Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-1

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

3.12.1 Introduction

This section identifies the major public utilities likely to occur within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR 

Study Area and evaluates the potential effects of the No Build Alternative and Build Alternative 

Options on public utilities and energy resources.

3.12.2 Regulatory Framework

In accordance with NEPA (42 USC Section 4321 et seq.), CEQ regulations implementing NEPA 

(40 CFR Parts 1501–1508); FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts (64 FR

28545, May 26, 1999); and CEQA, FRA identified public utilities and energy resources within the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area and evaluated the potential impacts on those resources as a 

result of implementing the Build Alternative Options. 

Federal

Energy and Independence Security Act of 2007

The federal government adopted the Energy and Independence Security Act of 2007 on December 

19, 2007. The act aimed to move the U.S. toward greater energy independence and security; 

increase the production of clean renewable fuels; protect consumers; increase the efficiency of 

products, buildings, and vehicles; promote research on and deploy GHG capture and storage 

options; improve the energy performance of the federal government and increase U.S. energy 

security; develop renewable fuel production; and improve vehicle fuel economy. Primary provisions 

of the act included increasing Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards; advancing vehicle 

technology to reduce fuel consumption; promoting the creation of biomass-based diesel fuel; 

establishing greater energy efficiency standards for residential appliances and equipment; and 

increasing building efficiency for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, and federal 

buildings.

Energy Policy Act of 2005

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established a comprehensive, long-term federal energy policy to be 

implemented by the U.S. Department of Energy that addresses energy production in the U.S., 

including oil, gas, coal, and alternative forms of energy, as well as energy efficiency and tax 

incentives. Energy efficiency and tax incentive programs include credits for the construction of new 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-2

energy efficient homes, production, or purchase of energy efficient appliances and loan guarantees 

for entities that develop or use innovative technologies that avoid the production of GHGs. Another 

provision of the act increases the amount of biofuel that must be mixed with gasoline sold in the U.S. 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is an independent agency that regulates the interstate 

transmission of natural gas, oil, and electricity. If there is a need for relocation of a certificated 

interstate pipeline, the utility company has to obtain approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission for the relocation. If the relocation also requires new easements, local approval would 

also be required.

United States Department of Transportation Research and Special Programs Administration

The Research and Special Programs Administration is responsible for carrying out the duties 

regarding pipeline safety set forth in 49 USC Section 60101 et seq. and 49 CFR Part 190.1. The 

regulations require operators of gas pipelines to participate in a public safety program, such as a 

one-call system that would notify the operator of any proposed demolition, excavation, tunneling, or 

construction that would take place near or affect the facility.

State

Assembly Bill 2076, Reducing Dependence on Petroleum

The California Energy Commission (CEC) and the California ARB are directed by AB 2076 (passed 

in 2000) to develop and adopt recommendations for reducing dependence on petroleum. A 

performance-based goal is to reduce petroleum demand to 15 percent less than 2003 demand by 

2020.

California Green Building Standards

Title 24 of the CCR, Part 11, or CALGreen, sets standards for sustainable building design for 

residential and non-residential buildings in California. It also outlines sustainable construction 

practices applicable to planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, 

material conservation and resource efficiency, and environmental quality. 2013 CALGreen became 

effective on January 1, 2014, and mandated that permitted new residential and non-residential 

building construction, demolition, and certain additions and alterations must recycle and/or salvage 

for reuse a minimum of 50 percent of the non-hazardous construction and demolition debris 

generated during a project (CALGreen Sections 4.408, 5.408, 301.1.1, and 301.3). 2016 CALGreen 

became effective January 1, 2017 and increased the recycle and/or salvage mandate to 65 percent 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-3

for new residential and non-residential building construction, demolition, and certain additions and 

alterations (2016 CALGreen Sections 4.408 and 5.408). Although the 2019 CALGreen became 

effective January 1, 2020, no changes were made to the construction waste management 

requirements from 2016 CALGreen (California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery 

2020a).

California Public Utilities Commission

The CPUC provides guidance to multiple laws and general orders which regulate the provision of 

privately owned utilities in California and the safety of both publicly and privately owned railroad and 

rail transit companies/agencies, as well as rail crossings.

Integrated Waste Management Act (Assembly Bill 939)

AB 939, enacted in 1989, mandates a reduction of waste being disposed and establishes an 

integrated framework for program implementation, solid waste planning, and solid waste facility and 

landfill compliance. The California Integrated Waste Management Board oversees a disposal 

reporting system and facility and program planning. On January 1, 2010, all California Integrated 

Waste Management Board duties and responsibilities, along with the Division of Recycling of the 

Department of Conservation, transferred to California Department of Resources Recycling and 

Recovery, which is under the jurisdiction of the Natural Resources Agency.

Office of the State Fire Marshal, Pipeline Safety Division

The Office of the State Fire Marshal has exclusive safety regulatory and enforcement authority over

approximately 6,500 miles of intrastate hazardous liquid transportation pipelines.

Senate Bill 1389, Chapter 568, Statutes of 2002

The CEC is responsible for forecasting future energy needs for the state and developing renewable 

energy resources and alternative renewable energy technologies for buildings, industry, and 

transportation. SB 1389 (Chapter 568, Statutes of 2002) requires the CEC to prepare a biennial 

integrated energy policy report assessing major energy trends and issues facing the state’s 

electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuel sectors. The report is also intended to provide policy 

recommendations to conserve resources; protect the environment; and ensure reliable, secure, and 

diverse energy supplies. The 2019 Integrated Energy Policy Report, the most recent report required 

under SB 1389, was released to the public in February 2020 (CEC 2020).
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-4

Regional

Goals and policies related to public utilities and energy and applicable to the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR 

were identified in the Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties’ general plans.

Los Angeles County 2035 General Plan

The Los Angeles County General Plan has several goals and policies that guide the provision of 

public services and facilities, including:

• Goal PS/F 1: A coordinated, reliable, and equitable network of public facilities that preserves 

resources, ensures public health and safety, and keeps pace with planned development;

• Goal PS/F 2: Increased water conservation efforts;

• Goal PS/F 3: Increased local water supplies through the use of new technologies;

• Goal PS/F 4: Reliable sewer and urban runoff conveyance treatment systems;

• Goal PS/F 5: Adequate disposal capacity and minimal waste and pollution; and

• Goal PS/F 6: A county with adequate public utilities.

Orange County General Plan

The Orange County General Plan has several goals, objectives, and policies for general public 

services and facilities and energy, including:

• Public Service Goal 1: Provide a network of public services and facilities that are integrated, 

complementary, and compatible with other countywide regional land use and development 

goals;

• Public Service Goal 2: Encourage funding and development of public services and facilities 

to meet the county’s existing and future demand; 

• Wastewater System Goal 1: Support the planning and development of a wastewater system 

to meet both the county’s demand and attain water quality goals;

• Energy Resources Goal 1: Maximize the conservation and wise use of energy resources in 

all residences, businesses, public institutions, and industries in Orange County;

• Energy Resources Goal 2: Encourage the utilization of existing energy resources to their 

highest potential and the development of alternative energy sources consistent with sound 

energy conservation practices and techniques to meet the county's future energy demand; 

and
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-5

• Energy Resources Goal 3: Maximize the conservation of energy resources in all future land 

use and transportation planning decisions.

County of Riverside General Plan

The County of Riverside General Plan anticipates an increase in population in the county; therefore,

the plan dictates that development should only occur where adequate public facilities and services 

are available or are planned for at the time of development.

• LU 5.1: Ensure that development does not exceed the ability to adequately provide 

supporting infrastructure and services, such as libraries, recreational facilities, educational 

and day care centers transportation systems, and fire/police/medical services;

• LU 5.2: Monitor the capacities of infrastructure and services in coordination with service 

providers, utilities, and outside agencies and jurisdictions to ensure that growth does not 

exceed acceptable levels of service;

• LU 5.3: Review all projects for consistency with individual urban water management plans; 

and

• LU 5.4: Ensure that development and conservation land uses do not infringe upon existing 

essential public facilities and public utility corridors, which include county regional landfills, 

fee-owned ROWs, and permanent easements, whose true land use is that of public facilities. 

This policy will ensure that the public facilities designation governs over what otherwise may 

be inferred by the large-scale general plan maps.

County of San Bernardino General Plan

The San Bernardino County General Plan has several goals and policies for public facilities, 

including:

• Goal CI 10: Ensure timely development of public facilities and the maintenance of adequate 

service levels for these facilities to meet the needs of current and future county residents;

• Goal CI 11: The county will coordinate and cooperate with governmental agencies at all 

levels to ensure safe, reliable, and high-quality water supply for all residents and ensure 

prevention of surface and groundwater pollution;

• Goal CI 12: The county will ensure adequate wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal 

consistent with the protection of public health and water quality;

• Goal CI 14: The county will ensure a safe, efficient, economical, and integrated solid waste 

management system that considers all wastes generated within the county, including 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-6

agricultural, residential, commercial, and industrial wastes, while recognizing the relationship 

between disposal issues and the conservation of natural resources; and

• Goal CI 18: The county will ensure efficient and cost-effective utilities that serve the existing 

and future needs of people in the unincorporated areas are provided.

