[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 2, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22067-22069]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10903]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration


Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the California 
High Speed Train System

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FRA is issuing this notice to advise the public that FRA will 
join the California High Speed Rail Authority (Authority) in the 
preparation of a programmatic environmental impact statement (EIS) and 
programmatic environmental impact report (EIR) for the California High-
Speed Train System. FRA is also issuing this notice to solicit public 
and agency input into the development of the scope of the EIR/EIS and 
to advise the public that outreach activities conducted by the 
Authority and its representatives will be considered in the preparation 
of the EIR/EIS. Alternatives to be evaluated and analyzed in the 
Programmatic EIR/EIS include (1) take no action (No-Project or No-
Build); (2) construction of a steel-wheel-on-steel-rail or Maglev high-
speed train system and stations; and (3) modal alternatives that would 
include a combination of air, highway, and conventional passenger rail 
improvements. Possible environmental impacts include displacement of 
commercial and residential properties; disproportionate impacts to 
minority and low-income populations; community and neighborhood 
disruption; increased noise and electro-magnetic interference along 
rail corridors; traffic impacts associated with stations; effects to 
historic properties or archaeological sites; impacts to parks and 
recreation resources; visual quality effects; exposure to seismic and 
flood hazards; impacts to water resources, wetlands, and sensitive 
biological species and habitat; land use compatibility impacts; energy 
use; and impacts to agricultural lands.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding the 
programmatic environmental review, please contact: Mr. John Barna, 
Deputy Director of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, 925 L 
Street, Suite 1425, Sacramento, CA 95814, (telephone 916-322-0827) or 
Mr. David Valenstein, Environmental Program Manager, Office of 
Passenger Programs, Federal Railroad Administration, 1120 Vermont 
Avenue (Mail Stop 20), Washington, DC 20590, (telephone 202 493-6368).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Authority has determined that the need 
for a high-speed train system is directly related to the expected 
growth in population and resulting increases in intercity travel demand 
in California over the next twenty years and beyond. As a result of 
this growth in travel demand, there will be increases in travel delays 
from the growing congestion on California's highways and at airports. 
In addition, there will be effects on the economy and quality of life 
from a transportation system that is less and less reliable as travel 
demand increases and from deteriorating air quality in and around 
California's metropolitan areas. The intercity highway system, 
commercial airports, and conventional passenger rail serving the 
intercity travel market are currently operating at or near capacity, 
and will require large public investments for maintenance and expansion 
in order to meet existing demand and future growth. The proposed high-
speed train system would provide a new mode of high-speed intercity 
travel that would link the major metropolitan areas of the state; 
interface with international airports, mass transit, and highways; and 
provide added capacity to meet increases in intercity travel demand in 
California in a manner sensitive to and protective of California's 
unique natural resources.

Background

    The California High-Speed Rail Commission, established in 1993 to 
investigate the feasibility of high-speed rail in California, concluded 
that a high-speed train system is technically, environmentally, and 
economically feasible and set forth recommendations for the technology, 
corridors, financing, and operations of a proposed system. Following 
the Commission's work, a new nine-member California High-Speed Rail 
Authority (Authority) was established in 1996 and is authorized and 
directed by statute to undertake the planning for the development of a 
proposed statewide high-speed train network that is fully coordinated 
with other public transportation services. The Legislature has granted 
the Authority the powers necessary to oversee the construction and 
operation of a statewide high-speed train network once financing is 
secured. As part of the Authority's efforts to implement a high-speed 
train system, the Authority adopted a Final Business Plan in June 2000, 
which reviewed the economic feasibility of a 700-mile-long high-speed 
train system capable of speeds in excess of 200 miles per hour on a 
dedicated, fully grade-separated state-of-the-art track. The FRA has 
responsibility for oversight of the safety of railroad operations, 
including the safety of any proposed high-speed ground transportation 
system. For the California proposal, the FRA would need to take certain 
regulatory actions before any new high-speed train system could 
operate.

