Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for the Redlands; Passenger Rail Project in the Cities of San Bernardino and Redlands, CA, 45415-45417 [2012-18636]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2012 / Notices
DOT’s implementation of MAP–21 and
DOT’s guidance for awarding TIFIA
credit assistance. Interested parties can
provide comments on any aspect of
DOT’s implementation of the changes
made by MAP–21. DOT will consider
these comments as it continues to
implement the program and develop
supplemental program guidance. The
instructions for submitting comments
are included below.
Comments should be sent to DOT by
September 1, 2012. Late-filed comments
will be considered to the extent
practicable.
Authority: 23 U.S.C. §§ 601–609 (as set
forth in MAP–21); 49 CFR part 1.48(b)(6); 23
CFR part 180; 49 CFR part 80; 49 CFR part
261; 49 CFR part 640.
Issued on: July 27, 2012.
Ray LaHood,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–18785 Filed 7–30–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Transit Administration
Preparation of an Environmental
Impact Statement for the Redlands;
Passenger Rail Project in the Cities of
San Bernardino and Redlands, CA
Federal Transit Administration
(FTA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement/
Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR).
AGENCY:
FTA and San Bernardino
Associated Governments (SANBAG)
intend to prepare an EIS/EIR for the
Redlands Passenger Rail Project (RPRP
or Project). Early in 2012, FTA and
SANBAG began the preparation of an
Environmental Assessment (EA)/EIR for
the RPRP and conducted two scoping
meetings; one on April 24 in the City of
Redlands and the other on May 2 in the
City of San Bernardino. Based on the
input received from the community,
including written comment letters, and
preliminary findings from ongoing
technical studies, FTA determined that
an EIS is required. The EIS/EIR will be
prepared in accordance with regulations
implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA:
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) of 1969 and the
regulations implementing NEPA set
forth in 40 CFR Parts 1500–1508 and
23 CFR Part 771, as well as provisions
of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU). The
purpose of this Notice is to:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Jul 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
• Advise the public that FTA is the
lead Federal agency;
• Provide information about the
proposed project, purpose and need for
the project, and alternatives to be
considered; and
• Invite public and agency
participation in the EIS process.
The EIS/EIR will examine alternatives
to provide a cost-effective, alternative
travel option for communities located
along the Redlands Corridor in a way
that improves transit mobility, travel
times, and corridor safety.
DATES: The date, time, and location for
the public scoping meetings are as
follows:
August 14, 2012
5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
´
ESRI Cafe, 380 New York Street,
Redlands, CA 92373.
August 15, 2012
5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
San Bernardino Hilton, 1755 South
Waterman Avenue, San Bernardino,
CA 92408.
These locations are accessible by
persons with disabilities. If special
translation or signing services or other
special accommodations are needed,
please contact Robert Chevez at
Westbound Communications (909–384–
8188) at least 48 hours before the
meeting.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be
submitted to Mitchell A. Alderman,
P.E., Director of Transit & Rail Programs,
SANBAG, 1170 W. 3rd St, 2nd Floor,
San Bernardino, CA 92410, or emailed
to RPRP_Public_Comments@sanbag.ca.
gov. Written comments may also be
submitted to Mr. Hymie Luden, City and
Regional Planner, FTA, Region 9, 201
Mission Street, Suite 1650 San
Francisco, CA 94105.
In accordance with Section 6002 of
SAFETEA–LU, FTA and SANBAG
invite comment on the scope of the EIS/
EIR, specifically on the Project’s
purpose and need, the alternatives to be
evaluated that may address the purpose
and need, and the potential impacts of
the alternatives considered. Comments
on scope of the EIS/EIR must be
received no later than 5:00 p.m. Pacific
Standard Time on August 31, 2012. A
scoping information packet is available
on the Web site at: https://sanbag.ca.gov/
projects/redlands-transit.html or by
calling Jane Dreher, SANBAG’s Public
Information Officer (909–884–8276).
