SYSTEM

TRANSPORTATION GOODS MOVEMENT

ADOPTED | APRIL 2016

APPENDIX

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
SYSTEM VISION 1

THE REGIONAL GOODS MOVEMENT SYSTEM 1

THE SUPPLY CHAIN SYSTEM AND SOUTHERN 

CALIFORNIA 5

KEY FUNCTIONS AND MARKETS 8

TECHNOLOGY AND CONSUMER BEHAVIOR 

IMPACTING GOODS MOVEMENT 12

GOODS MOVEMENT TRENDS AND DRIVERS 13

HIGHWAY STRATEGIES 13

REGIONAL CLEAN FREIGHT CORRIDOR SYSTEM 20

TRUCK BOTTLENECK RELIEF STRATEGY 22

RAIL STRATEGIES 27

ON-DOCK/NEAR-DOCK RAIL CAPACITY 

ENHANCEMENTS 32

OTHER STRATEGIES 36

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 

(ITS) AND FREIGHT 39

GOODS MOVEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGY 

AND ACTION PLAN 43

NOTES 78

ADOPTED | APRIL 2016

APPENDIX

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT
GOODS MOVEMENT

SYSTEM VISION

Our region’s transportation network for moving goods, referred to as our “goods movement” 

system, relies on a complex infrastructure that supports multiple modes of transportation. 

This system includes deep-water marine ports, international border crossings, Class I 

rail lines, interstate highways, state routes and local connector roads, air cargo facilities, 

intermodal facilities and distribution and warehousing centers.

With rising consumer demand for multiple shopping options, faster order replenishment 

and inexpensive or free two-way shipping costs, holistic supply chain strategies supported 

by a reliable transportation network are critical. Supply chain strategies are becoming 

increasingly complex and imposing greater demands on our transportation system. 

Collaborative planning is critical in this emerging environment and to this end, the Southern 

California Association of Governments (SCAG) continues to support the vision for the 

region’s goods movement system established in coordination with our public and private 

sector industry partners. 

SCAG supports a world-class, coordinated Southern California goods 

movement system that accommodates growth in the throughput of freight 

to the region and nation in ways that support the region’s economic vitality, 

attainment of clean air standards and the quality of life for our communities.

This vision continues to promote the improvement of the goods 

movement system in order to:

z Maintain the long-term economic competitiveness of the region

z Promote local and regional job creation and retention

z Increase freight and passenger mobility

z Improve the safety of goods movement activities

z Mitigate environmental impacts of goods movement operations

In support of this vision, the 2016 RTP/SCS describes a goods movement system with 

regional initiatives and projects totaling about $71 billion through 2040. This Plan includes 

key initiatives identified in past RTPs, namely a comprehensive system of zero- and near 

zero-emission freight corridors, alleviation of major bottlenecks, a rail corridor improvement 

package and an environmental strategy to address emissions through both near-term 

initiatives and a long-term action plan for technology advancement.

This Goods Movement Appendix provides an overview of our regional goods movement 

system, describing key components and how they work together to support commerce 

and our economy. The following section describes critical markets served, and how 

these markets depend on our transportation infrastructure. The final section identifies 

regional strategies and initiatives, including an action plan to support the development 

and commercialization of technologies necessary for a zero and near-zero emissions 

goods movement system.

THE REGIONAL GOODS MOVEMENT SYSTEM

The goods movement system in the SCAG region is comprised interconnected infrastructure 

components designed to serve commercial activities spurred by regional, national and 

global demand. This goods movement system provides the backbone for the flow of goods 

between businesses and consumers. Numerous demand factors (e.g., types of products, 

destinations, urgency, costs, etc.) create unique markets that must be accommodated by 

varying types of goods movement activities. Markets in the SCAG region range from origins 

like local manufacturing companies and the San Pedro Bay Ports to business and customers 

across the U.S. These markets depend on an extensive regional transportation network that 

provides the mobility and speed necessary to support economic growth. These mobility 

needs, coupled with air quality, environmental and community challenges posed by regional 

goods movement activities, serve as the rationale for developing a comprehensive plan to 

enhance the regional freight system.

COMPONENTS OF THE REGIONAL GOODS MOVEMENT 

SYSTEM

EXHIBIT 1 depicts the region’s multimodal goods movement system, which is comprised of 

the following major elements:

z Seaports (Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Hueneme): Serving as the 

largest container port complex in the U.S., the Ports of Los Angeles and Long 

Beach (together called the San Pedro Bay Ports) handled about 117 million metric 

tons of imports and exports in 2014 – for a total value of goods at about $395.7 

billion.1

The Port of Hueneme, in Ventura County, specializes in the import and 

export of automobiles and produce, and serves as the primary support facility 

for the offshore oil industry. In 2014, two-way trade activities through the Port of 

Hueneme were valued at nearly $9.2 billion and generated $1.1 billion in economic 

activities in the immediate region.2
 2 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

along key goods movement corridors (EXHIBIT 1). Port-related warehousing 

is concentrated in the Gateway Cities subregion, while national and regional 

distribution facilities tend to be located in the Inland Empire.

z Interstate, Highways and Local Roads: Our region has about 70,000 lane 

miles of roadways.6 Sections of I-710, I-605, SR-60 and SR-91, which carry the 

highest volumes of truck traffic in the region, averaged more than 25,000 trucks 

per day in 2013. Other major components of the regional highway network also 

serve significant numbers of trucks. These include I-5, I-10, I-15 and I-210. More 

than 20,000 trucks per day travel on some sections. These roads carry a mix 

of cargo loads, including local, domestic and international. The arterial roadway 

system also plays a critical role in goods movement, providing first and last-mile 

connections to regional ports, manufacturing facilities, intermodal terminals, 

warehousing and distribution centers and retail outlets.

z Primary Highway Freight System: With the recent passage of the Fixing America’s 

Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, the Primary Highway Freight System (PHFS) 

is designated, using a 41,000 mile highway network. Within the SCAG region, 

about 1,477.33 miles of highways are designated as a part of the PHFS, with 

Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties accounting for about 60 percent 

of the total coverage. TABLE 1 shows the breakdown of the miles by county 

within the SCAG region.

EXHIBIT 2 shows the location of both the PHFS coverage within the SCAG region.

z Land Ports: The international border crossings in Imperial County are busy 

commercial land ports; they were responsible for more than $8 billion in imports 

and $6 billion in exports in 2014. This cross-border commerce was driven by the 

maquiladora trade, as well as the movement of agricultural products.

z Air Cargo Facilities: The region is home to numerous air cargo facilities, including 

Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) and Ontario International Airport (ONT). 

Together they handled more than 99 percent of the region’s air cargo, valued at 

more than $96 billion3

, in 2014.

z Class I Railroads: Critical to the growth of the region’s economy, the Burlington 

Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) and Union Pacific (UP) carry international 

and domestic cargo to and from distant parts of the country. The BNSF mainline 

operates on the Transcontinental Line (Cajon and San Bernardino Subdivisions). 

The UP operates on the Coast Line, Saugus Line through Santa Clarita, Alhambra 

and LA Subdivisions, and Yuma Subdivision to El Paso. Both railroads operate on 

the Alameda Corridor that connects directly to the San Pedro Bay Ports. The San 

Pedro Bay Ports also provide several on-dock rail terminals along with the six 

major intermodal terminals operated by the BNSF and UP. The SCAG region also 

has Class III railroads (Pacific Harbor Line, Los Angeles Junction Railway and the 

Ventura County Railway) that provide short-haul services.

z Warehouse and Distribution Centers: In 2014, the region had close to 1.2 billion 

square feet of facility space for warehousing, distribution, cold storage and truck 

terminals.4

 Nearly 750 million square feet of this space, or 4,900 buildings, were 

facilities that are larger than 50,000 square feet. An estimated ten percent of 

the occupied warehouse space served port-related uses, while the remaining 90 

percent supported domestic shippers.5 Many of these warehouses are clustered 

Table 1 Primary Highway Freight System-Southern California Summary

County Total Miles of Primary Freight Network % Share

Imperial 77.74 5.3%

Los Angeles 460.81 31.2%

Orange 126.21 8.5%

Riverside 312.72 21.2%

San Bernardino 446.88 30.2%

Ventura 52.97 3.6%

Total 1,477.33 100.0%

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation

Note: Does not include “Other Interstate” portions not on the PHFS, Critical Rural Freight Corridors (CRFCs), nor Critical Urban 

Freight Corridors (CUFCs).
91

14

60

126

71

57

60

110

134

91

22

134

101

101

101

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

105

5

10

405

210

San

Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los

Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Camarillo

Simi

Valley

Thousand

Oaks Burbank

Carson

Glendale Los

Angeles Pasadena

Pomona

Whittier

Calabasas

Adelanto

Apple

Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino

Hills

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Ontario

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto

Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca

Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa

Clarita

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Temecula

Perris

Moreno

Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa

Valley

San

Jacinto

Banning

Calimesa

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La Q

Palm

Springs

Anaheim

Brea

Fullerton

Irvine

Orange

Santa

Ana

Seal

Beach

(Source: SCAG, CoStar Realty Information Inc.)

8

10

10

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Imperial

County

Ports

Ports of Entry

Major Airports

Intermodal Facilities Routes

Major Freight Highway Corridors

Main Line Rail Network

Alameda Corridor

0 5 10 2.5

Miles

Warehouses

>= 50,000 sq ft

< 50,000 sq ft

Exhibit 1 Existing Regional Goods Movement System
Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxnard

Arca dia Azusa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

La

Mirada

Los Angeles Monrovia

Mo nterey

Park

Norwa lk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Colton

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto San

Bernardino Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastva le

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert H ot Springs

San

Jacinto

Beaum ont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

Desert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La 

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Huntingto n

Beach

Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

San

Clemente

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yorba Linda 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

110

134

91

22

134

101

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110 5

10

405

210

210

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Primary Highway Freight System

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation

8

10

10

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Imperial

County

° 0 5 10 2.5

Miles

Exhibit 2 Primary Highway Freight System 

Note: Does not include “Other Interstate” portions not on the PHFS, Critical Rural Freight Corridors (CRFCs), nor Critical Urban Freight Corridors (CUFCs).
 5 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 5

As a premier global trade gateway to the U.S., Southern California boasts high 

concentrations of goods movement-dependent industries, with each industry contributing 

considerably to the overall regional GDP and employment (TABLE 2). In 2014, the SCAG 

region’s goods movement-dependent industries collectively generated close to three 

million jobs, which is 33 percent of the region’s total number of jobs. These industries also 

contributed $291 billion, or 35 percent of the regional GDP in the same year. Among all 

goods movement-dependent industries, retail trade generated the highest number of jobs 

at 985,000, or 11 percent of the regional total, followed by manufacturing at 702,000 jobs 

or eight percent of the regional total. In terms of GDP, manufacturing contributed the most 

at $107 billion, or 13 percent, of the regional total, followed by the wholesale trade at $58 

billion, or seven percent of the regional total.

THE SUPPLY CHAIN SYSTEM AND SOUTHERN 

CALIFORNIA

Supply chains generally refer to end-to-end processes, starting from product demand 

forecasting and production planning, material sourcing, manufacturing and product delivery 

to intermediate nodes such as distribution centers and warehouses to consumption nodes 

such as stores. While supply chains encompass end-to-end processes, logistics involves 

the management of inventory, whether goods are in transit or stored in warehouses. The 

simplest definition of logistics is the flow of funds, goods and information between source 

and consumer. If logistics doesn’t flow, then the supply chain does not function.7

Businesses are continuously evaluating their supply chain strategies. Generally, functional 

products with steady demand, long product life and low profit margins (e.g., daily items such 

as toilet paper, canned foods, general purpose nails and screws) require efficient supply 

chains to minimize inventory and transportation cost. Innovative products with high demand 

uncertainties, high inventory cost, high seasonality and high profit margins (e.g., latest model 

of digital printers, high fashion items, seasonal furniture) require responsive supply chains 

to ensure that the products are available at the right time and in the right quantities. Further, 

businesses factor in supply chain trade-offs (i.e., making choices to accept less of one thing 

in order to receive more of something else).

There are several prominent forces that have facilitated the rapid globalization of supply 

chains in the last couple of decades. These include national GDP growth rates of foreign 

countries, the availability of skilled labor in different parts of the world, advanced technology, 

trade policies, and political and economic factors. The force of rapid globalization and 

information technology have raised the importance of international gateways as consumers 

demand faster order fulfillment and companies promise to deliver through their sophisticated 

global supply chains. Southern California is a key global trade gateway as many trade 

routes are connected through SCAG’s regional transportation system to the rest of the 

nation and the world.

GOODS MOVEMENT-DEPENDENT INDUSTRIES

All industries depend on reliable and efficient transportation services to meet their business 

objectives. Understanding the impacts and linkages between improvements in the 

transportation system and supply chains for key goods movement-dependent businesses is 

critical for making decisions to support the regional economy. Goods movement-dependent 

industries are defined as industries that operate frequent inbound and outbound freight 

vehicle trips and costs associated with goods movement have sizable impact on their 

business expenses. Key industries include construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade, 

retail trade, and transportation and warehousing.

Table 2 Regional Employment and GDP Contribution of Key Goods Movement-Dependent Industries 

(2014)

Key Industries Jobs (in 

Thousands)

% Share 

of Total 

GDP (in 

Billions)

% Share 

of Total

Construction 437 5% $29 3%

Manufacturing 702 8% $107 13%

Wholesale Trade 461 5% $58 7%

Retail Trade 985 11% $54 7%

Transportation and Warehousing 332 4% $23 3%

Other Goods Producing 82 1% $21 3%

All Goods Movement Dependent 

Industries 2,999 33% $291 35%

All Sectors 9,069 $820 

Source: Regional Economic Models, Inc. TranSight SCAG, CA, US v3.6.5

Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding.
 6 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

are moved between plants via trucks, especially if the plants are located within or near the 

SCAG region. As discussed in the next section, the SCAG region’s manufacturing industries 

have complementary relationships with a number of manufacturers in Mexico, including 

maquiladoras along the Baja California border. The distance between the SCAG region and 

Mexico makes truck transportation the most desirable mode of transportation.

MANUFACTURING, NEAR-SHORING AND RE-SHORING

Manufacturing is expected to remain critical to the regional economy for the foreseeable 

future. This is largely due to the synergy created by increasing manufacturing activities in 

Mexico, especially in Baja California. Since 2007, Mexico has invested nearly $40 billion on 

transportation infrastructure to significantly improve the quality and increase the capacity 

of its multi-modal transportation system. The country generates approximately three times 

more engineering graduates each year as compared to the U.S. Mexico’s strategic decision 

to shift its manufacturing sector make-up two decades ago has resulted in a major shift 

from commodity manufacturing to high-tech manufacturing. As a result, Mexico’s industry 

cluster today includes manufacturing of vehicles, automotive parts, aerospace components, 

white goods (washers, dryers, refrigerators, etc.), electronics (cell phones and other small 

electronic devices), medical devices and pharmaceuticals.11

MANUFACTURING SECTOR IN THE SCAG REGION

While the overall national trend in the number of manufacturing establishments has been 

declining, the SCAG region remains the second largest manufacturing center in the nation, 

after the state of California (FIGURE 1).8

The top five manufacturing sectors in the SCAG region in terms of the number of 

establishments include fabricated metal product manufacturing, apparel manufacturing, 

food manufacturing9 and printing and related support activities.10 In 2013, the manufacturing 

sector generated over $34 billion in payroll. Contributing 13 percent to the regional GDP and 

generating eight percent of the region’s employment, manufacturing still plays an important 

role in the SCAG region’s economy.

The regional manufacturing sector relies heavily on truck transportation, followed by 

rail transportation. In 2014, the manufacturing sector spent over $2.25 billion on truck 

transportation, a 68 percent share of total direct transportation expenditures (TABLE 3). 

