4.16 Safety and Security

Transcription

1 Introduction This section describes the regulatory and environmental setting for safety and security in the vicinity of ACEforward s near-term and longer-term improvements. It also describes the impacts on safety and security that would result from implementation of ACEforward and mitigation measures that would reduce significant impacts, where feasible and appropriate. This section addresses the potential for hazards associated with public airports/private airstrips, wildland fires, impediments to emergency response or emergency evacuation plans, and changes or increases in passenger rail and freight movements. This section also addresses potential electromagnetic fields (EMF) and electromagnetic interference (EMI) associated with the traction power system for one longer-term alternative in the Tri-Valley segment. Additional consideration of safety and security concerns are presented in Section 4.7, Geology and Soils, which discusses seismic and soil failure hazards; Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, discusses the management of hazardous materials and the disturbance of existing hazardous materials present in soil, ballast, groundwater, and building materials within ACEforward improvement footprints; Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, which evaluates flooding and inundation hazards; Section 4.14, Public Services, which describes impacts to emergency police and fire services; and Section 4.17, Transportation and Traffic, which examines traffic impacts at rail grade crossings, including impacts to emergency access. Cumulative impacts on safety and security, in combination with planned, approved, and reasonably foreseeable projects, are discussed in Chapter 5, Other CEQA-Required Analysis Regulatory Setting This section summarizes federal, state, regional, and local regulations related to safety and security and applicable to ACEforward Federal Department of Homeland Security The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is responsible for public security and has the goal of preparing for, preventing and responding to domestic emergencies. Agencies under DHS include the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). As part of DHS, TSA and FEMA are responsible for keeping the Railway system safe and secure. TSA has the authority of the traveling public. Rail Transportation Security (49 Code of Federal Regulations [C.F.R.] 1580) codifies the TSA inspection program (U.S. Government Publishing Office 2015). It also includes security requirements for freight railroad carriers; intercity, commuter, and short-haul passenger train service providers; rail transit systems; and rail operations at certain fixed-site facilities that ship or receive specified hazardous materials by rail. Security requirements for commuter passenger train services include allowing the TSA to inspect the transit system,

2 appointing a rail security coordinator, and reporting significant security concerns including reporting suspicious activities, people, or packages. Additionally, Security Directives RAILPAX and RAILPAX require rail transportation operators to implement certain protective measures, report potential threats and security concerns to the TSA, and designate a primary and alternate security coordinator (Department of Homeland Security 2008). FEMA s mission is to build, sustain and improve the country s capability to prepare for, prevent, respond to, recover from and mitigate all hazards, including hazards from natural disasters, hazardous substances and other emergencies (Federal Emergency Management Agency 2016). FEMA sponsors Incident Command System (ICS) training to meet the demands of small or large emergency or nonemergency situations (Federal Emergency Management Agency 2013). An ICS is implemented by the owner/agency responder to an incident involving the release of a hazardous chemical (Federal Emergency Management Agency 2013). Railway system operator/staff complete ICS training in order to be prepared in advance for an incident. The ICS facilitates a coordinated response by all involved parties, establishes a common process for planning/managing resources, facilities, response equipment, personnel and communications all within a common organized framework. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration U.S. Department of Transportation s (DOT) Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) goal is to reduce safety risk by reducing both the likelihood of accidents occurring and the consequence should they occur. Pursuant to the Federal Rail Safety Improvement Act 2008 (FRSIA); Sections , promulgates railroad safety rules governing tracks, locomotives, train cars, braking systems, operating practices, locomotive engineer certification, alcohol and drug use, and transportation of hazardous materials via rail (U.S. Government Printing Office 2008). FRA is responsible for requiring each railroad carrier providing intercity rail passenger or commuter rail passenger transportation to develop a Railroad Safety Risk Reduction Program, which includes railroad safety improvements, highway-rail grade crossing and pedestrian safety and trespasser prevention, and railroad safety enhancements (U.S. Government Printing Office 2008). As part of the Program, a railroad carrier is responsible for developing a long-term strategy that maintains or improves railroad safety, including: Risk Analysis; Technology Implementation Plan, Implementation Schedule; and Fatigue Management Plan (U.S. Government Printing Office 2008). Additionally, FRA is responsible for enforcing safety rules and standards under Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49, Sections , which address a comprehensive range of railroad safety topics, such as track safety, roadway workplace safety, freight car safety, railroad operation rules, communications, occupational noise, locomotive safety standards, inspections and maintenance, signal systems, grade crossing safety, bridge safety standards, emergency preparedness, passenger safety, safety training, dispatching, and qualification/certification of conductors, etc. In May 2015, FRA issued Enhanced Tank Car Standards and Operational Controls for High-Hazard Flammable Trains (HHFT). This action codified Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act of 2015 (FAST Act) requirements for flammable liquids and rail tank cars. These standards set the following requirements for HHFT trains (U.S. Department of Transportation 2014, 2015). Require enhanced braking systems, such as two-way end-of-train device or distributive power (DP) braking system and electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) to mitigate derailments