Copies will also be available at the
scoping meetings.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for the Project: The
overall purpose of the Project is to
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45415
provide a cost-effective, travel
alternative for communities located
along the Redlands Corridor that would
improve transit mobility, travel times,
and corridor safety while minimizing
adverse environmental impacts. The
RPRP would provide travelers and
commuters with a new mobility option
that would achieve more-efficient travel
times than automobiles or other transit
alternatives within an existing corridor.
The Project is needed because
population growth has increased
roadway congestion, which has
increased commute travel times for
work and recreational purposes,
increased the number of hours of lost
productivity, increased fuel
consumption, contributed to air
pollution, interfered with emergency
response vehicles, and caused spillover
effects onto secondary and alternative
routes. SANBAG also needs to maintain
existing freight service along the
corridor per its purchase agreement
with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe
(BNSF) Railroad.
Project Location and Environmental
Setting: The RPRP would introduce
passenger rail service along an existing
railroad right-of-way (ROW) from the
City of San Bernardino on the west to
the City of Redlands on the east. This
existing ROW is commonly referred to
as the Redlands Corridor, an
approximately 9-mile rail spur segment
that extends east from E Street in the
City of San Bernardino. Passenger rail
service would serve passengers from
five platforms located at E Street,
Tippecanoe Avenue, New York Street,
Orange Street, and University Street.
SANBAG proposes the construction of a
single track within a ROW 50 feet wide,
with a passing siding one-mile long
located near the midpoint of the
alignment. Project components would
include track improvements; boarding
platforms; passenger amenities such as
ticket vending machines, shade
canopies with seating; pedestrian access
to the public ROW, lighting, parking
areas; grade crossing improvements;
utility and traffic improvements; and
construction of a train layover facility.
The proposed Project would not include
the purchase of additional vehicles.
Passenger rail operations would start in
2018.
Possible Alternatives: The EIS/EIR
will consider alternatives to the
proposed Project consistent with the
requirements of NEPA. SANBAG
anticipates that this may include
consideration of Alternative 1—No
Build, Alternative 2—Preferred Project,
Alternative 3—Reduced Project
Footprint, Alternative 4—Light Rail
Transit, Alternative 5—Bus Rapid
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
45416
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2012 / Notices
Transit, Design Option 1—Train
Layover Facility (Waterman Avenue),
and Design Option 2—Use of Existing
Train Layover Facilities. Other
alternatives and/or design options may
also be considered. These alternatives
are described further as follows:
• Alternative 1—No Build: Track
improvements and facilities would not
be constructed to facilitate passenger
rail service between San Bernardino and
the University of Redlands. Under this
alternative, track maintenance and
rehabilitation of existing bridge
structures would be required throughout
the western 3.5 miles of the rail corridor
to facilitate continued freight service.
• Alternative 2—Preferred Project:
SANBAG would construct track and
grade crossing improvements, bridge
replacements, rail platform, and new
train layover facilities to facilitate
passenger rail service along the 9-mile
corridor.
• Alternative 3—Reduced Project
Footprint: Track improvements and
facilities would be constructed as
described for the Preferred Project but
they would be constructed within a
narrower permanent easement, where
feasible, to minimize direct impacts on
sensitive biological, cultural, and public
park resources. Alternative bridge
structures would be constructed at
Warm Creek and the Santa Ana River.
• Alternative 4—Light Rail Transit:
This alternative would involve
development of the rail corridor with
new tracking and an overhead catenary
system to power the light rail transit
(LRT) vehicles.
• Alternative 5—Bus Rapid Transit:
Under this alternative, a new bus rapid
transit (BRT) guideway would be
constructed adjacent to the existing
freight track, which will be used solely
by BRT vehicles. Signalization would be
required at all existing grade crossings
as opposed to the use of crossing gates.
• Design Option 1—Train Layover
Facility (Waterman Avenue): Track
improvements and facilities would be
constructed as described for the
Preferred Project but the Train Layover
Facility would be constructed at a
different location, west of the Santa Ana
River, east of Waterman Avenue, and
immediately north of the rail corridor.