This is evident as many of the manufacturing facilities in the SCAG region are strategically 

located near major transportation corridors (EXHIBIT 3). This is a highly specialized and 

segmented industry, where a number of manufacturers individually handle various stages 

of production before products become finished goods. As a result, semi-finished goods 

2009

2011

2013

8.8

12.4

12.7

13.6

13.7

14.2

16.2

19.5

21.3

38.2

8.9

12.3

12.6

14.0

14.0

14.5

16.7

19.5

21.5

38.4

9.2

12.7

12.9

14.7

14.5

15.2

17.3

20.0

22.9

40.6

Wisconsin

Michigan

Florida

Illinois

Pennsylvania

Ohio

New York

Texas

SCAG Region

California

2009

2011

2013

Figure 1 Total Number of Manufacturing Establishments (in Thousands)

Source: U.S. Census County Business Patterns

Table 3 Expenditures on Transportation by Manufacturing Industries (2014) (Direct inputs)

Transportation Mode Spending on Different Transportation Modes

Millions of Dollars Percent of Total

Air transportation $211 6%

Rail transportation $424 13%

Water transportation $125 4%

Truck transportation $2,252 68%

Warehousing and storage $166 5%

Other* $113 3%

Total $3,291 100%

* Other includes “Transit and ground passenger transportation”, “Pipeline Transportation”, “Other transportation and support 

activities” and “Household production of transportation services”

Source: REMI TranSight for SCAG v3.7.6 and the Transportation Satellite Accounts Commodity-by-Industry Direct 

Requirements (2012)

Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding.
San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Simi Valley

Thousand Oaks

Oxnard

Agoura

Hills

Alham bra

Arcadia Azusa

Bell

Burbank

Carson

Cerritos

Compton

Diamond

Bar

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

Inglew ood

Irwindale

La Mirada

La

Los Angeles Verne

Monrovia

Monterey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

San

Dimas

Santa

Monica

So uth Ga te

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Colton

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto

San

Upland Bernardino

Victorville

Yucaipa

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet

Tem ecu la

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert Hot Springs

San Jacinto

Beaumont Banning

Calimesa

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

Palm

Springs

Aliso

Viejo

Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Cypress

Fo untain

Valle y

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Huntington

Beach

Irvine

La

Habra

Laguna

Niguel

Lake

Forest

Mission

Viejo

New port

Beach

Orange

San

Clemente

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach

Tustin

Yorba Linda 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Source: InfoGroup 2011

!!!!!

!

!!

!!

!!! ! !!! !! !

!!! !

!! !

!!

8

10

10

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Imperial

County

° 0 4.5 9 2.25

Miles

Manufacturing Firms by Total Employment

! <=50

! 51 - 100

! 101 - 250

! 251 - 500

! 501 - 1,000

! 1,001 - 3,000

Exhibit 3 Manufacturing Firms in the SCAG Region 
 8 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

expenditure for manufacturing sector was $3.3 billion (three percent of the SCAG region 

manufacturing GDP), the retail sector’s direct expenditure was $5.6 billion (ten percent of the 

SCAG region retail GDP) (TABLE 3 & 4). This indicates that a reliable transportation system is 

critical to the SCAG region’s retail industry.

KEY FUNCTIONS AND MARKETS

The freight transportation system in the SCAG region serves a wide range of user markets 

with unique performance needs that dictate the components of the system that they will use. 

The following provides a summary of international, domestic and local trade markets and 

associated transportation system needs.

INTERNATIONAL TRADE

The SCAG region is the largest international trade gateway in the U.S. with trade moving 

through the San Pedro Bay Ports, international land border crossings with Mexico and 

regional airports. This international trade is supported by an extensive transportation system 

that includes a highly developed network of roadways and railways, air cargo facilities, 

intermodal facilities and an abundance of regional distribution and warehousing clusters. 

While the SCAG region has made great strides in building infrastructure and planning for the 

future, continued investment is needed to support commerce and economic growth.

Many of the goods manufactured at plants in the SCAG region and Mexico are semifinished goods that receive further modifications and refinements before being transported 

to warehouses and distribution centers. Similarities in manufacturing commodities are 

observed in the types of manufacturing establishments that exist in the SCAG region 

and Mexico. These include transportation equipment, computer and electronic products, 

electrical equipment, appliances, and components and machinery.12 The similarities in 

commodities indicate that complementary manufacturing processes take place with 

Mexico. Often, semi-finished products are moved across the border several times, each 

time getting closer to finished products, before being shipped to final destinations in the U.S. 

for consumption. This synthesized manufacturing system is expected to continue as more 

businesses observe the benefits of near-shoring.

While outsourcing and off-shoring of manufacturing still dominate the current industry 

practice, some multi-national corporations such as General Electric and Caterpillar are reshoring jobs to the U.S. The types of products that lend themselves to re-shoring, however, 

are relatively limited. These include electrical equipment, appliances, transportation 

equipment, computers and electronics, plastics and rubber products, fabricated metal 

products and machinery. Top decision drivers for companies to re-shore include 13:

z Reduce time-to-market (73.7 percent);

z Reduce cost (63.9 percent);

z Improve product quality (62.2 percent);

z Gain more control (56.8 percent);

z Reduce hidden supply chain management costs (51.4 percent); and

z Protect intellectual property (48.5 percent).

RETAIL SUPPLY CHAINS

Retail trade includes a wide variety of subsectors including motor vehicles, furniture, 

electronics and appliances, building materials, health and personal care products, clothing, 

sporting goods and books. The retail industry supported nearly $30 billion in wages and 

salaries in 2014.14 In general, retail industries are heavily dependent on international trade to 

receive materials and products, usually through containerized cargo imported through the 

San Pedro Bay Ports. This industry is also heavily reliant on Southern California’s freight 

transportation systems to ensure products are available at stores as well as for the delivery 

of goods via online shopping.

Similar to the manufacturing sector, the direct transportation expenditures by the SCAG 

region’s retail industry exhibit the industry’s heavy reliance on truck transportation. 

Compared to the manufacturing sector, however, the retail industry spends significantly 

more on transportation services. In 2014, the regional GDP was almost $107 billion 

for manufacturing and $54 billion for retail (TABLE 2). While total direct transportation 

Table 4 Transportation Expenditures by Retail Industry (2014) (Direct inputs)

Transportation Mode Transportation Spending

In Millions Percent of Total

Air transportation $65.1 1%

Rail transportation $7.8 0%

Water transportation $2.8 0%

Truck transportation $3,290.8 59%

Warehousing and storage $1,524.0 27%

Other* $709.2 13%

Total $5,599.6 100%

* Other includes “Transit and ground passenger transportation”, “Pipeline Transportation”, “Other transportation and support 

activities” and “Household production of transportation services”

Source: REMI TranSight for SCAG v3.7.6 and the Transportation Satellite Accounts Commodity-by-Industry Direct 

Requirements (2012)
 9 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 9

Transloading is broadly defined as activities that involve the deconsolidation of the contents 

of marine containers, which are usually 40-foot equivalent units (FEUs) and reloading of 

their contents into 53-foot domestic trailers that can be transported by trucks. Transloading 

allows for the movement of increased amounts of goods while utilizing less equipment, 

resulting in significant cost savings through economies of scale and other transportationrelated savings. Transloading sometimes provides value-added services as well. Existing 

infrastructure, equipment and trade flows in the SCAG region provide a substantial 

competitive advantage and serve as a major economic incentive for importers to move freight 

requiring transloading through Southern California.

INTERNATIONAL BORDER CROSSINGS

International border crossings between the U.S. and Mexico are critical components of the 

freight transportation system in Southern California. Mexico remains the third-largest trading 

partner of the U.S. behind Canada and China, with a $534.5 billion trade volume in 2014, 

accounting for 13.5 percent of total U.S. foreign trade. It is also the largest market for exports 

of goods made in California, accounting for approximately $25.4 billion (or 12.4 percent) of 

California’s overall exports in 2014. Most of the merchandise flows in the California-Baja 

California region are made by truck, supporting manufacturing and maquiladora industries 

that lie on the Mexican side of the international border.

Increased trade across the border has been bolstered by the existence of multiple free trade 

zones (FTZs). As a result of the associated tax savings and lower wages in Mexico, FTZs 

have been used by U.S. companies to export raw materials into Mexican manufacturing 

firms (maquiladoras), where goods are processed or assembled and then exported back 

in their finished state to the U.S.17 The ability to transfer goods from one FTZ to another 

within Mexican territory without losing any of the fiscal incentives (tax savings) is slowly 

creating a logistics and manufacturing network of FTZs that is expected to boost Mexican 

foreign trade with the U.S.

As more businesses try to capitalize on the benefits of sourcing and manufacturing in 

Mexico, substantial impacts are expected on the transportation systems that service 

the border region and provide network connections to the trade nodes that have strong 

relationships with the border region i.e., the Inland Empire and the San Pedro Bay Ports.

In order to assess the mobility of commerce at the Imperial County-Mexicali border and 

to develop freight planning strategies that address long term trade and transportation 

infrastructure needs in this border region, SCAG is analyzing the patterns and the efficiency 

of goods that move across the border. Although analysis is still underway, some key findings 

include the following: (i) projected cross-border goods movement volumes in future years 

suggest that roadway congestion levels will increase, partly due to cross-border activities; (ii) 

transportation infrastructure in the greater Los Angeles area (intermodal rail, ports, roadway 

SAN PEDRO BAY PORTS

Containerized trade between the U.S. and Asia constitutes the majority of international 

cargo transiting the SCAG region, with over 32.5 percent of all containers in the U.S. moving 

through the San Pedro Bay Ports.15 Despite some modest shifts recently in container 

volumes to other U.S., Canadian and Mexican ports, total container volume for the San Pedro 

Bay Ports is still expected to grow to 36 million by 2035, a 225 percent increase over the 

next two decades (FIGURE 2).

Imports, which constitute most of the containers that move through the San Pedro Bay 

Ports, may be categorized as local or discretionary. Local containerized traffic is that which 

is ultimately consumed in a geographical area local to the San Pedro Bay Ports (Southern 

California, Southern Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico and southern portions of Utah and 

Colorado). Discretionary containerized traffic is that which terminates outside this region. 

Recent analysis indicates that local traffic carrying containerized imports accounts for 

approximately 22-29 percent of San Pedro Bay Ports’ total import-related traffic. The other 

71-78 percent is assumed to be discretionary traffic, routed through the San Pedro Bay Ports 

for economic reasons.16

Beyond local or discretionary (outside of the region), imports can be further categorized 

as Direct, Transloaded, or Rail. When containers arrive at the San Pedro Bay Ports, the 

way they move is largely determined by final consumption points, inventory needs and 

transportation costs (see FIGURE 3).

14 

16 

22 

35 36 

2010 (actual) 2015 2020 2030 2035

Figure 2 San Pedro Bay Ports Container Volume Trend and Projections (Millions of TEUs)

Source: Port of Long Beach and Port of Los Angeles, based on thier Feb. 2015 forecats:
 10 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Figure 3 Import Container Flow by Mode, Handling Process, and Destination

SAN PEDRO 

BAY PORTS

2470 2016.04.02

* Geographical areas included in Local Market are Southern California, Southern Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, and southern portions of Utah and 

Colorado for which the San Pedro Bay Ports serve as the closest container ports with the lowest land-side transportation costs. 

** Transloading is broadly defined as activities that involve the deconsolidation of the contents of marine containers, which are usually forty-foot 

equivalent units (FEUs), and reloading of their contents into 53-foot domestic trailers. Transloading allows for the movement of increased amounts 

of goods while utilizing less equipment, resulting in transportation cost savings through economies of scale. Transloading sometimes provides 

value-added services as well. 

LEGEND

MARINE

(40 Feet in Length)

DOMESTIC

(53 Feet in Length)

LOCAL* - 

DIRECT

LOCAL* -

TRANSLOAD**

OUTSIDE OF 

THE REGION -

TRANSLOAD**

OUTSIDE OF 

THE REGION - 

TRANSLOAD** 

TO RAIL 

OUTSIDE OF 

THE REGION - 

DIRECT RAIL 

(ON DOCK)

OUTSIDE OF 

THE REGION - 

DIRECT RAIL 

(NEAR/

OFF-DOCK)

SAN PEDRO 

BAY PORTS

SAN PEDRO 

BAY PORTS

SAN PEDRO 

BAY PORTS

SAN PEDRO 

BAY PORTS

SAN PEDRO 

BAY PORTS

LOCAL DRAY

DESTINATION 

DRAY

DESTINATION 

DRAY

ON-DOCK RAIL

NEAR/OFF-DOCK 

RAIL YARD

NEAR/OFF-DOCK 

RAIL YARD

REGIONAL 

DISTRIBUTION

CENTER

RETAIL 

OUTLETS

REGIONAL 

DISTRIBUTION

CENTER

RETAIL 

OUTLETS

REGIONAL 

DISTRIBUTION

CENTER

RETAIL 

OUTLETS

REGIONAL 

DISTRIBUTION

CENTER

RETAIL 

OUTLETS

REGIONAL 

DISTRIBUTION

CENTER

RETAIL 

OUTLETS

REGIONAL 

DISTRIBUTION

CENTER

RETAIL 

OUTLETS

TRANS-LOAD 

FACILITY**

LOCAL DRAY

LOCAL DRAY

LOCAL DRAY

LOCAL DRAY

TRANS-LOAD 

FACILITY**

TRANS-LOAD 

FACILITY**

DESTINATION 

DRAY
 11 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 11

network, air cargo facilities) and distribution facilities in the Inland Empire will continue to be 

critical in supporting the growth of manufacturing activities in Tijuana; (iii) the magnitude of 

the near-shoring trend and associated impacts on overall cross-border activities is yet to be 

determined; (iv) delays associated with land port of entry, especially for northbound finished 

goods, continue to be major concerns for companies on both sides of the border; and, (v) 

research & development, value engineering in certain manufacturing sectors like medical 

devices and components is providing additional opportunities for growth.

INTERNATIONAL AIR CARGO

Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) handled over 897,000 metric tons of cargo in 

2014, making it the seventh-busiest cargo airport in the United States and the 14th busiest 

in the world. Most often used for time-sensitive and higher-value goods, international air 

cargo plays a significant role in the regional economy, representing $96 billion in trade. 

Over 82 percent of the international air cargo at LAX is handled by scheduled passenger 

airlines or their cargo divisions that operate freighter aircraft. According to SCAG’s recent 

air cargo forecast, air cargo activity has been declining over the past decade, with most of 

this decline confined to domestic air cargo. International air cargo, representing nearly 60 

percent of tonnage handled, peaked in 2007, declined during the recession between 2007 

through 2009 and is slowly recovering to pre-recession levels. As the regional economy 

continues its recovery from the recession, international air cargo at LAX is expected to 

grow by 1.9 percent annually within the next twenty years, totaling 3.0 million metric 

tons by 2040. Preparing for this growth will be a major challenge for LAX over the coming 

decades as the existing urban footprint may limit the ability to address warehousing and 

office requirements, aeronautical infrastructure needs, auto parking demands and other 

landside operational issues.

DOMESTIC AND LOCAL GOODS MOVEMENT

While the region is a major gateway for international containers, local and domestic 

freight is dominant. An overwhelming majority of goods movement activity in the SCAG 

region is generated by local businesses moving goods to local customers and serving 

national domestic trade systems. These local goods movement-dependent industries 

rely on transportation as a key part of their business model and generally utilize a more 

geographically dispersed transportation network than the international container market. 

About 85 percent of truck trips are associated with intra-regional goods movement. 

Domestic manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers also use the rail system and the air cargo 

system, though to a much more limited extent than international shippers.

The regional transportation system provides the infrastructure to allow these businesses 

to ship and receive the materials necessary to perform daily operations. Examples include 

shipments of raw material to support manufacturing processes and the delivery of refined 

or finished products to market. Major goods movement-dependent industries include 

those related to the manufacturing, wholesale trade, construction, transportation and 

warehousing, and mining sectors.

