August 18, 2020 

Subject: Dismissal of Complaint DOT# 2018-0339 

Dear 

1200 NewJerse·v .A.venue, SE. 

Washington, DC 20590 

In Reply Refer to: HCR-20 

DOT# 2018-0339 

This letter is to info1m you that the Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) Office of Civil 

Rights has detennined that it will dismiss the above complaint, which alleges violations that may 

be related to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the U.S. Department ofTransportation 

(USDOT) Title VI implementation regulations at 49 C.F.R. Paii 21 and/or FHWA's Title VI 

regulations at 23 C.F.R. Paii 200 (hereinafter Title VI). Title VI prohibits discrimination on the 

basis of race, color, or national origin in programs and activities receiving Federal financial 

assistance. 

You allege that CAL TRANS violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by failing to 

account for or mitigate impacts on the Hispanic community as a result of the SR-132 Project. 

The impacts you cite include those on air quality, noise, soil pollution, relocation and on 

community cohesion. You fmiher allege that the public involvement process used by 

CALTRANS was insufficient and failed to adequately consult with the predominantly Hispanic 

Community of Elm Tract. 

The SR-132 Project is a proposal to build a fom-lane, divided, controlled access freeway along 

Kansas A venue to the N011h of the cmTent alignment along Maze Boulevard. The Project 

described in the environmental documents is being constmcted in two phases. The Project goes 

from SR-99 in the East to No1ih Dakota Ave in the West and is approximately three miles in 

length. Two alternatives were considered in addition to no-build that featured similai· alignment 

along Kansas Ave and differed near the eastern tenninus in how they reconnect with SR-99. 

Alternatives along the current alignment were mled out early in the process and did not make it 

to the final enviromnental study. Alternative #2 was the selected alternative and includes the 

relocation of 7 businesses and 28 residences. 

FHW A accepted the complaint for investigation in December 2018. Dming the course of its 

investigation, FHW A conducted a site visit in August 2019 and reviewed pe1iinent Project 

documentation. FHWA's investigation focused on the following issues: 
1. Whether CALTRANS violated Title VI due to potential disparate, adverse impacts to the 

predominantly Hispanic community of Elm Tract as result of the proposed State Route 

132 West Freeway/Expressway Project. 

2. Whether CALTRANS properly accounted for and mitigated impacts to the community as 

a result of the project during the environmental review process. Such impacts include air 

quality, noise, soil pollution, relocations and effects on community cohesion. 

3. Whether the public involvement process used by CALTRANS during the environmental 

review for the State Route 132 West project lacked adequate consultation with the 

predominantly Hispanic community of Elm Tract. 

After careful consideration, FHWA has determined the allegations and facts in your complaint 

do not meet the minimum criteria under which FHWA could establish a case of disparate impact 

under Title VI. The available information is insufficient to show that populations in the Project 

vicinity, distinguishable by race, color, or national origin, will be—or have been—disparately 

impacted by the Project. FHWA also finds that even if the Project would result in adverse, 

disparate impacts, CALTRANS has provided a substantial legitimate justification for its actions 

and shown that a less discriminatory alternative has not been identified. 

Specifically, FHWA did not find sufficient evidence that the Project would create disparate 

impacts in regards to air quality, noise, soil pollution, relocations and effects on community 

cohesion: 

• Air Quality: CALTRANS estimated in its May 2016 Air Quality Study Report that the 

Project would result in lower emissions as compared to the no-build alternative. 

• Soil Pollution: Hazardous materials in soil stockpiles will be monitored and maintained 

according to a remedial action plan approved by the California Department of Toxic 

Substances Control. 

• Noise: Noise impacts to Elm Tract and surrounding residential areas will be mitigated by 

a noise barrier on the south side of the new alignment. 

• Relocations: The selected alternative had less residential relocations than the other build 

alternatives. Most of the new alignment is being built on land already within the 

CALTRANS right-of-way. 

• Community Cohesion: The selected alternative provides several improvements to 

pedestrian and bicycle mobility. The improvements include new bicycle lanes and ADAcompliant sidewalks. 

For these reasons, the complaint will be dismissed by FHWA and closed with no further action. 

If you have any questions, please contact Nichole McWhorter at (202) 366-1396. 

Page 2 of 3 
Sincerely, 

Nichole McWhorter 

Title VI Team Leader 

Office of Civil Rights 

cc: Vincent Mammano, Division Administrator, FHWA CA Division Office 

Paul Schneider, Chief Operating Officer, FHWA CA Division Office 

Will McClure, Civil Rights Program Manager, FHWA CA Division Office 

Scott Carson, Civil Rights Specialist, FHWA CA Division Office 

Jim Esselman, Senior Attorney-Advisor, FHWA Office of Chief Counsel 

Yvette Rivera, Associate Director, Equal Employment Opportunity Programs Division 

Kevin Resler, National Title VI Program Coordinator, FHWA Office of Civil Rights 

Page 3 of 3