decreasing 61:2 Commissioners' 54:18 conjunction 36:9 86:22 Council 1:14 13:8 Defense 1:18 37:9,17 Committee 1:15,17 connections 78:16 Counsel 2:3 41:11,12 38:1 50:17 connectivity 60:17 Counties 45:18 define 36:19 communicate 90:15 Consent 3:7 15:1,7,8 countries 85:12 defined 75:15 communications 12:6 15:22 16:4 counts 92:11 definitely 10:14 44:11 consider 20:15 63:5 county 43:8,8,12,14,15 degrees 41:16 communities 95:22 70:9 43:16 44:7,10,12 DEIS 92:9 97:12 consideration 21:15 59:20 62:10 63:14 delegated 55:21,21 Community 41:9 65:5 67:15 78:4 64:18 65:19 66:9,17 deliberations 7:22 8:4 commuter 68:22 69:3 considering 66:3 74:13 75:5 demands 61:1 commuting 53:18 55:7 77:16 couple 51:15 52:19 department 1:17,18
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 102
37:9,17 41:12,20 44:8 disruption 75:17 79:14 economic 60:18 61:3 42:3 44:17,18 86:12 89:21 94:17 68:10 entire 65:14 91:5,9 92:17 disruptive 70:2 editorial 27:15 entity 57:3 85:22 departments 57:12 diss 55:15 edits 55:1 entrances 64:4,7 depending 13:18 distance 65:13,20 EDT 1:10 environment 67:3 describe 19:19 distinct 24:10,19 effect 27:15 55:11 environmental 59:2 described 24:20 47:22 distinction 30:19 effective 37:13 42:3 86:15 87:13 60:20 distribution 42:22 58:2 environs 36:17 38:4,5 describes 75:4 district 1:14,19,20 effects 90:8 39:12 40:22 47:4 description 24:15 37:22 50:16 57:16 effort 40:6 52:9 78:14 envisioned 91:12 design 1:21 13:5 87:10 59:14,19 61:17,22 efforts 19:14 41:20 equal 43:1 90:21 62:1,2,9,14 66:17 56:13 57:10 95:19 equity 96:18 designed 48:1 67:2 68:1 72:14,17 73:3 egress 66:15,19 errors 55:16 despite 78:12 75:6 77:18,19 78:21 EIS 26:3,9 60:16,20 especially 57:19 70:11 detail 70:14 77:20 78:22 83:3 62:3 63:1,6,20 64:2 74:12 81:4 detailed 22:12 71:2 District's 13:7 78:13 66:3,13 67:1,9,15 establish 39:19 75:12,19 79:12 86:20 81:1 68:7,12 69:8 70:12 establishing 40:18 87:6,10 Districts 50:20 72:19 73:6,17 74:19 et 20:22 details 13:17 19:4 dived 84:16 75:3,6 76:21 77:21 evaluate 53:8 60:9 20:10 22:19 Dixon 1:16 5:8,9 8:21 79:6 80:1 83:4,7 evaluating 52:17 determine 23:6,19 9:6 10:3,4 17:14,15 88:14,20 89:4 92:15 EVAN 1:14 determining 23:9 31:10,11 35:1,2 49:12 EIS's 78:4 everybody 51:7 develop 72:14 75:15 49:15,16 87:22 93:17 either 63:18 73:5,22 evolve 53:19 76:4,19 79:4 86:17 93:18 96:11 Elect 3:3 8:11 exactly 53:16 56:1 developed 74:7 86:20 document 26:22 27:5 electing 10:19 example 24:4 25:8 development 15:16 27:13 66:13 electromagnetic 76:9 38:10 39:2 41:8 45:6 19:17 20:22 21:6 38:7 DOI 89:8,13,14,16 77:11 52:20 53:1 57:8 61:21 62:8 64:10 doing 12:3 22:3 55:19 elements 61:4 66:1 examples 23:22 72:18 75:9 94:7 67:5,7 excellent 50:13 dialog 48:13 dots 66:7 elevated 64:22 65:19 excite 95:2 DIANE 1:21 downtown 59:22 63:11 91:19 excited 50:11 95:1 died 11:8 63:13 64:1,14 81:5 elevation 65:1 exclude 42:18 differ 41:5 draft 20:17 21:6 22:12 eliminate 74:16 excuse 9:19 34:2 differences 21:16 68:21 59:2 60:16 62:3,22 eliminated 90:17 Executive 2:2 3:5 12:14 different 52:4 56:11 64:1 66:3 67:15,22 eliminating 78:17 12:16 27:11 57:15 64:4 65:4 67:9 68:7 69:8 70:11 73:17 elimination 77:22 existing 24:5 61:1 67:11,14 88:11 91:10 77:21 79:6 83:4,7 Elizabeths 22:8 30:2 79:14 83:9 94:13 differentiation 30:9 88:14 89:4 email 13:17 expect 13:6 difficult 55:17 57:11 drafted 22:22 48:16 emerge 64:19 expectation 69:14 78:5 drafts 89:3 emergency 66:15,18 experience 38:11 77:4 difficulty 55:20 drive 68:15 employment 60:22 experiencing 8:6 digging 95:12 due 63:2 enable 60:6 explains 83:7 dignity 11:21 enables 20:19 express 80:6 diminished 92:6 E encourage 13:13 61:7 expressed 77:19 direct 78:15 EA 26:3 96:8 extend 64:15 directly 38:22 41:13 eager 18:13 encroachment 73:19 extending 63:11 47:16 48:3 73:12 76:6 earlier 22:16 39:9,21 ends 65:18 92:21 extensive 11:11 28:7 89:2 47:12 53:7 56:13,14 Energy 44:9 74:18 90:21 Director 1:21 2:2 3:5 82:17 89:3 96:15 engagement 19:13 extent 72:7 75:18 12:14,16 47:18 early 19:11 20:19 21:5 57:21 95:19 extremely 38:5 85:15 Director's 27:11 21:8 22:3,11 63:7 engineering 38:12 discuss 24:12 97:7 80:2 88:21 86:20 F discussed 39:7 easier 32:20 Engineers 41:10 44:17 F 44:7 discussion 25:13 27:13 east 65:7,8 74:20 76:4 Engraving 13:22 53:3 facilities 3:16 19:14 28:1,5 30:11 36:11 77:2,5 78:4 55:4 35:15,19 36:7,17,19 49:6,11,14 80:13 eastern 65:15 98:9 enhance 48:12 38:4,9 40:20,22 41:2 discussions 19:6 83:21 echo 51:6 56:7 enjoyed 83:20 42:5,11,11,16,20,22 87:16 ecological 72:5 73:9 ensure 11:12 39:22 43:2,7,13,15,20 44:1
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 103