30, 0%

26, 0% 26, 0%

437, 5%

702, 8%

461, 5%

985, 11%

332, 4%

Service and Other Industries

Forestry, Fishing, 

and Related Activities

Mining

Utilities

Construction

Manufacturing

Wholesale Trade

Retail Trade

Transportation and

Warehousing

Goods Movement-Dependent Industries

6,070, 67% 2,999, 33%

Figure 4 2014 Employment Contribution of Goods Movement-Dependent Industries (in Thousands) 

Source: REMI TranSight SCAG, CA, USv3.6.5.

$529.43,65% 

$0.64, 0%

$7.41, 1% $12.68, 2%

$28.67, 3%

$106.87, 13%

$57.97, 7%

$53.66, 6%

$22.60, 3%

Forestry, Fishing, 

and Related Activities

Mining

Utilities

Construction

Manufacturing

Wholesale Trade

Retail Trade

Transportation and

Warehousing

Service and Other Industries

Goods Movement-Dependent Industries

$290.50, 35% 

Figure 5 2014 Economic Contribution of Goods Movement-Dependent Industries (in Billions) 

Source: REMI TranSight SCAG, CA, USv3.6.5.
 12 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

TECHNOLOGY AND CONSUMER BEHAVIOR 

IMPACTING GOODS MOVEMENT

In 2014, the retail industry provided nearly $30 billion in wages and salaries for the region.19

This industry includes a wide variety of subsectors including motor vehicles, furniture, 

electronics and appliances, building materials, health and personal care products, clothing, 

sporting goods, and books. In general, retail industries are heavily dependent on international 

trade to receive materials and products, usually through containerized cargo imported 

through the San Pedro Bay Ports.

One of the most notable changes in the retail industry is the strong growth in e-commerce. 

E-commerce sales for U.S. retailers were $261 billion in 2013, an increase of 13.6 percent 

from 2012, while total sales increased by 3.8 percent at $4.5 trillion in 2013. Within the 

e-commerce sales merchandise category, clothing and clothing accessories had the 

largest sales at $40 billion, followed by electronics and appliances at nearly $23 billion. 

E-commerce provides consumers with a broad range of shopping options as they compare 

product prices instantaneously from their mobile devices and decide how the purchased 

products will be acquired (e.g., home delivery or store pick-up), known as omni-channel 

retailing (TABLE 5). Omni-channel retailing offers shoppers multiple purchasing and 

receiving options. Simultaneously, e-commerce has generated a considerable force of 

change in terms of how traditional distribution centers and retail outlets are operating to 

meet customer demands.

Distribution centers in the past delivered bulk size goods to their customers or single 

vendors. Because e-commerce orders tend to be smaller in size than the traditional 

distribution center orders (i.e., a single item order as compared to a bulk-case order), many 

retailers and distribution center/warehouse operators are upgrading their facilities, or 

developing new facilities to meet surging e-commerce orders.

In 2014, local goods movement-dependent industries employed over 2.9 million people 

throughout the region (FIGURE 4) and contributed $291 billion to the regional GDP. (FIGURE 

5). As shown in FIGURE 6 these industries are projected to grow steadily through 2040.

Regional GDP is a broad indicator of the level and strength of economic activity in a region. 

In the long term, the region’s GDP is projected to grow steadily through 2040 at a rate 

slightly faster than the U.S. economy as a whole. The region’s total GDP was $820 billion in 

2014 and is projected to top $1.45 trillion in 2040, growing at an average rate of 2.3 percent 

between these years. In comparison, the U.S. economy (U.S. GDP) is expected to grow at 2.4 

percent annually during the same period.18

Mirroring national trends, this GDP growth is anticipated to be accompanied by an increasing 

transition toward a higher value-added manufacturing and service economy. The predicted 

highest-growth industry sectors from 2014 to 2040 include the manufacturing, wholesale 

trade and construction sectors—all of which are highly dependent on the regional freight 

transportation system. All three of these sectors will more than double in size over the next 

two decades and will contribute a combined $545 billion to regional GDP by 2040.

4.5%

2.6% 2.8%

2.5%

2.2%

Construction Manufacturing Wholesale

Trade

Retail Trade Transportation

and

Warehousing

Figure 6 2014-2040 Average Real Annual Growth Rates by Major Goods Movement-Dependent 

Sectors 

Source: REMI TranSight SCAG, CA, USv3.6.5.

Table 5 Omni-Channel Retailing Options

Shopping Mode Fulfillment Options Return Options

• In store

• Online or catalog

• Via phone or other 

mobile device

• Pick up in store

• Online or catalog

• Ship from warehouse/distribution center

• Direct shipping from manufacturer

• In store

• Online

• Via phone or other 

mobile device

Source: Industrial Warehousing in the SCAG Region Study, Task 3 Trend Report, SCAG, 2015
 13 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 13

Meanwhile, mitigating the impacts of increased train traffic in communities will 

continue to be a challenge.

z Logistics Epicenter: Southern California continues to be the nation’s epicenter 

for distribution and logistics activity despite challenges that were observed in 

recent years, including increasing land prices, labor cost and transportation cost 

for moving goods through Southern California. The geographical proximity to 

the nation’s largest container ports and accessibility to the rest of the country via 

the region’s extensive transportation network make Southern California an ideal 

location for many logistics activities. With continued growth in international trade 

and regional and national population, Southern California is poised to continue 

serving as a global trade node.

z Air Quality Issues: Much of our region does not meet federal air quality standards 

for ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Ships, trucks, trains and other 

goods movement equipment are among the largest contributors to regional air 

pollution. Criteria pollutants such as NOX and PM2.5 can have significant public 

health impacts. Freight transportation is also a major producer of greenhouse gas 

emissions. Emissions generated by the movement of goods are being reduced 

through efforts such as the San Pedro Bay Ports Celan Air Action Plan, as well 

as regulations such as the statewide Heavy Duty Truck and Bus Rule. But these 

reductions are unlikely to be sufficient to meet regional air quality goals. 

z Emissions generated by the movement of goods are being reduced through efforts 

such as the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan, as well as regulations 

such as the statewide Heavy Duty Truck and Bus Rule. But these reductions are 

unlikely to be sufficient to meet regional air quality goals.

HIGHWAY STRATEGIES

Our strategies will now be described, however, for information on individual regional goods 

movement projects, refer to Regional Goods Movement Project List (TABLE 19) at the 

end of this appendix.

EXISTING AND PROJECTED HIGHWAY CONDITIONS

With continued growth in freight demands, regional truck-related activities will increase over 

the 2016 RTP/SCS time horizon. SCAG’s Heavy Duty Truck (HDT) model is the primary 

analysis tool to evaluate the impacts of truck traffic and highway goods movement strategies 

on the regional transportation network. Major sources of truck traffic are grouped into the 

following categories in SCAG’s HDT model:

Further, consumers are increasingly demanding quicker fulfillment of their orders and sameday delivery options. To meet the same-day delivery promise, distribution or fulfillment 

center proximity to population centers becomes critical. This is exemplified by large-scale 

e-commerce fulfillment center developments in the periphery of urban population centers. 

At the same time, small to medium size buildings that are narrow, but with ample loading 

doors and docks in urban cores, have also been attractive as they provide even quicker 

access to dense population centers than those in the outskirts. Additionally, retailers are 

increasingly using products available at their stores to fulfill e-commerce orders. This has 

increased their reliance on parcel delivery services such as UPS, FedEx and the U.S. Postal 

Service, making parcel hubs, delivery centers, as well as local streets and highways in urban 

environments critical to e-commerce.20,21,22

GOODS MOVEMENT TRENDS AND DRIVERS

A number of key trends and drivers are expected to impact our region’s goods movement 

system. Some of these are highlighted below:

z Population and Employment Growth: The regional population and rate of 

employment in our region are key indicators of economic health, and both are 

projected to grow rapidly over the next two decades. By 2040, the region’s 

population is expected to grow by about 21 percent and employment is expected 

to grow by about 32 percent. This growth is expected to fuel consumer demand 

for products and in turn, the goods movement services that provide them. 

This increased demand will drive stronger growth in freight traffic on already 

constrained highways and rail lines.

z Unemployment rates: The rates have declined in more recent years for the region. 

The latest data reflects a 6.6 percent unemployment rate for the region—a decline 

from 7.5 percent a year ago.23 The Inland Empire, in particular, is experiencing 

steady job growth with a 6.9 percent unemployment rate—2.1 percentage points 

lower than it was one year ago. Employment growth in the Inland Empire is being 

led by the Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities sectors.24

z Continued Growth in International Trade: The San Pedro Bay Ports anticipate 

cargo volumes to grow to 36 million containers by 203525—despite increasing 

competition with other North American ports, the expansion of the Panama Canal 

and more recent delays at the port terminals due to labor contract negotiations. 

Port of Hueneme in Ventura County is also positioned to grow as a preferred port 

for specialized cargo such as automobiles, break bulk fruit and military cargo. 

This growth will place further demands on marine terminal facilities, highway 

connections, and rail intermodal terminals. If port-related rail traffic and commuter 

demands are to be met, main line rail capacity improvements also will be required. 
Alhambra

Arcadia

Artesia

Azusa

Baldwin Park

Bell

Bell Gardens

Bellflower

Bradbury

Carson

Cerritos

Claremont

Commerce

Compton

Covina

Cudahy

Diamond Bar

Downey

Duarte

El Monte

Glendale

Glendora

Hawaiian

Gardens

Huntington Park

Industry

Irwindale

La Habra Heights

La Mirada

La Puente

La Verne

Lakewood

Los Angeles

Lynwood

Maywood

Monrovia

Montebello

Monterey Park

Norwalk

Paramount

Pasadena

Pico Rivera

Pomona

Rosemead

San Dimas

San Gabriel

San Marino

Santa Fe Springs

Sierra Madre

Signal Hill

South El Monte

South Gate

South Pasadena

Temple City

Vernon

Walnut

West Covina

Whittier

Long Beach

Chino

Chino Hills

Montclair

Ontario

Upland Rancho Cucamonga

Eastvale

Corona

Jurupa V

Norco

Anaheim

Brea

Buena Park

Cypress

Fountain Valley

Fullerton

Garden Grove

Huntington Beach

Irvine

La Habra

La Palma

Los Alamitos

Orange

Placentia

Santa Ana

Seal Beach

Stanton

Tustin

Villa Park

Westminster

Yorba Linda

60

71

57

110

134

91

22

134

01

210

605

710

15

5

10

405

210

210

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

(Source: SCAG)

° 0 1 2 0.5

Miles

2012 I 2040 

DAILY TRUCKS (BIDIRECTIONAL)

Numbers in thousands (rounded)

41

68

28

44

34 18

36 20

32 18

22 33

29 19

22 29

37

17

36

23

39 27

25

17 26

34

25 15

23

17

Exhibit 4 Rising Truck Volumes On Key Truck Corridors 

(2012 and 2040 Baseline)
 15 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 15

AM and PM Peak periods, respectively. EXHIBIT 7 illustrates the expected speeds on the 

regional highway network during the PM Peak period in 2040 if no action is taken.

HIGHWAY TRUCK COLLISIONS

Truck-involved collisions are of critical concern as the region’s highways carry high volumes 

of trucks daily. Between 2010 and 2012, truck-involved collisions on the region’s highway 

network totaled 5,013, predominately along heavily truck traveled corridors in Los Angeles 

County and the Inland Empire.

EXHIBIT 8 shows truck involved crashes on the major highways in the region on a per-mile 

basis. Some of the key locations with the highest truck involved crashes are located along 

the following highways within our region:

z I-5 between SR-60 and I-10

z SR-60 east of SR-57 to Euclid Ave

z I-710 North of I-5

z I-710 between I-105 and SR-91

z I-10 between SR-57 and I-215

z Internal Truck Trips: These are truck trips that have both an origin and a 

destination within the SCAG region and are generated by local industries, 

construction sites, domestic warehouses, truck terminals and residences.

z External Truck Trips: These are interregional truck trips that reflect trade between 

the SCAG region and the rest of the U.S.

z Port Truck Trips: These are truck trips with an origin or destination at the 

San Pedro Bay Ports.

z Secondary Port Truck Trips: These are truck trips with an initial origin or 

destination at the San Pedro Bay Ports that are moved a second time after the first 

trip to or from the San Pedro Bay Ports. Transloading trips are in this category.

z Intermodal (IMX) Truck Trips: These are domestic intermodal truck trips that have 

origins or destinations at regional intermodal rail terminals. These truck trips do not 

include those that have either an origin or destination at the San Pedro Bay Ports.

TABLE 6 shows the number of regional truck trips in 2012 by category and county.

In 2012, the San Pedro Bay Ports were responsible for approximately 55,000 direct daily 

regional truck trips. As shown in TABLE 6, this constitutes only five percent of regional truck 

trips. That number is expected to grow to approximately 87,000 daily regional truck trips, an 

increase of nearly 58 percent, by 2040.

All key regional highway corridors used to move goods are expected to see an increase in 

overall truck volumes by 2040 (EXHIBIT 4 reflects 2040 baseline conditions). EXHIBIT 5 

and EXHIBIT 6 illustrate existing truck speeds on the regional highway network during the 

Table 6 Daily Regional Truck Trips by Category by County 

* Does not include the trips between external to external SCAG zones (about 10,000 trips)

Source: SCAG

Imperial Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino Ventura Total Percent

Internal 10,002 550,207 174,631 89,910 112,434 45,781 982,965 84.8%

External * 2,061 47,992 8,046 4,231 7,601 2,347 72,278 6.2%

Port 14 50,585 1,460 659 1,897 104 54,719 4.7%

Intermodal (IMX) 6 5,430 284 197 1,610 44 7,571 0.7%

Secondary 2 5,986 307 128 1,206 20 7,648 0.7%

Total 12,085 660,200 184,728 95,124 124,748 48,295 1,125,181

Percent 1.0% 56.9% 15.9% 8.2% 10.8% 4.2%
%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

%&'

%&'

%&'

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

%&'

%&'

(/

|}ÿ

(/

|}ÿ

%&'

%&'

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

%&' |}ÿ

Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxnard

Arcadia Azu sa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

La Mirada

Los Angeles Mo nrovia

Mon terey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Co lt on

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto San

Bernardino Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert Hot Springs

San

Jacinto

Beaumont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

De sert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La Q

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Hu ntington

Beach

Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

Sa n

Clem e n te

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yo rb a L in d a 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

105

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

AM Peak Speed (mph) 2012 Less than 35 36 to 50 Greater than 50

Source: SCAG

%&'

%&'

%&'

8

10

10

° 0 5 10 2.5

Miles

Exhibit 5 Average 2012 Weekday Truck Speeds On Highways–AM Peak 

Period 
%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

%&'

%&'

%&'

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

%&'

%&'

(/

|}ÿ

(/

|}ÿ

%&'

%&'

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

%&' |}ÿ

Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxnard

Arcadia Azu sa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

La Mirada

Los Angeles Mo nrovia

Mon terey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Co lt on

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto San

Bernardino Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert Hot Springs

San

Jacinto

Beaumont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

De sert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La Q

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Hu ntington

Beach

Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

Sa n

Clem e n te

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yo rb a L in d a 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

105

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

PM Peak Speed (mph) 2012 Less than 35 36 to 50 Greater than 50

Source: SCAG

%&'

%&'

%&'

8

10

10

° 0 5 10 2.5

Miles

Exhibit 6 Average 2012 Weekday Truck Speeds On Highways–PM 

Peak Period
%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

%&'

%&'

%&'

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

%&'

%&'

(/

|}ÿ

(/

|}ÿ

%&'

%&'

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

%&' |}ÿ

Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxnard

Arcadia Azu sa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

La Mirada

Los Angeles Mo nrovia

Mon terey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Co lt on

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto San

Bernardino Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert Hot Springs

San

Jacinto

Beaumont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

De sert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La Q

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Hu ntington

Beach

Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

Sa n

Clem e n te

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yo rb a L in d a 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