• Design Option 2—Use of Existing
Train Layover Facilities: Track
improvements and facilities would be
constructed as described for the
Preferred Project. However, instead of
constructing new layover facilities as
described for the Preferred Project and
Alternative 3, the project would not
construct layover facilities but use the
existing Metrolink layover facilities
located west of E Street.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Jul 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
Areas of investigation include, but are
not limited to, land use, land
acquisitions, displacements, and
relocations, community and
neighborhood character, transportation,
visual quality and aesthetics, air quality,
greenhouse gases, and global climate
change, noise and vibration, biological
and wetland resources (including
threatened and endangered species),
agricultural resources, floodplains and
hydrology, geology, soils, and
seismicity, hazardous waste and
materials, water quality, energy use,
utilities, cultural and historic resources,
parklands, community services and
facilities, safety and security,
socioeconomics, environmental justice,
and cumulative effects. Measures to
avoid, minimize, or mitigate any
significant adverse impacts will be
identified.
Probable Effects: The EIS/EIR will
consider in detail the potential
environmental effects of the alternatives
under consideration based on the
current scoping efforts. The Draft EIS/
EIR and Final EIS/EIR will summarize
the results of coordination with federal,
state, and local agencies and the public
at large; present the appropriate federal,
state, and local regulations and policies;
inventory and compile previous studies
pertinent to the project; describe the
methodology used to assess impacts;
identify and describe the affected
environment; analyze and document the
construction related (short-term) and
operational (long-term) environmental
consequences (direct, indirect, and
cumulative) of the project alternatives;
and identify opportunities and measures
that mitigate any identified adverse
impacts. The specific scope of analysis
and study areas used to undertake the
analysis in the EIS/EIR will be
established during the public and
agency scoping process.
FTA Procedures: The EIS/EIR is being
prepared in accordance with the NEPA
of 1969, as amended, and implemented
by the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR parts
1500–1508), FHWA environmental
impact regulations (49 CFR part 622, 23
CFR part 771, and 23 CFR part 774), and
Section 6002 of the SAFETEA–LU of
2005. The EIS/EIR will also comply
with requirements of Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act of
1966, as amended, Section 4(f) of the
U.S. Department of Transportation Act
of 1966, the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments, Executive Order 12898
(Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority and
Low-Income Populations), Executive
Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands),
and other applicable federal laws, rules,
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and regulations. The EIS/EIR will also
satisfy environmental review
requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Regulations implementing NEPA, as
well as provisions of SAFETEA–LU, call
for public involvement in the EIS
process. Section 6002 of SAFETEA–LU
requires that FTA and SANBAG do the
following: (1) Extend an invitation to
other Federal and non-Federal agencies
and Indian tribes that may have an
interest in the proposed project to
become ‘‘participating agencies,’’ (2)
provide an opportunity for involvement
by participating agencies and the public
in helping to define the purpose and
need for a proposed project, as well as
the range of alternatives for
consideration in the impact statement,
and (3) establish a plan for coordinating
public and agency participation and
comments on the environmental review
process. An invitation to become a
participating agency, with the scoping
information packet appended, will be
extended to other Federal and nonFederal agencies and Indian tribes that
may have an interest in the proposed
project. It is possible that we may not be
able to identify all Federal and nonFederal agencies and Indian tribes that
may have such an interest. Any Federal
or non-Federal agency or Indian tribe
interested in the proposed Project that
does not receive an invitation to become
a participating agency should notify at
the earliest opportunity the Project
Managers identified above under
ADDRESSES.
A comprehensive public involvement
program has been developed and a
public and agency involvement
Coordination Plan will be created. The
program includes, among other things, a
Project Web site (https://sanbag.ca.gov/
projects/redlands-transit.html); outreach
to local and county officials and
community and civic groups; a public
scoping process to define the issues of
concern among all parties interested in
the Project; establishment of a
community advisory committee and
organizing periodic meetings with that
committee; a public hearing on release
of the Draft EIS/EIR; and development
and distribution of Project newsletters.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Mitchell A. Alderman, P.E., Director
of Transit & Rail Programs, SANBAG,
1170 W. 3rd St, 2nd Floor, San
Bernardino, CA 92410, (909) 884–8276.