44:3,5,14,16,20,21 figures 42:18 Fourteen 89:11 go 27:15 28:2 32:18 45:2,8,9,11,15,15,16 figuring 55:20 FRA 63:4,16 66:12 33:1 42:8 49:12 52:20 46:18 48:9 50:19 52:2 fill 20:12 27:7 70:22 71:15 72:12 54:6 81:6 84:5,15 52:3,14,16 56:17 final 15:10,16 33:6 63:6 75:11 76:3 79:13,20 85:7 95:2,8 97:9 57:12 72:4 63:20 66:13 72:19 80:3 89:2,5 90:15 go-round 51:18 facility 13:10 40:12 76:21 78:21 80:1 86:1 93:10 goal 39:18 46:1 41:6,7,14 43:10 45:4 86:15 88:20 frankly 91:11 92:16 goals 39:15 56:19 45:5,21 48:5,12 53:5 finalize 49:1 79:17 Free 19:13 35:21,22 Goddard 12:22 61:16 53:8 62:7,15 64:20 finally 13:18 26:20 36:3 49:9 57:18 58:8 76:1,17 66:2,13 67:13 68:11 66:14 70:4 frictionless 60:3 goes 88:8 70:6 71:13 74:8,15 financial 12:8 frozen 28:15 going 26:12 55:8 80:14 76:5,11 92:22 find 45:16 57:1 85:15 fruition 85:18 85:21 87:12 88:18 facility-specific 48:2 findings 39:16 full 55:11 91:20 93:22 94:1,2,5 fact 51:16 78:15 finds 48:10 fully 72:9 73:17 78:19 94:6,11,21,22,22 factors 70:10 firm 62:17 86:22 92:13 95:18,21 96:12 Fairfax 43:11,21 44:7 first 4:8 15:10 22:22 functions 75:1 good 4:3 18:19 25:9 45:18 38:14 47:19 49:16 further 21:6 43:5 47:8 29:1 32:7 36:4 38:10 fairly 86:7 87:14 51:16 59:9 62:19 83:1 81:16 90:14,15 97:7 39:2 41:8 45:6 47:15 fall 43:21 89:1 future 12:19 26:6 53:20 51:8,8 55:6 58:19 familiar 44:6 fiscal 46:9,12 61:21 66:13 68:13 87:18 88:1 91:20 94:9 famous 52:20 86:8 Five 44:20 69:9,21 74:16 75:8 95:20 97:20 far 22:4 40:16 82:16 fixed 63:12 76:19 77:8,16 79:14 gotten 90:21 93:14 flawed 52:21 82:21 83:21 Government 1:17 fare 69:1,6,7 flexibility 71:17 Governmental 1:15 fares 69:4 Flight 61:17 76:1,17 G governments 38:6 farmland 72:6 Flis 3:14 18:10,15,18 gap 20:12 27:7 gradually 64:18 fascinating 93:19 27:21 29:21,22 30:8 garage 64:11 78:11 Grail 53:10,14 56:21 faster 94:18 30:14,17 31:1 39:7 Garden 13:4,12 grapple 54:1 fault 57:10 57:18 gathered 42:1 grappling 88:7 FCIP 37:10 40:6 flying 93:5 Gathering 3:10 15:5,18 grateful 90:22 FDA 14:1 focus 42:21 68:1 gatherings 7:13 gray 67:8 FDR 13:2 focused 19:1 21:10 general 1:20 2:3 15:19 great 18:12,15,18 33:2 feasible 21:5 71:13 focuses 36:16 57:4 20:18,20,21 21:1 23:4 36:3 51:7 53:13 54:13 75:18 79:9 fold 51:17 44:18 45:6 59:16 58:5,7 federal 3:10 13:7 15:4 follow 13:16 70:21 greater 33:3 48:11 15:17 19:8,14 27:16 follow-up 80:4 generally 25:3 53:15 56:16 71:17 74:6 76:3 36:6,17,19 37:9 38:7 followed 43:8 91:3 77:4 40:20 43:1,9,22 45:10 following 19:18 geography 51:9 57:16 green 43:19 45:14 50:15 52:16 follows 43:14 geophysical 76:10 Greenbelt 89:10 56:17 57:4 59:3,14 footprint 92:1 George's 43:8 44:11 greenfield 24:5 61:4,13,21 62:1,8,11 for-profit 62:16 45:17 59:20 62:10 ground 60:10 64:19,21 62:14 63:2 68:1,5 Forces 11:7 64:18 66:17 65:2,13,15 91:14 70:3,9,13,18 71:4,6 forecast 68:12 George's/Anne 65:18 growing 60:22 71:13,19 72:13,17 forested 61:8 73:10 Germantown 44:9 grown 58:1 73:1 75:13,17 76:16 forests 72:6 getting 22:4 31:2 56:14 growth 60:18 77:16,21 79:3,10,15 form 68:18 85:4 GSA 23:3 45:8 55:19 79:18 83:3 86:9 89:20 formal 24:19 25:5 26:18 Ginsberg 1:16 5:16,17 Guard 44:6 90:11 95:10 97:1,4 formalize 37:19 5:20 6:3 10:9,10,13 guess 81:5 82:13 83:13 federally 36:20 format 8:1 28:3 49:13 17:20,21 31:22 32:1 85:19 86:21 93:21 feedback 20:21 24:9 former 41:19 54:7 35:7,8 50:9,10 81:18 guidance 7:13 13:19 feel 94:4 Fort 72:1 81:21 82:2,7 21:21 25:2 26:17 feet 65:1 forthcoming 46:12 GIS 41:18 30:15 52:18 fellow 10:18 54:18 forthwith 56:3 give 24:2 46:10 Guide 48:16,17 95:11 forward 8:8 18:11 28:9 given 36:11 37:16 guidelines 3:13 18:5,8 fewer 94:6,7 47:20 49:6 51:22 52:8 53:18 57:8 68:3 84:17 19:1,12,19,19 20:1,6 field 13:20 58:5 83:16,21 90:1 84:17 89:20 20:8 22:17 23:8 24:21 Fifteen 94:9 95:5 97:4 glad 87:20 96:21 27:7,12 28:10 32:19 figure 56:1 four 44:19 45:14 88:10 Global 44:10 33:6 36:10 37:14 39:4
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 104
guides 37:14 93:2 61:2 issue 25:13 30:20 guideway 59:20 60:3 Humphreys 38:12 incredibly 53:20 issues 8:7 21:5,10,13 64:15,22 65:22 66:16 indicates 67:1 22:14 32:22 38:13 guideway's 65:14 I individual 36:22 39:21 39:8 60:21 72:17 idea 24:3 29:4 42:9 47:3 48:5 84:19 96:18 H 44:13 information 3:15 13:3 item 3:12 8:16 11:1 Hal 11:10 identified 63:20 66:7 14:2 19:5 20:13 24:16 12:15 14:15 15:7 18:3 half 91:17 identify 8:10 21:5 40:21 24:18 25:1,3,11,17,22 18:7,7 35:12,18 36:10 handle 94:14 66:12 29:17 30:4,17 35:13 58:10,11 happen 85:17 87:16 II 13:3 35:17,18 40:8,11,13 items 3:7 15:1,8 16:1 89:20 90:14 images 91:20 41:3 43:5 48:18,22 happened 55:11 imagine 30:2 49:1 58:11 70:22 J happening 94:5 impact 39:1 59:2 67:17 72:15,16 75:12,14,20 J 65:6 happens 88:22 96:2 70:21 72:15 74:5,6,21 79:7,12 80:4 87:6 J1 65:9 happy 10:21 14:6 27:19 76:3 86:16 87:13 93:9 Jamie 3:10 15:4,17 49:6 90:20 91:22 96:15 informative 50:1,6 January 37:12 62:20 hard 32:19 54:1 impacted 76:14 83:6 informed 42:13 88:16 Headhouse 64:5,10 impacts 59:14 68:2,4 infrequent 38:15 JENNIFER 1:18 hear 26:12 28:15,18 68:10 71:18 72:3,7,22 initial 51:18 70:19 job 95:9,15 46:16 59:7 81:22 73:7,13 74:9 75:15,22 initiate 36:8 joined 82:10 82:18 76:18 77:4,10 78:7,9 initiative 3:17 13:5 jointly 