105

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

PM Peak Speed (mph) 2040 Less than 35 36 to 50 Greater than 50

Source: SCAG

%&'

%&'

%&'

8

10

10

° 0 5 10 2.5

Miles

Exhibit 7 Baseline 2040 Weekday Truck Speeds on Highways–PM 

Peak Period
San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Simi Valley

Thousand Oaks

Oxnard

Agoura

Hills

Alhambra

Arcadia Az u sa

Bell

Burbank

Carson

Cerritos

Co m pt on

Diamond

Bar

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

Inglewood

Irwindale

La Mirada

La

Los Angeles Verne

Monrovia

Monterey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

Sa n

Dim as

Santa

Monica

Sou th Gate

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Colton

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto

San

Upland Bernardino

Victorville

Yucaipa

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert Hot Springs

San Jacinto

Beaumont Banning

Calimesa

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

Palm

Springs

Aliso

Viejo

Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Cypress

Fountain

Valley

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Huntington

Beach

Irvine

La

Ha br a

Laguna

Niguel

Lake

Forest

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

San

Clemente

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach

Tustin

Yorba Linda 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

105

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Source: Califorina Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System

(SWITRS), Safe Transportation Research & Education Center

at University of California, Berkeley (2010, 2011, & 2012)

8

10

10

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Imperial

County

° 0 4.5 9 2.25

Miles

Avg Truck Involved Crashes per mile <= 3 4 to 7 8 to 12 13 to 15 > 15

Exhibit 8 Truck Involved Crashes on Major Highways
 20 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

activity. The corridor’s traffic mitigation impacts would be significant, especially 

considering that some segments of the EWFC are forecast to carry between 

58,000 and 78,000 trucks per day in 2040.

z Reduction in Regional Delay: The EWFC is projected to result in substantial delay 

reduction for both trucks and autos. Within the identified project influence area, 

all traffic is expected to experience a reduction of approximately 4.3 percent, 

with heavy-duty trucks seeing a nearly ten percent decrease. This reduced delay 

would provide demonstrable travel time savings as well as reduce emissions from 

idling vehicles on congested roadways.

z Impact on Parallel Routes: The EWFC is projected to draw significant volumes of 

truck traffic away from parallel routes, easing congestion and creating capacity for 

other vehicles on general purpose lanes. Estimates indicate that the EWFC could 

reduce daily traffic on portions of SR-60 (between 42-82 percent), I-10 (up to 

33 percent), SR-91 (up to 19 percent), I-210 (up to 17 percent) and major regional 

arterials (up to 21 percent).

z Mobility Benefits for Critical Markets: The EWFC would offer considerable 

benefits to regional businesses and industries served by the numerous 

clusters of warehousing and manufacturing facilities near the route. Portions 

of the recommended potential route lie within a five-mile radius of 52 percent 

of the region’s warehousing square footage and 27 percent of regional 

manufacturing employment.

z Reduction of Truck-Involved Accidents: The East-West Freight Corridor offers the 

potential to reduce truck-involved crashes as a result of the separation between 

trucks and other vehicles. Safety analysis revealed that several existing east-west 

corridors have high rates of truck-involved crashes, including segments of SR-60, 

SR-91 and I-10. The EWFC designed specifically for use by heavy duty trucks has 

the potential to improve safety and decrease the number of accidents for trucks 

and autos on parallel routes.

z Preservation of Jobs and Income: Increasing congestion is making Southern 

California a less attractive place to do business, threatening jobs and the 

positive economic impacts of the goods movement sector. An EWFC delivers a 

transportation system with greater capacity and less congestion in support of 

industries that depend on efficient freight movement throughout the SCAG region.

z Reduction of Harmful Emissions: The EWFC provides an opportunity to reduce 

harmful pollutants through the use of zero and near-zero emission technologies 

for freight transportation, although the technology to be used will be determined 

as the market evolves.

REGIONAL CLEAN FREIGHT CORRIDOR SYSTEM

The 2016 RTP/SCS continues to envision a system of truck-only lanes extending from 

the San Pedro Bay Ports to downtown Los Angeles along I-710, connecting to the SR-60 

corridor and finally reaching I-15 in San Bernardino County. Such a system would address 

the growing truck traffic and safety issues on core highways through the region and serve 

key goods movement industries. Truck-only lanes add capacity in congested corridors, 

improve truck operations and safety by separating trucks and autos and provide a platform 

for the introduction and adoption of zero- and near zero-emission technologies. Ongoing 

evaluation of a regional freight corridor system is underway, including recent work on an 

environmental impact report (expected to be recirculated in Winter 2016) for the I-710 

segment. Additionally, as a part of the 2016 RTP/SCS, SCAG continues to refine the eastwest corridor component of the system along the SR-60 corridor. Current efforts have 

focused on working to identify an initial operating segment. Additional study is underway to 

evaluate the East-West Freight Corridor (EWFC) project concept.

EAST-WEST FREIGHT CORRIDOR

The 2016 RTP/SCS continues to identify a corridor concept along the SR-60 (EXHIBIT 9). 

While numerous EWFC options were examined, the Plan identifies a corridor concept to be 

explored further. Utilizing a right-of-way of approximately 100 feet, the bi-directional corridor 

would be restricted to truck traffic and have limited ingress/egress points. The EWFC would 

be a catalyst for the use of zero- and near zero-emission truck technologies, improving air 

quality for communities near the corridor and throughout the region.

BENEFITS OF THE EAST-WEST FREIGHT CORRIDOR

Continuing to move freight efficiently is critical to retain Southern California’s trade 

competitiveness. The EWFC offers the opportunity to address many goods movement 

challenges, including congestion, air quality and safety concerns. The EWFC will support 

mobility for key industries, serve goods movement markets in an efficient manner, promote 

the region’s environmental goals and contribute to alleviating the region’s congestion. 

Analysis completed as part of the SCAG Comprehensive Regional Goods Movement Plan 

and Implementation Strategy indicates that major benefits of the potential East-West 

Freight Corridor include:

z Mitigation of Future Truck Traffic: Truck traffic is projected to grow significantly 

on all existing key east-west freeway segments. These dramatic increases in 

truck traffic on east-west corridors will cause increased congestion and longer 

delays to both trucks and general traffic on existing routes. The construction of 

the EWFC would increase capacity to accommodate the projected growth in truck 
I-15 Freight Corridor Potential East West Freight Corridor Alignment I-710 Freight Corridor

Source: SCAG

8

10

10

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Imperial

County

0 2 4 1

Miles

5

710

605

60

60

Industry

Whittier

Montebello

Pico Rivera

Bell

Commerce

Monterey Park

West Covina

La Puente

Vernon

South El Monte

geles

Maywood

El Monte

Bell Gardens

Rosemead

La Habra Heights Downey

gton Park

Los Angeles County

60

Baldwin Park

Claremont

Covina

Diamond Bar

onte

Industry

Irwindale

La Habra Heights

La Puente

La Verne

Pomona

San Dimas

Walnut

West Covina

Whittier

Chino

Chino Hills

Fontana

Montclair

Ontario

Rancho Cucamonga

Upland

Eastvale

Jurupa Valley

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Los Angeles

County

60

60

57

71

60

605

10

15

10

0 0.9 1.8 0.45

Miles

(Note: Actual alignment is being evaluated)

Exhibit 9 Potential East-West Freight Corridor
 22 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Using this approach, all truck bottlenecks on a corridor will have the same percent change 

applied to them. Potential emerging bottlenecks were identified by utilizing the PeMS “Top 

Bottlenecks” feature to measure queue lengths, time periods and estimated delays for 

recurring regional bottlenecks. These delays were adjusted by using Caltrans truck volumes 

since PeMS estimates total delay, but not truck delay. This recent analysis also identifies 

potential new truck bottleneck locations as shown in TABLE 7 and EXHIBIT 10.

These priority truck bottleneck locations, combined, contribute over 1 million hours of truck 

delay annually to SCAG regional roadways during congested time periods. Addressing these 

bottlenecks would contribute to reduction in delay as well as emissions “hot spots.”

One of the most congested truck bottleneck locations in the SCAG region is at the 

intersection of the SR-57 and SR-60 freeways in Los Angeles County. In 2014, the City 

of Industry, along with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 

(LACMTA), was awarded a TIGER Grant to construct the 57/60 Confluence Freight 

Corridor Project. This $37.3 million project will improve both directions of travel to/from 

the Grand Avenue interchange by constructing an eastbound on- and off-ramp bypass, 

add an eastbound mainline lane, re-align all on- and off-ramps, replace the Grand Avenue 

Overcrossing and reconstruct the Grand Avenue & Golden Springs Drive intersection. The 

multi-phase effort is expected to reduce congestion, eliminate the hazards associated with a 

high accident rate at that location, and will facilitate more efficient freight movement.

There are a number of major highway projects that were recently completed or are currently 

under construction as shown in TABLE 8. These projects are expected to provide significant 

improvements at or near the identified truck bottleneck locations. SCAG is currently 

developing a supplemental truck bottleneck report, and with access to the latest real time 

data, bottleneck issues are anticipated to be monitored on a continuous basis.

Some of the truck bottleneck locations also have a higher number of truck related 

crashes in the region with a crash rate of more than eight on a per mile basis. These 

locations are listed below:

z I-5: At I-210, between SR-2 and I-710, South of I-605, between SR-22 and SR-55;

z I-605: Between I-105 and I-10;

z I-15: Between I-10 and SR-60;

z I-210: East of SR-134;

z I-10: East of I-605 and east of I-15;

z SR-60: Between I-10 and east of I-710, between I-605 and SR-57;

z SR-91: West of SR-57.

TRUCK BOTTLENECK RELIEF STRATEGY

As driver wages and fuel costs represent over 50 percent of total motor carrier costs, truck 

congestion has major impacts on the bottom line of the trucking industry. In a 2013 analysis 

conducted by the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), the Los Angeles 

metropolitan area was identified as leading the nation in costs to the trucking industry 

caused by traffic congestion, with nearly $1.1 billion in added operational costs to truckers.26

Further, the SCAG region had five of the top 100 truck bottlenecks in the U.S. in 2014 and 

2015 as identified by ATRI. The 2015 ranking for the SCAG region is as follows:

z #9 SR-60 at SR-57 in Los Angeles County

z #18 I-710 at I-105 in Los Angeles County

z #36 I-10 at I-15 in San Bernardino County

z #43 I-15 at SR-91 in Riverside County

z #61 I-110 at I-105 in Los Angeles County.27

In 2013, SCAG’s Comprehensive Regional Goods Movement Plan identified the top-priority 

truck bottlenecks through a process that included both a quantitative analysis of congestion 

in the region along with stakeholder outreach and input from other sources such as Caltrans’ 

Corridor System Management Plans (CSMPs). This analysis resulted in a list of the top 50 

regional priority bottlenecks (TABLE 7). Top priority bottlenecks include those that had the 

highest truck-related annual delay according to the quantitative bottleneck assessment as 

well as others identified by key stakeholders and CSMPs.

For the 2016 RTP/SCS, these bottlenecks were updated using a two-step approach. The 

first step was to update the congestion levels for the previously identified bottlenecks 

to verify if any major changes had occurred between 2008 and the 2012 base year for 

the 2016 RTP/SCS. The second step used readily available data to identify potential 

emerging truck bottlenecks that may have developed since the last analysis. The existing 

bottleneck “refresh” was performed by estimating the percent change in truck delay on a 

corridor between 2009 and 2012. To facilitate this analysis using the Caltrans Performance 

Measurement System (PeMS), a corridor was defined as a directional freeway at the county 

level (e.g., I-5 northbound in Orange County). The percent change was calculated by taking 

PeMS corridor delays for 2008 and 2012, adjusting those total delays to represent truck 

congestion by using Caltrans estimated truck volumes and calculating the percent change in 

corridor delay for the two years.
 23 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 23

Note: Not listed in the order of priority. 

Sources:*Comprehensive Regional Goods Movement Plan and Implementation Strategy. ** 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS).

Identification Methodology Route Direction Absolute Postmile/Limits County

SCAG Analysis*

605 SB 13.8 Los Angeles

5 NB 117.8 Los Angeles

405 NB 46.5 Los Angeles

101 SB 4.1 Los Angeles

5 NB 124.9 Los Angeles

605 NB 17.5 Los Angeles

60 EB 18.3 Los Angeles

110 NB 16.1 Los Angeles

10 EB 25.6 Los Angeles

91 WB 3.9 Los Angeles

60 EB 21.6 Los Angeles

110 SB 17.8 Los Angeles

60 EB 19.3 Los Angeles

10 WB 32.0 Los Angeles

405 NB 50.8 Los Angeles

60 EB 5.1 Los Angeles

60 EB 8.2 Los Angeles

91 WB 42.7 Los Angeles

101 NB 132.4 Los Angeles

5 SB 128.5 Los Angeles

5 NB 101.5 Orange

605 NB 19.2 Los Angeles

5 SB 132.3 Los Angeles

210 WB 31.0 Los Angeles

60 WB 13.0 Los Angeles

Table 7 Priority Truck Bottlenecks in the SCAG Region
 24 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Identification Methodology Route Direction Absolute Postmile/Limits County

SCAG Analysis*

91 WB 40.9 Riverside

5 NB 160.8 Los Angeles

10 WB 30.1 Los Angeles

10 EB 6.6 Los Angeles

105 WB 12.9 Los Angeles

5 NB 119.2 Los Angeles

60 WB 16.4 Los Angeles

710 SB 17.5 Los Angeles

91 WB 23.6 Orange

Corridor System Management 

Plan (CSMP)*

5 SB 144.3 Los Angeles

10 EB 70.5 San Bernardino

57 SB 12.3 Orange

91 WB 46.9 Riverside

210 WB 28.8 Los Angeles

Stakeholder Identified*

215 NB/SB NA San Bernardino

10 EB 57.5 San Bernardino

101 NB 53.2 Ventura

101 NB 42.1 Ventura

57 NB 24.4 Los Angeles

710 NB 0.5 Los Angeles

98 EB/WB Dogwood Rd to SR111 Imperial

Forrestor Rd NB/SB SR-78/86 to CA-98 Imperial

8 EB/WB Imperial Ave Imperial

Potential New Bottlenecks Identified 

SCAG Analysis**

5 NB 137.7 Los Angeles

57 NB 15.2 Los Angeles

TABLE 7 Priority Truck Bottlenecks in the SCAG Region Continued

Note: Not listed in the order of priority. 

Sources:*Comprehensive Regional Goods Movement Plan and Implementation Strategy. ** 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS).
 25 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 25

Table 8 Major Highway Projects within SCAG Region at Bottleneck Locations 

Major Highway Projects Status

I-5/SR-14 Direct HOV Connector Completed

I-405 Sepulveda Pass Project Completed

I-5 South Los Angeles County Projects Under Construction

I-10/I-605 Interchange Improvements Under Construction

I-15/I-215 Interchange Improvements at Devore Under Construction

SR-91 Fast Forward Project (Riverside County) Under Construction

SR-91 Westbound General Purpose (Between SR-57 and I-5) Under Construction

US 101/SR-23 Interchange Improvements Projects Under Construction

I-710/Firestone Blvd/Atlantic Interchange SR-2 Terminus 

Project (3 phases) Under Construction

TABLE 7 Priority Truck Bottlenecks in the SCAG Region Continued

Identification Methodology Route Direction Absolute Postmile/Limits County

Potential New Bottlenecks Identified 

SCAG Analysis**

60 EB 23.5 Los Angeles

105 EB 11.9 Los Angeles

210 EB 33.4 Los Angeles

605 NB 11.4 Los Angeles

5 NB 104.6 Orange

5 NB 108.7 Orange

91 EB 42.9 Riverside

91 EB 46.6 Riverside

15 SB 107.7 San Bernardino

101 SB 45.7 Ventura

Note: Not listed in the order of priority. 

Sources:*Comprehensive Regional Goods Movement Plan and Implementation Strategy. ** 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS).