Local and Tribal Governments

Regulations from cities, local agencies, and tribal governments would be identified in the Tier 

2/Project-level analysis once site-specific rail infrastructure improvements and station facilities are 

known.

3.12.3 Methods for Evaluating Environmental Effects

The methodology for this evaluation consists of using existing data to identify public utilities and 

potential energy resources within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area for each Build Alternative 

Option and evaluating the potential level of effect or impact that each Build Alternative Option could 

have if constructed. For purposes of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR, utilities include natural gas, water, 

electricity, sewage, and communication systems. Available utility GIS data was overlaid on aerial 

photography to map majority utilities that occur within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area, 

including those that could be affected by development of planned stations.

The limitation of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation is that only utilities with publicly available 

information have been identified. A comprehensive field and records search would be necessary in 

Tier 2/Project-level analysis to identify all potentially affected utilities, including water distribution 

lines, minor gas lines, sewer lines, irrigation canals, and telephone and fiber optic lines.

Assessing energy use for the Program requires consideration of construction activities within the 

Program Corridor to identify potential conflicts with energy demand and inefficient usage. Because 

design specifics are not known at this time, the effects on energy consumption are considered 

qualitatively in this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. A detailed quantitative assessment of the change in 

overall energy consumption resulting from Tier 2/Project-level implementation would be considered 

during the Tier 2/Project-level analysis. In the absence of specific details regarding construction 

activities at this time, a qualitative assessment of anticipated energy consumption is presented along 

with potential mitigation measures strategies that may be required to minimize the wasteful use of 

energy.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-7

The operational energy effects of the Program were evaluated by quantifying the net effect on 

energy that would result from shifts in transportation modes. Some people would choose to take the 

train instead of driving in a personal vehicle, resulting in reduced VMT and fuel and energy use. To 

quantify the energy reductions, the following steps were taken.

• Fuel efficiency estimates (i.e., mileage per gallon) were quantified by dividing total regional 

VMT and total regional fuel consumption for light-duty vehicles and motorcycles in the SCAG 

region for 2024 and 2044, and for gasoline and diesel vehicles. 

• The VMT reductions resulting from the Program (Table 3.12-1) were divided by the fuel 

efficiency estimates to quantify total fuel reductions.

• Fuel reductions were converted to British thermal units (BTU) of energy using gasoline and 

diesel energy content values from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA; U.S. EIA

2017).

Table 3.12-1. Estimate of Build Alternative Ridership and Vehicle Miles Traveled 

Reductions per Day

Projection Year Ridership Estimate Range VMT Reduction Estimate Range

Opening Year 2024 521–710 43,835–57,534

Future Year 2044 830–1,128 73,972–95,890

Notes:

VMT=vehicle miles traveled

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

This service-level evaluation is limited to a desktop evaluation of the data sources described in 

Section 3.12.3. The Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area was combined with GIS overlays to identify 

potential utilities that could be affected by the Program. These potential utilities were identified on a 

broad scale using available mapping information. A detailed description of the Tier 1/Program 

EIS/EIR Study Area is provided in Section 3.1, Introduction to Environmental Analysis.

Data Resources

Data from key utility service providers, available county GIS data and general plans, and Google 

Earth Pro were used to conduct an inventory of pipelines, transmission lines, and wastewater 

facilities located within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area. Data for the energy analysis used 

information for the SCAG region for 2024 and 2044, which was obtained from the California ARB’s 

EMFAC2017 emissions database.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-8

Related Resources

This evaluation incorporates data and analysis from related resources to contribute to the 

assessment of public utilities and energy assessment. These related resources are identified in 

Table 3.12-2. 

Table 3.12-2. Related Resource Inputs for Public Utilities and Energy Assessment

Resource Input for Public Utilities and Energy Assessment

Transportation

(Section 3.3)

Changes in VMT, ridership, and service levels were identified.

Air Quality and Greenhouse 

Gases 

(Section 3.5)

EMFAC2017 – Vehicle emissions based on available traffic data were identified.

Net GHG emissions changes that occur from potential losses or savings in 

transportation energy as a result of net VMT were determined.

Notes:

GHG=greenhouse gas; VMT=vehicle miles traveled

3.12.4 Affected Environment

The Program Corridor crosses a large geographic area within Southern California, spanning 

approximately 144 miles from its western terminus in Los Angeles to its eastern terminus in 

Coachella. The Program Corridor occurs within an existing railroad corridor that traverses areas that 

have predominately been heavily modified for urban purposes, especially in the Western Section, 

although some areas occur in or adjacent to lands that are undeveloped or contain natural 

vegetation. Much of the Program Corridor from Los Angeles to Redlands is urbanized. The Eastern 

Section of the Program Corridor is less urbanized with vacant land comprising the largest land use 

category within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area.

Public Utilities

In general, the geographic sections of the Program Corridor can be characterized as urban and rural 

areas. These areas typically include above-ground and underground electrical transmission lines, 

above-ground electrical substations, and underground natural gas and water pipelines that provide 

power, natural gas, and water to residential, business, manufacturing, and agricultural land uses. 

The greatest densities of utilities occur in urban areas where there are a greater number of 

residential, business, and manufacturing uses, whereas lower densities of utilities occur in rural 

areas and areas that are mainly used for agricultural purposes.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-9

Within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area, key providers of energy include the Los Angeles 

Department of Water and Power, Southern California Edison, and Imperial Irrigation District. Each of 

these energy providers has a diverse power production portfolio that consist of a variety of 

renewable and non-renewable sources. Within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area, there are 

also sub-regional energy providers that supply electricity to customers in local municipalities. Natural 

gas service within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area is provided by the Southern California 

Gas Company.

Domestic water within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area is provided by various sources,

including municipal water departments, local water districts and water agencies, and private water 

companies. Imported water is primarily purchased from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern 

California and the State Water Project (the California Aqueduct) as a supplemental source to local 

water supplies. Metropolitan Water District water supplies are delivered by two principle facilities: the 

Colorado River Aqueduct and the California Aqueduct. Imported water is supplemented by local 

groundwater supplies. Metropolitan Water District, the primary water importer, supplies water to six 

counties (Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura). The agency 

membership consists of 21 entities, including 14 cities, 12 metropolitan water districts, and 1 county 

water authority (San Diego).

Figure 3.12-1 provides an overview of existing electrical transmission lines, natural gas pipelines, 

and water transmission lines in relation to the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-10

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-11

Figure 3.12-1. Known Utilities within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

(Page 1 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-12

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-13

Figure 3.12-1. Known Utilities within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

(Page 2 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-14

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-15

Figure 3.12-1. Known Utilities within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

(Page 3 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-16

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-17

Figure 3.12-1. Known Utilities within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

(Page 4 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-18

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-19

Figure 3.12-1. Known Utilities within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

(Page 5 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-20

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-21

Figure 3.12-1. Known Utilities within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

(Page 6 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-22

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-23

Build Alternative Option 1 (Coachella Terminus)

The Western Section of Build Alternative Option 1 is urbanized, resulting in a higher density of utility 

facilities. As summarized in Table 3.12-3, there are 116 electric transmission lines, ranging from 

33 to 500 kilovolts, that cross the Western Section of Build Alternative Option 1. Six natural gas 

pipelines cross the Western Section of Build Alternative Option 1. There are no wastewater 

treatment facilities or landfills located within Build Alternative Option 1. In addition, there are three 

oil/petroleum product pipelines that cross the Western Section of Build Alternative Option 1.

The Eastern Section of Build Alternative Option 1 is less developed with more land devoted to 

agricultural uses than the Western Section. As summarized in Table 3.12-3, there are 64 electric 

transmission lines, ranging from 66 to 500 kilovolts, that cross the Eastern Section of Build 

Alternative Option 1. There are no natural gas pipelines that cross the Eastern Section of Build 

Alternative Option 1. In addition, there are four oil/petroleum product pipelines and one aqueduct 

that cross the Eastern Section of Build Alternative Option 1.

In addition, Build Alternative Option 1 crosses the San Gorgonio Pass Wind Resource Area, located 

at the San Gorgonio Pass. The 70 square mile San Gorgonio Pass Wind Resource Area is one of 

three primary regions in California dedicated to wind energy production and provides enough 

electricity to power Palm Springs and the entire Coachella Valley. 