3 Require tank cars constructed after October 1, 2015 used in HHFTs to meet USDOT Specification 117 design or performance (The prescribed car has a 9/16 inch tank shell, 11 gauge jacket, 1/2 inch full-height head shield, thermal protection, and improved pressure relief valves and bottom outlet valves); or require existing tank cars to be retrofitted in accordance with the USDOT retrofit design. Require all HHFTs to travel 50 mph or slower in all areas; or HHFTs that contain any tank cars not meeting the Specification 117 to operate 40 mph or slower in high-threat urban areas defined by TSA regulations at Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49, Section A modified phase-out schedule for older USDOT Specification 111 tank cars transporting highly flammable liquids based on the type of product. Railroads operating HHFTs must perform a routing analysis that considers, at a minimum, 27 safety and security factors, including track type, class, and maintenance schedule and track grade and curvature, and select a route based on its findings. Rail Routing Improves Information Sharing Ensures that railroads notify State and/or regional fusion centers and State, local, and tribal officials who contact a railroad to discuss routing decisions are provided appropriate contact information for the railroad in order to request information related to the routing of hazardous materials through their jurisdictions. Offerors shippers of unrefined petroleum-based products must develop and carry out sampling and testing programs for all unrefined petroleum-based products. Additionally, offerors must certify that hazardous materials subject to the program are packaged in accordance with the test results, document the testing and sampling program outcomes, and make that information available to DOT personnel upon request. U.S. Code on Railroad Safety The purpose of Part A of Subtitle V of Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C ) is to promote safety in every area of railroad operations and reduce railroad related accidents and incidents. The Code contains a series of statutory provisions affecting the safety of railroad operations and gives the Secretary of Transportation authority to do the following: Order restrictions and prohibitions, of a condition or practice that caused an emergency involving death, injury or significant harm to the environment; and prescribe standards and procedures for obtaining relief from the order. Prescribe investigative and surveillance activities necessary to enforce the safety regulations prescribed that apply to railroad equipment, facilities and operations. Conduct investigations, make reports and prescribe recordkeeping. Delegate to a public entity or qualified person the inspection, examination and testing of railroad equipment, facilities, operations and staff. Carry out, as necessary, research, development, testing, evaluation, and training for every area of railroad safety. Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act The objectives of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (42 U.S.C. 116) are to allow state and local planning for chemical emergencies, provide for notification of emergency

4 releases of chemicals, and address a community s right to know about toxic and hazardous chemicals. Electromagnetic Fields and Interference The Federal Drug Administration, Federal Communications Commission, Department of Defense, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at various times have considered EMF guidelines, but none has been adopted State California Public Utilities Commission The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) regulates privately owned railroad, railroad transit and passenger transportation companies, via the following: Safety and Enforcement Division (SED); the California Public Utilities Code; CPUC rules of Practice and Procedure; and CPUC General Orders. SED is responsible for inspection, surveillance, and investigation of the rights-of-way (ROW), facilities, equipment, and operations of railroads and public mass transit guideways, and enforcing federal and state laws. The SED advises the CPUC on matters related to rail safety and proposes measures necessary to reduce the dangers caused by unsafe conditions on the railroads. The California Public Utilities Code covers railroad safety and emergency planning and response to locomotives, including both passenger and freight trains. Under this code, the CPUC is required to adopt safety regulations and to report sites on railroad lines that are deemed hazardous within California. California Public Utilities Code Article 10, Railroad Safety and Emergency Planning and Response, Sections deal with funding for rail safety and accident prevention and responding to accidents, including release of hazardous materials. Pursuant to Section 7713, the Rail Accident Prevention and Response Fund was created in the State Treasury for the purpose of having money in a fund that is appropriated by the Legislature to carry out efforts related to rail accident prevention and/or response to accidents. Pursuant to Section 7714, the Hazardous Spill Prevention Account in the Railroad Accident Prevention and Response, moneys can be used to support rail accident prevention and state-level and local toxic emergency response teams to provide immediate onsite response capability in the event of large scale releases of toxic substances resulting from surface transportation accidents. In addition, pursuant to Section 7718, the Railroad Accident Prevention and Immediate Deployment Force provides immediate onsite response in the event of a large-scale unauthorized release of hazardous materials. Lastly, the CPUC rules of Practice and Procedure, and CPUC General Orders set protocols for railroad safety. CPUC s Rules 3.7 to 3.11 discuss rail crossings, including in regards to public road access, railroad across railroad, railroad across public road, and alteration or relocation of existing railroad crossings. CPUC general orders related to railroad safety are listed below (California Public Utilities Commission 2016): General Order (GO) 22-B: Requires reporting of incidents resulting in the loss of life or serious injury, including: collisions involving locomotives, trains and cars; derailments; highway crossing accident and bridge failure