The 2016 RTP/SCS allocates an estimated $5 billion toward goods movement bottleneck 

relief strategies. Some bottleneck relief concepts have been identified through the CSMP 

process, and others are currently programmed for implementation. Major capital-intensive 

goods movement infrastructure investments must be supplemented with a comprehensive 

strategy to mitigate the most pressing bottlenecks in the region. Examples of bottleneck 

relief strategies include ramp metering, extension of merging lanes, ramp and interchange 

improvements, capacity improvements and auxiliary lane additions. Although some 

bottleneck relief projects, such as auxiliary lanes, can be capital-intensive. Others like ramp 

metering are less complex and would therefore be relatively easier to implement.

Source: SCAG
San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Simi Valley

Thousand Oaks

Oxnard

Agoura

Hills

Alham bra

Arcadia Azusa

Bell

Burbank

Carson

Cerritos

Compton

Diamond

Bar

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

Inglew ood

Irwindale

La Mirada

La

Los Angeles Verne

Monrovia

Monterey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

San

Dimas

Santa

Monica

So uth Ga te

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Colton

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto

San

Upland Bernardino

Victorville

Yucaipa

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet

Tem ecu la

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert Hot Springs

San Jacinto

Beaumont Banning

Calimesa

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

Palm

Springs

Aliso

Viejo

Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Cypress

Fo untain

Valle y

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Huntington

Beach

Irvine

La

Habra

Laguna

Niguel

Lake

Forest

Mission

Viejo

New port

Beach

Orange

San

Clemente

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach

Tustin

Yorba Linda 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

105

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

High Priority Bottlenecks/ Congested Areas Recently Identified Bottlenecks

Source: SCAG

8

10

10

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Imperial

County

° 0 4.5 9 2.25

Miles

Exhibit 10 Priority Truck Bottlenecks in the SCAG Region 2014
 27 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 27

The BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision has at least two main tracks with segments of triple 

track between Hobart and Fullerton. On the Cajon Subdivision, the BNSF completed a third 

main track from San Bernardino to the summit of Cajon Pass.

While a majority of the UP Alhambra Subdivision is single track, since the 2012 RTP/SCS 

5.8 miles between South Fontana and Reservoir has been double-tracked and three new 

run-through tracks at Montclair have been constructed. Combined, these projects addressed 

more than one-third of the entire project that is envisioned for the segment between South 

Fontana and Reservoir on the Alhambra subdivision. The UP Los Angeles Subdivision has 

two main tracks west of Pomona and a mixture of one and two tracks east of Pomona.

North from West Colton, the single-track UP Mojave Subdivision closely parallels the 

BNSF Cajon Subdivision as the two lines climb the south slope of Cajon Pass. There are 

connections at Keenbrook and Silverwood to enable UP trains to enter/exit the main tracks 

of the BNSF Cajon Subdivision. Beyond Silverwood to Palmdale, the UP Mojave Subdivision 

has very little train traffic. UP uses this line to reach points in Northern California and 

the Pacific Northwest.

The BNSF operates intermodal terminals for containers and trailers at Hobart Yard (in the 

City of Commerce) and at San Bernardino. UP operates intermodal terminals at:

z East Los Angeles Yard at the west end of the UP Los Angeles Subdivision;

z Los Angeles Transportation Center (LATC) at the west end of the UP 

Alhambra Subdivision;

z City of Industry on the UP Alhambra Subdivision; and the

z Intermodal Container Transfer Facility (ICTF) near the south end of 

the Alameda Corridor.

In addition, both UP and BNSF operate trains hauling marine containers that originate or 

terminate at on-dock terminals within the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

UP also has a large carload freight classification yard at West Colton (at the east end of the 

Alhambra Subdivision). A large automobile unloading terminal is located at Mira Loma (midway between Pomona and West Riverside on the Los Angeles Subdivision).

RAIL STRATEGIES

EXISTING AND PROJECTED RAIL CONDITIONS

Southern California is served by two Class I railroads:28 Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and the 

Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF). Pacific Harbor Line, Inc. (PHL), a Class III 

railroad, provides rail transportation, maintenance and dispatching services within the San 

Pedro Bay Ports area. The Port of Hueneme is served by the Ventura County Railway (VCR), 

a Class III railroad, which connects to the UP Coast main line in Oxnard. Another Class III line, 

the Los Angeles Junction Railway (LAJ), provides industrial switching services in the Cities 

of Vernon, Maywood, Bell and Commerce. The LAJ provides connections to both UP and 

BNSF. EXHIBIT 11 shows key segments of the rail system described in more detail below.

North of the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, UP and BNSF trains operate on the 

Alameda Corridor, which was completed in 2002. All harbor-related trains of the UP and 

BNSF use the Alameda Corridor to access the rail mainlines that originate near downtown 

Los Angeles. East of downtown Los Angeles, freight trains operate on the BNSF San 

Bernardino Subdivision, the UP Los Angeles Subdivision, or the UP Alhambra Subdivision. 

North and west of Los Angeles, freight trains operate on the UP Coast line toward Santa 

Barbara, the Antelope Valley line from the San Fernando Valley to Palmdale, or the UP 

Mojave Subdivision from West Colton to Palmdale.

To transition from the Alameda Corridor to the Alhambra Subdivision, the UP utilizes 

trackage rights over Metrolink’s East Bank Line, which runs parallel to the Los Angeles River 

on the east side of downtown Los Angeles. The UP Los Angeles Subdivision terminates at 

West Riverside Junction, where it joins the BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision. The BNSF 

San Bernardino Subdivision continues north of Colton Crossing and transitions to the BNSF 

Cajon Subdivision. The Cajon line continues north to Barstow and Daggett and then east 

toward Needles, CA and beyond. UP trains exercise trackage rights over the BNSF San 

Bernardino Subdivision from West Riverside Junction to San Bernardino and over the Cajon 

Subdivision from San Bernardino to Daggett, which is a short distance east of Barstow. UP 

trains continue north of Daggett on the UP Cima Subdivision to Las Vegas.

The UP Alhambra Subdivision and the BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision cross at 

Colton Crossing in San Bernardino County. East of Colton Crossing, the UP operates its 

transcontinental Sunset Corridor main line, also known as the UP Yuma Subdivision. 

The Yuma Subdivision passes through the Palm Springs area, Indio and continues 

to Arizona and beyond.

The UP Yuma Subdivision has two main tracks from Colton to Indio. East of Indio, doubletracking of more than 80 percent of the Sunset Corridor has been completed to date.
|}ÿ

%&'

%&'

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

%&'

(/

|}ÿ %&'

%&'

|}ÿ

%&'

|}ÿ

Atwood

Silverwood 

k

Simi Valley

nd Oaks

Agoura

Hills

Alhambra

Arcadia

Azusa

Bell

Bellflower

Beverly

Hills

Burbank

Carson

Cerritos

Claremont

Commerce

Compton

Covina

Diamond

Bar

Downey

Duarte

El Monte

El

Segundo Gardena

Glendale

Glendora

Haw thorne

Inglewood

Irwindale

La Habra Heights

La Mirada

La

Verne

Lakewood

Los Angeles

Ly nw ood

Malibu

Monrovia

Montebello

Monterey

Park

Norwalk Paramount

Pasadena

Pico

Rivera

Pomona

Rosem ea d

San

Dimas

San

Marino

Santa

Monica

Sierra

Madre

South G ate

South

Pasadena Temple City

Torrance

Vernon

Walnut

West Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Chino

Chino Hills

Colton

Fontana

Grand

Terrace

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Linda

Montclair

Ontario

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto

San

Bernardino

Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

He

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Corona

Jurupa Valley

San J

Bea

Calimesa

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

Ma nha ttan

Beach

Aliso

Viejo

Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Cypress

Fountain

Valley

Fullerton

Garden Grove

Huntington

Beach

Irvine

La Habra

Laguna

Hills

Lake

Forest

Mission

Viejo Newport Beach

Orange

Seal Beach Santa Ana

Stanton

Tustin

Westminster

Yorba Linda

91

14

60

71

60

101

215

10

210

405

605

710

15

405

110

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Source: SCAG

° 0 3 6 1.5

Miles

UP Mojave Subdivision:

W Colton to Silverwood

BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision:

Fullerton to Atwood

Atwood to W Riverside

Hobart to Fullerton

W Riverside to Colton

Pomona to W Riverside

UP Yuma Subdivision:

UP Yuma Subdivision

Silverwood to Barstow

UP LA Subdivision:

East LA to Pomona

Silverwood to Mojave

BNSF Cajon Subdivision:

Colton to Silverwood

UP Coast Line

UP Alhambra Subdivision: UP East Bank

Yuma Junction to Pomona

Pomona to W Colton UP Santa Clarita Line

Commuter Rail Network

Main Line Rail

57

Exhibit 11 Regional Rail Segments
 29 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 29

REGIONAL RAIL STRATEGIES

The proposed regional rail package has several components. These include mainline rail 

improvements (rail-to-rail grade separations, double or triple tracking, new signal systems, 

universal crossovers, new sidings, etc.) that would benefit both freight rail and passenger rail 

service depending on their location; rail yard improvements (upgrades to existing yards as 

well as construction of new yards); rail operation safety improvements such as Positive Train 

Control (PTC) that could greatly reduce the risk of rail collisions and increase capacity; grade 

separations; and emissions reduction strategies.

CURRENT AND FUTURE VOLUMES AND POTENTIAL 

CAPACITY CONSTRAINTS

Significant growth in passenger and freight rail traffic is expected on most segments of the 

SCAG regional rail system by 2040. This anticipated growth is highlighted in TABLE 9, which 

shows 2012 and projected 2040 peak day train volumes on key segments. Freight train 

volumes include container trains, also called intermodal trains (marine and domestic) and 

non-intermodal trains (unit automobile trains, unit oil trains, unit bulk and carload trains). 

Passenger trains include Amtrak and Metrolink service. Increases in railroad traffic will 

require ongoing infrastructure investment to maintain current levels of service. Increased 

rail traffic also has an impact on roadway traffic and congestion, as more trains will result in 

increased wait times for vehicles at at-grade crossings - as much as 5,500 vehicle hours of 

delay per day at the regional level by year 2040.

Note: A “peak day” experiences the 90th percentile of the distribution of daily train movements. SCAG’s freight rail volume forecast was originally developed by Dr. Robert Leachman, Leachman and Associates, LLC, and was recently updated using the Train 

Builder model by Cambridge Systematics. These numbers do not represent forecasts made by BNFS Railway or UP Railroad. Passenger volume totals include Amtrak and Metrolink. Passenger volumes reflect input provided by Metrolink, LOSSAN Rail Corridor 

Agency, Riverside County Transportation Commission, and San Bernardino Associated Governments. 

Line Segments Type 2012 2040

BNSF San Bernardino Sub Hobart-Fullerton

Passenger 49 (25) 110 (72)

Freight 36 80

BNSF San Bernardino Sub Atwood-W. Riverside

Passenger 27 (25) 62 (60)

Freight 40 91

BNSF San Bernardino Sub W. Riverside-Colton

Passenger 39 (37) 108 (106)

Freight 60 139

BNSF Cajon San Bernardino-Silverwood + UPRR Mojave W. Colton-Silverwood

Passenger 2 2

Freight 89 167

UPRR LA Sub East LA-Pomona + UP Alhambra Sub Yuma Jct. - Pomona

Passenger 54 (53) 98 (96)

Freight 37 100

UP LA Sub Pomona-W. Riverside + UPRR Alhambra Sub Pomona-W. Colton

Passenger 13 (12) 48 (46)

Freight 43 112

UPRR Yuma

Passenger 1 2

Freight 40 95

Table 9 Peak Day Train Volume (Metrolink Volumes in Parentheses)
Kern

Camarillo

Moorpark

Simi Valley

Thousand Oaks 

d

Agoura

Hills

Alham bra

Arcadia Azusa

Bell

Burbank

Carson

Cerritos

Compton

Covina

Diamond

Bar

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

Inglew ood

Irwindale

La

Mirada

La

Verne

Los Angeles

Malibu

Monrovia

Monterey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

San

Dimas

Santa

Monica

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Colton

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto

San

Bernardino Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet

In

W

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Cathedral

City

Desert Hot Springs

San Jacinto

Beaumont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

Des

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

Palm Springs

Aliso

Viejo

Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Cypress

Fo untain

Valle y

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Huntington

Beach Irvine

La

Habra

Laguna

Niguel

Lake

Forest

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach

Tustin

Yorba Linda

91

14

60

126

71

57

60

101

101

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

15

405

110

105

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Source: SCAG

° 0 4.5 9 2.25

Miles

A - Fourth Main Track from Silverwood to Frost

B - Third Main Track Martinez to Barstow

C - Devore Rd Crossovers

D - Flying Junction at Rancho

E - Second Main Track Devore to Rancho

F - Colton Crossing Grade Separation

G - Third Main Track MP 2.9 to Highgrove MP 6.1

H - Third Main Track West Riverside to Prado Dam

I - Third Main Track Esperanza to Atwood

J - Third Main Track Atwood to Fullerton

K - Fourth Main Track Fullerton to Hobart

L - Third Main Track Valley View to Serapis

M - Second Main Track South Fontana to Reservoir

N - Second Main Track Pomona to City of Industry

Main Line Rail Network

A

B

C

E

F

D

G

N

M

H

I

J

K

L

Exhibit 12 Regional Mainline Rail Enhancements
 31 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 31

Positive Train Control (PTC) is a radio or GPS-based system designed to automatically 

prevent train-to-train collisions, derailments caused by excessive speeds, unauthorized train 

movements in work zones, and the movement of trains through switches left in the wrong 

position. Congress mandated the installation of PTC through the Rail Safety Improvement 

Act of 2008 on lines where certain hazardous materials are carried and any line on which 

passenger or commuter rail services operate.30,31

While information on individual railroads implementation status is not available, recent 

documentation through the Federal Rail Administration reports that, nationally, 32 out of 

38 railroads have completed installation of approximately 50 percent of the locomotives 

that require PTC equipment, deployed approximately 50 percent of wayside units, replaced 

approximately 505 signals that need replacement and completed most of the required 

mapping for PTC tracks. With projected volume increases on both freight and passenger rail, 

ensuring railroad safety is of paramount importance to the region’s growth and quality of life.

The 2016 RTP/SCS assumes that no changes have been made to the Class I Railroads 

routing operations and includes mainline rail improvements that were estimated based on 

the Modified Status Quo routing along the UP Lines.32

Location of regional mainline rail enhancements are shown in EXHIBIT 12 and estimated 

costs of the recommended mainline track improvements are shown in TABLE 10.

Improvements to the BNSF Cajon Subdivision include installing a third main track and a 

fourth main track on specific segments, exceptional earthmoving, crossovers and bridges 

across multiple culverts.

Improvements to the BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision include a third main track, as well 

as a fourth main track along the Hobart to Fullerton segment. Caltrans has provided $121.8 

million for the triple tracking from Serapis (MP 151.1) to Valley View (MP 158.7).

MAINLINE ENHANCEMENTS

The most notable change since the 2012 RTP/SCS is the completion of the Colton railto-rail grade separation project in the City of Colton, San Bernardino County. Completed 

in August 2013, this project physically separated two Class I railroads that crossed 

perpendicularly. An elevated 1.4-mile-long overpass that lifts UP trains traveling east-west 

removed the chokepoint that existed where BNSF and UP mainlines crossed tracks in 

Colton. Physically separating this crossing has numerous economic benefits to the region 

as well as the nation as the majority of imported cargo through the San Pedro Bay Ports are 

moved by freight rail via this crossing. The project completion was widely celebrated by the 

surrounding community, San Bernardino Associated Governments, Caltrans and both UP 

and BNSF as the project was delivered eight months ahead of schedule with $109 million in 

project cost savings.29

Table 10 Estimated Cost of Mainline Rail Improvements (in Nominal Dollars)

Mainline Rain Improvements "Estimated Cost

($ YOE, Thousands)"

Rail package — mainline rail capacity expansion:

Colton rail-to-rail grade separation–BNSF Cajon 

Subdivision (Complete not included in the total); Barstow 

to Keenbrook–BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision; Colton 

Crossing to Redondo Junction–UP Mojave Subdivision; 

Devore Road to West Colton (inc. Rancho Flying 

Junction)–UP Alhambra Subdivision; West Colton to 

City of Industry–UP Los Angeles Subdivision; UP Yuma 

Subdivision.