23:19 heard 26:9 81:4 84:12 87:6 88:12 35:15,20 36:19 37:5 juice 93:22 96:12 hearing 14:14 15:6 16:3 90:2 91:10 92:10,19 39:14,17,19 40:17 Julia 2:2 28:21 95:7 95:12 96:2 46:2,16 48:15 49:4 July 12:20 heavily 71:2 impede 85:14 input 20:19 52:18 June 12:20,21 13:14 height 21:2 22:15 implications 36:14 inscribed 11:6 39:15 98:8 held 37:12 60:3 importance 77:15 installations 36:21 jurisdiction 40:21 43:5 Hello 28:22 84:9 important 21:22 22:5 installed 13:10 45:22 66:21 71:22 help 21:7,21 23:21 27:7 26:15 30:11 32:17 instances 26:4 jurisdictions 44:2 47:2 32:7 33:3 42:13 56:16 36:13 38:5 53:21,21 Institution 3:8 15:2,12 56:18 57:6 61:13 helpful 22:10,13 23:20 57:3 87:20 95:20 96:3 15:14 53:6 97:2 institutional 38:16 K helping 96:6 importantly 21:14 intake 66:15,18 keep 28:4 40:10 49:13 helps 21:4 impossible 72:8 integrate 40:3 54:19 85:3 91:8 high 21:3 impressed 54:18 Intelligence 41:9,11 keeping 32:21 high-level 59:10 improve 19:9 46:2 intend 12:8 key 21:18 40:18 67:5 high-speed 60:10 69:2 69:20 70:1 intended 24:17 60:21 68:21 72:10 75:11 70:8 improved 56:17 64:12 79:1 84:19 highlight 67:21 70:14 improvements 37:10 intent 69:16 kicked 29:5 72:21 48:12 69:21,22 interaction 19:11 kidding 55:10 highway 92:6 in-depth 54:22 interactive 40:10 kind 27:5 84:10 85:8 Hill 63:18 inaccuracies 54:21 interchange 66:9 86:19 87:4 94:15 Hirshhorn 13:4,12 inch 53:9 interests 61:12 know 11:3 18:11 29:17 historic 27:3 61:8 71:8 include 24:4 27:14 interference 76:9 77:12 29:19 54:7 55:8,17 73:8 36:21 37:2,19 47:7 intergovernmental 56:14,22 83:13,14 history 88:8 59:7 61:5 66:1 71:22 47:1,6 84:11,12,12,17 85:10 hold 46:7 75:4,7 78:8 96:1 Interior 1:17 89:22 85:12 87:15 88:15,21 holistically 52:10 included 26:21 Interior's 92:18 89:1,6,22 90:6,14,16 Holy 53:10,14 56:21 includes 37:22 67:9 internal 27:5 41:19 90:20 91:7,7,8,21 home 94:8 90:5 internet's 50:11 92:2,3,8,10,16,20 Homeland 1:15 including 20:3 22:8 introduce 30:19 94:10 95:1,7,16 Hong 93:20 23:3 37:8 39:8 40:12 introducing 25:4 knowledge 38:16 hope 97:7 41:18 61:13 69:1 intrusion 95:3 knowledgeable 48:4 hopefully 53:9,11 incorporate 49:3 inventoried 45:8 known 62:17 65:6,9 hoping 52:12 incorporated 37:4 inventory 40:20 41:19 Kong 93:21 hour 60:5 increase 70:8 involved 53:7 89:9,21 Korean 11:5,8,9 12:11 House 1:16 increased 74:11 96:19 Koster 2:2 4:9,11,14,18 huge 84:10,11,12,14 increasing 19:7 60:22 involvement 19:7 4:21 5:2,5,8,10,13,19
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 105
6:1,7,11,15 9:2,4,11 little 29:18 31:2 55:22 97:5 Meade 72:1 9:14,16,18,21 10:2,5 82:18 Maglev's 68:9,13 69:1 mean 30:1 53:17 54:2 10:7,11,16 16:14,17 livestreamed 6:21 75:5 55:18 83:13 86:2 17:1,4,6,8,11,14,16 living 53:22 magnetic 59:11 87:17 88:8 90:3,9 17:18,22 33:15,18 local 13:18 38:6 47:2,7 magnetics 60:4 91:5 92:7,22 93:2,7 34:5,10,13,15,17,19 47:9 56:18 57:6 70:3 magnitude 72:8 78:6 94:11 95:21 96:7 34:22 35:3,5 57:19 75:5 maintain 46:2 97:12 80:16 locate 53:4 66:19 maintaining 61:3 meaning 45:21 located 36:17,20 40:22 maintenance 66:2,12 meaningful 21:15 72:9 L 42:11 43:7,10 44:1,14 67:13 74:7,15,20 76:5 means 93:4 L 3:10 15:4,17 45:16,17 64:2,3 66:5 92:22 meant 88:15 L'Enfant 89:11 67:7 76:11 major 23:4 78:10 meet 60:14 98:8 Laboratory 44:9 location 42:5 55:5 majority 43:7 67:22 meeting 1:3,9 4:6 6:19 lack 77:20 63:17,20 66:8 77:2 68:13 6:20 8:15,20 10:19,21 laid 19:18 78:4 maker 86:1 11:4,15 13:14 36:12 land 20:22 38:8 73:14 locational 53:17 making 32:20 90:11 40:14,14 79:18 80:7 73:21 75:8 76:11 locations 63:13 67:12 Mall 22:9 97:9 77:14 90:8 95:4,10 78:1,18 79:5 manage 40:11 44:16 meetings 7:14 12:19,20 landholding 87:17 logical 37:18 48:9 57:17 37:8 38:1 46:8,19,22 lands 57:4 long 12:5 55:22 75:3 manageable 90:8 91:11 47:8,12,20 48:22 Lanes 26:11 86:8 90:6 longer 75:1 Managed 26:11 86:8 88:10 language 23:14,15 longer-distance 70:6 90:6 members 1:11 18:19 large 74:14 89:9 92:20 look 12:20 18:11 28:9 management 40:4,8 50:16,19 54:20 58:20 larger 25:4 71:20 40:5 45:13 49:6 51:22 44:8 49:2 54:8 74:10 59:8 80:6,9 97:14 late 38:20 55:5 52:8,9 54:22 56:12 Manassas 43:21 Memorial 11:5 12:12 Laughter 5:22 6:4,10 66:22 83:15 91:20 mandatory 23:17 13:3 6:14 10:15 29:3,6,9 97:3,11 map 44:4 mentioned 82:16 53:12 54:10 81:8,12 looked 42:4 44:14 map-based 40:10 Metro 78:16 86:6 looking 12:19 19:9,15 MARC 68:22 69:3,7,9 Mike 86:4 layout 20:21 42:2,20 83:21 92:17 69:12 miles 59:21 60:5 64:16 lead 34:8 44:19 86:10 95:5,13 96:14 MARCEL 2:2 65:13,16,20 70:5 leading 30:7 45:14 looks 82:19 83:1 Maryland 36:18 42:12 91:15,16 leads 43:12 45:7 loss 38:15 42:17,21 43:3,6 59:20 MINA 1:20 leased 76:11 lost 75:2 60:1 62:10 63:12,15 minimize 78:14 79:14 leave 29:20 85:18 lot 32:8 52:2,3 81:2,3 66:10 86:12 minimizing 75:17 led 62:11 84:4 85:10 87:15 massing 22:15 minor 26:21 27:14 Legislative 3:6 14:13 92:16 94:4,8,21 95:1 master 12:22 13:2 19:3 minutes 36:5 94:9 