5 GO 26-D: Sets regulations related to clearances on railroads and street railroads to side and overhead structures, parallel tracks, and crossings. GO 72-B: Sets regulations governing construction and maintenance for crossings at grade of railroads with public streets, roads and highways. GO 75-D: Sets regulations governing warning devices for at-grade highway-railroad crossings to reduce hazards associated with at-grade crossings. GO 88-B: Establishes criteria for alterations of existing public highway-rail crossings. GO 143-B: Sets safety rules and regulations governing design, construction, and operation of light rail transit systems to reduce hazards to patrons, employees and the public. GO 145: Sets regulations governing railroad grade crossings to be classified exempt from the mandatory stop requirements of Section of the Vehicle Code. GO 164-D: Sets regulations governing State Safety Oversight of Rail Fixed Guideway Systems (RFGS), which include any light, heavy, or rapid rail system, monorail, inclined plane, funicular, trolley, cable car, automatic people mover, or automated guideway transit system used for public transit and not regulated by the FRA or not specifically exempted by statute from Commission oversight. Under Rule 3.1, each new Rail Transit Agency (RTA) will submit its initial System Safety Program Plan (SSPP), a document adopted by an RTA detailing its safety policies, objectives, responsibilities, and procedures, to CPUC for approval. No new RTA will begin transit operations prior to CPUC approval of its initial SSPP. California Department of Occupational Safety and Health The California Department of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) protects the health and safety of workers throughout California. California Code of Regulations, Title 8, establishes industrial safety standards for construction (California Department of Occupational Safety and Health 2017). Employers are required to have an effective injury and illness prevention plan, which includes training and instruction on safe work practices (California Department of Occupational Safety and Health 2005). Cal/OSHA conducts onsite inspections of construction sites and has the authority to fine or cite unsafe practices or incomplete Health and Safety Plans to ensure the practice of safe work environments (California Department of Occupational Safety and Health 2005). California Emergency Services Act The Emergency Services Act supports the State s responsibility to mitigate effects of natural, humanmade, or war-caused emergencies that threaten human life, property, and environmental resources of the state. Its mission is to protect human health and safety, and to preserve the lives and property of the people of the State. Under the Act, California Office of Emergency Services (CalOES), part of the Governor s Office of Emergency Services, is responsible for overseeing and coordinating emergency preparedness, response and homeland security activities (California Office of Emergency Services 2015). CalOES has developed an emergency response plan to coordinate emergency services provided by federal, state, and local governments and private agencies. Responding to hazardous materials incidents is one part of this plan. Emergency Response Team members respond and work with local

6 fire and police agencies, emergency medical providers, California Highway Patrol, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics The California Public Resources Code requires that the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics 2011 be used as a technical resource to assist in the preparation of an EIR for any projects situated within the boundaries of an airport land use compatibility plan(alucp). The Airport Land Use Planning Handbook supports the State Aeronautics Act (California Department of Transportation 2011), providing compatibility planning guidance to airport land use commissions, their staffs and consultants, the counties and cities having jurisdiction over airport area land uses, and airport proprietors. The California Code of Regulations, Title 21, Airports and Heliports, identifies airport design standards including standards for markings, lighting, and visual aid, operation standards for the safe design and operation of airports. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) establishes distances of ground clearance for take-off and landing safety based on criteria such as the type of aircraft using the airport. These distances affect land uses and dimensional standards for buildings within the approaches. Local municipal airports are subject to the FAA, the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, the Regional Aviation System Plan, and county- and city level ALUCPs. These plans identify future improvements for the airport to meet future aviation needs and address airport safety by identifying compatible land uses for adjacent areas. The county-level airport land use commission is an advisory body that assists local agencies with ensuring the compatibility of land uses in the vicinity of airports. They review proposed development projects for consistency with airport land uses. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) implements fire safety regulations in the state of California. The California Public Resources Code (Title 14 and Title 19) includes fire safety regulations that restrict the use of equipment that may produce a spark, flame, or fire; require the use of spark arrestors on construction equipment that use an internal combustion engine; specify requirements for the safe use of gasoline-powered tools in fire hazard areas; and specify fire suppression equipment that must be provided onsite for various types of work in fire-prone areas (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2016). CAL FIRE maps out California and rates areas for their potential fire hazards. The risk of wildland fires is related to a combination of factors, including winds, temperatures, humidity levels, and fuel moisture content. Of these four factors, wind is the most crucial. Steep slopes also contribute to fire hazard by intensifying the effects of wind and making fire suppression difficult. Where there is easy human access to dry vegetation, fire hazards increase because of the greater chance of human carelessness. To quantify this potential risk, CAL FIRE has developed a fire hazard severity scale with three criteria for designating potential fire hazards in wildland areas (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2016). The criteria are fuel loading (vegetation), fire weather (winds, temperatures, humidity levels, and fuel moisture contents), and topography (degree of slope)