Table 3.12-3. Summary of Known Utility Facilities (Build Alternative Option 1)

Utility Infrastructure Facility

Number of 

Crossings within 

Western Section

Number of 

Crossings within 

Eastern Section

Total Number of 

Crossings

Electric transmission lines 116 64 180

Natural gas pipelines 6 0 6

Oil/petroleum product pipelines 3 4 7

Canals/aqueducts 0 1 1

Sources: CEC 2018a, 2018b
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-24

Build Alternative Option 2 (Indio Terminus)

As summarized in Table 3.12-4, the number of utility crossings within the Western Section of Build 

Alternative Option 2 are the same as Build Alternative Option 1. In the Eastern Section of Build 

Alternative Option 2, there are fewer utility crossings because of the shorter route alignment and 

reduced station options.

Table 3.12-4. Summary of Known Utility Facilities (Build Alternative Options 2 and 3)

Utility Infrastructure Facility

Number of 

Crossings within 

Western Section

Number of 

Crossings within 

Eastern Section

Total Number of 

Crossings

Electric transmission lines 116 58 174

Natural gas pipelines 6 0 6

Oil/petroleum product pipelines 3 4 7

Canals/aqueducts 0 1 1

Sources: CEC 2018a, 2018b

Build Alternative Option 3 (Indio Terminus with Limited Third Track)

Utility facilities and infrastructure within Build Alternative Option 3 are the same as Build Alternative 

Option 2.

Solid Waste

Counties and local jurisdictions within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area are responsible for 

their own integrated solid waste management planning, implementation, and monitoring, although 

waste management responsibilities may be contracted to private waste haulers. These waste 

collection programs usually have a collection and disposal system: typically using household trash 

cans and commercial dumpsters emptied into carts or trucks that deliver the solid waste to municipal 

landfills or sorting centers. Based on the type of waste, the waste is taken to a landfill or a recycling 

facility. Solid waste containing asbestos or waste determined to contain non-hazardous industrial 

waste may only be disposed of at landfills permitted to receive this type of waste. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-25

Build Alternative Option 1 (Coachella Terminus)

Table 3.12-5 provides a summary of landfill facilities that serve the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study 

Area.

Table 3.12-5. Summary of Landfill Facilities (Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3)

County Landfill Facility Waste Types Accepted

Remaining 

Capacity 

(Tons)

Maximum 

Permitted 

Capacity 

(Tons)

Los Angeles Scholl Canyon 

Landfill

Tires, manure, mixed municipal, industrial, 

construction/demolition, and inert material

13,860,000 82,460,000

Los Angeles Burbank Landfill 

Site Number 3

Inert, industrial, construction/demolition, and 

mixed municipal

7,244,107 8,306,711

Los Angeles Lancaster 

Landfill and 

Recycling Center

Contaminated soil, sludge (biosolids), 

asbestos, green materials, inert material, 

tires, mixed municipal, industrial, 

construction/demolition, and agricultural

20,320,507 38,780,000

Los Angeles Calabasas 

Landfill

Green materials, tires, mixed municipal, 

industrial, and construction/demolition

20,300,000 90,020,000

Los Angeles Chiquita Canyon 

Sanitary Landfill

Inert, industrial, construction/demolition, 

green materials, and mixed municipal

84,571,200 154,512,400

Los Angeles Pebbly Beach 

(Avalon) 

Disposal Site

Metals, inert, green materials, sludge 

(biosolids), mixed municipal, and ash

91,728 200,399

Los Angeles San Clemente 

Island Landfill

Inert, construction/demolition, mixed 

municipal, and industrial

293,742 329,642

Los Angeles Antelope Valley 

Public Landfill

Mixed municipal, inert, industrial, green 

materials, contaminated soil, 

construction/demolition, asbestos, and 

agricultural

25,075,715 42,280,000

Los Angeles Savage Canyon 

Landfill

Inert, green materials, industrial, 

construction/demolition, and mixed municipal

13,315,166 27,072,430
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-26

County Landfill Facility Waste Types Accepted

Remaining 

Capacity 

(Tons)

Maximum 

Permitted 

Capacity 

(Tons)

Orange Prima Dechecha 

Landfill

Wood waste, sludge (biosolids), mixed 

municipal, industrial, and 

construction/demolition

134,300,000 172,100,000

Orange Olinda Alpha 

Landfill

Wood waste, tires, mixed municipal, 

construction/demolition, industrial, and 

agricultural

34,200,000 148,800,000

Orange Frank R. 

Bowerman 

Sanitary Landfill 

Construction/demolition, industrial, and mixed 

municipal

205,000,000 266,000,000

San 

Bernardino

California Street 

Landfill

Sludge (biosolids), other designated, mixed 

municipal, and construction/demolition

7,235,455 15,960,000

San 

Bernardino

Victorville 

Sanitary Landfill

Wood waste, tires, sludge (biosolids), mixed 

municipal, industrial, green materials, dead 

animals, construction/demolition, ash, and 

agricultural

114,114,000 116,480,000

San 

Bernardino

Barstow Sanitary 

Landfill

Sludge (biosolids), other designated, mixed 

municipal, industrial, construction/demolition, 

and agricultural

100,074,324 112,496,300

San 

Bernardino

Mid-Valley 

Sanitary Landfill

Wood waste, tires, mixed municipal, 

industrial, inert, green materials, dead 

animals, contaminated soil, 

construction/demolition, ash, and agricultural

85,707,128 141,820,000

San 

Bernardino

Landers Sanitary 

Landfill

Tires, sludge (biosolids), other designated, 

mixed municipal, industrial, and 

construction/demolition

15,607,340 19,576,900

San 

Bernardino

United States 

Marine Corps –

29 Palms 

Disposal Facility

Tires, sludge (biosolids), mixed municipal, 

inert, industrial, dead animals, agricultural,

and construction/demolition

10,579,800 15,232,000

San 

Bernardino

Fort Irwin 

Sanitary Landfill

Sludge (biosolids), mixed municipal, dead 

animals, and contaminated soil

26,509,283 26,600,000
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-27

County Landfill Facility Waste Types Accepted

Remaining 

Capacity 

(Tons)

Maximum 

Permitted 

Capacity 

(Tons)

San 

Bernardino

Mitsubishi 

Cement Plant 

Cushenbury 

Landfill

Industrial 302,400 728,560

San 

Bernardino

San Timoteo 

Sanitary Landfill

Sludge (biosolids), mixed municipal, inert, 

industrial, dead animals, agricultural, and 

construction/demolition

17,304,554 31,760,099

Riverside Badlands 

Sanitary Landfill

Wood waste, tires, sludge (biosolids), mixed 

municipal, metals, liquid waste, industrial, 

inert, green materials, dead animals, 

contaminated soil, construction/demolition, 

ash, asbestos, and agricultural

22,048,319 48,160,000

Riverside Lamb Canyon 

Sanitary Landfill

Tires, sludge (biosolids), mixed municipal, 

metals, liquid waste, industrial, inert, green 

materials, dead animals, contaminated soil, 

construction/demolition, ash, asbestos, and 

agricultural

26,940,130 54,509,914

Riverside Oasis Sanitary 

Landfill

Wood waste, mixed municipal, metals, inert, 

green materials, construction/demolition, and 

agricultural

607,291 1,536,013

Riverside Desert Center 

Sanitary Landfill

Wood waste, tires, mixed municipal, metals, 

inert, green materials, dead animals, 

contaminated soil, construction/demolition, 

asbestos, and agricultural

178,397 572,757

Riverside Blythe Sanitary 

Landfill

Wood waste, tires, mixed municipal, metals, 

liquid waste, inert, industrial, green materials, 

dead animals, contaminated soil, 

construction/demolition, and agricultural

5,368,258 8,721,538

Riverside El Sobrante 

Landfill

Tires, mixed municipal, contaminated soil, 

and construction/demolition

201,568,038 293,874,000

Source: California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery 2020b
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-28

Build Alternative Option 2 (Indio Terminus)

Waste management facilities that would serve the area within Build Alternative Option 2 are the 

same as Build Alternative Option 1. 

Build Alternative Option 3 (Indio Terminus with Limited Third Track)

Waste management facilities that would serve the area within Build Alternative Option 2 are the 

same as Build Alternative Option 1.

Energy

Energy can be measured in two ways: direct energy, which would be the energy used to maintain 

and operate the Program, and indirect energy, which would be used during construction activities.

Primary energy sources take many forms, including nuclear energy, fossil energy (e.g., coal, oil, and

natural gas), and renewable resources (e.g., wind, solar, and hydropower). These primary sources 

are turned into secondary sources, such as electricity. The major primary energy sources consumed 

in the U.S. are petroleum (oil), natural gas, coal, nuclear energy, and renewable energy. 

For transportation projects, energy usage is predominantly influenced by the amount of fuel used. 

BTU is a measure of the heat content of fuels or energy sources, with the average BTU content of 

fuel being the heat value (or energy content) per volume of fuel, as determined from tests of fuel 

samples. A gallon of gasoline produces approximately 120,286 BTU (U.S. EIA 2021).