You may also contact Mr. Hymie Luden,
City and Regional Planner, FTA, Region
9, 201 Mission Street, Suite 1650 San
Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 744–2732.
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2012 / Notices
Issued On: July 25, 2012.
Edward Carranza, Jr.,
Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 9.
[FR Doc. 2012–18636 Filed 7–30–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
[Docket ID PHMSA–2012–0175]
Notice of Availability of Draft
Environmental Assessment for Public
Comment for the Longhorn Pipeline
Reversal Project
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of Draft
Environmental Assessment for Public
Comment for the Longhorn Pipeline
Reversal Project.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321–4347, and the
Council on Environmental Quality
NEPA implementing regulations,
40 CFR Parts 1500–1508, the Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) is announcing
the availability of and requesting
comments on the Draft Environmental
Assessment (Draft EA) for the Longhorn
Pipeline Reversal Project (Proposed
Project).
SUMMARY:
Submit any comments regarding
the Draft EA no later than September 14,
2012.
ADDRESSES: Comments should reference
the docket number PHMSA–2012–0175
at the beginning of the comment.
Comments are posted without changes
or edits to https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided. There is a privacy statement
published on https://
www.regulations.gov. Comments may be
submitted in the following ways:
E-Gov Web Site: https://
www.regulations.gov. This site allows
the public to enter comments on any
Federal Register notice issued by any
agency.
Mail: Docket Management System:
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M–30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. If you submit
your comments by mail, please submit
two copies. To receive confirmation that
PHMSA has received your comments,
please include a self-addressed stamped
postcard.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Jul 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
Hand Delivery: Docket Management
System: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590 between 9:00
a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: Docket Management System:
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, 202–493–2251.
PHMSA has posted the Draft EA at
https://www.regulations.gov in docket
number PHMSA–2012–0175.
The Draft EA is also available for
inspection at the following public
libraries:
• Austin Public Library—Twin Oaks
Branch, 1800 South 5th Street, Austin,
TX 78704, 512–974–9980.
• Collier Regional Library, 6200
Pinemont Drive, Houston, TX, 77092,
832–393–1740.
• Abilene Public Library–South
Branch, 1401 South Danville Drive,
Abilene, TX 79605, 325–698–7565.
• El Paso Main Library, 501 North
Oregon Street, El Paso, TX, 79901, 915–
543–5433.
• Ector County Public Library, 321
West 5th Street, Odessa, TX, 79761,
432–332–0633.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amelia Samaras, Attorney, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, Office of the Chief
Counsel, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590; by phone at
202–366–4362; or email at
amelia.samaras@dot.gov.
The
Longhorn Pipeline runs from El Paso,
Texas to Houston, Texas and is owned
and operated by Magellan Pipeline
Company, L.P. (Magellan). The
Longhorn Pipeline currently transports
refined petroleum products from east to
west (Houston to El Paso). The Proposed
Project would convert the segment of
the Longhorn Pipeline from Crane,
Texas to East Houston, Texas to crude
oil service and reverse the flow so that
crude oil would flow from west to east
(Crane to Houston). At Crane, refined
products would enter the pipeline and
move west to El Paso. The refined
products would enter the Longhorn
Pipeline via an existing pipeline
segment that connects the Longhorn
Pipeline to the existing Orion West
Pipeline located to the north of the
Longhorn Pipeline. The Orion West
Pipeline runs from Frost, Texas to El
Paso and is also owned and operated by
Magellan.
PHMSA is responsible for regulating
the transportation of hazardous liquids
via pipeline. PHMSA issues and
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45417
enforces pipeline safety regulations that
dictate requirements for construction,
design, testing, operation, and
maintenance of natural gas and
hazardous liquid (including crude oil,
petroleum products, and anhydrous
ammonia) pipelines. PHMSA does not
typically serve as lead agency for
pipeline construction projects, as it has
no authority over pipeline siting and
does not issue any approval or
authorization to commence a pipeline
construction project. However, a
settlement agreement specific to this
action titled: ‘‘The Longhorn Mitigation
Plan’’ (LMP) resulted from litigation
associated with changes to the Longhorn
Pipeline in 1999. The LMP provides
PHMSA with broader responsibility and
oversight of the Longhorn Pipeline.