14:15 lots 96:10 20:9,14 21:7 22:7,8 mission 74:14 77:7 Lena 1:15 6:5,6 Loudoun 43:15 22:10,12,18 23:2,16 mitigate 72:9 lend 57:17 love 56:10 57:14 82:18 24:6 27:2,10 36:22 mitigation 71:14 72:15 length 59:22 65:14,16 96:11 37:11 39:9,22 47:3,5 73:16 75:16 76:20 lessen 72:7 low 69:6 48:18 71:13 79:5,10 86:2,16,17,19 let's 28:5 30:1 lower 69:12 material 32:9 87:7 letter 59:8 78:21 79:4 materials 73:6 97:10 MixMaster 55:9 79:17 89:16 M matrices 67:16 mobility 61:2 letters 26:3,4,10 Madam 8:18,19 12:18 matrix 67:11 mockup 13:11,15 level 21:3 39:10 64:19 14:17 58:16,19 87:11 matter 71:5 98:12 mode 69:18 65:2 90:20 magenta 65:11 Matthew 3:14 Modification 3:11 15:5 levels 69:13 Maglev 3:18 26:13 58:9 mature 73:17 15:18 levitation 59:11 58:13,22 59:10,16 maximum 75:18 moment 7:9,11 84:5 light 42:17 65:8 60:2,12 61:10 62:7,11 May's 55:3 monitoring 40:5 lighting 76:9 62:15,17,18 63:8,10 Mayor 1:18,19 monsters 29:5 limited 65:20 70:6 64:12,14 66:10,14 Mayoral 1:13,16 Montgomery 43:8 LINDA 1:13 68:17,21 69:9,14,16 McMAHON 1:18 4:15 44:10 45:17 line 65:19 70:4,11,20 71:16 4:15,16 9:12,13 17:2 month 25:20 linear 73:10 72:12 73:1,5 78:1 17:3 32:11,12 33:11 month's 15:9 36:11 list 11:13 45:1 79:22 80:3 86:22 33:12,14 34:6,11,12 monthly 38:1 listed 45:11 47:17 91:13 93:5,20 94:19 51:5,6 83:18,19 months 14:3 20:7 55:12
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 106
80:3 neither 71:12 79:8 58:16 83:12 84:7 85:3 oversight 1:17 38:9 mother 81:10 NEPA 22:1 26:2,5,13,16 86:5 88:3,4 98:6 45:9 48:4 motion 8:8,10,16 9:1,5 27:3 39:11 58:22 71:2 old 81:6 overview 59:10 67:20 16:3,13,15,18 18:1 71:17 once 13:8 42:1 44:13 84:18 33:5,16,20 35:10 net 55:11 62:14 63:3 64:21 overwhelming 85:9,16 motives 11:16 12:2 network 61:1,8 71:13 79:10 83:9 owned 36:20 62:15 Mount 78:3 never 12:7 86:13 owner 41:1,5,12,15 mouthful 15:13 new 19:13 24:4 28:9 one- 69:6 ownership 67:19 move 28:20 58:4 87:22 37:13 39:13 46:20 one-way 60:6 69:1,4,6 owns 45:8 55:17 56:1 88:18 90:14 47:15 48:16 52:14 ones 47:17 moved 16:5 33:7 62:5,6 64:3,5,7,8,10 ongoing 37:7 71:1 P moving 24:14 47:20 70:7 73:15 78:9,11 74:10 75:2 76:6 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 74:4 75:22 82:17 83:5 94:16,20 online 7:14 10:19 4:1 Muirkirk 14:1 news 89:5 OPDQ 54:20 p.m 1:10 4:2 98:9,13 multiple 67:12 74:10 nice 81:7 open 1:5 3:3 8:11 27:22 packets 14:5 89:7 noise 77:11 84:4 49:10 80:13 97:15 pandemic 25:21 Museum 3:8 15:2,12 NOMA 78:17 98:7,10 parallel 91:14 nominate 8:14,16,19,20 operate 60:2,9 parameters 23:8 N non-Parkway 79:7 operated 62:16 park 13:1 37:2,3,3 names 11:7,13 non-single 96:8 operates 91:16 42:19,19 49:3 51:17 NASA 76:6 normal 28:3 operating 60:12 87:1 52:2 61:8 62:4 65:17 NASA's 12:22 76:10 north 64:8 77:1 operation 66:11 65:21 89:9,10,14 90:4 nation 7:10 northeast 62:17 64:15 operational 75:19 78:9 90:8 91:16 93:6 National 1:1,11 3:13,16 note 12:3 25:16 37:1 operations 76:18 79:15 parking 25:12 78:13,14 4:4 18:4,8 35:14,20 47:11 68:20 69:4 opinion 54:13 parklands 72:4 36:20 37:2 42:19 70:17 75:3 88:13 opportunities 19:10 parks 52:4 83:5 89:8,10 51:17 52:16 57:5 noted 89:6 96:15 78:13 parkway 61:16 62:9 59:17 61:19 62:4 notes 40:14 77:13 opportunity 46:19 47:1 64:20 65:7,8,17 66:9 65:17 66:6 67:6 72:2 notice 27:17 optimum 60:11 67:14 71:4,9 73:4,6,8 83:5 91:16 noting 6:18 54:21 option 91:4 73:21 74:3,20 76:3,13 nature 71:8 NPS 37:2 49:3 76:2 options 70:19 71:12 77:2,5 89:11 90:19 Navy 23:3 44:18 number 38:2 42:15 79:9 94:9 91:14,17,17 92:4,5 NCPC 2:1 7:13 11:4 44:15 60:16 61:12 orange 42:18 43:2,16 93:4,6 96:3 12:7 13:9 19:17 20:20 62:12 74:16 83:4,14 order 4:8 6:19 7:2 28:3 parkway's 65:11 73:7 21:11,22 23:17 25:15 93:8 71:11 parkways 61:9 73:20 26:17 36:7,12 38:8,16 numerous 67:15 organizational 52:5 part 19:14 24:16 48:15 38:19 39:14 41:12 organizations 25:18 57:19 59:9 63:21 46:7,14 47:6,10,11 O organize 32:8 46:4 64:10 95:18 48:5,13,20 52:12,17 objection 7:1 organizing 51:9 partially 59:18 53:5 56:17 62:20 objectives 60:16 68:7 out-of- 24:6 participating 62:13 78:19 79:16 90:22 observatory 76:10 outline 43:19 97:8 92:13 93:13 obvious 87:15 outlined 43:6,9,12 participation 41:16 NCPC's 6:22 21:16 obviously 94:21 96:10 outreach 3:17 19:14 particular 23:7,15 72:3 35:19 37:7 38:4,19,22 occupancy 96:8 35:15,19 36:6 37:6,7 74:8,19 89:21 40:21 45:11 46:15 occupant 41:1,5,11,15 37:13,17,19 39:14 particularly 21:12 48:19 73:17 82:17 occupied 73:14 40:5 42:3,4,6,14 23:11 26:3 53:18 55:3 near 53:19,22 64:9,9 occupy 41:7 45:5,10 45:21 46:2,3,5,6,7 55:6,12 66:9 occur 19:11 25:14 42:7 47:12,19,20 48:1,22 partners 19:8 nearby 78:12,12 46:8 56:15 57:21 95:19 pastoral 73:20 necessarily 90:12 occurs 20:16 outside 62:2,9 64:17 path 90:1 necessary 23:7 37:15 October 11:4 40:19 66:21 67:7 71:21 74:2 patterns 53:18 55:7 91:3 offer 80:19 outstanding 72:16 81:2 Patuxent 72:1 89:12 need 38:13 59:13 66:11 Office 1:14,18,19 overall 27:6 PAUL 1:18 68:7 77:7 81:3 85:16 officer 48:6 overarching 77:19 pause 7:8 96:20 Oh 6:7 29:1 33:22 overlaid 44:4 pending 26:7 needed 42:2 okay 5:19 9:21 10:2,9 oversee 41:7 45:4 Pennsylvania 13:5 needs 52:10,14 60:14 10:16 17:20 18:18 overseen 45:2 people 85:10 neighborhood 63:18 28:17 31:4 34:4 36:3 oversees 42:12 percent 43:1,3,13,14,18