The U.S. EIA reported that the U.S. used approximately 20 percent of worldwide oil consumption in 

2017. Petroleum products (gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel) make up 92 percent of the U.S. usage of 

crude oil. Within the U.S. oil consumption, 27 percent was used for transportation in 2017. Over half 

of that energy usage was devoted to highway travel with cars and light trucks (U.S. EIA 2021).

According to the U.S. EIA, California has the second highest total energy demand in the country but 

is also one of the states with the lowest per capita total energy consumption. California ranks 48 out 

of 51 states (including the District of Columbia) in 2019 per capita energy consumption largely due to 

the state’s mild climate and energy efficiency efforts. The state is also a leader in total renewable 

energy production (after Washington state), ranking first in the nation in generation of solar, 

geothermal, and biomass energy. Additionally, California produces conventional hydroelectric power 

(the fourth-largest producer in the nation) and wind energy (fifth largest producer in the nation) (U.S. 

EIA 2018a).
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-29

The transportation end-use sector accounts for the largest share of energy consumption in 

California. In 2016, transportation accounted for 49 percent of all energy consumed in California, 

compared with 24.5 percent for industrial uses, 12.5 percent for commercial uses, and 14 percent for 

residential uses (U.S. EIA 2018b). 

Table 3.12-6 presents a comparison of travel modes in the U.S., including the vehicle miles, 

passenger miles, and energy intensities of those travel modes. In 2015, commuter rail used less 

energy per passenger mile than cars, personal trucks, motorcycles, air, and transit buses. Thus, 

among the travel modes in the U.S., commuter rail is more energy efficient on a per-passenger mile 

basis than most other transportation modes.

Table 3.12-6. 2015 United States Passenger Travel Mode and Energy Use

Travel Mode

Vehicle-Miles 

(millions)

Passenger-Miles 

(millions)

Energy 

Consumption

BTU per 

Vehicle-Mile

Energy Consumption

BTU per 

Passenger-Mile

Cars 1,445,400 2,240,370 4,702 3,034

Personal trucks 1,123,226 2,066,736 6,156 3,345

Motorcycles 19,606 22,743 2,855 2,462

Air 5,589 632,648 263,971 2,332

Buses (transit) 2,216 20,239 36,760 4,025

Rail (transit) 803 20,710 20,022 776

Rail (commuter) 374 11,804 51,888 1,643

Rail (intercity-Amtrak) 319 6,536 34,034 1,663

Source: Davis et al. 2018

Notes:

BTU=British thermal unit

Build Alternative Option 1 (Coachella Terminus)

Energy production typically varies by season and by year depending on hydrologic conditions. 

Regional electricity loads tend to be higher in the summer because the higher summer temperatures 

drive increased demand for air-conditioning. In 2019, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s 

energy resources consisted of 45 percent from eligible renewable sources (i.e., biomass and 

biowaste, geothermal, eligible hydroelectric, solar, and wind), 17 percent from coal, 2 percent from 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-30

large hydroelectric, 32 percent from natural gas, and the remaining percentage from unspecified 

power (CEC 2019a). In 2018, Southern California Edison’s energy resources consisted of 36 percent 

from eligible renewable sources (including 1 percent from large hydroelectric), 17 percent from 

natural gas, 6 percent from nuclear, and 37 percent from unspecified power1 (CEC 2019b). Imperial 

Irrigation District’s energy resources consisted of 29 percent from eligible renewable sources, 

4 percent from large hydroelectric, 27 percent from natural gas, 3 percent from nuclear, and 

37 percent from unspecified power (CEC 2019c).

Build Alternative Option 2 (Indio Terminus)

Existing energy production and resources within Build Alternative Option 2 are the same as Build 

Alternative Option 1. 

Build Alternative Option 3 (Indio Terminus with Limited Third Track)

Existing energy production and resources within Build Alternative Option 3 are the same as Build 

Alternative Option 1.

3.12.5 Environmental Consequences

Overview

Effects as a result of implementing the Build Alternative Options can be broadly classified into 

construction and operational effects. Long-term or permanent effects and short-term or temporary 

effects on public utilities and energy would be anticipated as a result of constructing any of the Build 

Alternative Options. Most effects on public utilities would occur during construction when the ground 

is disturbed and when there could be utility conflicts to overhead and underground utilities, including 

utility relocations to accommodate the proposed infrastructure or service disruptions (both planned 

and unanticipated) as a result of construction activities. Most of the energy consumption associated 

with the Build Alternative Options would occur over the operational lifetime of the Program. 

No Build Alternative

The No Build Alternative, as described in Chapter 2, Program Alternatives, is used as the baseline 

for comparison. The No Build Alternative would not implement the Program associated with this 

service-level evaluation. Because no physical changes would occur, no effects related to public 

utilities or solid waste facilities are anticipated under the No Build Alternative. 

1 Unspecified sources of power means electricity from transactions that are not traceable to specific 

generation sources.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-31

Under the No Build Alternative, no passenger rail system would be built, and no changes in effects 

on energy use would occur beyond those that could occur due to other reasonably foreseeable 

projects, such as ongoing operation and maintenance. Under the No Build Alternative, passenger 

train service would not be available to the public between Coachella Valley and Los Angeles, 

resulting in the continued reliance on automobiles, buses, and planes for transportation between 

communities in the Program Corridor. With the continued trend in substantial increases in VMT 

within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area, energy consumption and GHG emissions would be 

likely to increase steadily under the No Build Alternative. This assessment does not take into 

account other influences, including changes in Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards, bus 

and aircraft efficiency, fuel compositions, and other factors.

In addition, an increase in traffic and VMT is expected with the No Build Alternative because more 

cars would be on the roadways compared with what would occur with implementation of the 

Program. Therefore, traffic congestion is likely to worsen with the No Build Alternative, resulting in 

the continued trend in substantial increases in VMT within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

and energy consumption in the form of fuel under the No Build Alternative. Detailed VMT 

calculations for the Program are further discussed in Section 3.3, Transportation, of this Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR. 

Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3

Public Utilities Effects

CONSTRUCTION 

Western Section. No construction activities would be required to implement any of the Build 

Alternative Options within the Western Section of the Program Corridor because the existing railroad 

ROW and stations from LAUS to Colton would be used. The Build Alternative Options would not 

require construction of new stations, new track or extensions to existing track, or the addition of 

sidings, wayside signals, drainage, or at-grade separations within the Western Section of the 

Program Corridor. When compared with the No Build Alternative, effects on public utilities would be 

negligible within the Western Section under Build Alternatives Options 1, 2, and 3.

Eastern Section. Activities associated with the construction of rail infrastructure improvements and 

station facilities are not anticipated to result in new substantial discharges of wastewater. During 

construction activities, the construction contractor would provide portable toilets on site, which would 

then be removed from the site on a regular basis for servicing off site at an approved wastewater 

handling facility. Therefore, construction activities are unlikely to produce a substantial increase in 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-32

wastewater generation, and there would be minimal effects on wastewater treatment requirements, 

capacity, and facilities. 

Although construction activities would require water during site preparation, building preparation, 

material preparation, and for dust suppression, it is anticipated that construction would not directly 

use groundwater supplies for these activities. Sufficient water supplies are anticipated to be 

available during construction of Tier 2/Project-level improvements, either through local sources or by 

trucking in water for construction. The Tier 2/Project-level analysis would identify and evaluate 

effects on specific water supplies once site-specific projects are known.

For utility relocations, potential construction impacts are dependent on the location of rail 

infrastructure improvements and station facilities, which are currently unknown. As shown on 

Figure 3.12-1, there are multiple known utilities within and adjacent to existing ROW and 

construction of new stations or rail infrastructure improvements may require relocation of these 

utilities. The Tier 2/Project-level analysis would identify and mitigate impacts associated with the 

relocation of utility facilities once station locations and site-specific rail infrastructure improvements 

are known.

When compared with the No Build Alternative, Build Alternative Option 1 could have a moderate 

effect associated with public utilities within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor. Although 

Build Alternative Options 2 and 3 would not include the Coachella Station Area and non-station 

between the Indio and Coachella Station Areas, there is still the potential for utility relocations to be 

required during construction of rail infrastructure improvements and station facilities. When 

compared with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have the same 

magnitude of effects on public utilities and be considered moderate when compared with the 

No Build Alternative. When compared with Build Alternative Options 1 or 2, Build Alternative Option 

3 may have slightly reduced effects due to a smaller footprint associated with a shorter route 

alignment, reduced station options, and reduced third track rail infrastructure. However, the 

magnitude of effects would be similar for Build Alternative Option 3 and considered moderate when 

compared with the No Build Alternative.