7 The rating scheme applicable to ACEforward ranges from very high to moderate. Several segments of ACEforward are located within a very high Fire Hazard Severity Zone, within the State Responsibility Area (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2016). California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Office of Spill Prevention and Response Senate Bill (SB) 861, signed in 2014, significantly expanded the scope of the Office of Spill Prevention and Response (OSPR). Previously, OSPR worked to prevent, prepare for, and respond to oil spills in California s coastal waters. Those activities now include the state s inland waters (streams, rivers, lakes, etc.). The expanded authority and activities of OSPR are funded by a fee on every barrel of oil entering California. Prior fees were levied only on oil arriving at a marine terminal (i.e., via tanker). SB 861 expanded the fee to all oil as it enters California refineries, whether by tanker, pipeline, or railroad. Other requirements in SB 861 include OSPR preparation of Geographic Response Plans, owner preparation of Area Contingency Plans, and owner oil spill response drills for preparedness, containment, and cleanup. As part of CDFW, OSPR has responsibility for protecting, managing and restoring fish, wildlife, and plants. It is mandated to ensure that prevention, preparedness, restoration and response to a spill or release incident provides the best protection to the state s natural resources. That responsibility includes identifying locations to stage spill responders and equipment for response to rail and pipeline incidents; development of spill contingency plans, drills, and exercises; close collaboration and cooperation with local governments, non-governmental organizations, and industry; establishment of working relationships with local governments and industry through workshops and presentations, and collaborative training; and preparation of geographic response plans. California Energy Commission The California Energy Commission (CEC) recommends that transmission lines be designed so electric fields at the edge of rights-of-way (ROW) do not exceed 1.6 kilovolt (kv)/meter (m); no recommendation is provided for magnetic fields, however. The CEC s current position is that EMF exposure at utility ROW limits should not constitute a significant effect if emissions have been mitigated to the extent achieved by engineering practice (Exponent Health Group 2001). The California Department of Education has established a policy of prudent avoidance for the location of schools in the vicinity of high-voltage power lines Regional and Local The San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (SJRRC), a state joint powers agency, proposes improvements located within and outside of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) right-of-way (ROW). The Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA) affords railroads engaged in interstate commerce 1 considerable flexibility in making necessary improvements and modifications to rail infrastructure, subject to the requirements of the Surface Transportation Board (STB). ICCTA broadly preempts state and local regulation of railroads and this preemption extends to the construction and operation of rail lines. As such, activities within the UPRR ROW are clearly exempt from local building and zoning codes and other land use ordinances. ACEforward improvements 1 Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) operates within a right-of-way (ROW) and on tracks owned by the UPRR, which operates interstate freight rail service in the same ROW and on the same tracks

8 proposed outside of the UPRR ROW, however, would be subject to regional and local plans and regulations. Though ICCTA does broadly preempt state and local regulation of railroads, SJRRC intends to obtain local agency permits for construction of facilities that fall outside of the UPRR ROW even though SJRRC has not determined that such permits are legally necessary and such permits may not be required. Appendix H, Regional Plans and Local General Plans, provides a list of applicable goals, policies, and objectives from regional and local plans of the jurisdictions in which ACEforward improvements are proposed. Section 15125(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to discuss any inconsistencies between the proposed project and applicable general plans, specific plans, and regional plans. These plans were considered during the preparation of this analysis and were reviewed to assess whether ACEforward would be consistent 2 with the plans of relevant jurisdictions. ACEforward would be generally consistent with the applicable goals, policies, and objectives related to safety and security identified in Appendix H Environmental Setting This section describes the environmental setting related to safety and security by geographic segment for ACEforward improvements for the following topics. Airports Wildfire hazards Emergency response plans Train operational safety EMI/EMF (I-580 corridor between Greenville Road and BART Dublin/Pleasanton Station only) For the purposes of this analysis, the study area is generally a 0.5-mile radius from the near-term or longer-term improvement footprint. However, the study area is augmented for the following aspects. For airports, both public and private, and airport land use plans, the study area is a 2-mile radius from the near-term or longer-term improvement footprint, and airports where the near-term or longer-term improvement footprint is within the airport land use plan. For emergency responses, the study area is typically the emergency response jurisdiction in which near-term and longer-term improvements are located. For EMI/EMF, the study area is the area immediately adjacent to I-580 and the potential Greenville Road Station location. Information for the safety and security environmental setting was obtained from the following sources. Airports: FAA, airport facilities data, Airport Land Use Plans (ALUP) (Federal Aviation Administration 2016) 2 An inconsistency with regional or local plans is not necessarily considered a significant impact under CEQA, unless it is related to a physical impact on the environment that is significant in its own right