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 107
43:20 65:14,16 69:10 play 7:4 52:17 25:3,14,17 26:1 30:18 40:1 41:15 46:11,17 69:11 92:4 played 7:6 35:13,17 47:4,10,15 48:9 57:1 percentage 42:16 pleasant 32:7 presented 56:11 57:7 76:19 77:9 96:14 Performance 13:1 please 4:9 8:9 16:14 Presenting 18:10 projects' 39:22 period 59:5 63:4 79:20 28:4 33:15 37:1 49:13 preservation 27:3 39:3 properties 37:3,4 42:19 93:12 Pledge 7:4 61:7 49:4 55:21 61:13 permanent 62:6,7 plus 55:19 Presidential 1:13 70:13 71:19,20 73:1 67:17 71:3 73:7 Pod 3:9 15:3,12 presiding 1:10 75:14 89:8,8 permanently 71:9 point 26:17 48:8 53:7 pretty 42:9 property 36:20 59:15 person 13:14,16 53:14 65:3 85:6 86:18 previous 36:10 37:7 61:22 62:1,2 64:21 perspective 21:17 31:3 87:20 90:5,7,18 39:6 57:10 77:12,22 65:18,21 66:5 67:18 51:11 92:18 policies 20:21 21:12 78:17 68:1 70:3 71:4 72:17 perspectives 47:9 39:4 61:5,6 96:8 previously 47:22 76:15 74:3,12 76:2 83:3 pertinent 26:6 policy 46:15 93:10 89:13 PETER 1:17 polluted 74:11 primarily 27:4 45:17 property's 73:9 Peter's 87:18 population 60:22 primary 39:18 40:12 proposals 19:17 phase 37:4 62:6 83:7 portal 64:19 48:7 proposed 11:5 13:11 83:10 positive 68:9,16 Prince 43:7,16 44:11 13:22 23:14 59:1,20 physical 70:12 72:3 possible 13:13 40:7 45:17 59:19 62:9 63:10 73:15 90:2 73:18 55:16 72:7 64:17 65:18 66:17 prospect 52:8 picture 89:18 possibly 75:2 principles 53:21 protect 73:21 pinged 54:20 Postal 13:21 printing 14:1 53:3,4 protection 20:4 61:7 pipeline 46:12 potential 21:5 47:15 55:4 proud 81:10 pivot 58:3 66:4,8 67:13,16 68:4 prior 21:6 37:16 46:8 prove 45:20 71:12 79:9 place 38:22 62:15 68:9,10 71:18 73:5 47:9 59:4 72:11 76:20 provide 20:10,13,19 placement 21:2 22:15 74:9,16 75:22 76:8,18 76:21 79:19 91:1 21:20,21 22:11 23:8 74:15 77:10 78:1,7,8,11,12 private 12:5 62:16 70:3 23:10 24:17,22 25:2,6 plan 1:21 3:11 12:22 88:12 proactive 54:11 56:22 26:17 27:2,8 80:4 13:2,8 15:5,18 20:9 potentially 61:12 72:22 57:11 provided 11:10 14:2 20:14,20 21:7,12 22:8 75:13 84:11 probably 83:14 77:20 22:10,18 23:16,21 powerful 60:4 problem 82:4 providing 19:3,10 38:9 24:6 36:7 40:4 46:15 Prayer 13:2 problematic 90:19 52:18 47:5 48:16 61:5 73:18 pre- 23:18 24:12 proceed 8:12 public 3:10 4:5 7:13 76:17 79:21 86:17 preclude 29:17 process 19:10,18,22 11:19,21 13:12 15:4 88:14 96:7 preferable 78:3 22:16 23:10 26:14,16 15:17 57:22 59:5 63:1 planned 46:17 48:11 preferences 21:16 27:4 33:1 38:20,21 68:18,20 69:15,17 75:8 77:8 preferred 22:3 63:5,21 40:6 53:6 56:14 70:17 79:19,20 95:18,20 planners 70:9 73:3 66:12 72:12 75:16,21 87:5,14 96:4,5,17 97:8 77:19 78:6 76:20 79:13,22 86:14 program 24:8 36:6,16 publicly 12:2 planning 1:1,11 3:13 87:7 37:1,6,10 40:19 47:19 publish 27:16 63:6 4:5 13:19 18:4,9 preliminary 15:16 74:18 86:15 22:14 36:14 37:11 47:12 54:12 59:6 programming 71:14 purple 43:9,14 44:4 38:8,20 47:7 48:4 preparation 26:2 75:9 79:10 purpose 19:4 22:20 56:22 61:19 70:12 prepared 22:13 programs 74:11 23:5 24:18 59:13 60:8 71:6,17 72:16 75:6,12 preparing 48:19 progress 85:14 68:7 75:20 78:22 79:12 presence 6:18 project 12:5 25:10 purposes 26:22 36:18 87:9 95:10 Present 1:12 2:1 5:4 26:11,13,18 30:20 put 8:8 55:9 56:9 57:13 planning's 53:14 presentation 3:7,12,14 41:18 48:5 59:10 91:5 96:11 97:11 planning-related 25:19 14:4 18:3,11,14,16 60:20 61:10 62:20 putting 93:10 95:17 plans 15:11,16 19:3 25:12,20 27:18 35:19 66:1 67:5,21 68:3 22:7,13 23:3,22 24:6 39:7 49:5,17 50:2,6 69:17 70:11 71:18 Q 27:2,10 36:22 39:9,22 51:3 58:12,17 59:9 75:8 76:14 77:14 78:7 qualify 24:3 47:3 48:18 69:20 62:18,19 70:15 80:5,8 81:5 83:15 84:11,15 qualities 73:20 71:13 75:18 77:16 80:12 81:16 82:8,14 85:14,17 86:9 87:1 quality 73:8 79:10,15 86:19,21 83:16,20 88:5 89:7 88:8 95:13 97:2,7 question 11:16 29:15 planted 92:22 97:10,20 project's 68:6,10 77:10 29:20 30:7 82:13,16 Plaque 13:2 presentations 3:15 projects 25:5,7 26:6 85:22 86:4 93:22 platform 40:10 13:3 19:5 24:16,18 37:21 38:5 39:1,11 96:11 97:17
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 108