$3,092,400 

Table 11 San Pedro Bay Ports Direct Intermodal Volumes as a Percentage of Total Port Container Throughput (2003–2014)

Source: Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

% On-Dock 15.9% 18.1% 20.7% 24.1% 23.0% 23.7% 24.6% 23.5%  24.2% 25.0%  24.8%  26.9% 

% Near-/Off-Dock 23.4% 21.2% 19.5% 18.7% 18.4% 18.5% 15.3% 11.7%  9.9% 11.2%  10.5%  9.7% 

Total % Direct 

Intermodal 39.3% 39.3% 40.2% 42.8% 41.4% 42.2% 39.9% 35.2%  34.1% 36.2%  35.3%  36.6% 

Total Throughput (POLA 

+POLB) Millions of TEUs 11.8 13.1 14.2 15.8 15.7 14.3 11.8 14.1 14 14.1 14.6 15.1
 32 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Hobart, East Los Angeles) or existing near-dock yards (i.e., ICTF). These containers must be 

trucked between port terminals and these yards.

ON DOCK RAIL SUPPORT FACILITY AT PIER B STREET

(PIER B ODRSF)

Pier B ODRSF is a $310 million project that will expand the existing Pier B Rail Yard. Creation 

of an expanded rail support facility at the Pier B Rail Yard site would provide comprehensive 

rail support that currently does not exist within the port complex. The Pier B ODRSF project 

will provide the following functions: (1) arrival or departure of an entire container train 

internal to the site, (2) sufficient yard track storage capacity to facilitate train assembly and 

disassembly and (3) ancillary yard functions, such as locomotive layover and refueling 

capability. Carrying containers by rail is the most efficient method for cargo destined to 

points well beyond the Southern California region. Utilizing rail has the added benefit of 

potentially reducing the number of truck trips on regional roadways and freeways, which 

would otherwise be needed to carry cargo containers to near-dock or off-dock yards. The 

expanded facility will ease congestion and reduce air pollution. An Environmental Impact 

Report (EIR) is currently being prepared for this project.

PORT AREA RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS

The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have proposed neraly $2.0 billion in rail 

improvements within the harbor area (TABLE 12). These projects are designed to support 

increased on-dock rail service, to reduce railroad delay associated with train meets and 

passes and to reduce conflicts with highway traffic. By allowing more on-dock rail, truck 

traffic between the San Pedro Bay Ports and distant rail yards can be reduced. Use of ondock rail eliminates truck vehicle miles of travel (VMT) and associated emissions by allowing 

trains to be loaded and unloaded inside marine terminals.

With continued investments in on-dock infrastructure as proposed, on-dock rail is estimated 

to account for the movement of approximately 35 percent of all port TEUs by 2035. This 

projected share is sizeable as on-dock rail will not be able to accommodate 100 percent 

of direct intermodal moves. It is limited by factors such as shipper/steamship line logistics 

(transloading, transportation costs, etc.), railroad operations (equipment availability, the need 

to generate destination-specific unit trains, train schedules and steamship line contracts/

arrangements) and terminal operation and congestion.

The “On-Dock Railyards” category in TABLE 12 includes the following projects (see EXHIBIT 

23 for project locations):

z Port of Long Beach

Improvements to the UP Mojave Subdivision include a second main track over a key 

segment and a “flying junction” at Rancho (West Colton).

Improvements to the UP Alhambra Subdivision include double tracking key segments and 

route connections in Pomona.

ON-DOCK/NEAR-DOCK RAIL CAPACITY 

ENHANCEMENTS

In 2014, approximately 36.6 percent of the San Pedro Bay Ports’ containers were shipped 

by rail “intact” (direct intermodal), meaning the cargo was moved by rail in marine containers 

without being transloaded or deconsolidated first (TABLE 11). In addition to direct intermodal 

movement, containers can be transloaded into 53-foot domestic containers or trailers at 

deconsolidation facilities in the region. The larger containers are then trucked to off-dock rail 

yards for loading onto trains and transported out of the region. The 53-foot wheeled trailers 

are also typically transported out of the region. Containers that are neither shipped by rail 

intact (direct intermodal) nor transloaded are trucked directly to/from local warehouses or 

distribution facilities.

TABLE 11 shows the percentage of direct intermodal cargo handled at on-dock and near-dock 

rail yards. Containers moved using on-dock rail do not have to be trucked to/from more 

distant rail yards. In 2014, 26.9 percent of direct intermodal cargo was handled using ondock rail. In that same year, 9.7 percent of containers were handled at off-dock yards (e.g., 

Table 12 Estimated Cost of Port-Area Rail Improvement (Millions of Nominal Dollars)

Port Area Rail Improvements 

(Excluding SCIG and ICTF) Estimated Costs

Port of Long Beach

On-Dock Railyards $186.20

Rail Infrastructure Outside Marine Terminals $704.80

Subtotal Port of Long Beach $891.00

Port of Los Angeles

On-Dock Railyards $806.02 

Rail Infrastructure Outside Marine Terminals $297.01 

Subtotal Port of Los Angeles $1,103.03 

Total Port Area $1,994.03 

Source: Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach
 33 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 33

 Pier G South Working Yard Rehabilitation

 Pier G Metro Track Improvements

 Middle Harbor Terminal Rail Yard (Three Phases)

z Port of Los Angeles

 West Basin Container Terminal (WBCT) On-Dock Rail : Addition

of two new loading tracks

 YTI On-Dock Rail: Addition of one new loading track

 Pier 400 Rail Expansion: Phase 1

 Pier 300 Rail Expansion: Addition of two new loading tracks

 Seaside Yard: Dedicated on-dock rail yard for Berth 226-236 

terminal (Evergreen)

 Terminal Island Support Yard

 Berth 200 Railyard Expansion: Additional Storage/working tracks

 Evergreen/TICTF: Adding one new loading track

 Port of LA Container Movement Enhancement Program: WBCT wharf 

improvements, YTI wharf improvements and Pier 300 wharf improvements

 Pier 400 Second Lead Track.

The “Rail Infrastructure Outside Marine Terminals” category in TABLE 12 includes the 

following projects (see Exhibit 23 for project locations):

z Port of Long Beach

 Pier B Street Realignment

 Pier F Support Yard (currently under construction)

 Track Realignment at Ocean Boulevard (currently under operation)

 Terminal Island Wye Track Realignment

 Reconfiguration of Control Point (CP) Mole

 Navy Mole Road Storage Yard

 Pier B Rail Yard (Phase III–12th Street Alternative)

z Port of Los Angeles

 Port Truck Traffic Reduction Program: West Basin Railyard

 Port of Los Angeles Rail Efficiency Program (Alameda Corridor - West 

Basin Area Gap Closures)

z Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach Joint Projects

 New Cerritos Channel Rail Bridge33

 Third Track at Thenard Junction.34

EXPANSION OF NEAR-DOCK RAIL

Additional lift capacity at near-dock yards is needed to accommodate projected demand 

and to reduce the number of truck trips to off-dock yards. Near-dock rail terminals provide 

rail accessibility to import and export cargo, using drayage trucks for the connection to and 

from port terminals. Expansion of near-dock rail will reduce truck VMT and emissions by 

eliminating the need to access more distant off-dock rail facilities.

Two near-dock rail projects are currently undergoing environmental review: BNSF’s 

Southern California International Gateway (SCIG) and modernization of UP’s Intermodal 

Container Transfer Facility (ICTF). Without the SCIG and ICTF expansion projects, it is 

estimated that the growth in direct intermodal container volumes would require that at least 

County Locations

Los Angeles Valley View Ave

Los Angeles S. Wilmington

Los Angeles Baldwin Ave

Los Angeles Del Amo Blvd

Los Angeles Passons Blvd

Orange Kraemer Blvd

Orange Placentia Ave Undercrossing

Orange Jeffery Rd

Riverside Iowa Ave

Riverside Streeter Ave

Riverside Auto Center Drive

Riverside Riverside Ave

Riverside Avenue 52

San Bernardino Hunts Ln

San Bernardino Glen Helen Pkwy

San Bernardino N. Milliken

San Bernardino Ramona Ave at State Ave

Table 13 List of Recently Completed Grade Separation

Source: SCAG
 34 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Seventy-one grade crossings throughout the SCAG region were identified for inclusion in 

the financially constrained 2012 RTP/SCS. To date, seventeen grade separations were 

completed and opened to traffic as shown in TABLE 13.

Twenty-one grade separation projects are currently under construction and are anticipated 

to be complete and open to traffic in late 2015 to 2016. Further, additional grade separation 

projects have been identified for inclusion in the financially constrained 2016 RTP/SCS, for 

a total of forty-two grade separation projects (excluding complete and under construction 

projects). The forty-two grade separation locations are shown in EXHIBIT 13.

Financially Constrained and Strategic Plan (unfunded) grade separation projects are 

included at the end of this Technical Appendix (TABLE 17 &18), along with grade separation 

maps by county (EXHIBITS 14, EXHIBIT 15, EXHIBIT 16, EXHIBIT 17, EXHIBIT 18 AND EXHIBIT 

19). The estimated costs of the grade separation projects in the financially constrained plan 

total approximately $4.8 billion.

RAIL PACKAGE SUMMARY

As shown in TABLE 15, the combined rail package has been estimated to cost approximately 

$11 billion, including mainline rail improvements, port area rail improvements, near-dock 

railyard improvements and rail-highway grade separations.

1.5 million container lifts would have to be handled at different yards throughout the SCAG 

region. While the number of truck trips would not change significantly, vehicle miles traveled 

would be reduced due to the shorter distance from the Ports to the SCIG terminal (about 3 to 

four miles), compared to the distance to Hobart and East Los Angeles yards terminal (about 

20 miles). The Alameda Corridor has sufficient capacity to handle the projected increase in 

railroad traffic from the ICTF and SCIG.

INTERMODAL TRANSFER CONTAINER FACILITY (ICTF)

The UP has proposed to invest $500 million in a modernization project that will increase the 

capacity at the ICTF, from the current maximum of 725,000 containers (1.4 million TEUs) to 

1.5 million containers (2.8 million TEUs). The project will include the replacement of diesel 

cranes and yard hostlers with electric ones as well as the addition of six new railroad tracks 

totaling 50,000 ft. Clean technologies will be utilized to cut facility emissions by 74 percent. 

An EIR is currently being prepared for this project.

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INTERNATIONAL GATEWAY (SCIG)

SCIG is a $500 million project that will create a new near-dock facility for the BNSF adjacent 

to the San Pedro Bay Ports with direct access to the Alameda Corridor. BNSF forecasts that 

the new facility will take millions of truck-miles off regional freeways, easing congestion and 

reducing air pollution. The SCIG will include the use of electric and low-emission equipment 

and will have requirements that only lower emission trucks serve the facility. The Project 

was approved by Los Angeles City Council in May 2013.

RAIL GRADE SEPARATIONS

With increasing railroad and highway traffic, vehicle delays at grade crossings are expected 

to increase substantially by the year 2040. Allowing two intersecting axes of traffic to move 

concurrently, grade separations of at-grade crossings reduce traffic congestion and delays, 

as well as emissions from idling vehicles and address other critical rail crossing related 

concerns such as noise and safety.

Table 14 Estimated Cost of the Proposed Package of Rail Projects, by Major Category 

(Millions of Nominal Dollars)

Category Estimated Costs

Mainline Rail Improvements $3,092.40 

Port Area Rail Improvements $1,994.03 

Near-Dock Railyard Improvements $1,000.00 

Rail-Highway Grade Separations $4,870.20 

Total $10,956.63 

Source: SCAG

Figure 7 Rendering of Gerald Desmond Bridge–Expected 2018

Source: Port of Long Beach
Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxna rd

Arca dia Azusa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

La

Mi rada

Los Angeles Monrovia

Mo nterey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Colton

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto San

Bernardino

Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert H ot Sp rings

San

Jacinto

Beaum ont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

Desert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La 

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Huntingto n

Beach

Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

Sa n

Clemente

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yorba Linda 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

110

134

91

22

101

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

105

5

10

405

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): Complete (14) Planned (40) Under Construction (22) Regional Rail Lines

Source: SCAG

8

10

10

0 5 10 2.5

Miles

Exhibit 13 Locations of Financially Constrained Grade Separation 

Projects
 36 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

crossing), the realigned Pier B Street & Pico Avenue will be designated as a 

National Highway System Intermodal Connector Route. An EIR is currently being 

prepared for this project.

z The Schuyler Heim Bridge Replacement and SR-47 Expressway Project: Includes 

replacement of the seismically deficient bridge and development of a truck 

expressway that will transport port truck traffic on an elevated structure from the 

new bridge 1.7 miles northwest to Alameda Street. This project is already in the 

design phase. This project will improve safety (by bypassing three signalized 

intersections and five rail at-grade crossings) and reduce congestion and delay at 

many of the Port of Los Angeles’ terminals.

z South Wilmington Grade Separation: This project was completed in spring 

2015 and eliminates the conflict between vehicular traffic and two existing 

at-grade railroad crossings. The project provides unimpeded grade-separated 

vehicular access to the South Wilmington area (including for emergency 

vehicles), eliminates truck queues on surrounding streets, reduces accidents and 

improves safety in the area.

z C Street/I-110 Access Ramp Improvements: This will consolidate two closely 

spaced intersections and improve connectivity to Figueroa Street and Harry 

Bridges Boulevard and access to several shipping terminals. This project is 

currently under construction and is scheduled to be completed in January 2017.

z I-110/SR-47 Interchange & John S. Gibson Intersection/NB I-110 Ramp Access:

This project will provide an additional lane from the SR-47 connector to NB I-110 

and extend the existing off-ramp at John S. Gibson Boulevard. It will eliminate 

weaving between the slow-moving, on-ramp traffic from San Pedro and the 

fast-moving bridge traffic from Long Beach to improve the connection between 

SR-47 and the I-110 Freeway. This project is currently under construction and is 

scheduled to be completed in June 2016.

z SR 47 (Seaside Avenue)/Navy Way Interchange: Construction of interchange at 

the intersection of SR-47/Navy Way to eliminate the existing traffic signal and 

movement conflicts. This project removes the last signal on SR 47 between the 

I-710and the I-110. SR 47 is an NHS Intermodal Connector Route.

z SR 47/V. Thomas Bridge/Front St Interchange: This project entails removal of 

the existing westbound (WB) SR 47/Vincent Thomas Bridge off-ramp (south of 

the Vincent Thomas Bridge) with Harbor Boulevard and construction of new WB 

SR 47/Vincent Thomas Bridge off-ramp (north of the Vincent Thomas Bridge) 

with Front Street. These improvements eliminate the existing non-standard ramp 

connection to the Harbor Boulevard off-ramp. Front Street is an NHS Intermodal 

Connector Route and the Vincent Thomas Bridge is a state-owned bridge that is 

on the U.S. DOT Primary Freight Network. This project also includes realigned 

eastbound and westbound SR 47 on-ramps. 

OTHER STRATEGIES

SAN PEDRO BAY PORTS ACCESS PROJECTS

Landside access to the San Pedro Bay Ports is provided by highway facilities, including 

I-110 and I-710 and the Vincent Thomas (SR-47), Commodore Schuyler Heim (SR-103) and 

the Gerald Desmond Bridges. The San Pedro Bay Ports have long worked with regional and 

state transportation planning organizations to identify and promote projects that will alleviate 

congestion to and from port areas and improve air quality in the region (EXHIBIT 23).