OPERATION

Western Section. Under Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3, passenger train frequencies proposed 

as part of the Program would consist of the addition of two daily, round-trip intercity diesel-powered 

passenger trains operating the entire length of the Program Corridor between Los Angeles and 

Coachella. Once construction is completed, it is anticipated that effects on utilities would not occur 

during operations as the utilities would be in fixed locations operating independently of the Program.

Effects associated with the Western Section of the Program Corridor under Build Alternative Options 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-33

1, 2, and 3 would be negligible when compared with the No Build Alternative, as existing tracks 

would be used, and maintenance activities would be conducted within existing ROW.

Eastern Section. New rail infrastructure improvements are not anticipated to require the use of 

groundwater supplies during operation or maintenance activities. However, depending on the 

location and type of amenities identified for new station facilities, there is the potential that 

groundwater supplies may be needed during operation. The Tier 2/Project-level analysis would 

identify and evaluate the potential of site-specific Project impacts on water supplies. Similarly, new 

rail infrastructure improvements are not anticipated to generate substantial amounts of wastewater 

during operation or maintenance activities. However, new station or maintenance facilities would 

result in a new source of wastewater that would need to be treated by the local wastewater 

treatment facility. The Tier 2/Project-level analysis would identify and evaluate the potential of 

site-specific Project effects associated with wastewater treatment capacity demands. Ongoing 

operations are not expected to require the relocation or construction of new utilities as those impacts 

would occur during the construction of rail infrastructure improvements or station facilities. 

When compared with the No Build Alternative, Build Alternative Option 1 could have a moderate 

effect associated with public utilities within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor. Although 

Build Alternative Options 2 and 3 would not include the Coachella Station Area and non-station 

between the Indio and Coachella Station Areas, Build Alternative Options 2 and 3 would still 

generate additional wastewater that would need to be treated and require water for station operation 

within the other station areas in the Eastern Section. When compared with Build Alternative Option 

1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have the same magnitude of effects on public utilities and be 

considered moderate when compared with the No Build Alternative. When compared with Build 

Alternative Options 1 or 2, Build Alternative Option 3 may have slightly reduced effects due to a 

smaller footprint associated with a shorter route alignment, reduced station options, and reduced 

third track rail infrastructure. However, the magnitude of effects would be similar for Build Alternative 

Option 3 and considered moderate when compared with the No Build Alternative.

Solid Waste Effects

CONSTRUCTION

Western Section. No construction activities would be required to implement the Build Alternative 

Options within the Western Section because the existing railroad ROW and station areas from LAUS

to Colton would be utilized. The Build Alternative Options would not require construction of new 

stations, new track or extensions to existing track, or the addition of sidings, wayside signals, 

drainage, or at-grade separations within the Western Section of the Program Corridor. As such, no 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-34

construction-related effects on solid waste facilities would be anticipated in the Western Section 

under Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3 when compared with the No Build Alternative.

Eastern Section. Solid waste created during construction and demolition activities typically consists 

of asphalt, concrete, and metal rebar associated with roadway removal, culvert removal, and bridge 

renovations. The landfills that would receive the construction and demolition material from the 

various improvements envisioned under the Program have not been identified. Each landfill has 

specific permit requirements regarding the acceptance of wastes and construction and demolition 

material and quantities of waste accepted each day that may influence the selection of disposal 

sites.

Although construction activities under any of the Build Alternative Options could increase the 

generation of solid waste, appropriate construction waste disposal and recycling methods per the 

local jurisdiction’s goals and regulations would be used to minimize the amount of solid waste that 

would be transported to a solid waste facility. 

When compared with the No Build Alternative, Build Alternative Option 1 could have a negligible 

effect on solid waste facilities within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor. When compared 

with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have slightly reduced effects due to 

a shorter route alignment and reduced station options. However, the magnitude of effects would be 

similar and considered negligible when compared with the No Build Alternative. When compared 

with Build Alternative Options 1 or 2, Build Alternative Option 3 may have slightly reduced effects 

due to a smaller footprint associated with a shorter route alignment, reduced station options, and 

reduced third track rail infrastructure. However, the magnitude of effects would be similar for Build 

Alternative Option 3 and considered negligible when compared with the No Build Alternative.

OPERATION

Western Section. The additional train trips envisioned under Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 

3 would travel within an existing railroad ROW and would not affect solid waste facilities when 

compared with the No Build Alternative. Operation of all Build Alternative Options within the Western 

Section would not result in increased generation of solid waste or require new or additional solid 

waste facilities when compared with the No Build Alternative.

Eastern Section. The operation of new station facilities and maintenance of new rail infrastructure 

improvements would generate solid waste from passenger refuse disposal and materials used from 

maintenance activities. However, it is anticipated that these types of activities would generate small 

amounts of waste, and effects would be negligible on existing solid waste facilities that would service 

the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area when compared with the No Build Alternative. Although the 

quantity of solid waste generated cannot be determined for this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR, there are 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-35

15 landfills that service the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor with ample remaining capacity 

to serve the Program.

When compared with the No Build Alternative, Build Alternative Option 1 could have a negligible 

effect on solid waste facilities within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor. When compared 

with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have slightly reduced effects due to 

a shorter route alignment and reduced station options. However, the magnitude of effects would be 

similar and considered negligible when compared with the No Build Alternative. When compared 

with Build Alternative Options 1 or 2, Build Alternative Option 3 may have slightly reduced effects 

due to a smaller footprint associated with a shorter route alignment, reduced station options, and 

reduced third track rail infrastructure. However, the magnitude of effects would be similar for Build 

Alternative Option 3 and considered negligible when compared with the No Build Alternative.

Energy Effects

CONSTRUCTION

Western Section. No construction activities would be required to implement any of the Build 

Alternative Options within the Western Section of the Program Corridor because the existing railroad 

ROW and stations from LAUS to Colton would be used. The Build Alternative Options would not 

require construction of new stations, new track or extensions to existing track, or the addition of 

sidings, wayside signals, drainage, or at-grade separations within the Western Section of the 

Program Corridor. When compared with the No Build Alternative, effects associated with energy 

usage or consumption would be negligible within the Western Section under Build Alternatives 

Options 1, 2, and 3.

Eastern Section. Construction activities required for infrastructure improvements (e.g., sidings, 

additional main line track, wayside signals, drainage, grade-separation structures, and stations) 

would consume gasoline and diesel fuel through operation of heavy-duty, off-road construction 

equipment and on-road vehicles. The amount of fuel consumed would vary depending on the length 

of the construction period, specific construction activity (e.g., grading, bridge, and construction), 

types of equipment, and number of personnel. 

Design specifics and locations of the rail infrastructure improvements and station facilities are not 

known at this time, so the energy that may need to be consumed during specific construction 

activities cannot be quantified at the Tier 1/Program-level evaluation. Once detailed construction 

information for the site-specific rail infrastructure improvement or station facility is available, a 

quantitative estimate of the total energy consumption during construction would be conducted and 

evaluated during the Tier 2/Project-level analysis. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-36

In the absence of a quantitative energy analysis, the effects of construction under any of the Build 

Alternative Options are not anticipated to be substantial with respect to energy consumption. As 

discussed below, the operational effect of any of the Build Alternative Options would be a net energy 

savings relative to the No Build Alternative on an annual basis. To achieve those energy savings,

construction activity is needed to build the Program and allow drivers of on-road personal vehicles to 

shift to rail transportation. Because construction would involve typical activities for the purpose of 

building a more efficient, energy-saving transportation mode, fuel and other energy consumed during 

construction would not be considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary.

Implementation of BMPs to mitigate potential air quality and/or GHG effects, as described in Section 

3.5, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases, would also reduce fuel consumption during construction

activities, further preventing any wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary usage of energy.

When compared with the No Build Alternative, Build Alternative Option 1 could have a moderate 

effect on energy resources during construction activities. When compared with Build Alternative 

Option 1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have slightly reduced effects due to a shorter route 

alignment and reduced station options (e.g., less rail infrastructure and less station facilities that 

could be constructed). However, the magnitude of effects would be similar and considered moderate 

when compared with the No Build Alternative. When compared with Build Alternative Options 1 or 

2, Build Alternative Option 3 may have slightly reduced effects due to a smaller footprint associated 

with a shorter route alignment, reduced station options, and reduced third track rail infrastructure. 

However, the magnitude of effects would be similar for Build Alternative Option 3 and considered 

moderate when compared with the No Build Alternative.

OPERATION

Western and Eastern Section. Implementation of any of the Build Alternative Options is expected to 

increase transit ridership within the Program Corridor, which would result in reduced VMT. Because 

the Western and Eastern Sections would not undergo train operations in isolation without the 

adjacent section, the entire length of the Program Corridor must be evaluated to comprehensively 

assess the Program’s energy effects. Under the Program, the range of estimated reductions in VMT 

is between 43,835 and 57,534 miles per day in Opening Year 2024 and 73,972 and 95,890 miles per 

day in Horizon Year 2044. Reductions in VMT would be realized through a shift in travel models 

within the Program Corridor attributable to a reduction in fuel consumption by passenger vehicles. 

