1. Capitol Corridor Service Expansion Program Program Environmental Assessment (EA) BART Boardroom Presentation October 26, 2010

2. Capitol Corridor Route Map

3. 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 (3 rd 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

4. 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 – P LACER C OUNTY T RANSPORTATION P LANNING A GENCY (PCTPA) – S OLANO T RANSPORTATION A UTHORITY (STA) – Y OLO C OUNTY T RANSPORTATION D ISTRICT (YCTD) – S ACRAMENTO R EGIONAL T RANSIT D ISTRICT (S AC RT) – S AN F RANCISCO B AY A REA R APID T RANSIT D ISTRICT (BART) – S ANTA C LARA V ALLEY T RANSPORTATION A UTHORITY (VTA)

5. 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

6. 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)

7. 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

8. 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.

9. 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)

10. Project Number Project Name Anticipated Project- Level NEPA Environmental Document Rail Network Location Capacity Improvements and Service Increases 1Reno Railyard to Sacramento Track Capacity Enhancement ProjectCE Martinez Subdivision/ Roseville Subdivision From one to two daily round trips (Auburn to Sacramento). 2 San Pablo to Oakland Restore Existing Third Track to Mainline Project CENiles SubdivisionReliability/not capacity 3Hayward Double Track (Elmhurst to Industrial Parkway)CENiles Subdivision From 7 to 11 daily round trips collectively. Incrementally, reliability projects with an interim capacity of several projects to increase to 9 daily round trips. 4 Newark-Albrae Siding Connection including South Switching Lead Extension for Newark Yard EACoast Subdivision 5CP Coast-Rte 237 (Gold Street) Double Track ProjectCECoast Subdivision 6 Change of route alignment from the UPRR Niles Subdivision to the UPRR Oakland Subdivision (Industrial Parkway to Shinn) EAOakland Subdivision 7 Union City Station and Track Work Improvements on the UPRR Oakland Subdivision (including reconnection with UPRR Niles Subdivision near Shinn Street crossing) EA*Oakland Subdivision 8Fremont Full Platform Extension (on Track 2)CENiles Subdivision 9 9A Niles Canyon Railroad Mainline Track Upgrade (New Niles Wye to Former SP Main at CP-Hearst) and Radum Second Main Track Upgrade on UPRR Oakland Subdivision (near Pleasanton) CE Niles Subdivision/ Oakland Subdivision 9B Add Third Main Track on Niles Subdivision between Niles Junction and Newark Junction (in Fremont) or between Shinn Connection and Newark Junction CE Niles Subdivision/Oaklan d Subdivision 10San Jose Diridon Station Track and Platform UpgradeCE**Caltrain Track 11Fourth Track ProjectCECaltrain 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. Projects in/around Fremont and Niles

11. Program EA adheres to CEQ regulations and FRA Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts Resource AreaProgram EA Section Air qualitySection 4.5 Water qualitySection 4.9 Noise and vibrationSection 4.4 Solid waste disposalN/A Ecological systemsSection4.8 Impacts on wetlands areasSection 4.8 Impacts on endangered species or wildlifeSection 4.8 Flood hazards and floodplain managementSection 4.9 Coastal zone managementN/A Use of energy resourcesSection 4.6 Use of other natural resources (e.g., water, minerals, or timber)N/A Aesthetic and design quality impactsSection 4.7 Possible barriers to the elderly and handicappedSection 4.15 Land use, existing and plannedSection 4.2 Impacts on the socioeconomic environmentSection 4.15 Environmental JusticeSection 4.15 Public healthSection 4.14 Public safety, including any impacts due to hazardous materialsSections 4.13 and 4.14 Recreational opportunitiesSection 4.10 Use of 4(f)-protected propertiesSection 4.10 Impacts on transportationSection 4.3 Locations of archaeological or architectural cultural resourcesSection 4.11 Construction period impactsWithin each section

12. 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

13. Projects on the Map FY 2010 HSIPR Application – Project 1: Donner Pass – Project 4: Newark- Albrae Siding – Project 8: Fremont Platform Future HSIPR funding – Remaining projects based on HSIPR funding levels and coordination with California request

14. Rail: East Bay and Beyond Coast Subdivision Niles Subdivision Oakland Subdivision Port of Oakland 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

15. Fremont Amtrak Station 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

16. 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

17. Rail: Routing under Project 9A Port of Oakland Passenger Rail Traffic (daily trains) ExistingPlanned Capitol Corridor (yellow line)1422 ACE (blue line)66 Freight Rail Traffic (green line - UPRR levels are estimated) Niles Subdivision (North of Niles Junction)6 ->12?? Oakland Subdivision/Niles Canyon (Altamont Pass route)10?? Niles Subdivision (Centerville area)11->5?? 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.

18. 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. Passenger Rail Traffic (daily trains) ExistingPlanned Capitol Corridor (yellow line)1422 ACE (blue line)66 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??

19. Program Schedule Projects will be implemented based on funding availability – FRA – HSIPR now in 2 nd year of 5 years (FY 2010 request is pending) – State – Funding dependent on State budget Apply for funding in each remaining HSIPR year (FY 2011- 2013) 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

20. 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 CO 2 and general traffic congestion relief will not occur

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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