9 Wildfire hazards: CAL FIRE, California Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2012) Emergency Operations Plans: local and regional emergency operations plans (EOPs) (see Section , Emergency Response and Emergency Evacuation Plans) Train Operation Safety: rider and safety statistics EMI/EMF: Prior environmental evaluations of electrified systems including the Caltrain Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project (PCEP) (Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 2014) and Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Livermore Extension Program EIR (BART PEIR) (San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit 2009) Airports Several proposed ACEforward improvements would be located within 2 miles of a public or private airport or within an Airport Influence Area (AIA). Table lists airports in the study area for safety and security. In addition, Figure displays the airports in the study area. Table Airports in the Study Area Facility (Airport Code) County ACEforward Geographic Segment Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport (SJC) Santa Clara County Livermore Municipal Airport (LVK) Alameda County Tri-Valley San Jose to Fremont Sharpe AAF (LRO) San Joaquin County Tracy to Lathrop Tracy Municipal Airport (TCY) San Joaquin County Tracy to Lathrop Stockton Metropolitan (SCK)* San Joaquin County Tracy to Lathrop, Lathrop to Stockton Modesto Municipal (MOD)/Modesto City-County- Airport Stanislaus County Manteca to Modesto Turlock Airpark Airport (9CL0) Stanislaus County Modesto to Merced Castle AFB (MER) Merced County Modesto to Merced Merced Regional Airport-Macready Field (MCE) Merced County Modesto to Merced * Study area within Airport Land Use Comprehensive Plan AIA; the Airport is approximately 5 miles to the north. Source: Federal Aviation Administration San Jose to Fremont The Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport (SJC) is a public airport serving the San Francisco Bay Area region. It is located in San Jose at 1701 Airport Boulevard. Figure identifies the airport s location in relation to ACEforward improvements. This segment is within SJC s Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) AIA; the safety Runway Protection Zone, which only permits open space uses such as streets and parks with limited vegetation; and the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 height restriction of 112 feet above ground level (AGL) (Windus and PE 2011)

10 Centerville to Union City This segment is not within an ALUP, and there are no public or private airports within 2 miles of this segment. Centerville/Niles/Sunol This segment is not within an ALUP, and there are no public or private airports within 2 miles of this segment. Tri-Valley The Livermore Municipal Airport (LVK) is a public airport owned by the City of Livermore and operated as a Division of the Public Works Department. It is located in Livermore at 680 Terminal Circle, south of the Tri-Valley segment. Figure identifies the airport s location in relation to ACEforward. The airport is a general aviation reliever airport which serves private business and corporate tenants and customers. LVK primarily serves the Tri-Valley region with most of its 460 tenants being Livermore and Pleasanton residents. Portions of longer-term improvements in this segment are within LVK s ALUCP AIA, within certain safety zones, and restricted by FAR Part 77 height restrictions (City of Livermore 2012). Altamont This segment is not within an ALUP and there are no public or private airports within 2 miles of the segment. Tracy to Lathrop The Tracy Municipal Airport (TCY) is a public airport owned and operated by the City of Tracy. It is in Tracy at 5749 S Tracy Boulevard, south of the Tracy to Lathrop segment. Figure identifies the airport s location in relation to the segment. The airport provides general aviation services, jet fuel sales, and hangar and tie-down rentals. There is a fixed base operator providing aircraft maintenance services, flight training, and aircraft rental services for standard aircraft and light sport aircraft. Portions of near-term improvements in this segment are within TCY s AIA as identified in the San Joaquin County s Aviation System ALUCP8. In this zone, FAR restricts heights greater than 77 feet. Prohibited uses are hazards to flight which include physical (i.e., tall objects), visual, and electronic forms of interference with aircraft operations. Airspace review is required for objects more than 100 feet tall (County of San Joaquin 2009). Lathrop to Stockton The Stockton Metropolitan Airport (SCK) is a public airport owned by the County of San Joaquin. It is in Stockton at 5000 S Airport Way, Suite 202, north of the Tracy to Lathrop segment, Manteca to Modesto segment, and Lathrop to Stockton segment. The airport provides general aviation, air cargo, and passenger airline services to the public. Figure identifies SCK s location in relation to ACEforward. The Lathrop to Stockton segment is within SCK s ALUCP AIA, within the airports Safety Zones 4, Outer Approach/Departure, Zone 7a and 7b. Zone 7a and 7b require 10 percent open land, no residential density limitations, and a 450 person per acre non-residential density. Airspace review is required for objects greater than 100 feet (San Joaquin County 2009)