Although the amount of VMT on roadways generated in the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

would be reduced, the passenger rail system would also require fuel, and hence energy 

consumption, which would offset some of the VMT reduction effect. The energy consumption 

associated with decreased on-road travel and operation of the passenger rail system under each of 

the Build Alternative Options is summarized in Table 3.12-7 and Table 3.12-8.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-37

Table 3.12-7. Net Operational Energy Effects (Build Alternative Option 1)

Source

Annual Energy Consumption in 

2024 (MMBTU)

Annual Energy Consumption in 2044 

(MMBTU)

Total on-road vehiclesa 77,291–100,469 98,191–127,635

Gasoline vehiclesb 76,791–99,819 97,382–126,585

Diesel vehiclesc 500–650 808–1,051

Proposed passenger raild 10,909 10,909

Energy savings (1. – 2.) 66,382–89,560 87,282–116,726

Notes:

a Based on fuel and mileage data from California ARB’s EMFAC2017 vehicle emissions database and the VMT 

reductions in Table 3.12-1. Energy consumed by electric vehicles is not accounted for in EMFAC2017 and is 

thus excluded from this energy analysis.

b Light-duty fuel efficiency for gasoline vehicles is 31 miles per gallon (in 2024) and 40 miles per gallon (in 2044), 

as calculated with EMFAC2017 for the SCAG region. 99 percent of light-duty vehicles and motorcycle mileage is 

with gasoline vehicles. The energy content of 1 gallon of gasoline fuel is 120,476 BTU (U.S. EIA 2017).

c Light-duty fuel efficiency for diesel vehicles is 48 miles per gallon (in 2024) and 59 miles per gallon (in 2044). 1

percent of light-duty vehicles and motorcycle mileage is with diesel vehicles. The energy content of 1 gallon of 

gasoline fuel is 137,452 BTU (U.S. EIA 2017).

d Based on a total daily travel distance of 576 miles/day (144-mile corridor * 2 round trips/day) and the energy use 

per vehicle mile for commuter rail.

MMBTU=million British thermal unit; SCAG=Southern California Association of Governments; VMT=vehicle miles 

traveled

Table 3.12-8. Net Operational Energy Effects (Build Alternative Options 2 and 3)

Source

Annual Energy Consumption in 

2024 (MMBTU)

Annual Energy Consumption in 2044 

(MMBTU)

Total on-road vehiclesa 77,291–100,469 98,191–127,635

Gasoline vehiclesb 76,791–99,819 97,382–126,585

Diesel vehiclesc 500–650 808–1,051

Proposed passenger raild 10,625 10,625
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-38

Source

Annual Energy Consumption in 

2024 (MMBTU)

Annual Energy Consumption in 2044 

(MMBTU)

Energy savings (1. – 2.) 66,666–89,844 87,566–117,010

Notes:

a Based on fuel and mileage data from California ARB’s EMFAC2017 vehicle emissions database and the VMT 

reductions in Table 3.12-1. Energy consumed by electric vehicles is not accounted for in EMFAC2017 and is 

thus excluded from this energy analysis.

b Light-duty fuel efficiency for gasoline vehicles is 31 miles per gallon (in 2024) and 40 miles per gallon (in 2044), 

as calculated with EMFAC2017 for the SCAG region. 99 percent of light-duty vehicles and motorcycle mileage is 

with gasoline vehicles. The energy content of 1 gallon of gasoline fuel is 120,476 BTU (U.S. EIA 2017).

c Light-duty fuel efficiency for diesel vehicles is 48 miles per gallon (in 2024) and 59 miles per gallon (in 2044). 1

percent of light duty vehicles and motorcycle mileage is with diesel vehicles. The energy content of 1 gallon of 

gasoline fuel is 137,452 BTU (U.S. EIA 2017).

d Based on a total daily travel distance of 561 miles/day (140.25-mile corridor * 2 round trips/day) and the energy 

use per vehicle mile for commuter rail.

MMBTU=million British thermal unit; SCAG=Southern California Association of Governments; VMT=vehicle miles 

traveled

As summarized in Table 3.12-7, Build Alternative Option 1 is expected to result in energy savings 

ranging from 66,382 to 89,560 million British thermal units (MMBTU) in 2024 and 87,282 to 

116,726 MMBTU in 2044. As summarized in Table 3.12-8, Build Alternative Options 2 and 3 are 

expected to result in energy savings ranging from 66,666 to 89,844 MMBTU in 2024 and 87,566 to 

117,010 MMBTU in 2044. However, these energy savings do not account for the energy consumed 

by existing stations and maintenance activities that may occur in the Western Section. For operation 

in the Eastern Section, additional energy consumption is anticipated for operation of the new station 

and maintenance facilities and supporting infrastructure. 

For these reasons, energy savings would be lower than depicted in Table 3.12-7 and 

Table 3.12-8 because quantifying energy consumption for stations and maintenance activities is not 

possible at the Tier 1/Program-level evaluation. Conversely, the energy estimates for the passenger 

rail system assume an energy consumption value per vehicle mile for commuter rail for 2015. Modes 

of transportation (including commuter rail) would likely become more energy efficient in 2024 and 

much more energy efficient in 2044. As such, the rail energy estimates for train propulsion would 

likely be lower, resulting in an increasing effect on energy savings.

Overall, the Build Alternative Options are expected to result in energy savings relative to the No 

Build Alternative because the primary source of energy consumption for the Program (i.e., train 

propulsion) is more efficient than personal single occupancy vehicles. In the Western Section, 

existing infrastructure and stations would be utilized, so energy savings would be greatest in this 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-39

section. In the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor, new rail infrastructure improvements and 

station facilities would be constructed and operated, resulting in additional increases in energy 

consumption. As such, energy consumption in the Eastern Section would be higher than in the 

Western Section, and the net savings would be lower. 

Because the Build Alternative Options would result in energy savings relative to the No Build 

Alternative, there would be no inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary energy consumption. When 

compared with the No Build Alternative, Build Alternative Option 1 could have a moderate effect on 

energy resources during operational activities. When compared with Build Alternative Option 1, Build 

Alternative Option 2 would have slightly reduced effects due to a shorter route alignment and 

reduced station options (e.g., less rail infrastructure and less station facilities that could be 

constructed and operated). However, the magnitude of effects would be similar and considered 

moderate when compared with the No Build Alternative. When compared with Build Alternative 

Options 1 or 2, Build Alternative Option 3 may have slightly reduced effects due to a smaller footprint 

associated with a shorter route alignment, reduced station options, and reduced third track rail 

infrastructure. However, the magnitude of effects would be similar for Build Alternative Option 3 and 

considered moderate when compared with the No Build Alternative.

3.12.6 NEPA Summary of Potential Effects

Table 3.12-9 through Table 3.12-11 summarize the qualitative assessment of potential effects 

(negligible, moderate, or substantial) under NEPA for each of the Build Alternative Options. This 

service-level evaluation uses the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area to determine the public utilities,

solid waste facilities, and energy resources that may be affected and the relative magnitude of the 

effect. The level of intensity for effects is based on potential utility conflicts, resultant relocations, and 

service disruptions and that most utility effects can be mitigated. Specific mitigation measures to 

reduce effects would be analyzed at the Tier 2/Project-level phase. 

Table 3.12-9. NEPA Summary of Effects on Public Utilities

Alternative Option

Potential Intensity of Effect: 

Western Section

Potential Intensity of Effect: 

Eastern Section

No Build Alternative Construction: None 

Operation: None

Construction: None

Operation: None 

Build Alternative Option 1 

(Coachella Terminus)

Construction: Negligible 

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate 

Operation: Moderate 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-40

Alternative Option

Potential Intensity of Effect: 

Western Section

Potential Intensity of Effect: 

Eastern Section

Build Alternative Option 2 

(Indio Terminus)

Construction: Negligible 

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate

Operation: Moderate 

Build Alternative Option 3 

(Indio Terminus with Limited Third 

Track)

Construction: Negligible 

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate

Operation: Moderate

Table 3.12-10. NEPA Summary of Effects on Solid Waste 

Alternative Option

Potential Intensity of Effect: 

Western Section

Potential Intensity of Effect: 

Eastern Section

No Build Alternative Construction: None 

Operation: None

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Build Alternative Option 1 

(Coachella Terminus)

Construction: Negligible 

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Build Alternative Option 2 

(Indio Terminus)

Construction: Negligible 

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Build Alternative Option 3 

(Indio Terminus with Limited Third 

Track)

Construction: Negligible 

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Table 3.12-11. NEPA Summary of Effects on Energy

Alternative Option

Potential Intensity of Effect: 

Western Section

Potential Intensity of Effect: 

Eastern Section

No Build Alternative Construction: None 

Operation: None

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Substantial

Build Alternative Option 1 

(Coachella Terminus)

Construction: Negligible 

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate 

Operation: Moderate
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-41

Alternative Option

Potential Intensity of Effect: 

Western Section

Potential Intensity of Effect: 

Eastern Section

Build Alternative Option 2 

(Indio Terminus)

Construction: Negligible 

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate 

Operation: Moderate

Build Alternative Option 3 

(Indio Terminus with Limited Third 

Track)

Construction: Negligible 

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate

Operation: Moderate 

3.12.7 CEQA Summary of Potential Impacts

Based on the information provided in Sections 3.12.4 and 3.12.5, and considering the CEQA 

Appendix G Checklist questions for utilities and service systems and energy, the Build Alternative 

Options would have potentially significant impacts on public utilities and energy when reviewed on a 

Program-wide basis. Placing the infrastructure improvements and new stations largely within or 

along the existing ROW would reduce the potential for significant impacts associated with existing 

utilities. However, because the infrastructure and station sites have not been selected, some areas 

that may contain utilities may be significantly impacted. At the Tier 1/Program-level of analysis, it is 

not possible to know the location, extent, and particular characteristics of impacts on these areas. 