The Proposed Project would require
upgrades to the pipeline and would
include construction of a six-mile
pipeline segment in El Paso and a
2.5-mile pipeline segment in Houston.
Modifications and upgrades to existing
infrastructure to facilitate reversal and
increased capacity, such as new pump
stations and terminals, would occur at
various locations along the Longhorn
and Orion Pipelines’ right-of-ways.
Although not originally included in the
LMP, activities along the Orion West
Pipeline and the segment from Odessa
to Crane that would take place as a
result of the Proposed Project are
analyzed in this Draft EA as connected
actions.
This Draft EA analyzes the changes
that would take place as a result of the
Proposed Project and how the changes
could impact the human environment
during construction, normal operations,
and in the unlikely event of a release.
PHMSA has also analyzed the condition
of the Longhorn Pipeline and how the
change in product and direction would
affect the pipeline.
Linda Daugherty,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Policy
and Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012–18524 Filed 7–30–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
[Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0176]
Pipeline Safety: Inspection and
Protection of Pipeline Facilities After
Railway Accidents
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA); DOT.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 147 (Tuesday, July 31, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45415-45417]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18636]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Transit Administration
Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for the
Redlands; Passenger Rail Project in the Cities of San Bernardino and
Redlands, CA
AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement/
Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FTA and San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) intend
to prepare an EIS/EIR for the Redlands Passenger Rail Project (RPRP or
Project). Early in 2012, FTA and SANBAG began the preparation of an
Environmental Assessment (EA)/EIR for the RPRP and conducted two
scoping meetings; one on April 24 in the City of Redlands and the other
on May 2 in the City of San Bernardino. Based on the input received
from the community, including written comment letters, and preliminary
findings from ongoing technical studies, FTA determined that an EIS is
required. The EIS/EIR will be prepared in accordance with regulations
implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA: 42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.) of 1969 and the regulations implementing NEPA set forth
in 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508 and 23 CFR Part 771, as well as provisions of
the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). The purpose of this Notice is to:
Advise the public that FTA is the lead Federal agency;
Provide information about the proposed project, purpose
and need for the project, and alternatives to be considered; and
Invite public and agency participation in the EIS process.
The EIS/EIR will examine alternatives to provide a cost-effective,
alternative travel option for communities located along the Redlands
Corridor in a way that improves transit mobility, travel times, and
corridor safety.
DATES: The date, time, and location for the public scoping meetings are
as follows:
August 14, 2012
5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
ESRI Caf[eacute], 380 New York Street, Redlands, CA 92373.
August 15, 2012
5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
San Bernardino Hilton, 1755 South Waterman Avenue, San Bernardino, CA
92408.
These locations are accessible by persons with disabilities. If
special translation or signing services or other special accommodations
are needed, please contact Robert Chevez at Westbound Communications
(909-384-8188) at least 48 hours before the meeting.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted to Mitchell A. Alderman,
P.E., Director of Transit & Rail Programs, SANBAG, 1170 W. 3rd St, 2nd
Floor, San Bernardino, CA 92410, or emailed to RPRP_Public_Comments@sanbag.ca.gov. Written comments may also be submitted to Mr.
Hymie Luden, City and Regional Planner, FTA, Region 9, 201 Mission
Street, Suite 1650 San Francisco, CA 94105.