questions 8:2 14:6,10 reflect 72:18 95:9 research 11:11 56:1 robin 80:15 14:20 15:21 27:19 reflected 67:10 61:15 71:7 72:1 74:10 robust 32:21 37:22 49:7,18 50:3 80:6,9 Reform 1:17 74:14 75:1,2 76:6 57:21 80:20 81:2 83:14 85:6 Refuge 72:1 89:13 89:12 93:1 Rockville 43:10 85:8 92:14 95:15 97:6 regard 46:6 53:2 87:13 reservations 62:4 83:5 ROD 86:16 97:13 regarding 12:2 15:22 83:8 89:11 role 52:17 82:20 quick 51:15 20:4,10 22:19 26:12 reserved 25:4 roll 3:2 4:7,10 7:18 9:3 quickly 42:9 55:14 27:3 36:12 37:21 resolve 42:4 72:16 16:15 33:16 quorum 6:16,18 70:16 79:16 resource 37:14 48:16 round 80:15 region 3:16 35:14,20 48:17 round-robin 8:1 28:2 R 36:7,21 44:5 57:5 resources 61:9 72:5,5 49:12 rail 69:7 78:16 94:13 59:18 60:15,19 66:6 73:9 route 63:10 66:10 Railroad 59:4 62:12 67:6,8 68:5,12 70:13 respect 11:21 Rowley 61:14 77:3 63:3 70:18 76:16 71:20 79:15 respectively 43:18 run 3:3 8:11,15 10:19 77:22 79:3,18 86:9 region's 61:8 73:20 respond 80:8 65:12,15 70:7 91:14 97:1,4 regional 61:3 69:5 95:9 response 5:14 7:12 runoff 74:12 77:12 raising 92:13 Register 27:16 14:12,22 16:2 69:13 range 59:13 73:6 registered 93:14 81:19 97:18 98:5 S ranges 65:1 67:17 regular 37:13 responsibility 11:20 safe 60:10 reach 23:1 reinforces 77:15 22:1 sample 69:4 reaches 64:17 relate 61:10 68:9 responsible 45:9 saw 37:18 91:19 read 54:19 related 23:5 25:7 26:2 rest 8:13 24:20 44:21 saying 89:5 real 68:3 76:18 78:6 39:16 59:12 72:17 result 39:20 52:12 57:6 says 91:22 realistic 75:21 76:8 77:9,18,21 94:1,10 scale 90:10 really 19:1 21:1,18 22:4 relates 48:8 results 38:15 scenic 73:19 26:15 32:17,19 50:13 relating 60:16 returned 83:9 schedule 23:11 39:20 50:18 53:1 56:7,10 relationship 59:17 revenue-producing 40:5 46:7 48:22 57:3,4 58:1,5 84:16 relatively 21:3 70:5 60:10 scheduled 88:19 86:1 87:8 93:2,21 release 76:21 80:1 review 1:21 12:22 13:7 Schuyler 2:3 14:16,17 94:11 95:2,8,12,13 88:14 19:9,21 20:9,11,16,17 14:21 96:3,20,21 97:2 relevant 74:13 20:18 21:4,9,19 22:7 scope 56:12 70:5 realm 85:11 rely 71:2 23:6,9,16,20 24:1,4 screen 20:18 36:1 reason 45:20 46:1 remain 68:2 24:11,19 25:10 26:7 80:17 reasons 56:5 78:17 remainder 70:15 26:19 27:4 29:16 30:3 Sculpture 13:4,12 recall 20:6 25:19 remarks 55:3 30:12 36:8 38:4,7 seating 28:3 receive 12:8 89:15 remember 85:9 40:2 41:14,21 43:22 second 8:9,15,21 9:1 received 79:21 Remembrance 11:6 45:12 46:15 47:6 15:15 16:9,10,15 Receiver 44:11 reminder 19:16 48:16,19 57:2 59:18 33:10,12,16 34:6 receives 11:19 remuneration 12:8 63:1,4 66:21 71:22 62:18 95:8 recognize 34:3 rendering 63:22 79:20 82:20 96:20 seconded 9:6 16:19 recognized 7:19,21 replace 29:16 97:3,9 33:14 recognizes 73:18 replaced 74:22 reviewed 11:4 22:6 seconding 16:13 recommend 71:15 replacement 20:5 39:3 25:8 36:15 89:3 Secondly 38:18 recommendation 25:15 report 3:4,5 10:22 11:2 reviews 19:2 22:10 23:6 Secret 61:14 77:3,6 27:11 72:10 12:14,16 14:5,18 27:10 56:15 Secretary 2:2 4:11,14 recommendations 51:8 reporting 40:13 46:20 revise 23:14 4:18,21 5:2,5,8,10,13 59:2 67:22 75:11 79:2 Representatives 1:16 revisions 27:12 5:19 6:1,7,11,15 9:2,4 87:4 represented 50:16 rider 94:5 9:11,14,16,18,21 10:2 record 63:6 72:19 76:22 represents 61:11 riders 64:13 10:5,7,11,16 16:17 80:1 98:13 request 7:21 ridership 60:14 68:12 17:1,4,6,8,11,14,16 records 41:19 requesting 18:21 68:14 69:9,11 17:18,22 33:18 34:5 recreational 72:4 require 62:7 66:14 right 5:15 6:2,11,15 34:10,13,15,17,19,22 reduce 60:13 69:9 69:12 17:22 28:15 30:13 35:3,5 80:16 redundancy 60:17 required 36:15 40:19 31:5,8 53:14 56:4 section 63:19 66:16,20 redundant 68:11 requirement 24:22 86:17 91:12 94:14 sections 63:8 refer 20:8 22:17 47:3 requirements 19:2 right-aways 94:18 security 1:15 3:10 15:5 refine 86:18,19 20:11 22:20 27:1 rise 64:18,22 15:18 71:7 72:2 77:10 refined 90:22 38:17 road 22:4 91:18 security-related 77:7
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 109
see 13:13 18:16 20:17 significant 68:4 70:12 squeeze 94:1 96:12 structures 66:15,19,22 36:1 43:6,11 58:16 71:19 St 22:8 30:2 67:2 92:21 75:20 82:9 88:22 significantly 60:13 74:5 stacked 13:11 structuring 42:14 90:14 92:3 95:5 silence 7:9,11 staff 2:1 12:7 13:15 study 42:22 51:8 58:22 seeing 85:9 similar 20:11 43:17 18:21 23:1,13,17 25:1 59:13 60:8 62:11 seek 59:1 79:13 56:19 86:8 25:2,15,17,22 26:4 69:10 70:4,20 71:2,5 seeking 24:9 Simultaneous 82:1,6 27:9 30:10 32:18 36:8 71:11,17,21 77:16 seen 57:20 90:4 85:2 97:22 37:13 38:14,20 39:14 79:8 86:13 90:6 segue 87:18 single 41:5 89:15 40:19 41:13 46:7,14 study's 59:13 63:21 select 63:5,16 76:3 site 13:22 15:11,16 47:6 48:10,13,14,16 70:16 79:22 36:13 44:11 55:4 48:20 49:17 50:1 51:2 stuff 86:2 93:9 selected 70:22 71:6 61:21 66:2,13 74:20 52:1,3 54:20 55:15 subject 26:6 45:11 87:8 76:5,12 78:5 57:10 58:7 59:1,6 submission 3:13 18:5,8 selecting 79:12 sites 24:5 36:22 66:4,11 64:12 67:21 78:19 18:22 19:20 20:11 selection 36:13 70:17 67:13 74:6,17 78:2 79:1,16 84:16 92:13 22:19 23:19 24:13 72:11 75:20 76:20 siting 52:15,21 93:13 95:11,16 97:10 25:5 27:1 28:9 36:10 77:5 86:14 situated 59:18 staff's 80:22 83:20 39:4 41:19 Senate 1:15 situations 24:8 stage 20:9,16 21:1,4,9 submissions 19:20 send 59:3 79:18 six 91:15 22:7,18 23:17,19 38:15 sense 30:21 46:4 size 74:14 24:13 40:1 submit 19:17 sensitive 74:9 slide 47:18 67:4 69:19 stages 19:21 20:12 submittal 56:14 September 13:20 46:10 75:10 24:19 submitted 