Proposed programmatic mitigation strategies discussed in Section 3.12.8 would be applied to reduce 

potential impacts.

Table 3.12-12 summarizes the CEQA significance conclusions for the Build Alternative Options, the 

proposed programmatic mitigation strategies that could be applied to reduce, avoid, or minimize the 

potential impacts, and the significance determination after mitigation strategies are applied. The 

identification and implementation of site-specific mitigation measures necessary for Project 

implementation would occur as part of the Tier 2/Project-level analysis. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-42

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-43

Table 3.12-12. CEQA Summary of Impacts for Utilities and Service Systems and Energy

Impact Summary Mitigation Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Would the Program require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water 

drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant

environmental effects?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No construction impacts are anticipated at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3 

because no physical improvements are proposed or required within the Western 

Section.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potential construction impacts are 

dependent on the location of rail infrastructure improvements and station 

facilities, which are currently unknown. There are multiple known utilities within 

and adjacent to existing ROW and construction of new stations or rail 

infrastructure improvements may require relocation of utilities. The Tier 

2/Project-level analysis would identify and mitigate impacts associated with the 

relocation of utility facilities once station locations and site-specific rail 

infrastructure improvements are known.

UTL-1

UTL-2

LU-2

LU-3

Potentially Significant. UTL-1, UTL-2, LU-2, and 

LU-3 would minimize, reduce, or avoid potential 

impacts associated with utilities through design 

and further analysis. However, impacts may 

remain significant and unavoidable as further 

analysis may determine that the construction of rail 

infrastructure improvements or station facilities 

would result in the relocation of existing utilities or 

construction of new utilities.

Operation

Western Section – No Impact. The increase in train service (two additional 

round-trip daily trains within the Program Corridor) would not change existing 

land use and would not require or result in the relocation or construction of public 

utilities or facilities. Therefore, no operational impacts are anticipated under Build 

Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3 at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level. 

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-44

Impact Summary Mitigation Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – Less than Significant. Ongoing operation is not expected to 

require the relocation or construction of new utilities, as those impacts would 

occur during the construction of rail infrastructure improvements or station 

facilities. Therefore, a less than significant operational impact is anticipated at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. 

Not applicable Not applicable 

Would the Program have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Program and reasonably foreseeable future development during 

normal, dry, and multiple dry years?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No construction impacts are anticipated at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level because no physical improvements are 

proposed or required within the Western Section under Build Alternative Option 1, 

2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Although construction activities 

would require the use of water in site preparation, building preparation, material 

preparation, and for dust suppression, it is anticipated that construction water 

supply would not use groundwater supplies for these uses. The Tier 

2/Project-level analysis would identify and evaluate impacts on specific water 

supplies once site-specific projects are known.

LU-2

LU-3

Less than Significant. LU-2 and LU-3 would 

minimize, reduce, or avoid potential impacts by 

requiring coordination with water providers through 

subsequent design and analysis.

Operation

Western Section – Less Than Significant. The increase in train service (two 

additional round-trip daily trains within the Program Corridor) on an existing rail 

corridor would require maintenance of existing infrastructure. While these 

maintenance activities on the existing rail corridor would require some water, the 

amount of water needed is anticipated to be minimal. Therefore, a less than 

significant impact is anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level

under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-45

Impact Summary Mitigation Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. New rail infrastructure improvements 

are not anticipated to require the use of groundwater supplies during operation or 

maintenance activities. However, depending on the location and type of 

amenities identified for new station facilities, there is the potential that 

groundwater supplies may be needed during operation. The Tier 2/Project-level 

analysis would identify and evaluate the potential of site-specific Project impacts 

on water supplies.

UTL-1

LU-3

Potentially Significant. UTL-1 and LU-3 would 

minimize, reduce, or avoid potential impacts 

associated with water supplies through design and 

confirmation of water supply availability. However, 

impacts may remain significant and unavoidable as 

further analysis may determine that operational 

activities would result in water supply impacts.

Would the Program result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate 

capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No construction impacts are anticipated at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level because no physical improvements are 

proposed or required within the Western Section under Build Alternative Option 1, 

2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – Less than Significant. During construction activities, the 

construction contractor would provide portable toilets on site, which would then 

be removed from the site on a regular basis for servicing off site at an approved 

wastewater handling facility. Therefore, construction activities are unlikely to 

produce a substantial increase in wastewater generation and would have minimal 

impacts on wastewater treatment facilities. A less than significant impact is 

anticipated at the Tier 2/Project-level analysis level under Build Alternative Option 

1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-46

Impact Summary Mitigation Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Operation

Western Section – Less Than Significant. The increase in train service (two 

additional round-trip daily trains within the Program Corridor) would not change 

existing land use and would not result in new generation of wastewater that 

would impact existing wastewater facilities. A less than significant impact is 

anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative 

Option 1, 2, or 3. 

Not applicable Not applicable 

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. New rail infrastructure improvements 

are not anticipated to generate substantial amounts of wastewater during 

operation or maintenance activities. However, new station or maintenance 

facilities would result in a new source of wastewater that would need to be 

treated by the local wastewater treatment facility. The Tier 2/Project-level 

analysis would identify and evaluate the potential of site-specific Project impacts 

associated with wastewater treatment capacity demands.

UTL-2

LU-3

Less Than Significant. UTL-1 and LU-3 would 

minimize, reduce, or avoid potential impacts 

associated with wastewater treatment capacity 

demands through design and determination of 

wastewater service capacity. 

Would the Program generate solid waste in excess or state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise 

impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? 

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No construction impacts are anticipated at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level because no physical improvements are 

proposed or required within the Western Section under Build Alternative Option 1, 

2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-47

Impact Summary Mitigation Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – Less than Significant. Construction activities would be 

required to adhere to the local jurisdictions’ goals and regulations associated with 

solid waste disposal and recycling. Construction activities are unlikely to produce 

a substantial increase in solid waste and would have minimal impacts on solid 

waste facilities. Therefore, construction activities are unlikely to conflict with 

federal, state, or local regulations related to solid waste. A less than significant 

impact is anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build 

Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Operation

Western Section – Less Than Significant. The increase in train service (two 

additional round-trip daily trains within the Program Corridor) would not change 

existing land use and would not result in new generation of solid waste that would 

conflict with solid waste regulations. A less than significant impact is anticipated 

at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 

2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – Less than Significant. Operational activities would be 

required to adhere to the local jurisdictions’ goals and regulations associated with 

solid waste disposal and recycling. Operational activities are unlikely to produce a 

substantial increase in solid waste generation and would have minimal impacts 

on solid waste facilities. Therefore, operational activities are unlikely to conflict 

with federal, state, or local regulations related to solid waste. A less than 

significant impact is anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level

under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. 

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-48

Impact Summary Mitigation Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Would the Program comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No construction impacts are anticipated at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level because no physical improvements are 

proposed or required within the Western Section under Build Alternative Option 1, 

2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – Less than Significant. Construction activities would be 

required to adhere to the local jurisdictions’ goals and regulations associated with 

solid waste disposal and recycling. Construction activities are unlikely to produce 

a substantial increase in solid waste and would have minimal impacts on solid 

waste facilities. Therefore, construction activities are unlikely to conflict with 

federal, state, or local regulations related to solid waste. A less than significant 

impact is anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build 

Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. 