Alternatives

    An initial system alternatives evaluation will consider all 
reasonable system alternatives at a broad level of analysis. This 
analysis will be followed by a more detailed consideration of the most 
practical and feasible alternatives in the Programmatic EIR/EIS. The 
alternatives will include:

No-Build Alternative

    The take no action (No-Project or No-Build) alternative is defined 
to serve as the baseline for comparison of all alternatives. The No-
Build Alternative represents the state's transportation system 
(highway, air, and conventional rail) as it existed in 1999-2000, and 
as it would exist after completion of programs or projects currently 
planned for funding and implementation by 2020.
    The No-Build Alternative defines the existing and future statewide 
intercity transportation system based on programmed and funded 
improvements to the intercity transportation system through 2020, 
according to the following sources of information:
     State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
     Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) for all modes of 
travel
     Airport plans
     Intercity passenger rail plans (Amtrak Five- and Twenty-
year Plans)

[[Page 22068]]

High-Speed Train Alternative

    The Authority has defined a 700-mile-long (1,126-kilometer-long) 
high-speed train system capable of speeds in excess of 200 miles per 
hour (mph) (320 kilometers per hour [km/h]) on dedicated, fully grade-
separated tracks, with state-of-the-art safety, signaling, and 
automated train control systems. Both steel-wheel-on-steel-rail and 
magnetic levitation (maglev) train technologies are being considered 
for the system that would serve the major metropolitan centers of 
California, extending from Sacramento and the San Francisco Bay Area, 
through the Central Valley, to Los Angeles and San Diego.
    The Authority has identified high-speed train corridors and station 
locations in their 2000 Business Plan. Within these corridors, there 
are several potential alignment and station location options that will 
undergo a screening evaluation prior to detailed environmental and 
engineering technical studies. In heavily constrained urban areas, 
alignment options that assume sharing corridors and/or tracks with 
other passenger rail services will also be considered. The high-speed 
train corridors are defined as follows:
    San Diego To Los Angeles: Mainline service connecting Los Angeles 
and San Diego would follow either an inland route (along existing 
transportation corridors) and/or a coastal route (along the existing 
LOSSAN corridor). The inland route runs from Los Angeles Union Station 
to Riverside along existing rail corridors and new rights-of-way, 
continuing to San Diego along the I-15/I-215 Corridor. The coastal 
route extends from Los Angeles Union Station to San Diego along the 
existing LOSSAN rail corridor. A link between Los Angeles Union Station 
and Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) will also be studied.
    Los Angeles To Bakersfield: From Los Angeles Union Station to Santa 
Clarita, existing rail corridors would be followed. There are two 
corridors crossing the Tehachapi Mountains, the first links Bakersfield 
to Los Angeles via the I-5 Grapevine Corridor. The second corridor 
connects Bakersfield and Los Angeles through the Antelope Valley 
(Palmdale).
    Bakersfield To Sacramento: Between Bakersfield and Sacramento, 
specific options to be evaluated will include minimizing impacts to 
prime agricultural lands, utilizing existing rail corridors, and 
serving downtown stations or airports in Bakersfield and Fresno.
    Merced To Bay Area: From the vicinity of Merced in the Central 
Valley, the alignment would follow the Pacheco Pass to Gilroy. From 
Gilroy to San Jose, the alignment would follow the existing Caltrain 
corridor. North of San Jose, mainline service would continue to follow 
the existing Caltrain corridor along the peninsula to San Francisco 
and/or existing rail corridors in the East Bay to Oakland.
    Stations: Station placement would be determined on the basis of 
ridership potential, system-wide needs, and local planning constraints/
conditions. Station placement will be coordinated with local and 
regional planning agencies, and will provide for seamless connectivity 
with other modes of travel. Potential station locations to be evaluated 
in the screening evaluation prior to detailed environmental and 
engineering technical studies in the Programmatic EIR/EIS include: San 
Diego, Mira Mesa, Escondido, Temecula, Riverside, Ontario International 
Airport (ONT), East San Gabriel Valley, University Town Center (La 
Jolla), Oceanside, Irvine, Anaheim, Norwalk, Los Angeles International 
Airport (LAX), Los Angeles Union Station, Burbank, Santa Clarita, 
Palmdale, Bakersfield, Tulare County/Visalia, Fresno, Merced, Modesto, 
Stockton, Sacramento, Los Banos, Gilroy, San Jose, Redwood City, San 
Francisco International Airport (SFO), San Francisco, Fremont/Newark, 
Oakland International Airport (OAK), and Oakland. The potential sites 
listed represent general locations for planning purposes.