15:13,19 series 39:17 40:15 slides 39:17 40:15 stakeholders 72:14 23:2 26:18 40:1 47:10 41:22 60:4 41:22 42:9 45:1 start 28:1 52:1 substantial 24:7 90:3,3 serious 96:19 slow 29:14 51:19 87:5 started 42:2 70:18 92:9 seriously 91:7 slowly 88:19 88:10 substantially 24:6 serve 48:7 Smithsonian 3:8 15:2 starting 49:11 68:6 73:3 91:18 service 37:2 42:19 15:13 23:4 80:14 success 37:16 51:18 52:2 60:18 62:4 Smithsonian's 15:11 state 32:6 38:6 77:13 suggested 24:1 62:16 65:21 69:2,5,13 society 96:13 83:9 suggestions 57:14 70:1,9 83:5 87:2 89:8 soils 72:6 stated 76:15 suited 83:15 89:10,14 90:4,8 91:16 solar 74:16 statement 59:3 81:10 Sullivan 1:21 57:19 Service's 13:1 61:14 solution 39:13 86:16 87:13 87:11 65:17 77:3,7 solutions 39:8 states 15:19 69:8 74:19 summarize 39:15 59:12 services 1:20 15:19 somebody 84:5 station 25:9 44:7 63:12 summary 41:21 45:19 44:19 45:7 68:22 sorry 6:8 8:19 29:14 63:17 64:1,3,4,10 summed 82:15 69:15 34:1 82:3 85:7 86:4 67:12 78:1,2,5,17 summer 14:9 36:8 session 1:5 3:3 8:11 sort 22:14 86:2 stations 92:21 46:10 47:21 30:4 97:15 98:7,10 sorting 57:15 status 13:4 96:22 Superconducting 3:18 sessions 29:17 sound 14:9 Steingasser 1:18 4:12 58:9,13 set 70:19 90:2 91:10 sources 41:18 4:13 9:9,10 16:21,22 supplement 47:1 setting 71:8 73:8 74:21 south 22:9 64:6 75:22 32:4,5 33:7,21,22 support 3:9 15:3,12 seven 63:9 space 12:22 61:17 76:1 34:4,8,9 50:22 51:1 21:8 40:16 47:8 48:11 shapes 44:4 76:17 77:8 step 19:12 37:18 52:9 51:8 59:1 61:5 66:11 share 7:16 spaces 64:12 85:20 78:20 shared 93:10 96:21 span 59:21 65:19 steps 39:16 48:20 supportive 54:14 78:19 short 7:4 13:15 59:11 speak 87:21 79:16 87:3,12 sure 33:19 81:9,21 show 45:20 73:6 speaking 82:1,6 85:2 stone 13:11 84:14 89:19,22 90:13 shown 42:16,18 43:2,3 91:1 97:22 storm 74:9,11 77:12 92:12 43:14,15,16,19 44:4 special 93:21 strategy 42:13 surface 88:7 62:22 65:8,11 67:6,8 specific 25:6,13 72:14 Street 64:9,9 surprised 88:19 69:19 75:10 72:21 73:2 79:4,5 Streets 64:6 surprises 23:11 shows 60:16 62:3 67:4 Specifically 76:7 strip 74:20 76:4,12 surrounding 67:3 68:13 70:12 83:4 speed 54:19 60:5,12 strong 45:20 Sustainable 74:18 side 40:8 49:2 64:6,8 spend 94:17 stronger 52:17 synergies 57:1 65:8,11 73:5 77:2 spirit 96:6 structure 42:3 45:20 system 60:11 69:20 93:4 sponsor 83:15 52:4,5 91:5 93:2 systems 96:9,17 sides 90:18 spring 47:12 94:16
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 110
T 93:18,20 95:15,15 travel 60:13 61:2 96:16 28:8 36:11 38:22 table 30:10 68:13 96:13 travelers 68:14 updated 25:11 take 4:9 16:15 25:16 thinks 30:10 traveling 68:20 updates 18:22 20:3 33:16 36:5 40:20 third 38:21 39:13 63:16 treat 11:20 23:1 27:6,15 46:16 73:16 80:17 97:11 66:8 tree 20:4 39:3 86:3 upgrade 94:13 taken 64:1 thorough 49:18 80:12 trees 73:15 urban 1:21 36:14 takes 32:18 55:22 85:15 88:6 tremendously 51:20 urge 72:12 talk 19:13 50:17 85:10 thought 94:22 58:1 use 8:1 19:15 23:9 88:2 thoughtful 54:11 95:11 tried 51:20 25:22 30:3 42:10 talking 21:1 25:21 thoughts 32:8 82:15 trigger 29:14 46:19 62:3,6 64:12 30:20 52:1 89:2 91:10 thousand 64:12 trip 13:20 60:6 71:3 72:15 73:22 target 42:5 threat 73:19 tripped 29:18 75:14 76:16 96:16 team 80:3 97:5 threatening 74:17 Troops 11:8 useful 50:18 52:7 Teams 29:5 three 39:5 44:20 64:4 Trueblood 1:19 82:10 uses 20:22 71:7 75:9 technical 8:7 66:3 82:11,12 83:12 USPS 44:7 technically 86:10 throttled 90:7 try 51:17 54:2 84:6 utility 70:8 technology 60:12 93:19 Thursday 1:7 98:8 trying 5:20 6:1,3 30:8 V temporarily 83:6 time 7:3 8:6 12:5 13:19 30:18 53:8 56:20,22 temporary 62:3 67:17 20:3 30:5 37:3 49:19 57:1 58:4 94:18 values 11:18 73:14 55:6 56:4 60:13 75:3 tunnel 64:16 66:19 variety 68:5 ten 91:15 80:10 82:22 83:4 85:9 tunneled 66:16 various 41:18 52:11 tens 73:11 88:13 94:17 98:9 tunneling 74:1 varying 41:16 terms 27:9 48:20 68:17 timeline 62:22 turn 7:20 28:5 85:7 vegetation 73:15 96:2 testimony 11:10 timely 36:9 55:13 two 15:8 35:17 39:7 vehicle 96:8 thank 4:18,21 5:2,5,10 times 61:2 44:22 63:12 64:7 66:4 ventilation 92:20 6:7,17 7:7 8:22 10:18 TMP 40:4,13 46:20 66:7,14 67:14 70:22 venues 37:18 12:13,18 14:8,17,19 today 7:17 10:21 14:18 79:9 89:9 Vernon 78:3 16:7,13 18:2,15 27:19 18:7,10,21 19:12 20:9 type 20:22 version 93:11 27:20 28:11,12 29:10 23:15 26:11 27:14 typically 41:13 versus 30:20 51:9 31:5,7,8,13,17,19 36:5 58:21 59:7 89:5 viability 61:3 U 32:1,3,10,13 33:8 97:9 viable 91:8 34:10,22 35:9,22 36:2 today's 6:20 20:12 U.S 1:15,16 44:6 61:14 viaduct 64:22 65:19 49:7,8,17,19,20 50:1 22:21 79:17 80:7 77:3 91:19 50:5,8,21 51:2,4,12 tool 19:15 UDPRD 47:18 vibration 77:11 54:3,4,15 56:6 58:6,8 tools 90:10 ultimately 22:2 60:9 vibrational 76:8 58:15,18 80:10,11,17 top 58:3 60:5 94:16 Unclassified 48:17 Vice 1:10,13 3:4 4:3,8 80:18 81:13,15,17 topic 24:14 67:18 83:22 unclear 68:2 86:3 5:3,4 6:16,17 7:7,12 82:4,7,9,12,14 83:12 88:11 underground 64:11,16 8:12,19,22 