[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 160 (Friday, August 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49856-49857]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20245]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration


Environmental Impact Statement for the Salinas to San Luis Obispo 
Portion of the Coast Corridor: Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties, 
CA

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 and 
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) will jointly 
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Environmental Impact 
Report (EIR) to study potential service upgrades and rail corridor 
improvements to the Salinas to San Luis Obispo portion of the Coast 
Corridor. The objective of the EIS/EIR is to evaluate alternatives and 
present environmental analysis to help make decisions regarding the 
type of service upgrades and rail improvements to be provided in the 
corridor, including variations in train frequency, trip time, and on-
time performance. FRA is also issuing this notice to solicit public and 
agency input into the development of the scope of the EIS/EIR, whether 
to tier the environmental process, and to advise the public that public 
and agency participation resulting from outreach activities conducted 
by Caltrans and its representatives will be considered in the 
preparation of the EIS/EIR.

DATES: Written comments on the scope of the EIS/EIR for the Salinas to 
San Luis Obispo Portion of the Coast Corridor should be provided to 
Caltrans no later than September 10, 2012. Public scoping meetings are 
scheduled on August 28 and August 29, 2012 at the times and locations 
identified in the Addresses section below.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the scope of this study should be sent 
to Ms. Emily Burstein, Division of Rail, Office of Planning and Policy, 
California Department of Transportation, 1120 N Street, MS 74, 
Sacramento, CA 95814 or via email to 
[email protected]. Comments may also be 
provided orally or in writing at the public scoping meetings scheduled 
at the following locations:

Salinas

Tuesday, August 28, 2012, 3:30 p.m.-6:00 p.m., Transportation Authority 
for Monterey County (TAMC), TAMC Conference Room, 55 Plaza Circle 
B, Salinas, CA 93901.

San Luis Obispo

Wednesday, August 29, 2012, 3:30 p.m.-6:00 p.m., San Luis Obispo County 
Library Community Room, 995 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regarding the environmental review 
please contact: Ms. Emily Burstein, Division of Rail, Office of 
Planning and Policy, California Department of Transportation, 1120 N 
Street, MS 74, Sacramento, CA 95814 (telephone: (916) 654-6932) or Ms. 
Stephanie Perez, Environmental Protection Specialist, Office of 
Railroad Policy and Development, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 
New Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop 20, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 
(202) 493-0388).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need

    The greater Coast Corridor region from San Jose, California to Los 
Angeles, California faces significant mobility challenges today. These 
challenges are likely to continue in the future as continued growth in 
population, employment, and tourism activity is expected to generate 
increased travel demand. By 2040, statewide population is expected to 
grow substantially, further straining the existing transportation 
network. An effective rail system is necessary to meet the future 
mobility needs of residents, businesses, and visitors. The Coast 
Corridor faces continuing transportation challenges as evidenced by the 
following:
     Constrained Travel Options--While the Coast Corridor is 
served by a transportation system that includes air, highway, and rail 
modes system access and capacity is insufficient to meet future travel 
demand. Air access is limited for many residents because major airports 
are located at a substantial distance outside the Salinas to San Luis 
Obispo portion of the corridor. This portion of the corridor is served 
by a single major highway--US 101--which experiences frequent 
congestion and travel delays. Amtrak offers a single daily Coast 
Starlight passenger service along the corridor and trains are often 
delayed due to the primarily single-track rail system operating beyond 
its design capacity.
     Significant Highway Congestion--While travel by automobile 
is expected to meet the majority of future travel demand, this 
increased use will result in worsening of existing congestion. 
Congestion is particularly acute at the corridor's urban chokepoints 
and is likely to worsen, making travel times unreliable. In addition, 
space constraints limit the potential to expand the highway system.
     Constrained Rail System Capacity--Corridor rail service 
could accommodate an increasing portion of projected travel demand 
growth by providing an alternative mode to automobile travel, but rail 
service is constrained by infrastructure that is significantly 
undersized for the volumes it currently accommodates, much less future 
service, without significant system improvements. Moreover, the 
existing Coast Starlight service is often fully booked during peak 
travel periods.
     Aging Rail Infrastructure--Investment in corridor rail 
service has not kept pace with population and travel demand growth, and 
many tracks, signals and bridges have not been upgraded or improved in 
decades. Improvements would allow shorter travel times and greater 
reliability, making rail a more attractive and competitive choice.
     Safety Concerns - Increasing potential for accidents in 
congested rail chokepoints underscores the need for upgraded signaling 
and infrastructure investments. Growing frequency of rail-related 
collisions call for improved highway/rail crossings and new or upgraded 
pedestrian crossings.
     Need for Increased Travel Capacity Without Impacting Air 
Quality and Natural Resources--Highway capacity improvements can have 
negative impacts on regional and local air quality as well as the 
efficient use of natural resources. Simultaneously expanding travel 
capacity while meeting federal and state air quality standards will 
likely require reductions in total vehicle miles traveled. Rail system 
improvements offer the opportunity to achieve air quality benefits with 
minimal impact on natural resources.
    In light of the transportation challenges listed above, Caltrans 
has identified rail improvements to the Coast Corridor as an 
opportunity to

