Select a topic to view talking point to counter each false claim:
1. If we stop to consider a Tysons tunnel, the $900 million
of federal money will be lost.
2. The ground/soil under Tysons Corner will not support
construction of a tunnel.
3. A tunnel is more expensive.
4. A tunnel will take more time to build.
5. Tunnel will be more disruptive.
6. We can't afford to consider a tunnel.
7. We need a tunnel under Dulles International Airport but don’t need
one for Tysons Corner.
8. The public overwhelmingly supports elevated rail for Tysons Corner.
9. The current Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project is the best
pricing available for the railway.
10. Tysons Tunnel is the reason the Project was denied funding by the FTA.

1. If we stop to consider a Tysons tunnel, the $900 million
   of federal money will be lost.
   FALSE: The $900 million of federal money for the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project via the Federal Transit Administration’s New Starts Program already is lost because the federal agency does not believe the current project proposal is a “prudent investment”. This is TysonsTunnel’s position, too.Instead of lamenting the FTA’s decision, the state of Virginia, Gov. Tim Kaine, the state’s Transportation Department, Fairfax County, MWAA, WMATA and other involved and interested parties should get started on soliciting competitive bids for a new Phase I proposal. The sooner they do so, the quicker a revised, cost-effective and improved Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project with a tunnel under Tysons Corner can be submitted for consideration and approval by the FTA and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Congress will continue to provide funding for deserving mass-transit projects in future fiscal years. It is incumbent on everyone involved with this Project to immediately get started developing a competitively bid, tunnel-inclusive and cost-effective proposal that can gain FTA approval.
   back to top
   
   
2. The ground/soil under Tysons Corner will not support construction of a tunnel.
   FALSE: The truth is the total opposite for these three reasons:
   1. First, the ground under Tysons Corner is extremely similar to the ground throughout the National Capital region, including D.C. and Arlington. Under these locales already exists an extensive network of tunnels that carry the Metrorail system and its passengers safely and efficiently. In fact, Metro did not encounter any major difficulties while constructing its existing tunnel network; a similar experience awaits construction of a tunnel under Tysons Corner.
   2. Second, a geotechnicalanalysis of the ground under Tysons Corner contained in the TysonsTunnel Preliminary Engineering Report, which was completed by experts retained by TysonsTunnel, shows conclusively that a tunnel can be built efficiently, cost-effectively, safely and with little or no negative environmental and community disruptions.
   3. Third, the project’s own engineering report shows that the ground under Dulles International Airport can support a tunnel. If that is the case, there’s no justifiable explanation that the ground under Tysons Corner—just a mere 14.5 miles distant in geophysical proximity—is that much different and thus cannot support tunneling.
      
      
3. A tunnel is more expensive.
   FALSE: It has not been determined conclusively if a tunnel will be more costly than the current proposal because an open, competitive bidding process whereby the differing approaches—a tunnel or elevated rail—for Tysons Corner and a comparison of the anticipated costs for each were never completed. In fact, evidence contained in the TysonsTunnel Preliminary Engineering Report shows that a tunnel can be constructed for less than the current proposal. Also, an American Society of Civil Engineers panel appointed by Gov. Kaine found that a tunnel would be less expensive than the current estimate for Phase I. Further, Dragados USA, a major international construction group with experience constructing more than 850 miles of tunnels and related facilities worldwide, submitted a fixed-price proposal of $823 million to construct a 3.4-mile, single-bore Metrorail tunnel under Tysons Corner. This fixed-price proposal is significantly less than the estimated cost for a proposed elevated railway through the same area. Lastly, experts have determined that a tunnel will remain functional twice as long as an elevated structure. Annual tunnel maintenance costs are projected to be $5 million less than elevated rail. Therefore, over 40 years, a tunnel is projected to save $200 million in maintenance costs.
   back to top
   
   
4. A tunnel will take more time to build.
   FALSE: Again, this claim has not been determined conclusively because a competitive-bidding process was never completed. In fact, all indicators point to a quicker construction schedule for a tunnel. Unlike above-ground construction, an underground project would not be affected by weather conditions. Also, unlike the current proposed construction method, there will be minimal modifications to existing power, gas and other public utilities, thereby saving both precious time and resources. This key difference would enable the tunnel construction team to begin immediate work instead of wasting time moving utilities, disrupting the lives of Tysons Corner residents, workers, businesses and thru-commuters. Also, a single-bore tunnel constructed using state-of-the-art boring machines that dig the tunnel and place supporting walls would have a comparatively limited construction footprint, less construction traffic, increased safety for workers and the public, provide greater operational flexibility for Metrorail and greatly speed the construction phase.
   back to top
   
   
5. Tunnel will be more disruptive.
   FALSE: Again, the opposite is true. Aside from the construction of the entry plazas for the four below-ground Metrorail stations in Tysons Corner, residents, workers and visitors will not even be aware of the tunnel construction. Comparatively, the construction of an elevated railway would have a number of area-wide disruptions, including widespread movement of utilities; constantly altering traffic patterns throughout Tysons Corner to accommodate construction, especially down the middle of Tysons Corner’s major highway—Route 7; environmental pollution caused by the large volume of construction machinery and vehicles; noise pollution during construction; noise pollution once an above-ground railway is operational; and an aesthetic, 100+-year eyesore for Tysons Corner residents, workers and visitors.Lastly, the disruption caused by an elevated railway to the community atmosphere and walkability of Tysons Corner that planners envision will be enormous. The community will be bisected by a railway that will have few crossing points for pedestrians and commuters alike, hindering rather than helping achieve these goals.
   back to top
   