11 Manteca to Modesto The Modesto City-County Airport-Harry Sham Field (MOD) is owned and operated by the City of Modesto. It is in Modesto at 617 Airport Way, east of the Manteca to Modesto segment. The airport provides private air charter services and general aviation aircraft services; it does not provide commercial air services. Figure identifies the airport s location in relation to ACEforward. This segment is within MOD s ALUCP s AIA, is not within the airport s Safety Zones, and passes through FAR Part 77 conical surface with height restriction of 249 feet AGL (County of Stanislaus 2014). Modesto to Merced The Turlock Airpark Airport is a small airport owned by Turlock Airport Inc. It is in Turlock, west of the Modesto to Merced segment, and bounded to the south by E Greenway Avenue, to the west by Lander Avenue, and to the northeast by State Route 99. It is approximately 62 acres with two runways. Figure identifies the airport s location in relation to ACEforward. The Castle Airport (MER) is owned by Merced County. It is in Atwater at 2507 Heritage Drive, east of the Modesto to Merced segment. The airport serves Atwater and Merced and is an approximately 1,600-acre single runway facility. The airport is a general aviation airport supported by Gemini Flight Support to assist the airport s general aviation pilots and visitors. Figure identifies the airport s location in relation to the Modesto to Merced segment. This segment is within MER s ALUCP AIA, along the AIA boundary, Compatibility Zone D. Zone D is considered a low risk level with tall structures over 150 feet the main concern. Merced Regional Airport Macready Field (MCE) is owned by the City of Merced and operated through the City Manager s office. It is in Merced at 20 Macready Drive, west of the Modesto to Merced segment. The airport is classified as a commercial service/non-primary airport and a commercial/primary airport. Figure identifies the airport s location in relation to the Modesto to Merced segment. This segment is within MCE s ALUCP AIA, in Compatibility Zone B2. Zone B2 has a moderate risk level where height is restricted to structures under 100 feet (County of Merced 2012) Wildfire Hazards Some of the proposed ACEforward improvements would be located within wildfire risk areas. Table identifies wildfire hazard locations in the study area. Figure shows the wildfire risk areas in the study area

12 Table Wildfire Hazards in the Study Area Jurisdiction Description of location Fire Severity Rate ACEforward Segment From Niles Canyon through Sunol to the southwestern boundaries of Pleasanton North of I-580 in the Tri-Valley, east of Fallon Road to Livermore Avenue and from Laughlin Road towards the Altamont Hills Moderate (1) to Very High (3) Centerville/Niles/Sunol Alameda County Moderate (1) to High (2) Tri-Valley Entirety of the Altamont Hills extending east into the west of Tracy areas in western San Joaquin County Moderate (1) to High (2) Altamont Tracy to Lathrop San Joaquin County West of Tracy areas in western San Joaquin County to just east of I-580 Moderate (1) Tracy to Lathrop Source: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection San Jose to Fremont Based upon review of CAL FIRE s Fire and Resource Assessment Program fire hazards severity zone maps for Alameda County, there are no wildfire hazard zones at or above moderate in the San Jose to Fremont segment. Centerville to Union City Based upon review of CAL FIRE s Fire and Resource Assessment Program fire hazards severity zone maps for Alameda County, there are no wildfire hazard zones at or above moderate in the Centerville to Union City segment. Centerville/Niles/Sunol Within the Centerville/Niles/Sunol segment, the study area for this segment includes wildfire hazard zones. In Alameda County and Fremont, the CAL FIRE hazard severity zones in the study area range from moderate (1) to very high (3) from just north of Dresser through Sunol to the city boundaries of Pleasanton. Figure identifies the fire severity ratings along this segment. Tri-Valley Within the Tri-Valley segment, the study area includes a wildfire hazard zone. The CAL FIRE fire hazard severity zones in the study area range from moderate (1) to very high (3) through Dublin east of Fallon Road to Livermore Avenue and along I-580 from Laughlin Road to the end of this segment. Figure identifies the fire severity ratings in relation to this segment

13 Altamont Within the Altamont segment, the study area includes wildfire hazard zones. In Alameda County, CAL FIRE fire hazard severity zones in the study area range from moderate (1) to high (2) for the entire Altamont segment. Figure identifies the fire severity ratings in relation to this segment. Tracy to Lathrop Within the Tracy to Lathrop segment, the study area includes wildfire hazard zones. In San Joaquin County and Tracy, the CAL FIRE fire hazard severity rating in the study area is moderate (1) from the Alameda County San Joaquin County border to just east of I-580. Figure identifies the fire severity rating in relation to this segment. Lathrop to Stockton Based upon review of CAL FIRE Fire and Resource Assessment Program fire hazards severity zone maps for San Joaquin County, there are no wildfire hazard zones at or above moderate in the Lathrop to Stockton segment. Manteca to Modesto Based upon review of CAL FIRE Fire and Resource Assessment Program fire hazards severity zone maps for San Joaquin and Stanislaus Counties, there are no wildfire hazard zones at or above moderate in the Manteca to Modesto segment. Modesto to Merced Based upon review of CAL FIRE Fire and Resource Assessment Program fire hazards severity zone maps for Stanislaus and Merced Counties, there are no wildfire hazard zones at or above moderate in the Modesto to Merced segment Emergency Response and Emergency Evacuation Plans In addition to emergency operations requirements set forth in the county and city general plans, all counties and cities operate under the guidance of EOPs. These plans outline procedures for operations during emergencies such as earthquakes, floods, fires, and other natural disasters; hazardous materials spills; transportation emergencies; civil disturbance; and terrorism. The plans also identify the location of critical emergency response facilities, such as emergency dispatch and operations centers, government structures, and hospitals or other major medical facilities. Table provides a summary of the state and county emergency response plans that have been identified, reviewed, and considered for the preparation of this analysis. For a list of applicable safety and security goals, policies, and objectives from these emergency response plans, please see Appendix H