[[Page 49857]]

improve mobility and reliability in this congested part of the state's 
rail system. The proposed improvements would allow for a more reliable, 
safe, competitive, and attractive intercity travel option. These 
improvements would provide additional capacity to relieve some of the 
projected near- and long-term demand on the highway system, potentially 
slowing the need to further expand highways and airports in this 
portion of the corridor, or reduce the scale of those expansions, 
including their associated cost and impacts on communities and the 
environment. Rail improvements would augment the highway system, 
creating an interconnected, multimodal solution, allowing for better 
mobility throughout the corridor. Improved rail infrastructure would 
contribute to the economic viability of the Coast Corridor and provide 
connectivity with local transit systems.

Environmental Review Process

    The EIS/EIR will be developed in accordance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 and the Council 
on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR part 1500 et seq.) 
implementing NEPA; the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), 
Division 13, Public Resources Code; and FRA's Procedures for 
Considering Environmental Impacts (64 FR 28545; May 26, 1999). FRA and 
Caltrans intend to use a tiered process for the completion of the 
environmental review of the Coast Corridor, as provided for in 40 CFR 
1508.28 and FRA Procedures.
    FRA is considering the option of preparing a Tier 1 EIS/EIS. 
``Tiering'' is a staged environmental review process often applied to 
environmental reviews for complex transportation projects. If used, the 
initial phase of a tiered process will address broad questions and 
likely environmental effects for the Salinas to San Luis Obispo portion 
of the Coast Corridor including, but not limited to, the type of 
service(s) being proposed, major infrastructure components, and 
identification of major facility capacity constraints. If tiering is 
not used, the EIR/EIS will analyze, at a greater level of detail, site-
specific proposals that would otherwise be addressed in subsequent 
phases or tiers based on the decisions made in a Tier 1 EIS/EIR.

Alternatives

    Alternatives to be evaluated and analyzed in the EIS/EIR include a 
no-action (No-Project or No-Build) scenario and an action alternative 
consisting of multiple options for the construction of various 
passenger Coast Corridor improvements between Salinas and San Luis 
Obispo. Possible environmental impacts from the action alternative 
include displacement of commercial and residential properties; 
disproportionate impacts to minority and low-income populations; 
community and neighborhood disruption; increased noise and vibration 
along the rail corridor; 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.

No Action Alternative

    The no action alternative is defined to serve as the baseline for 
comparison of all alternatives. This alternative represents 
California's transportation system (highway, air, and rail) as it 
exists, and as it would exist after completion of programs or projects 
currently funded or being implemented. The no-action alternative would 
draw upon the following sources of information:
    [ssquf] State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).
    [ssquf] Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) for all modes of 
travel.
    [ssquf] Airport plans.
    [ssquf] Passenger rail plans.

Action Alternative

    This alternative would facilitate expanded passenger service along 
the Coast Corridor. The Action Alternative will have ``options'' 
consisting of logical groupings of improvements that take into account 
the likely timing of such improvements and possible funding scenarios. 
The improvements to be analyzed in this alternative may include:
    [ssquf] Track upgrades.
    [ssquf] Curve realignments.
    [ssquf] Siding extensions and upgrades.
    [ssquf] Addition of second main track.
    [ssquf] Grade separations.
    [ssquf] New Stations.
    [ssquf] Station and platform upgrades.
    [ssquf] Installation of Centralized Traffic Control (CTC) and power 
switches.
    [ssquf] New or upgraded pedestrian crossings.
Scoping and Comments
    FRA encourages broad participation in the EIS/EIR process during 
scoping and subsequent review of the resulting environmental document. 
Letters soliciting comments were sent to appropriate Federal, State, 
and local agencies, and appropriate railroads. 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 
Caltrans 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 improvements.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 13, 2012.
Corey Hill,
Director, Rail Project Development and Delivery.
[FR Doc. 2012-20245 Filed 8-16-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P