Capitol Corridor Service Expansion Program
Program Environmental Assessment (EA)
BART Boardroom Presentation
October 26, 2010
Capitol Corridor Route Map
Background
• Capitol Corridor is one of the State’s three
Intercity Passenger Rail systems
• Capitol Corridor service is managed by the
Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA)
• Capitol Corridor (3rd busiest route in the Amtrak system)
is an important regional and inter-regional
transportation alternative reducing traffic
congestion and improving air quality
• Capitol Corridor operates on Union Pacific’s rail
system
The CCJPA Board
• The CCJPA is governed by a Board of Directors
comprised of 16 elected officials from six
member agencies along the 170-mile Capitol
Corridor rail route
–
–
–
–
–
–
PLACER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AGENCY (PCTPA)
SOLANO TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (STA)
YOLO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT (YCTD)
SACRAMENTO REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT (SAC RT)
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT (BART)
SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (VTA)
Presentation Outline
• Discuss current program of projects to support
service expansion plans
• Identify phasing plan to implement planned track
improvements to achieve service expansion plans
• Discuss the environmental documentation
process with the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA)
• Describe the CCJPA’s Program Environmental
Assessment (EA) and discuss the summary of
impacts, if any
• Answer questions
State Rail Plan (FY 2007/08 - 2017/18)
and CCJPA Vision Plan
• Frequency: Expanding service incrementally
–
–
–
–
Auburn – Sacramento: 4 round trips (currently 1)
Roseville – Sacramento: 10 round trips (currently 1)
Oakland – Sacramento: 18 round trips (currently 16)
San Jose – Sacramento: 16 round trips (currently 7)
• Travel Time: Reduce average travel time by 12
percent (past and future reductions coming)
• Reliability: Standard of 90% or better for on-time
performance (currently 93% - tops in the nation)
FRA HSIPR Funding – Requirements
• FRA administers the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
• High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program – a
five-year capital grant program to fund high speed and
intercity passenger rail
• To be eligible for HSIPR funding
– Complete a Service Development Plan
– Complete a full HSIPR application
– Complete Tier 1 Environmental Review – i.e., this Program EA
• If awarded funding, subsequent projects must go through
detailed project level (Tier 2) Environmental Review
NEPA Program EA
• The Program EA evaluates the potential environmental
effects of implementing an increase in Capitol Corridor
Intercity Passenger Rail service as follows:
– From 1 to 2 daily round-trips between Auburn and
Sacramento
– From 7 to 11 daily round-trips between Oakland and San
Jose
• The Program EA provides information that can be used
to evaluate program alternatives when preparing
project level Categorical Exemption or Environmental
Assessments.
Why, What, and How?
• Why must a program environmental document be
completed ?
– FRA requires a Program NEPA document before awarding
service program funding
• What level of program documentation is required?
– FRA indicated that for limited corridor development a
Program EA is appropriate
• How should the public be involved in the Program EA?
– FRA consulted with CCJPA to structure a public
involvement process (document circulation, public
meetings)
Projects in/around Fremont and Niles
Project
Number
9
Project Name
Anticipated ProjectLevel NEPA
Environmental
Document
Rail Network
Location
1
Reno Railyard to Sacramento Track Capacity Enhancement Project
CE
Martinez
Subdivision/
Roseville
Subdivision
2
San Pablo to Oakland Restore Existing Third Track to Mainline Project
CE
Niles Subdivision
3
Hayward Double Track (Elmhurst to Industrial Parkway)
CE
Niles Subdivision
4
Newark-Albrae Siding Connection including South Switching Lead Extension
for Newark Yard
EA
Coast Subdivision
5
CP Coast-Rte 237 (Gold Street) Double Track Project
CE
Coast Subdivision
6
Change of route alignment from the UPRR Niles Subdivision to the UPRR
Oakland Subdivision (Industrial Parkway to Shinn)
EA
Oakland Subdivision
Union City Station and Track Work Improvements on the UPRR Oakland
Subdivision (including reconnection with UPRR Niles Subdivision near Shinn
7
Street crossing)
8
Fremont Full Platform Extension (on Track 2)
Niles Canyon Railroad Mainline Track Upgrade (New Niles Wye to Former SP
9A Main at CP-Hearst) and Radum Second Main Track Upgrade on UPRR Oakland
Subdivision (near Pleasanton)
Add Third Main Track on Niles Subdivision between Niles Junction and Newark
9B
Junction (in Fremont) or between Shinn Connection and Newark Junction
10
San Jose Diridon Station Track and Platform Upgrade
11
Fourth Track Project
EA*
CE
CE
CE
Capacity Improvements
and Service Increases
From one to two daily
round trips (Auburn to
Sacramento).
Reliability/not capacity
From 7 to 11 daily round
trips
collectively.
Oakland Subdivision
Incrementally, reliability
projects with an interim
Niles Subdivision
capacity
of
several
Niles Subdivision/ projects to increase to 9
Oakland Subdivision daily round trips.
Niles
Subdivision/Oaklan
d Subdivision
CE**
Caltrain Track
CE
Caltrain Track
* The study area of Project 7 is analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in the Union City Intermodal Station EIR, which was adopted in February 2006 by the City Council of Union City.