9:19,20 83:17,22 84:1,22 88:3 topic-specific 20:3 78:15 91:5,6,9 10:17 11:1,2 12:15 93:14,16 95:6 97:3,19 topics 25:7,19 understand 42:10 47:9 14:8,14,17,19 15:6 98:1,6 total 42:15 43:13,20 50:19 52:13 55:10 16:7,12 17:8,10 18:2 thankful 80:22 65:16 57:22 78:6 95:21 96:4 18:6,17 27:20 28:12 thanks 31:15 32:14 touched 84:13 understanding 23:5 28:16,18 29:1,10 31:8 50:3,12 51:11 touches 38:13 88:6 46:11 48:11 52:10 31:13,17,21 32:3,10 thing 51:20 90:9 91:9 track 40:11 understood 71:15 32:14 33:8,13 34:2,17 91:20 94:15 trade-offs 96:7,10 79:11 34:18 35:9,16 36:2 things 40:9 49:2 53:20 traditional 68:18 69:15 undertake 55:13 49:8,20 50:4,8,21 53:22 85:13 92:5,12 train 60:3 66:2 67:13 undertaken 11:16 70:1 51:4,12 53:13 54:4,15 95:2 74:7 76:5 91:13 93:5 unfair 86:4 56:6 58:10,16,18,19 think 24:10 25:8 27:6 training 37:11 61:14 Unfortunately 11:14 80:11,18 81:9,13,17 30:8,18 31:1 32:6,16 77:3,8 Union 25:9 81:20 82:4,9 83:17 32:19 33:3,20 36:8 transmits 13:9 unique 21:13 47:18 84:1,7,22 85:3 87:19 50:10,13,18 51:10,20 transportation 20:4 74:21 88:3 93:16 95:6 97:19 52:7,19 53:1,20 55:7 40:4 60:11,17 61:1,6 United 15:19 98:2,6 55:10 56:3 57:8,13,16 68:11,19 69:15,17 unmute 7:20 8:9 video 6:22 7:4,6 8:5 58:1 81:2 82:13 84:12 78:10 86:12 94:8 96:9 update 3:6,13 14:13,15 13:15 85:16 88:18 89:17 96:16,18 18:5,8 19:11 20:6,12 Videoconference 1:9 90:19 91:3,19 92:7 Trap 13:1 22:21 24:15,16 25:6 view 13:16
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 111
viewing 13:12 welcome 4:4 10:20 29:2 X 3 viewsheds 72:4 92:4 35:21 58:14 82:11 3 11:1 Virginia 36:18 42:13,17 welcomed 30:5 31:6 Y 30 27:16 69:5,10 92:3 42:21 43:2,11 WENDY 1:16 Yard 63:19 311 60:5 virtual 58:3 went 98:13 year 46:9,13,18 47:19 33 59:21 70:5 visit 13:21 west 65:10,11,12 77:6 48:14 88:21 35 3:17 visual 40:10 73:8,18 93:4 years 47:14 63:9 73:15 36 59:21 70:5 96:2 wetlands 74:9 73:16 75:1 88:10,17 3rd 11:4 98:8 visuals 95:20 96:1 White 1:10,13 4:3,8 5:3 94:12 voice 34:3 5:4 6:16,17 7:7,12 yellow 43:17 66:7 4 vote 8:14 16:15 33:16 8:12,22 9:19,20 10:17 yeoman's 56:10 4 3:2 12:15 65:20 Votes 7:17 11:1 12:15 14:8,14,19 York 62:5 64:3,7,8 70:7 41 43:12 15:6 16:7,12 17:9,10 78:9 82:17 83:6 47 43:1 W 18:2,6,17 27:20 28:12 4th 64:9 wait 95:4 28:16,18 29:1,10 31:8 Z wall 11:6,14 13:11,14 31:13,17,21 32:3,10 zoning 75:6 5 want 7:16 9:2 11:3,22 32:14 33:8,13 34:2,17 5 14:15 65:13 12:3,12 32:6 33:1 34:18 35:9,16 36:2 0 50 92:3,3 49:17,22 92:12 95:2,8 49:8,20 50:4,8,21 50-foot-tall 67:1 95:16 97:16 98:3 51:4,12 53:13 54:4,15 1 53 43:2 wanted 33:19 58:6 56:6 58:10,18,20 1,000-space 78:11 58 3:18 War 11:5,9 13:3 80:11,18 81:9,13,17 1,400 92:2 5th 64:6 warranted 55:1 81:20 82:4,9 83:17 1:00 1:10 98:9 Washington 52:11 84:1,7,22 85:3 87:11 1:01 4:2 6 59:22 60:7 63:11,13 87:19 88:3 93:16 95:6 10 3:4 6 1:7 3:9 15:3,7,12 64:1,2,14 68:15 69:21 97:19 98:2,6 100 73:16 65:13 70:2 71:9 Whitten 3:10 15:4,17 12 3:5 43:17 64:16 67:9 60 69:1 wasn't 85:21 wide 68:4 125 65:1 6th 4:5 64:6 watching 97:9 widely 68:19 14 3:6 55:12 water 72:5 74:10,11 Wildlife 72:1 15 3:7 43:17 69:6 7 77:12 William 43:16 44:7 15-minute 60:6 75 73:16 way 21:7 30:14 32:8 winter 88:14 16 70:19 7A 18:7 45:21 50:14 51:10 wish 7:19 8:8 94:13 165 65:1 53:18 54:12,12,13 Wolf 13:1 17 65:14 8 57:13 69:7 70:2 72:9 work 11:16 12:2,9,13 170-to-200- 66:1 8 3:3 65:16 69:7 73:21 88:9,20 90:17 18:12 23:18 24:12 18 3:13,14 8A 35:18 95:14 96:11 32:17 33:2 37:7 39:1 19 91:16 8B 58:11 ways 19:9 38:12 39:5 40:16 49:1 51:7 53:22 198 66:10 56:11,11 57:15,17 55:15 56:10,12 57:22 1st 13:21 64:9 9 we'll 13:16 27:22 54:22 58:7 72:13 80:22 9 43:19 65:16 81:20 88:21,22 90:14 83:20 84:14 94:7 96:5 2 90 91:22,22 92:1 95:4 97:20 2 18:1 94 69:11 we're 10:21 18:13 19:8 working 12:4 40:9 2:34 98:13 98 3:19 19:15 21:1 30:8,18 48:21 51:22 86:11 20 94:12 32:22 39:5 55:9 56:4 Workshop 37:11 200-acre 74:7 92:22 56:19 57:3 88:7 89:17 world 7:10 13:2 2017 20:2 89:19 90:18 91:9 worth 94:1,2 96:12 2018 88:15,16,16 we've 20:2 23:22 24:15 Wow 85:18 2019 11:4 62:20 26:21 29:18 40:16 wrap 26:20 86:13 2020 37:12 55:18 Wright 1:20 5:6,7 9:22 2021 1:7 4:5 88:17 web 7:20 28:4 49:13 10:1 16:5,6,8,18 2022 63:7 80:2 website 6:22 17:12,13 29:11,12,13 2023 63:9 websites 41:20 30:1,13,16,22 31:4,9 2030 63:9 Wednesday 13:20 33:9,19 34:20,21 23 43:14 weigh 36:12 54:16,17 85:1,5 96:15 24th 59:5 63:3 Weil 58:14,15,19 68:6 Wright's 56:8 25 65:16 80:12,17 82:22 86:5,7 writing 93:11 97:20 98:1
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 112
C E R T I F I C A T E
This is to certify that the foregoing transcript
In the matter of: Open Session
Before: NCPC
Date: 05-06-21
Place: Teleconference was duly recorded and accurately transcribed under my direction; further, that said transcript is a true and accurate record of the proceedings.
------Court Reporter
1($/5*5266 COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com