Other Modal Alternatives

    There are currently three main options for intercity travel between 
the major urban areas of San Diego, Los Angeles, the Central Valley, 
San Jose, Oakland/San Francisco, and Sacramento: vehicles on the 
highway system, commercial air service, and conventional passenger 
trains (Amtrak). The FRA and the Authority will evaluate a set of 
Modal/System Alternatives consisting of expansion of highways, 
airports, and intercity and commuter rail systems serving the markets 
identified for the High-Speed Train Alternative at a similar level of 
investment. The modal alternatives will be defined by assigning the 
expected incremental travel demand forecasted for the horizon years of 
2020 and 2040 to the state's transportation infrastructure, then 
identifying alternatives for accommodating that travel demand without a 
high-speed train system.

Scoping and Comments

    FRA encourages broad participation in the EIS process during 
scoping and review of the resulting environmental documents. Comments 
and suggestions are invited from all interested agencies and the public 
at large to insure the full range of issues related to the proposed 
action and all reasonable alternatives are addressed and all 
significant issues are identified. In particular, FRA is interested in 
determining whether there are areas of environmental concern where 
there might be the potential for significant impacts identifiable at a 
program level. Public agencies with jurisdiction are requested to 
advise the FRA and the Authority of the applicable permit and 
environmental review requirements of each agency, and the scope and 
content of the environmental information that is germane to the 
agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed 
project.
    A statewide scoping meeting is scheduled for 1:00--3:30 p.m. on 
Tuesday, April 24, 2001 in Sacramento, California, at 1416 Ninth 
Street. Scoping meetings will be advertised locally and are planned for 
the following major cities along the planned 700-mile-long high-speed 
train corridor alternatives at the dates and times indicated:
     Oakland on April 25--Oakland City Hall, Council Chambers, 
3rd Floor One Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Oakland 94612, from 11 a.m.-12:30 
p.m. and in Hearing Rm. 3 from 6:00-8 p.m.
     Bakersfield on April 30--Kern County Administration 
Building, 1115 Truxtun Ave., Bakersfield 93301, from 3:00-5 p.m. and 
from 6:00-8 p.m.
     Los Angeles on May 2--Japanese/American National Museum, 
369 East First St., Los Angeles 90012, from 4:00-6 p.m. and from 6:30-9 
p.m.
     Fresno on May 7--Fresno City Hall, 2600 Fresno St., Fresno 
93721 from 3:00-5 p.m. and from 6:00-8 p.m.
     Riverside on May 8--Riverside Convention Center, La Sierra 
Rm., 3443 Orange St., Riverside 92501, from 6:30-9 p.m.
     San Diego on May 10--San Diego Association of Governments, 
Main Boardroom, 401 B St., Suite 800, San Diego 92101, from 2:30-4 p.m. 
and at the University Town Center, Forum Room, 4545 La Jolla Village 
Dr., Suite E25, San Diego 92122, from 6:00-8:30 p.m
     Modesto on May 14--Modesto City/County Administration 
Building, 1010 Tenth St., Modesto 95354, from 3:00-5 p.m. and from 
6:00-8 p.m.
     San Jose on May 15--Berger Drive Facility, Auditorium, 
1555 Berger Dr., San Jose 95112, from 1:30-3 p.m. and from 6:00-8 p.m.

[[Page 22069]]

     Irvine on May 23--Irvine Civic Center, Conference and 
Training Center, One Civic Center Plaza, Irvine 92623, from 3:00-5 p.m. 
and from 6:00-8 p.m.
    Persons interested in providing comments on the scope of the 
programmatic EIR/EIS should do so by May 31, 2001. Comments can be sent 
in writing to Mr. David Valenstein at the FRA address identified above. 
Comments may also be addressed to Mr. John Barna of the Authority at 
their address identified above. Information and documents regarding the 
environmental review process will also be made available through the 
Authority's Internet site: [http://www.cahighspeedrail.gov/].

    Signed on Thursday, April 19, 2001.
Mark E. Yachmetz,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Development.
[FR Doc. 01-10903 Filed 5-1-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-U