Some key projects to improve direct access to the San Pedro Bay Ports are already 

underway, including:

z The Gerald Desmond Bridge replacement (FIGURE 7): This bridge, which has 

been designated as a National Highway System Intermodal Connector Route and 

part of the Strategic Highway Network, carries nearly 15 percent of the nation’s 

waterborne cargo and is a critical access route for the Port of Long Beach, the Port 

of Los Angeles, downtown Long Beach and surrounding communities. The new 

bridge will provide three travel lanes in each direction for improved traffic flow 

including the emergency lanes on both inner and outer shoulders. The bridge also 

includes a Class I bicycle facility and pedestrian path along the south side of the 

bridge, connecting Pico Avenue and Terminal Island. A 205-foot vertical clearance 

would accommodate some of the largest vessels in the world. The new bridge will 

be built with a cable-stayed design and will be high enough to accommodate the 

newest generation of the most efficient cargo ships. In addition, the new bridge 

will be wider and better able to accommodate existing and future traffic volumes. 

Currently, the bridge is under construction and is expected to generate about 

3,000 jobs. It is expected to be completed between late 2017 and mid-2018.

z The Pier B Street Freight Corridor Reconstruction Project: This project is a crucial 

component to the success and full utilization of the Pier B On-Dock Rail Support 

Facility, a capital project that is intended to transport more containers by rail. The 

project involves realigning the roadway, which will facilitate future enhancement 

of the Pier B On-Dock Rail Support Facility, a critical link between the Port’s 

container terminals and the Alameda Corridor. In addition to the realignment 

of Pier B Street and Pico Avenue, the project will also enhance the capacity 

of the roadway by adding additional lanes to the Pier B Street, which would 

accommodate projected future cargo demand. This “stand-alone” project will also 

provide safety enhancements for both motorists and pedestrians by increasing its 

capacity and constructing a new sidewalk on the south side (eastbound) of Pier 

B Street for pedestrian travel. Upon eventual completion of the Pier B On-Dock 

Rail Support Facility (which involves the removal of 9th street at-grade railroad 
 37 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 37

On October 12, 2015, the Port of Hueneme Board of Harbor Commissioners formally adopted 

the 2020 Strategic Plan, which was developed through a comprehensive public outreach 

effort that included over 40 interviews with a diverse stakeholder base of port customers, 

local and regional agencies, Ventura County businesses and community stakeholders. The 

2020 Strategic Plan highlights a number of key strategies including:

z Business Retention and Growth;

z New Business Opportunities;

z Waterside Investments;

z Project Funding and Fiscal Planning;

z Terminal Efficiency;

z Agency Coordination;

z Land Use and Logistical Efficiency; and

z Port Safety and Resiliency.

As part of the 2020 Strategic Plan, critical transportation project priorities along the Port 

Intermodal Corridor include:

z Grade Separation at Rice Avenue and East 5th Street;

z Port Hueneme Road Widening between Ventura Road and Rice Avenue; and

z Rice Avenue Paving (allowing for State Route designation). 

In addition to the 2020 Strategic Plan, the following projects and strategies are among those 

anticipated to reduce truck congestion and other impacts:

z Rice Avenue UP Grade Separation;

z Rose Avenue UP Grade Separation;

z SR-118/Coast Line Grade Separation;

z Rice Avenue Reconstruction from Pacific Coast Highway (Route 1) 

to US Highway 101; and

z Maintain Port Hueneme Road/Hueneme Road and Rice Avenue as the primary 

truck access corridors to the Port of Hueneme and encourage trucks to use this 

route through additional signage.

The Port of Hueneme is also committed to protecting the environment and supporting a 

quality of life through numerous green initiatives. These include the use of clean energy at 

the Port, its Stormwater Improvement Plan, and shoreside power for vessels that will provide 

a 92 percent reduction in particulate matter, a 55 percent reduction in greenhouse gasses, 

and a 98 percent reduction in NOx

 over the 30 year life of the project. For more information, 

go to http://www.portofhueneme.org/community/environment. 

z Harbor Boulevard. & 7th Street Intersection: The project includes a reconfigured 

intersection at the junction of Harbor Boulevard, Sampson Way and 7th Street. 

The project improves motorized/non-motorized mobility to/from regional 

highways (I-110 and SR-47) and the following major regional destinations: 

community of San Pedro, downtown San Pedro, Catalina Ferry/Freight facility, 

World Cruise Center, Battleship USS Iowa Museum, Ports O’ Call (POC) Village, 

Alta Sea facility and Cabrillo Beach/Marina. The project entails the elimination of 

Sampson Way/6th Street intersection, incorporation of synchronized signals into 

the LADOT Advanced Traffic Control System, the widening of sidewalks from six to 

12 feet, the building of textured concrete crosswalks, and Class II bike lanes.

z Sampson Way to 22nd Street & Miner Street: Sampson Way would be realigned 

and expanded to two lanes in each direction and would curve near the Municipal 

Fish Markets to meet 22ndStreet in its westward alignment east of Miner 

Street. In the proposed project, Harbor Boulevard would remain in place at its 

current capacity with two lanes in each direction. Proposed enhancements 

would be consistent with design standards for the Community Redevelopment 

Agency (CRA) Pacific Corridor and the City of Los Angeles Planning Department 

Community Design Overlay.

z Harbor Boulevard Improvements: As part of the San Pedro Waterfront 

Development Project, Harbor Boulevard will be restriped and the median removed/

reconstructed as needed to provide three northbound through and southbound 

through lanes between the reconstructed Sampson Way/Harbor Boulevard 

intersection and the Westbound SR 47 on-ramp/Front Street intersection. This 

will result in the removal of parking and the bike lane on the northbound side. The 

parking and five foot bike lane on the southbound side, south of O’Farrell Street, 

will be preserved. North of O’Farrell Street, the parking and the parking lane on the 

southbound side would need to be removed to accommodate the northbound dual 

left-turn lane. The innermost northbound through-lane at the Eastbound off-ramp 

intersection would become a forced left-turn lane at the SR 47 Westbound onramp. This improvement is projected to be needed by the year 2024.

PORT OF HUENEME ACCESS PROJECTS

In addition to the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the SCAG region is home to the 

Port of Hueneme in Ventura County. Although smaller, two-way trade activities through the 

Port of Hueneme were valued at nearly $9.2 billion and generated $1.1 billion in economic 

activities in the immediate region.35 Unlike the San Pedro Bay Ports, the Port of Hueneme 

does not focus on containerized cargo. Instead, its primary imports and exports are 

refrigerated goods and produce, automobiles, bulk cargo and fuels.
 38 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

z Reconstruction of the I-8/Imperial Avenue interchange and Imperial Avenue 

Extension projects in the City of El Centro which expand to the Calexico East 

Port of Entry. The proposed projects would increase the number of commercial 

vehicle inspection lanes and booths from the existing three to six lanes and 

booths, while widening the bridge over the All-American Canal (Canal serves as 

U.S./Mexico Border);

z Construction of cold storage facilities in Imperial County to perform preinspections and allow streamlined crossing of trucks across the LPOEs; and

z Development at air cargo and intermodal capacity in the region.

HIGH DESERT CORRIDOR

The High Desert Corridor (HDC) project includes the construction of a new 63-mile eastwest multi-purpose corridor between SR-18 and SR-14 in Los Angeles and San Bernardino 

counties. This multi-purpose corridor is composed of a range of alternatives including the 

possible incorporation of Transportation System Management/Travel Demand Management 

(TSM/TDM) strategies, expressway/tollway, high-speed rail, a bike route and green energy 

components. The exact elements that will be included as part of the project are dependent on 

the outcome of the final preferred alternative. The Draft EIR/EIS for the project was released 

in fall 2014, and the Final EIR/EIS is scheduled to be completed in spring 2016.

Caltrans and Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA or Metro) 

are in the process of preparing the Draft EIR/EIS for the Northwest 138 Corridor project 

to analyze a range of alternatives along the 36-mile stretch of SR-138 between I-5 and 

SR-14. Proposed alternatives include a highway (six-lanes)/expressway (four-lanes), an 

expressway (six-lanes)/limited access conventional highway (four-lanes) and the TSM 

alternative to provide operational improvements to the existing SR-138 without adding 

capacity or access restrictions. Overall, the project will provide for improved connectivity and 

mobility between I-5 and SR-14.

TRUCK CLIMBING LANES

Additional highway projects that would facilitate goods movement activities in the region 

include truck climbing lanes. Examples of corridors identified as suitable for truck climbing 

lanes and currently programmed with funding and/or under construction include I-5, I-10, 

I-15, SR-57 and SR-60. Truck climbing lanes are additional lanes located outside mixed-flow 

lanes, which permit slower-moving trucks to operate at their own pace. This enables other 

vehicles to move at a faster pace, thereby reducing congestion. These lanes are typically 

placed where slow-moving trucks would cause an obstruction to other vehicles, such as 

hillsides or other areas with significant grade increases.

IMPERIAL COUNTY INTERNATIONAL PORTS OF ENTRY

International border crossings between the U.S. and Mexico in Imperial County are critical 

components of the freight transportation system in Southern California. Within Imperial 

County, the three ports of entry (POEs)–Calexico West-Mexicali I, Calexico East-Mexicali II 

and Andrade-Los Algodones–accounted for over $14 billion in international trade in 2014.

While most goods in Imperial County move by truck, the border areas also are served by 

the UP and Carrizo Gorge Railway (CGR). The Calexico East border crossing is the only 

international rail crossing in the SCAG region and provides the only rail connection from 

California into Central Mexico.

According to the Overall Economic Development Commission (OEDC), there are a number 

of challenges in Imperial County that could constrain future economic development. A 

lack of adequate transportation infrastructure, at the U.S. - Mexico border is a significant 

concern, but there are also operational issues that have to be addressed. Some of the most 

noticeable challenges include:

z The lack of direct freeway connections to railyards and intermodal facilities;

z The lack of dedicated truck lanes, passing lanes and truck bypass routes;

z High truck traffic through urban areas; and

z The impacts of empty trucks returning to Mexico after unloading 

their cargo in Calexico.

These statements are consistent with findings of recent SCAG goods movement 

border crossing studies, which found that costs of delays at the border are high. Other 

major findings were that:

z Border-crossing times in Imperial County’s land port of entries (LPOEs) are among 

the highest along the U.S.-Mexico border;

z Southbound commercial border-crossing times are higher than commonly 

anticipated, occasionally attaining levels comparable to those of 

northbound commercial trips;

z Future volumes of goods crossing the border are anticipated to generate significant 

pressure on current LPOE infrastructure, potentially increasing commercial truck 

wait times at the border; and

z LPOE users are willing to pay to improve border-crossing times and reliability 

on northbound trips.

Key transportation strategies identified to improve the flow of goods in the area include:

z Improving interchanges and developing bypasses to 

appropriate regional roadways;
 39 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 39

The FRATIS project is focused on:

z Improving communications and sharing intermodal logistics information between 

the truck drayage industry and port terminals so that terminals are less congested 

during peak hours; and

z Improving traveler information available to intermodal truck drayage fleets so that 

they can more effectively plan around traffic and port congestion.

Together, these two areas of focus can result in significant improvements in intermodal 

efficiency, including reductions in truck trips, reductions in travel times and improved 

terminal gate and processing efficiency. Technologies that are being utilized during the 

demonstration test include advanced traveler information, port terminal truck-queue-time 

measurement, automated Estimated Time of Arrival (ETA) messaging to the terminals one 

day in advance of truck arrivals, direct messaging of trucks by terminals, and employment 

of an algorithm that will optimize truck deliveries and movements based on several key 

constraints (e.g., time of day, PIERPASS restrictions, terminal queue status, etc.).

The primary user interfaces for these technologies are a web application for drayage truck 

dispatchers, a mobile application for drayage truck drivers and messaging and alerts 

functionality for terminal operators. This demonstration project is currently in operational 

testing that began in December 2013. US DOT will be expanding the FRATIS project to more 

container terminals in the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and involve more trucking 

companies as part of Phase 2.

I-710 AUTOMATED TRUCK RESEARCH

This project will implement a staged progression of commercial vehicle technologies in order 

to transition from current research-based, automated, commercial vehicle demonstration 

efforts to staged operational testing of a flow efficiency system of trucks along the planned 

I-710 truck lanes. The project will build upon the unique operational environment and 

potential partnerships of the Gateway Cities region to promote and enhance truck automated 

commercial vehicle research by bringing together the applications of automated commercial 

vehicle and automation technologies on one of the most heavily congested truck corridors in 

the country. The project will examine and test the specific design and operational concerns 

that impact the future development of I-710 and its approaches.

The Truck Platooning Demonstration Project is an intermediate step toward a long-term 

vision of trucks operating in closely coupled automated platoons on both long-haul and 

short-haul freight corridors. As part of the I-710 South Corridor project, one of the build 

alternatives considers dedicated truck lanes on a separate structure. Through the use of 

Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) communication and suitable sensor technologies, the automated 

trucks will be able to follow each other in platoons at separations of just a few feet on a 

dedicated corridor. In addition, V2V and Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control (CACC) will be 

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS) 

AND FREIGHT

Under MAP-21, evidence of consideration of innovative technologies and operational 

strategies, including intelligent transportation systems (ITS), which improve the safety and 

efficiency of freight movement, is now required for project development. ITS technologies 

allow freight infrastructure to increase its efficiency and capacity by enabling the value and 

volume of freight and freight movement to increase while reducing demands on the system. 

ITS technologies are very flexible and can be applied to the vast transportation infrastructure 

of highways, streets, bridges, tunnels, railways, seaports and airports, as well as associated 

vehicles. ITS can also be applied to mobile freight handling equipment, such as cranes, 

forklifts and conveyor belts. Even the shipping containers used to transport goods can 

have ITS applications.

Both public agencies and the private sector have recognized the need for a coordinated, 

strategic approach to ITS deployment and have established direct links between ITS 

planning and other transportation and strategic planning efforts. It is expected that ITS and 

technology projects will be specifically identified and funded within every freight funding 

program and that nearly all freight projects will have an ITS or advanced technology 

component. Within the SCAG region, there are some key ITS projects that are currently 

ongoing and are summarized in the following paragraphs.

GATEWAY CITIES TECHNOLOGY PLAN FOR GOODS MOVEMENT

The Gateway Cities Technology Plan for Goods Movement represents the most significant 

fusion of ITS and freight operation technologies within the region. Through the integration 

of traditional highway, arterial and traveler information technologies with intermodal freight, 

port and truck technologies, this project evaluates the potential of providing an end-to-end 

information support system that can improve the efficiency of goods movement in Southern 

California. The plan identifies new and expanded technology applications for the Gateway 

Cities and also includes a concept of operations and business plan. It is being developed by 

the Gateway Cities Council of Governments and the LACMTA, with close involvement from 

the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, Caltrans, the SCAG and other key stakeholders.

FREIGHT ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEM (FRATIS)

The United States Department of Transportation (US DOT), in conjunction with the Port of 

Los Angeles, a marine terminal and a drayage trucking company, is currently testing an 

advanced intermodal logistics information technology system designed to improve drayage 

and container handling. This system, termed the Freight Advanced Traveler Information 

System (FRATIS), is a demonstration project funded by the US DOT. The FRATIS project 

seeks to improve the efficiency of freight operations by using several levels of real-time 

information to guide adaptive and effective decision making.
 40 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

GOODS MOVEMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGIES

EXISTING AND PROJECTED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS

Ships, trucks, trains and other goods movement equipment are among the largest 

contributors to regional air pollution, which must be reduced to comply with federal law 

and improve quality of life. Criteria pollutants such as NOx

, PM2.5, SOx and CO can have 

significant public health impacts, including contributing to asthma and other respiratory 

ailments, increased stress and increased cancer risk. In addition, noise, safety issues, 

aesthetic changes, vibrations and natural resource depletion associated with goods 

movement impact quality of life and may have health implications. Freight transport is 

also a major producer of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and a user of energy in the 

form of diesel fuel.