   
6. We can't afford to consider a tunnel.
   FALSE: Truthfully, we cannot afford to ignore a tunnel. And, the FTA decision already has put the brakes on the Project giving everyone involved a great chance at a new beginning for this Project.It is eminently clear that for the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project to move forward that our elected and appointed leaders as well as regional transportation agencies must take aggressive steps to get this Project back on track. That requires taking a step back to rethink the Project, competitively bidding the Project, undertaking all the appropriate steps to gain federal government funding, and accepting that the people of the immediate Tysons Corner area and all of Northern Virginia want and demand competitive bidding and a tunnel for this Project. It is quite evident from the FTA’s announcement last week that bold steps must be taken to revive the project. Now is the time to get started!Price wise, it has been demonstrated repeatedly that it will be cheaper to build a tunnel than it would be to move the current Project concept forward. (See item #3 above for cost insights.)
   back to top
   
   
7. We need a tunnel under Dulles International Airport
   but don’t need one for Tysons Corner.
   FALSE: The reasons that a tunnel is needed for Dulles International Airport are the same reasons why a tunnel is necessary for Tysons Corner. Current Project proponents contend that a tunnel would cause fewer disruptions to the operations of Dulles International Airport and would provide better security for the facility.Ergo this same reasoning applies to Tysons Corner when it comes to a tunnel. As discussed previously, a tunnel under Tysons Corner would be less disruptive to community residents and commuters/workers during and after construction; would have less environmental impacts; provide a safer construction model; result in a more secure transportation system. To top it all off, a tunnel would be less costly than the alternative. It’s a win-win for the taxpayers of Northern Virginia as well as Dulles Toll Road commuters.
   back to top
   
   
8. The public overwhelmingly supports elevated rail for Tysons Corner.
   FALSE: Not so! A poll publicized by Dulles Rail Now! and other proponents of the current Project did not differentiate between the competing railway construction options for Tysons Corner. Instead, the poll asked only whether respondents supported extending Metrorail service to Dulles International Airport. Predictably, the supermajority of Northern Virginians support rail to Dulles. In fact, TysonsTunnel and its thousands of supporters support rail to Dulles; we, however, strongly believe the project should be competitively bid and include a Tysons tunnel.
   
   The only known survey that asked Northern Virginia residents to select a construction preference for Tysons Corner was conducted by the campaign of John Foust, who unseated incumbent Joan DuBois for the Dranesville District seat on the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors. The Foust campaign’s survey, conducted in early August, found that more than eight in 10 voters (81 percent) believed that the Project’s Phase 1 extension should include a tunnel. Meanwhile, only 12 percent of voters backed an aerial railway. A more revealing survey finding was that nearly seven in 10 voters (69 percent) strongly support a tunnel while only 15 percent strongly support the construction of an aerial railway.
   
   It is worth noting that Foust’s support for a tunnel propelled him to victory over DuBois, who lost in large part because she voted for the current Project proposal.
   back to top
   
   
9. The current Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project is the best pricing
   available for the railway.
   FALSE: There is not a sliver of truth to this assertion. The contract is grossly overpriced because it was never competitively bid. Instead, the project was sole-sourced to a consortium headed by Bechtel Corporation, the same company that managed the “Big Dig” debacle in Boston, and Washington Group International. Virginia Department of Transportation officials hid behind the veil of the state’s Public-Private Transportation Act, which locked out competition from other entities as well as prohibited consideration of a tunnel, to award the contract to Dulles Transit Partners, the Bechtel-Washington Group-backed consortium. Because of the lack of competition and consideration of a tunnel as a “reasonable alternative”, the resulting Dulles Transit Partners agreement price is too high and climbing every passing day because of penalties for construction delays.As such, it should come as no great surprise to anyone remotely interested or involved in this Project that the FTA is highly critical of the Project and the Dulles Transit Partners agreement. Through the process TysonsTunnel has pointed out repeatedly to state leaders and federal officials that the project is grossly over budget and would not meet federal cost-efficiency criteria.If the project had been bid among several suitors, competitive forces would have significantly deflated the Project’s price tag. Only through competitive bidding and addition of a tunnel will this multi-billion dollar Project secure considerable cost-savings that will make it meet federal funding guidelines and hold the line on cost increases. All this can be accomplished without making sacrificial cuts that would erode public confidence in the overall Project. Only if this occurs will the Project be acceptable to federal officials.
   back to top
   
   
10. Tysons Tunnel is the reason the Project was denied funding by the FTA.
    FALSE: The opposition of TysonsTunnel and the majority of Tysons Corner-area residents, businesses and organizations to the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project and Dulles Transit Partners agreement as proposed to federal authorities alone did not bring about the FTA’s decision to deny federal funding for the Project. The “local dissention [sic] about the design of the project”—the words of FTA Administrator James Simpson in a letter to Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine—was cited as a distant third- or fourth-level concern by FTA as rationale for its decision.
    
    FTA officials said the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project collapsed under the weight of the “sheer number and magnitude of the current project’s technical, financial, and institutional risks and uncertainties”. Primary reasons cited by FTA are:

1. The Project’s cost effectiveness (rated “low” by FTA);
2. Its capital financial plan (rated “medium-low” by FTA);
3. MWAA’s inexperience with mass transit projects and with exceptionally large design-build contracts;
4. Uncertainties about WMATA’s ability to manage the new line;
5. Highly probable cost escalations;
6. Highly probable schedule delays; and
7. Potential inter-agency conflicts between MWAA and WMATA that could further exacerbate cost escalations and schedule delays.

back to top