14 Table Emergency Response Plans in the Study Area Jurisdiction CAL EMA State of California Emergency Plan (2009) Summary Association of Bay Area Governments Taming Natural Disasters. Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area. (2010). Update of 2005 Plan Santa Clara County Santa Clara County Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan. (2008) Alameda County Based on the foundations described in the California Emergency Services Act. The emergency preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation actions serve as the basis for emergency operations in California. The concepts presented emphasize mitigation programs to reduce vulnerabilities to disaster and preparedness activities to ensure the capabilities and resources are available for an effective response. To assist communities and governments to recover from the disaster, the Emergency Plan outlines programs that promote a return to normalcy. The goal of the plan is to maintain and enhance a disaster-resistant region by reducing the potential loss of life, property damage, and environmental degradation from natural disasters, while accelerating economic recovery from those disasters. It services as a catalyst for dialogue on public policies needed to mitigate the natural hazards that affect the area. The Santa Clara County Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan (EOP or Plan) is an all hazards document describing the County s Emergency Operations organization, compliance with relevant legal statutes, other guidelines, and critical components of the Emergency Response System. This system is activated during extraordinary emergency situations associated with large-scale disasters affecting Santa Clara County and/or the Santa Clara County Operational Area. By definition of the State of California, the Santa Clara County Operational Area consists of the cities, special districts, and the unincorporated areas of the county. This plan is not intended to address specific emergency responses. Specific annexes to this document are planned including Emergency Response Guidelines and Emergency Reference Materials. The Emergency Response Guidelines Annex outlines event-specific response activities for organizations. The Emergency Reference Materials Annex includes Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) agreements, Mutual Aid agreements, and other documents collateral to this plan. This Plan accomplishes the following: Establishes a County emergency management organization (detailed in this Plan) which will coordinate and support on-scene responses including maintenance of situational awareness, facilitation of effective communication between emergency centers at various levels of government, and interaction with public information sources. Establishes the overall operational concepts associated with the management of emergencies at the County and Operational Area levels. Provides a flexible platform for planning and response to all hazards and emergencies believed to be important to Santa Clara County. It is applicable to a wide variety of anticipated emergencies including earthquake, wildland/urban interface fires, floods, terrorism, and public health emergencies

15 Jurisdiction Alameda County Emergency Operations Plan (2012) San Joaquin County San Joaquin County Emergency Medical Services Plan (2012) Stanislaus County Stanislaus County Emergency Operations Plan. Basic Plan. (2015) Merced County 2013 County of Merced Emergency Operations Plan (2013) Summary The Alameda County EOP establishes the emergency operations organization, assigns tasks, specifies polices and general procedures. Additionally, it provides coordinated planning efforts for various emergency staff and service elements using the Standardized Emergency Management System. The primary responsibility of the San Joaquin County EMS Agency is to plan, implement and evaluate an emergency medical services system, in accordance with the provisions of Division 2.5 of the Health and Safety Code, consisting of an organized pattern of readiness and response services based on public and private agreements and operational procedures. This EOP is based on the National Incident Management System and its component parts, along with the California Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS), including the five functional areas of incident or event management, operational coordination, planning, logistical support, and finance/administration support. The EOP will serve as the basis for response as well as recovery efforts and activities within the county. This plan also identifies Emergency Support Functions (ESFs) that represent core emergency response categories performed by agencies and jurisdictions with primary and supporting responsibilities within Stanislaus County. These may include public and non-government organizations. These ESFs are based on the State of California s Emergency Function Annexes (EFs) and the Federal Emergency Support Function Annexes (ESFs). The County of Merced EOP provides the basis for a coordinated response before, during and after a disaster incident affecting the County of Merced. The plan is the principal guide for the County s response to, and management of real or potential emergencies and disasters occurring. The plan is intended to: Facilitate multi-jurisdictional and interagency coordination Serve as a county plan, a reference document and may be used for preemergency planning in addition to emergency operations. To be utilized in coordination with applicable local, state, and federal contingency plans. Establish the operational concepts and procedures associated with field response to emergencies, and Emergency Operations Center activities. Establish the organizational framework for implementation of the California Standardized Emergency Management System, and the National Incident Management System within the County of Merced. At-grade railroad crossings hinder emergency response times when trains block crossings. In such instances, emergency response teams must use routes that take them farther away from their destination in order to bypass the train and reach emergencies on the other side of the tracks. This is particularly problematic in rural areas where crossings are farther apart