In accordance with Section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU, FTA and SANBAG
invite comment on the scope of the EIS/EIR, specifically on the
Project's purpose and need, the alternatives to be evaluated that may
address the purpose and need, and the potential impacts of the
alternatives considered. Comments on scope of the EIS/EIR must be
received no later than 5:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time on August 31,
2012. A scoping information packet is available on the Web site at:
https://sanbag.ca.gov/projects/redlands-transit.html or by calling Jane
Dreher, SANBAG's Public Information Officer (909-884-8276). Copies will
also be available at the scoping meetings.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for the Project: The overall purpose of the
Project is to provide a cost-effective, travel alternative for
communities located along the Redlands Corridor that would improve
transit mobility, travel times, and corridor safety while minimizing
adverse environmental impacts. The RPRP would provide travelers and
commuters with a new mobility option that would achieve more-efficient
travel times than automobiles or other transit alternatives within an
existing corridor. The Project is needed because population growth has
increased roadway congestion, which has increased commute travel times
for work and recreational purposes, increased the number of hours of
lost productivity, increased fuel consumption, contributed to air
pollution, interfered with emergency response vehicles, and caused
spillover effects onto secondary and alternative routes. SANBAG also
needs to maintain existing freight service along the corridor per its
purchase agreement with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)
Railroad.
Project Location and Environmental Setting: The RPRP would
introduce passenger rail service along an existing railroad right-of-
way (ROW) from the City of San Bernardino on the west to the City of
Redlands on the east. This existing ROW is commonly referred to as the
Redlands Corridor, an approximately 9-mile rail spur segment that
extends east from E Street in the City of San Bernardino. Passenger
rail service would serve passengers from five platforms located at E
Street, Tippecanoe Avenue, New York Street, Orange Street, and
University Street. SANBAG proposes the construction of a single track
within a ROW 50 feet wide, with a passing siding one-mile long located
near the midpoint of the alignment. Project components would include
track improvements; boarding platforms; passenger amenities such as
ticket vending machines, shade canopies with seating; pedestrian access
to the public ROW, lighting, parking areas; grade crossing
improvements; utility and traffic improvements; and construction of a
train layover facility. The proposed Project would not include the
purchase of additional vehicles. Passenger rail operations would start
in 2018.
Possible Alternatives: The EIS/EIR will consider alternatives to
the proposed Project consistent with the requirements of NEPA. SANBAG
anticipates that this may include consideration of Alternative 1--No
Build, Alternative 2--Preferred Project, Alternative 3--Reduced Project
Footprint, Alternative 4--Light Rail Transit, Alternative 5--Bus Rapid
[[Page 45416]]
Transit, Design Option 1--Train Layover Facility (Waterman Avenue), and
Design Option 2--Use of Existing Train Layover Facilities. Other
alternatives and/or design options may also be considered. These
alternatives are described further as follows:
Alternative 1--No Build: Track improvements and
facilities would not be constructed to facilitate passenger rail
service between San Bernardino and the University of Redlands. Under
this alternative, track maintenance and rehabilitation of existing
bridge structures would be required throughout the western 3.5 miles of
the rail corridor to facilitate continued freight service.
Alternative 2--Preferred Project: SANBAG would
construct track and grade crossing improvements, bridge replacements,
rail platform, and new train layover facilities to facilitate passenger
rail service along the 9-mile corridor.
Alternative 3--Reduced Project Footprint: Track
improvements and facilities would be constructed as described for the
Preferred Project but they would be constructed within a narrower
permanent easement, where feasible, to minimize direct impacts on
sensitive biological, cultural, and public park resources. Alternative
bridge structures would be constructed at Warm Creek and the Santa Ana
River.
Alternative 4--Light Rail Transit: This
alternative would involve development of the rail corridor with new
tracking and an overhead catenary system to power the light rail
transit (LRT) vehicles.
Alternative 5--Bus Rapid Transit: Under this
alternative, a new bus rapid transit (BRT) guideway would be
constructed adjacent to the existing freight track, which will be used
solely by BRT vehicles. Signalization would be required at all existing
grade crossings as opposed to the use of crossing gates.
Design Option 1--Train Layover Facility
(Waterman Avenue): Track improvements and facilities would be
constructed as described for the Preferred Project but the Train
Layover Facility would be constructed at a different location, west of
the Santa Ana River, east of Waterman Avenue, and immediately north of
the rail corridor.
Design Option 2--Use of Existing Train Layover
Facilities: Track improvements and facilities would be constructed as
described for the Preferred Project. However, instead of constructing
new layover facilities as described for the Preferred Project and
Alternative 3, the project would not construct layover facilities but
use the existing Metrolink layover facilities located west of E Street.
