Appendix C 

CALIFORNIA HIGH SPEED RAIL AUTHORITY

U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Railroad 

Administration

1

Errata for the Final Program Environmental Impact 

Report/Environmental Impact Statement for the 

Proposed California High-Speed Train System 

1.1 Introduction 

As a part of the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s and the Federal Railroad 

Administration’s review of the Final environmental impact report/environmental impact 

statement (EIR/EIS), several minor corrections were identified. These corrections 

make insignificant modifications to the EIR/EIS, are not considered significant new 

information, and do not change the analysis or conclusions of the Program EIR/EIS. 

These corrections merely clarify and amplify issues adequately addressed in the Final 

Program EIR/EIS. These corrections do not trigger the need to recirculate the 

document, per the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and 

the State CEQA Guidelines (CA Pub. Res. Code Section 21092.1; CA Code of 

Regulations, Title 14, Section 15088.5), and do not trigger the need to prepare a 

supplement, per the requirements of the U.S. Council on Environmental Quality 

National Environmental Policy Act regulations (40 CFR 1502.9(c)(1)). 

1.2 Corrections 

The table below shows the corrections to the Final Program EIR/EIS. Additions are 

shown in underline, deletions are shown in strikethrough, and notes are shown in 

italics. 

Chapter Location Page Change 

Section 3.4, Noise, 

subsection 3.4.6, B. 

Vibration Mitigation 

3.4-25 1. Specify the use of train and track technologies that minimize 

ground vibration such as state of the art suspensions, resilient 

track pads, tie pads, ballast mats or floating slabs.

2. Phase construction activity, use low impact construction 

techniques and avoid use of vibrating construction equipment 

where possible to avoid vibration impacts.

Section 3.5, 

Energy, subsection 

3.5.4, Operational 

(Direct) Energy 

3.5-14 By contrast, the proposed HST Alternative would increase direct 

energy consumption by 10% 9% over existing conditions, a much 

slower rate than the Modal or No Project Alternatives. 

Chapter 3, 

Affected 

Environment, 

Environmental 

Consequences, 

and Mitigation 

Strategies 

Section 3.12, 

Cultural and 

Paleontological 

Resources, Table 

3.12-1 

3.12-20 Medium Undetermined (applies to each occurrence in the HST row 

of the Paleontological column)
California High-Speed Train Final Program EIR/EIS Errata 

CALIFORNIA HIGH SPEED RAIL AUTHORITY

U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Railroad 

Administration

2

Chapter Location Page Change 

Table 3.14 1, title 3.14-10 Summary of Hydrologic Resources within Potentially Affected Areas 

Table 3.15-1, title 3.15-21 Summary of Potential Impacts on Biological Resources within the 

Potentially Affected Area for Modal and HST Alternatives

Section 3.17, 

Cumulative Impacts 

Evaluation 

3.17-14 Delete last paragraph in subsection and replace with the following. 

Program-level mitigation for Modal and HST Alternative 

contributions to the cumulative impacts to 4(f) and 6(f) resources, as 

discussed in Chapter 3 (Sections 3.16.6, 3.16.7, 3.16.8), include 

sound barriers, visual buffers/landscaping, and modification of 

transportation access to/egress from the resource. Some of these 

measures could include design modifications or controls on 

construction schedules, phasing, and activities. 

Planning efforts would be undertaken as a part of the project-level 

documentation phase to minimize harm to the Section 4(f) and 6(f) 

resources. At this second-tier review, it is expected that, for the 

proposed HST alignments, most of the impacts to individual park 

resources will be avoided or mitigated to a less-than-significant 

level, thereby minimizing contributions to cumulative impacts to 

public parks and recreation resources. At a project level, mitigation 

measures that may be taken to mitigate potential adverse 

environmental impacts include beautification measures, 

replacement of land or structures or their equivalents on or near 

their existing site(s), tunneling, cut and cover, cut and fill, treatment 

of embankments, planting, screening, creating wildlife corridors, 

acquisition of land for preservation, installation of noise barriers, and 

establishment of pedestrian or bicycle paths. Other potential 

mitigation strategies could be identified during the public input 

process.