Not applicable Not applicable

Operation

Western Section – Less Than Significant. The increase in train service (two 

additional round-trip daily trains within the Program Corridor) would not change 

existing land use and would not result in new generation of solid waste that would 

conflict with solid waste regulations. A less than significant impact is anticipated 

at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 

2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-49

Impact Summary Mitigation Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – Less than Significant. Operational activities would be 

required to adhere to the local jurisdictions’ goals and regulations associated with 

solid waste disposal and recycling. Operational activities are unlikely to produce a 

substantial increase in solid waste generation and would have minimal impacts 

on solid waste facilities. Therefore, operational activities are unlikely to conflict 

with federal, state, or local regulations related to solid waste. A less than 

significant impact is anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level

under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. 

Not applicable Not applicable

Would the Program result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy 

resources, during construction or operation?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No construction impacts are anticipated at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level because no physical improvements are 

proposed or required within the Western Section under Build Alternative Option 

1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potential impacts are dependent on 

the location and type of rail infrastructure improvements and station facilities, 

which are currently unknown. Construction of Tier 2/Project-level improvements 

would result in energy usage by construction activities. However, because 

construction would be temporary and relatively short term, energy consumed 

during construction would represent relatively negligible demand on regional fuel 

supplies over time. Once detailed construction information is available, a 

quantitative estimate of the total energy consumption during construction would 

be prepared and evaluated during the Tier 2/Project-level analysis.

GHG-1 Less than Significant. GHG-1 would minimize, 

reduce, or avoid potential impacts related to 

energy consumption during construction by 

preparation of a Project-specific construction 

energy conservation plan during Tier 

2/Project-level analysis.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-50

Impact Summary Mitigation Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Operation

Western Section – No Impact. No construction impacts are anticipated at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level because no physical improvements are 

proposed or required within the Western Section under Build Alternative Option 

1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potential impacts are dependent on 

the location and type of rail infrastructure improvements and station facilities, 

which are currently unknown. Operation of subsequent Tier 2/Project-level 

improvements would result in energy usage that would be needed to run the 

passenger rail system and new station facilities. Although operation of the 

Program would require energy, it is anticipated that the Program would result in 

overall energy savings because the primary source of energy consumption for 

the Program (i.e., train propulsion) is more efficient than personal on-road 

vehicles, which are largely single use. New station facilities would also be 

constructed to be energy efficient, further reducing the energy needed to operate 

the new station facilities. Once detailed Tier 2/Project-level information is 

available, a quantitative estimate of the total energy consumption during 

operation would be prepared and evaluated during the Tier 2/Project-level 

analysis. 

GHG-2 Less than Significant. GHG-2 would be 

implemented to minimize, reduce, or avoid

potential impacts related to energy consumption 

during operation by preparation of a 

Project-specific operational energy conservation 

plan during Tier 2/Project-level analysis.

Would the Program conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No construction impacts are anticipated at the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level because no physical improvements are 

proposed or required within the Western Section under Build Alternative Option 

1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-51

Impact Summary Mitigation Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – No Impact. Construction of the Program would support state 

and local plans for energy efficiency. No impacts are anticipated at the Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Operation

Western Section – No Impact. The increase in train service (two additional 

round-trip daily trains within the Program Corridor) would not change existing 

land use and would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable 

energy or energy efficiency. No impacts are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program 

EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – No Impact. Operation of the Program under Build Alternative 

Option 1, 2, or 3 would result in overall energy savings because the primary 

source of energy consumption for the Program (i.e., train propulsion) is more 

efficient than personal single occupancy vehicles. Operation of the Program 

would support state and local plans for energy efficiency. No impacts are 

anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative 

Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Notes:

EIS/EIR=environmental impact statement/environmental impact report; ROW=right-of-way
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-52

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-53

3.12.8 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Strategies 

Identified below are proposed programmatic mitigation strategies for further consideration in the 

Tier 2/Project-level analysis. Specific mitigation measures, to the extent required, would be identified 

and discussed during Tier 2/Project-level analysis after design details are known and specific 

impacts are identified. Any conflicts or potential relocations of underground utilities that would 

require ground disturbance would be analyzed in other applicable environmental resource areas. 

The Tier 2/Project-level analysis would consider whether sufficient water supplies and wastewater 

services are available to serve proposed Tier 2/Project improvements or station facilities. Tier 

2/Project-level analyses should include more detailed information on the location of water supply 

lines, wastewater conveyance lines, wastewater and water pump stations, storm drains, solid waste 

disposal, fiber-optic lines, and telecommunication lines. 

Potential mitigation measures would be developed in consultation with the agency or utility owner

with jurisdiction over the utility facility and might include avoidance by shifting infrastructure 

improvements or minimizing the acreage of a physical take of properties containing utility facilities 

during planning and design. 

Measures to reduce energy consumption include using energy efficient equipment and materials and 

preparation of a construction energy conservation plan. Proposed programmatic mitigation 

strategies, consistent with state and federal regulations, include, but are not limited to, the following:

Mitigation Strategy UTL-1: During Tier 2/Project-level analysis, additional water supply 

documentation shall be conducted by the identified lead agency or agencies to determine water 

supply impacts (including groundwater basin withdrawals) associated with the operation of rail 

infrastructure or station facility proposed. If required by the identified lead agency or agencies, this 

documentation may include, but is not limited to the following: 

• Preparation of a site-specific water supply assessment per Senate Bill 610 requirements

• Obtainment of a water supply verification letters from the applicable water purveyor per 

Senate Bill 221 requirements
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-54

Mitigation Strategy UTL-2: During Tier 2/Project-level analysis, a site-specific utilities report shall 

be prepared for the rail infrastructure or station facility proposed. The utilities report will identify the 

ability for existing utility infrastructure to serve the Project, additional utility infrastructure needs, and 

local jurisdiction/utility provider coordination. The report shall include, but not be limited to, the 

following analyses: 

• Wastewater/Sewer Infrastructure. Identification of existing sewer infrastructure, sewer 

capacity, required wastewater/sewer relocations, and site-specific wastewater generation 

estimates

• Electrical Infrastructure. Identification of existing electrical infrastructure, electrical capacity, 

required electrical infrastructure relocations, and site-specific electrical demand estimates

• Natural Gas Infrastructure. Identification of existing natural gas infrastructure, required 

natural gas infrastructure relocations, and site-specific natural gas demand estimates

Mitigation Strategy LU-2: Based on the results of a subsequent Tier 2/Project-level analysis and 

recommendations, the identified lead agency or agencies shall determine if a construction 

management plan is required for construction activities of the Tier 2/Project-level improvement being 

proposed. If required, a construction management plan shall be developed by the contractor and 

reviewed by the lead agency or agencies prior to construction and implemented during construction 

activities. The construction management plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 

• Measures that minimize effects on populations and communities within the Tier 2/Project

Study Area

• Measures pertaining to visual protection, air quality, safety controls, noise controls, and 

traffic controls to minimize effects on populations and communities within the Tier 2/Project

Study Area

• Measures to ensure property access is maintained for local businesses, residences, and 

community and emergency services

• Measures to consult with local transit providers to minimize effects on local and regional bus 

routes in affected communities

• Measures to consult with local jurisdictions and utility providers to minimize effects on utilities 

in affected communities

Mitigation Strategy LU-3: During a subsequent Tier 2/Project-level analysis, a land use consistency 

analysis shall be conducted by the identified lead agency or agencies to determine consistency of 

the Tier 2/Project-level improvement being proposed with the applicable local jurisdictional general 

plans or programs. If the land use consistency analysis identifies sensitive land uses or 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-55

environmental resource within the Tier 2/Project-level Study Area, design or siting strategies shall be 

identified by the lead agency or agencies to avoid or minimize conflicts with sensitive land uses or 

environmental resources. 

Mitigation Strategy GHG-1: During Tier 2/Project level analysis, a construction energy conservation 

plan to avoid excess energy consumption shall be required for the specific rail infrastructure or 

station facility proposed. The construction energy conservation plan shall identify best management 

practices including, but not limited to, the following:

• Identification of opportunities to use newer, more energy efficient construction equipment, 

vehicles, and materials

• Limit construction equipment idling

• Develop and implement a program encouraging construction workers to carpool or use 

public transportation for travel to and from construction sites

• Locate construction materials production facilities on-site or in proximity to project work sites

• Schedule material deliveries during off-peak hours to minimize highway congestion

Mitigation Strategy GHG-2: During Tier 2/Project-level analysis, an operational energy 

conservation plan shall be required for the specific rail infrastructure or station facility proposed. The 

operational energy conservation plan shall identify best management practices, including, but not 

limited to, the following:

• Limit operational idling at stations

• Identify state-of-the-art locomotives to maximize fuel efficiency

• Target-market to drivers of single-occupancy vehicles to maximize the effects of rail modal 

use on energy conservation and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions

• Concentrate bus-service routes to feed passengers to train stations

• Bring dispersed riders to train stations through other methods (e.g., demand response 

systems [paratransit, taxi, shuttle, call-and-ride])
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.12 Public Utilities and Energy

May 2021 | 3.12-56

This page is intentionally blank.