Areas of investigation include, but are not limited to, land use,
land acquisitions, displacements, and relocations, community and
neighborhood character, transportation, visual quality and aesthetics,
air quality, greenhouse gases, and global climate change, noise and
vibration, biological and wetland resources (including threatened and
endangered species), agricultural resources, floodplains and hydrology,
geology, soils, and seismicity, hazardous waste and materials, water
quality, energy use, utilities, cultural and historic resources,
parklands, community services and facilities, safety and security,
socioeconomics, environmental justice, and cumulative effects. Measures
to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any significant adverse impacts will be
identified.
Probable Effects: The EIS/EIR will consider in detail the potential
environmental effects of the alternatives under consideration based on
the current scoping efforts. The Draft EIS/EIR and Final EIS/EIR will
summarize the results of coordination with federal, state, and local
agencies and the public at large; present the appropriate federal,
state, and local regulations and policies; inventory and compile
previous studies pertinent to the project; describe the methodology
used to assess impacts; identify and describe the affected environment;
analyze and document the construction related (short-term) and
operational (long-term) environmental consequences (direct, indirect,
and cumulative) of the project alternatives; and identify opportunities
and measures that mitigate any identified adverse impacts. The specific
scope of analysis and study areas used to undertake the analysis in the
EIS/EIR will be established during the public and agency scoping
process.
FTA Procedures: The EIS/EIR is being prepared in accordance with
the NEPA of 1969, as amended, and implemented by the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), FHWA
environmental impact regulations (49 CFR part 622, 23 CFR part 771, and
23 CFR part 774), and Section 6002 of the SAFETEA-LU of 2005. The EIS/
EIR will also comply with requirements of Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, Section 4(f) of the U.S.
Department of Transportation Act of 1966, the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments, Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority and Low-Income Populations),
Executive Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands), and other applicable
federal laws, rules, and regulations. The EIS/EIR will also satisfy
environmental review requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Regulations implementing NEPA, as well as
provisions of SAFETEA-LU, call for public involvement in the EIS
process. Section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU requires that FTA and SANBAG do the
following: (1) Extend an invitation to other Federal and non-Federal
agencies and Indian tribes that may have an interest in the proposed
project to become ``participating agencies,'' (2) provide an
opportunity for involvement by participating agencies and the public in
helping to define the purpose and need for a proposed project, as well
as the range of alternatives for consideration in the impact statement,
and (3) establish a plan for coordinating public and agency
participation and comments on the environmental review process. An
invitation to become a participating agency, with the scoping
information packet appended, will be extended to other Federal and non-
Federal agencies and Indian tribes that may have an interest in the
proposed project. It is possible that we may not be able to identify
all Federal and non-Federal agencies and Indian tribes that may have
such an interest. Any Federal or non-Federal agency or Indian tribe
interested in the proposed Project that does not receive an invitation
to become a participating agency should notify at the earliest
opportunity the Project Managers identified above under ADDRESSES.
A comprehensive public involvement program has been developed and a
public and agency involvement Coordination Plan will be created. The
program includes, among other things, a Project Web site (https://sanbag.ca.gov/projects/redlands-transit.html); outreach to local and
county officials and community and civic groups; a public scoping
process to define the issues of concern among all parties interested in
the Project; establishment of a community advisory committee and
organizing periodic meetings with that committee; a public hearing on
release of the Draft EIS/EIR; and development and distribution of
Project newsletters.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mitchell A. Alderman, P.E.,
Director of Transit & Rail Programs, SANBAG, 1170 W. 3rd St, 2nd Floor,
San Bernardino, CA 92410, (909) 884-8276. You may also contact Mr.
Hymie Luden, City and Regional Planner, FTA, Region 9, 201 Mission
Street, Suite 1650 San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 744-2732.
[[Page 45417]]
Issued On: July 25, 2012.
Edward Carranza, Jr.,
Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 9.
[FR Doc. 2012-18636 Filed 7-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P