Subsection 5.3.3, 

Statewide 

Comparison of 

Alternatives 

5-10 Urbanized areas in California are expected to grow by 48% between 

2004 2002 and 2035 under the No Project Alternative, as shown in 

Table 5.3-3.

Chapter 5, 

Economic 

Growth and 

Related Impacts 

B. Detail for HST 

Alternative 

5-13 The HST Alternative would also need less land than the Modal 

Alternative; in 2035, the HST Alternative would consume 

approximately 68,100 ac (27,559 ha) fewer, or 1.4% less, of nonurbanized land than the Modal Alternative. 
California High-Speed Train Final Program EIR/EIS Errata 

CALIFORNIA HIGH SPEED RAIL AUTHORITY

U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Railroad 

Administration

3

Chapter Location Page Change 

Section 7.1, 

Adverse 

Unavoidable 

Potentially 

Significant Impacts 

7-2 Add the following subsection: 

7.1.4 Cumulative Impacts 

The Modal and HST Alternatives would each commit the use of land 

and natural resources to a transportation right-of-way causing 

significant and unavoidable direct impacts, as described in 7.1.2 . 

The construction of either the Modal or HST Alternatives could, in 

addition, cause a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts 

related to land use, agricultural lands, aesthetics and visual 

resources, cultural and paleontological resources, biological 

resources and wetlands, and public parks and recreation resources. 

As with the direct impacts, potential cumulative impacts would need 

to be further studied and clarified in the next stage of project design 

and environmental review, when more specific information would be 

available on the right-of-way needed for proposed alignments and 

station locations, and on the specific properties potentially affected. 

The objective at the project-specific stage of analysis would be to 

identify design options (plans and profiles) that would avoid or 

substantially reduce the contribution to the significant cumulative 

impacts, to the extent feasible. 

Section 7.3.2, 

Significant 

Unavoidable 

Adverse Effects, 

second paragraph 

7-4 Depending on the alignment options that may ultimately be 

selected, potentially significant unavoidable effects can be expected 

at some locations within the proposed HST system in the general 

environmental categories of agricultural lands, biological resources 

and wetlands, hydrology and water resources, and cultural 

resources, and cumulative impacts. 

Table 7.3-1, title 7-6 Add the following footnote to table title: 

1

 Short-term impacts, such as construction-related impacts, are not 

described. 

Table 7.3-1, Traffic 

and Circulation 

row, After 

Mitigation column 

7-6 potentially significant/ unavoidable

Table 7.3-1, Land 

Use row, Before 

Mitigation column 

7-8 Potentially significant/unavoidable

Table 7.3-1, Land 

Use row, After 

Mitigation column 

7-8 Potentially significant/unavoidable

Table 7.3-1, Visual 

Quality row, After 

Mitigation column 

7-9 Potentially less than significant

Table 7.3-1, 

Hydrology and 

Water Resources 

row, After 

Mitigation column 

7-11 potentially significant/ unavoidable

Chapter 7, 

Unavoidable 

Adverse 

Environmental 

Impacts 

Table 7.3-1, 

Section 4(f) and 

6(f) (Public Parks 

and Recreation) 

row, After 

Mitigation column 

7-11 Potentially less than significant / Potentially significant/ unavoidable 

indirect impacts
California High-Speed Train Final Program EIR/EIS Errata 

CALIFORNIA HIGH SPEED RAIL AUTHORITY

U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Railroad 

Administration

4

Chapter Location Page Change 

Table 7.3-1, Public 

Utilities row, Modal 

Alternative column 

7-13 Potential conflicts with 831 833 utilities. 

Table 7.3-1, Public 

Utilities row, HST 

Alternative column 

7-13 Potential conflicts with 545 to 812 511 to 842 utilities, depending on 

alignments. 

Summary S.5 Key Findings S-8 The key findings of this Draft Final Program EIR/EIS indicate that 

taking no action under the No Project Alternative would not meet the 

intercity travel needs projected for the future (2020) as population 

continues to grow, and would fail to meet purpose and need or the 

objectives of a statewide HST system.