16 Regionally significant roads are typically identified as emergency evacuation routes in the county and city general plans and emergency response plans. Refer to Section 4.17, Transportation and Traffic, for a discussion of regionally significant roads that cross the ACEforward tracks at grade potentially resulting in delays to emergency response and evacuation if trains block the crossings. For a discussion of hospitals and medical services, refer to Section 4.14, Public Services Train Operation Safety This section describes the types and amounts of accidents and incidents that have occurred in the US, state, and counties that ACEforward traverses. A train accident is defined as any collision, derailment, fire, explosion, or other event involving the operation of on-track equipment (standing or moving) that results in total damages to all railroads involved in the event that is greater than the current reporting threshold to railroad on-track equipment, signals, track, track structures, and roadbed (Federal Railroad Administration 2011). Whereas, a train incident is an event involving the movement of on-track equipment that results in a reportable casualty but does not cause reportable damage above the threshold established for train accidents (Federal Railroad Administration 2011). Compared to highway travel, transportation by rail is a safer mode of transportation. For the fiveyear period ending in 2013, there were 5.75 deaths per billion miles traveled by cars and trucks compared to 0.47 deaths per billion miles traveled by commuter rail and Amtrak (CNNMoney 2015). Vehicular safety issues primarily pertain to motor vehicles and trains at at-grade crossings. Where a roadway, sidewalk, or pedestrian trail/bikeway crosses the track at the same elevation, it is called an at-grade crossing. Where a roadway, sidewalk, or pedestrian trail/bikeway passes over the tracks via an overpass bridge structure or passes under a railroad track via an underpass bridge structure, these crossings are referred to as grade separated. Train tracks crossing streets in urban communities can present safety hazards for pedestrians and cyclists at highway-rail at-grade crossings. Existing safety features and traffic control devices at highway-rail at-grade crossings vary depending on the location of the crossing. Traffic control devices include safety features such as automatic gates, flashing lights, highway signals, wigwags or bells, signage such as cross-buck signs and STOP signs, and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant truncated dome pads indicating a rail crossing (Federal Highway Administration 2007). Operation Lifesaver, a volunteer organization, works to end collisions and resulting fatalities and injuries at highway-rail at-grade crossings and on railroad ROWs. Operation Lifesaver educates the community through presentations, festivals, and safety fairs. In addition, the CPUC rail safety staff participates in Officer on the Train and other enforcement events with local law enforcement to promote compliance with state motor vehicle laws on railroad at-grade crossings and ROWs (California Public Utilities Commission 2016). In 2013, the explanation for trespasser fatalities included: walking or running across tracks; walking or standing outside track gauge; sleeping/passed out, lying, or sitting on track or in gauge; ATV, bike, snowmobile, etc.; suicide and walking or standing on track (Federal Railroad Administration 2013). Another major cause of fatalities related to highway-rail at-grade incidents, is an incident between a train and highway users, including automobiles, buses, trucks, motorcycles, bicycles, recreational vehicles, farm vehicles, construction vehicles, roadway maintenance vehicles, and pedestrians. Table provides the numbers of fatalities and non-fatal injuries from train accidents, highwayrail at-grade crossing accidents, trespasser accidents, and other incidents in California compared to nationwide reporting FRA railroads. The category of other accidents includes obstruction impacts,

17 explosions/detonations, fire/violent ruptures, other impacts, and other events. As shown in Table , trespasser accidents (not at highway rail crossings) make up the leading group of railroadrelated fatalities. Table Accidents and Incidents (2016) Count Fatalities Non-Fatal Injuries California Nationwide California Nationwide California Nationwide Train Accidents 117 2, Highway-Rail 151 2, ,014 Incidents (atgrade) Trespasser Accidents (not at highway rail crossing) Other Incidents 497 7, ,349 Source: Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Analysis 2016a. Derailments are the most common type of train accident in the US. Derailments can be caused by the collision with another object, an operational error (including signal errors), traveling at excessive speeds, improper train handling (such as stopping abruptly), broken rails, or a mechanical failure of the wheels of a train. Table provides the number of train accidents in 2015 due to collisions, derailments, and other accidents. The collision category includes head-on collisions, rear-end collisions, side collisions, raking collisions, and broken train collisions. The other accidents category includes obstruction impacts, explosions/detonations, fire/violent ruptures, other impacts, and other events. This table does not include highway-rail grade accidents. As shown in Table , derailments occurred more often than other types of train accidents. Table Train Accidents by Type (2015) Type Train Accidents California Nationwide Collision Derailment 70 1,342 Other Total Train Accidents 98 1,917 Source: Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Analysis 2016b. Tables and show 2015 accident and incident data for ACE and UPRR in the counties that ACEforward traverses. As shown, few accidents/incidents, including collisions, derailments, highway-rail and fire/violent ruptures have occurred from ACE and UPRR trains. In Santa Clara County there was one non-fatal accident, which was a highway-rail incident. In Alameda County there was one derailment, resulting in no injuries. In Alameda and San Joaquin Counties, there were fire/violent ruptures with no injuries or fatalities. In total, there were four incidents. However, these incidents did not cause a release of hazardous materials