** This project has been cleared under CEQA and NEPA.
Program EA adheres to CEQ regulations and FRA Procedures for Considering
Environmental Impacts
Resource Area
Program EA Section
Air quality
Water quality
Noise and vibration
Solid waste disposal
Ecological systems
Impacts on wetlands areas
Impacts on endangered species or wildlife
Flood hazards and floodplain management
Coastal zone management
Use of energy resources
Use of other natural resources (e.g., water, minerals, or timber)
Aesthetic and design quality impacts
Possible barriers to the elderly and handicapped
Land use, existing and planned
Impacts on the socioeconomic environment
Environmental Justice
Public health
Public safety, including any impacts due to hazardous materials
Recreational opportunities
Use of 4(f)-protected properties
Impacts on transportation
Locations of archaeological or architectural cultural resources
Construction period impacts
Section 4.5
Section 4.9
Section 4.4
N/A
Section4.8
Section 4.8
Section 4.8
Section 4.9
N/A
Section 4.6
N/A
Section 4.7
Section 4.15
Section 4.2
Section 4.15
Section 4.15
Section 4.14
Sections 4.13 and 4.14
Section 4.10
Section 4.10
Section 4.3
Section 4.11
Within each section
Program Benefits
• Additional service frequency
– One additional Auburn frequency (1 to 2)
– Four additional to/from San Jose frequencies (7 to 11)
• Direct Benefits
– Improvements in ridership - incremental about 12%
– Improvements in revenue (offsetting State subsidy) –
incremental about 14%
• Indirect Benefits
– Reduction in greenhouse emissions
– Reduction in projected highway congestion
Projects on the Map
• FY 2010 HSIPR
Application
– Project 1: Donner Pass
– Project 4: NewarkAlbrae Siding
– Project 8: Fremont
Platform
• Future HSIPR funding
– Remaining projects
based on HSIPR funding
levels and coordination
with California request
Port of Oakland
Rail: East Bay and Beyond
Freight traffic to/from the Port of Oakland
heads primarily northeast to the Roseville
Yard (north of Sacramento), or via the
Central Valley by the Altamont Pass route.
Secondary usage goes south along a coastal
route
Niles Subdivision
Coast Subdivision
Oakland Subdivision
Niles/Fremont: Current Routing and Traffic
Passenger Rail Traffic (daily trains)
Capitol Corridor (yellow line)
14
ACE (blue line)
6
Freight Rail Traffic (green line - UPRR levels are estimated)
Niles Subdivision (North of Niles Junction)
6
Oakland Subdivision (Altamont Pass route)
10
Niles Subdivision (Centerville area)
11
Fremont Amtrak Station
Niles/Fremont: Project 9A Routing and Traffic
Project 9A can work under
either an Oakland
Subdivision or Niles
Subdivision alignment for
Capitol Corridor service
Fremont Amtrak Station
Rail: Routing under Project 9A
Port of Oakland
Freight traffic to/from the Altamont route
could go over an upgraded Niles Canyon
route (keeping Niles Canyon Railway whole
and able to operate) thus reducing the need
to accommodate freight traffic growth
through Centerville. This allows capacity for
increased Capitol Corridor service.
Existing
Planned
Capitol Corridor (yellow line)
14
22
ACE (blue line)
6
6
Niles Subdivision (North of Niles Junction)
6 ->12
??
Oakland Subdivision/Niles Canyon (Altamont Pass route)
10
??
Niles Subdivision (Centerville area)
11->5
??
Passenger Rail Traffic (daily trains)
Freight Rail Traffic (green line - UPRR levels are estimated)
Rail: Routing under Project 9B
Port of Oakland
Freight traffic to/from the Altamont route
could be increased by triple tracking through
Centerville. In addition to freight growth,
this allows capacity for increased Capitol
Corridor service. This option is operationally
worse for all concerned.
Existing
Planned
Capitol Corridor (yellow line)
14
22
ACE (blue line)
6
6
Niles Subdivision (North of Niles Junction)
6
??
Oakland Subdivision (Altamont Pass route)
10
??
Niles Subdivision (Centerville area)
11
??
Passenger Rail Traffic (daily trains)
Freight Rail Traffic (green line - UPRR levels are estimated)
Program Schedule
• Projects will be implemented based on funding availability
– FRA – HSIPR now in 2nd year of 5 years (FY 2010 request is
pending)
– State – Funding dependent on State budget
• Apply for funding in each remaining HSIPR year (FY 20112013)
• If funded steadily, projects will commence in FY 2011 and
be completed in FY 2016 or FY 2017
• Capitol Corridor service expansion will be incremental as
projects are completed
• Freight train growth is expected to increase independently
of the improvements
No Action Alternative
• Not implementing the program is impact-free
to all resource categories except air quality
– Under the No Action alternative for Air Quality,
the project benefits to reduce in CO2 and general
traffic congestion relief will not occur
Action Alternative – Implement Program EA
• Across all resource categories, there are either
– No impacts
– Minimal impacts that can be fully mitigated
• Approved Program EA will be used to advance
specific projects incrementally as part of an
application(s) for federal or state capital grants
Passenger-Freight Rail Partnership
• CCJPA’s plan is to partner with UPRR to accrue
public benefit from its investments
• Added Capitol Corridor trains
• Reduced truck traffic and greenhouse gas emissions
Summary
• Program EA identified either no impacts, no
impacts with mitigation, or benefits
• Detailed project level environmental review will
commence once we receive any FRA HSIPR
funding
• The CCJPA will be engaged with the communities
along the route and agencies as CCJPA looks to
advance the Capitol Corridor Service Expansion
Plan
THANK YOU