Currently, much of the SCAG region fails to meet federal ozone and fine particulate 

air quality standards as mandated by the federal Clean Air Act. The South Coast Air 

Basin (SCAB) which includes most of the SCAG region, has a deadline to reduce ozone 

concentrations to 80 parts per billion (ppb) by 2023 under the revoked 1997 eight-hour 

ozone standards and to 75 ppb by 2031 under the current 2008 8-hour ozone standards. 

Moreover, new federal ozone standards are expected to be finalized by the EPA in the 

2015/2016 time frame. Currently, the proposed range is 65-70 ppb, with an expected new 

attainment deadline of 2037. This translates to a need to reduce NOx

 emissions in the South 

Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) by 65 percent by 2023 and 75 percent 

beyond projected 2023 emissions by 2032 (beyond the benefits of all adopted programs) in 

order to attain federal ozone standards.36

In addition, both the South Coast Air Basin and the urbanized area of Imperial County have 

been designated as a “Moderate” nonattainment area under the new 2012 annual PM2.5

standards. The statutory attainment deadline is 2020 and the new annual PM2.5 standard 

is 12 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) versus the previous standard of 15 μg/m3. If 

appropriate measures to meet federal standards are not adopted, federal transportation 

funds may be jeopardized and permitting of stationary facilities may be restricted. The 

federal government may also take over air regulation if state plans are not adequate to 

meet federal standards.

Goods movement sources include trucks, locomotives, cargo handling equipment, marine 

vessels and aircraft. These sources, combined with all mobile sources in the region, emit 

approximately 90 percent of regional NOx

.

37 In 2014, heavy-duty trucks contributed 71 

percent of NOx

 emissions and locomotives contributed nine percent, of NOx emissions from 

tested in mixed-flow traffic conditions on the highway system as a short-term solution, if 

dedicated truck lanes are not implemented in the near term.

Caltrans and Berkeley PATH received approximately $1.6 million to test Cooperative 

Adaptive Cruise Control (CACC) on heavy trucks, enabling them to electronically couple 

themselves so that they occupy less space and use less energy than if driven independently. 

The project was initiated in September 2014.

ADVANCED TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM 

(ATMIS)

The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have deployed the ATMIS to monitor truck traffic 

within the Ports using vehicle detection devices and closed-circuit television cameras. 

A traffic management center operated jointly by the Ports provides traveler information, 

including real-time traffic conditions and incidents on changeable message signs in the 

vicinity of the Port area.

AUTONOMOUS COMMERCIAL VEHICLES

Autonomous vehicle technology is also being tested outside the SCAG region. For 

instance, on May 5, 2015, State of Nevada awarded the first license for an autonomous 

commercial truck to operate on a public highway to Daimler Trucks North America (DTNA). 

This autonomous vehicle technology is expected to help reduce accidents, improve fuel 

consumption, reduce highway congestion and in turn, address environmental impacts. 

This pilot project links together sophisticated camera and radar technology with systems 

providing lane stability, collision avoidance, speed control, braking, steering, and an 

advanced dash display to allow for safe autonomous operation on public highways.

Trucks such as the Daimler truck may have applications in the SCAG region once the 

technology becomes commercially available. The autonomous commercial truck is not 

a driverless truck; however, it provides a state-of-the-art dash interface and connectivity 

for a better driving experience. It is able to greatly improve the way data from the truck’s 

performance is communicated to the driver. The highway pilot informs the driver visually on 

its status and also accepts commands from the driver. Taking connectivity to another level, 

video displays inside the truck are capable of replacing exterior mirrors. Not only does this 

boost fuel efficiency by up to 1.5 percent, but the use of tiny cameras on the exterior of the 

truck greatly reduces blind spots. With the safety features on the trucks, drivers can optimize 

their time on the road by handling other important logistical tasks, from logging to routing. 

The technology contributes to improved safety and efficiency, while allowing for improved 

communication through connectivity and integration.
 41 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 41

make this a fully integrated plan. To date, the sustainable freight initiative has involved broad 

outreach statewide, technology assessments and identification of near-term and longerterm actions that include fleet turnover and improved system efficiency.

GHG emissions are also produced by goods movement sources. On a national scale, heavyduty vehicles were only four percent of registered vehicles on the road in 2010, but they 

accounted for approximately 25 percent of on-road fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions 

in the transportation sector.39 In September 2011, the EPA and the US DOT’s National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) finalized the first round of standards for 

medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, creating fuel efficiency standards for model year 2014-

2018 vehicles. Stricter Phase 2 standards are expected to be finalized in 2016. The proposed 

new standards would be for model year vehicles from 2021-2027 and are expected to cut 

national GHG emissions by approximately 1 billion metric tons and conserve about 1.8 billion 

barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program.40 The U.S. Department 

of Energy has also started a Super Truck (2010) program to develop and demonstrate more 

fuel efficient trucks that will increase engine efficiency and overall fuel economy from about 

6.5 miles per gallon to about 9.75 miles per gallon. To date, the four manufacturers involved 

in this program have improved engine efficiency and fuel economy. For instance, Cummins 

and PACCAR’s Peterbilt Motors Company have reached over ten miles per gallon under real 

world driving conditions on a Class 8 tractor-trailer.40

goods movement related sources. FIGURE 8 shows the distribution of emissions from various 

goods movement sources.

Several regional and state efforts are intended to reduce criteria pollutants such as NOx

 and 

PM2.5. Many of the regulations and programs in place will likely have co-benefits for GHG 

reductions. The California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) truck and bus regulation, as well 

as state and local incentive programs, were put into place to accelerate the introduction 

of cleaner technology. The Heavy Truck and Bus rule, passed in 2008, first implemented 

in 2012 and then amended in 2014, requires that by 2023 nearly all heavy duty vehicles 

(HDVs)will have engines that are model year 2010 or newer. Additionally, various incentive 

programs have since funded deployment of hybrid-electric and cleaner fueled trucks. 

Given existing programs and control measures, truck NOx

 emissions are expected to 

decrease from 142.85 tons per day (tpd) in 2014 to 56.4 (tpd) in 2032.38 This forecast 

is displayed FIGURE 9.

Additional state programs are under development as part of the California Sustainable 

Freight Strategy (SFS). Though not finalized, the SFS is intended to create a sustainable 

freight system that is primarily powered by zero-emission technologies and near zeroemissions technologies, when a zero emissions option is not a viable option. The plan 

defines sustainability broadly and is intended to meet environmental, economic, energy 

and transportation objectives. CARB is working closely with other state agencies including 

Caltrans and The Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development (“GO Biz”) to 

142.85

17.27

29.23

7.8

3.4

1.81

On Road Trucks

Freight Locomotives

OGV*

Harbor Craft

Cargo Handling

Equipment

Aircraft

Figure 8 2014 Distribution of NOx Emissions from Goods Movement Sources

Source: SCAQMD (June 2015) “Preliminary Draft AQMP White Paper Goods Movement: * Ocean Going Vessels

142.85

63.18

56.4

2014 (TPD) 2023 2032

Figure 9 Truck Emissions Baseline and Forecast NOx (Tons Per Day) 

Source: SCAQMD (June 2015) “Preliminary Draft AQMP White Paper Goods Movement: * Ocean Going Vessels
 42 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

The 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Environmental Strategy was developed to address 

community health concerns, federal attainment requirements and climate change issues, 

while contributing to our economic and energy security goals. Accordingly, the strategy 

emphasizes coordinated solutions for mobility, economy, energy and environment so that 

investments can provide multiple benefits. This 2016 RTP/SCS continues to focus on the 

long-term goal of a zero-emission goods movement system where technically feasible and 

economically viable, while also integrating near zero-emissions technologies that serve 

as bridging options to continue to reduce emissions below today’s levels. It is important to 

note that the term “zero-emission” as used throughout this document refers to technologies 

that are zero tailpipe emissions, where emissions are not released at the location of the 

vehicle, but may still be produced off-site through the production of energy needed to power 

the vehicle. For instance, electric vehicles may be zero tailpipe emissions while in use, but 

emissions are still being generated at the location of the power plant that is producing energy 

to power or charge the vehicle. Similarly, emissions may be generated in the production 

and transportation of fuels used to power the vehicle. Though this plan supports immediate 

accelerated deployment of existing proven technologies that will serve to improve the 

region’s air quality, this investment must be balanced with investment in our long-term goal 

of zero- and near zero-emission freight system. Continued innovation, partnerships with the 

private sector and building on lessons learned will help us achieve the goal of a robust zeroand near zero-emission freight system.

At the state level, reducing GHG emissions is a priority, as established by landmark 

legislation such as AB 32 and SB 375. In April 2015, Governor Brown signed Executive 

Order B-30-15, which calls for a reduction in GHG to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 

as a way of ensuring that the earlier targets of Executive Orders B-16-2012 and S-03-

05, which require transportation GHG emissions to be reduced 80 percent below 1990 

levels by 2050, are met. Between 2012 and 2016, the State of California has continued to 

implement GHG reduction measures to meet these goals, with some implications for freight. 

For instance, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard requires a minimum of ten percent reduction in 

carbon intensity of transportation fuels, based on a life cycle analysis of the fuel, by 2020. 

Beginning January 2015, GHG emissions from transportation fuels are included under 

the Cap-and-Trade Program. Additionally, in 2013, CARB adopted the Federal Phase 1 

standards (passed in 2011) for heavy duty vehicles manufactured for use in California. This 

harmonization of standards is set to reduce new vehicle emissions by four to five percent 

per year from 2014-2018.41 While a regional forecast is not available for GHG emissions, 

CARB reports that GHG emissions from goods movement sources statewide will continue to 

increase. For instance, GHG emissions from trucks increase from 20 million metric tons CO2

in 2012 to just over 30 million metric tons of CO2

 in 2040.42Because most control measures 

to date focused on reducing criteria pollutants harmful to human health, CO2

 emissions show 

a different trend by increasing over time, rather than decreasing.43

It is also a regional priority to reduce rail pollutants and work toward the objective of a zeroand near zero-emission freight rail system. At the federal level, regulations are in place that 

will contribute to future reductions in rail emissions, including the U.S. EPA Locomotive 

Engine Standards, the 2008 EPA rulemaking to reduce locomotive idling and the EPA nonroad locomotive and marine (NRLM) fuel sulfur rule. The EPA Tier 4 locomotive standards 

also become effective for all new engines in 2015, and Tier 4 are now available from General 

Electric (GE). GE was able to achieve the Tier 4 standard without using Selective Catalytic 

Reduction (SCR) for after-treatment, eliminating the need for an extra urea storage tank 

and reducing the complexity and cost of using a Tier 4 engine. GE estimates that these 

engines will reduce emissions by 70 percent as compared to a Tier 3 engine.44 Given current 

regulations, NOx

 emissions from rail are expected to decrease from 17.27 tpd in 2014 to 14.72 

in 2032. The emissions forecast for rail emissions is shown in FIGURE 10.

In the South Coast Air Basin, attaining the national ozone standards will require reductions 

in emissions of NOx

 well beyond reductions resulting from current rules, programs and 

commercially-available technologies. Previous regulations and incentive programs have 

improved vehicle emissions performance, but as the region grows, existing measures are not 

enough to realize attainment of the ozone standards in the 2023 and 2031 time frames. With 

the projected changes in both truck and rail emissions, greater advancements in technology 

are needed to meet regional attainment objectives. As such, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes an 

action plan to facilitate technology development and reduce emissions.

17.27 17.77

14.72

2014 (TPD) 2023 2032

Figure 10 Rail Emissions Baseline and Forecast NOx (Tons Per Day)

SCAQMD (June 2015) “Preliminary Draft AQMP White Paper Goods Movement:
 43 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 43

Project scoping also includes an understanding of the best state of technologies. Zeroemission freight technologies are evolving and some technologies are moving closer to 

market readiness. It is important to stay aware of progress made in this area. In 2012, the 

Zero-Emission Freight Collaborative was formed to foster the regional development of zeroemission technologies and share information on progress made in technology advancement. 

The collaborative includes SCAG, LACMTA, the Gateway Cities Council of Governments, the 

Port of Los Angeles, the Port of Long Beach and the South Coast Air Quality Management 

District. The group shares knowledge and findings about ongoing testing efforts and works 

together to attract funding to the region for additional testing and development.

This project scoping stage began prior to 2012, and we have learned and tracked information 

about operational needs and technology readiness. However, ongoing work is needed in 

this area, particularly to learn how industry could best incorporate new technologies into 

their daily operations. As several companies have begun to implement energy saving and 

emissions reducing practices, it is important to determine if these are indeed “best practices” 

and to determine if these practices can be replicated for other companies operating 

throughout the region.

GOODS MOVEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL 

STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN

ACTION PLAN FOR ADVANCEMENT OF ZERO-EMISSION 

TECHNOLOGY

In the 2008 RTP, recommendations for truck emissions reduction strategies included truck 

replacement, engine repowering, exhaust treatment device retrofits and alternative fuels. 

In 2012, the RTP/SCS included near-term measures similar to those in 2008, in addition 

to near zero-emission strategies. Further, the 2012 RTP/SCS included a Technology 

Advancement Plan to develop and deploy a fully zero-emission goods movement system 

in the 2035 time frame. Since the 2012 RTP/SCS, several key action steps have been 

taken. The 2016 RTP/SCS proposes an updated environmental action plan for the goods 

movement system that builds on regional progress to date. As the four phases of the updated 

action plan are reviewed below, the text also points to progress made related to specific 

action steps identified in 2012.

The technology development and deployment plan put forth in this Appendix is inclusive of 

all stages of technology development and deployment: beginning from an initial definition of 

key operational parameters, moving through prototype development, initial demonstration 

and evaluation, and eventually a staged roll-out. This start-to-finish framework is useful as 

there are many potential technologies available, each at different stages of readiness.

The four phases of the action plan applicable to technology solutions are (FIGURE 11):

z Phase 1: Project Scoping and Evaluation of Existing Work

z Phase 2: Evaluation, Development and Prototype Demonstrations

z Phase 3: Initial Deployment and Operational Demonstration

z Phase 4: Full-Scale Demonstrations and Commercial Deployment

PHASE 1: PROJECT SCOPING AND EVALUATION

OF EXISTING WORK

The project scoping stage of technology development is intended to define the needs 

that the new technology must provide. In addition to meeting the overriding goal of zero 

emissions, new technologies must have adequate range, power and charging capability to 

serve business needs. This stage of exploring market needs and potential applications that 

could meet those needs has already begun.

Figure 11 Phases of Technology Development and Deployment

PHASE

Evaluation, 

Development 

& Prototype 

Demonstrations 

PHASE

Initial Deployment 

& Operational 

Demonstration 

Project Scoping & 

Evaluation of Existing

Work

PHASE

Full Scale Demonstrations, 

Commercial Deployment &

Infrastructure Construction 

PHASE
 44 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

validation and initial demonstration of several types of advanced prototype vehicles 

and testing of the initial prototype. Phase 2 includes performance assessment of new 

technologies, including addressing market risks/uncertainties. As prototypes are developed 

and demonstrated, significant evaluation will also occur.

Developing and testing zero-emission prototypes requires considerable investment from 

both public and private sector partners. It is the original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) 

that must invest in research and development, with the assurance that there will be a market 

for their product when it becomes commercially viable. Both large companies and smaller 

startups have invested in new technology development. Particularly for smaller companies, 

it is important to receive public financial support for prototype development. Several 

successful partnerships already exist where public funding combines with private sector 

investment to develop technology prototypes. Once prototypes are available, it is beneficial 

for them to be tested in operational service with industry operators. Existing partnerships 

allow for trucking companies and terminal operators to integrate and experiment with new 

technologies in their everyday business operations.

**PHASE 2 ACTION STEPS SINCE 2012:

Convene Logistics Working Groups

Since 2012, the region has formed the Los Angeles County Zero Emission Truck 

Collaborative. This group includes LACMTA, the Gateway Cities COG, POLA, POLB, 

SCAQMD and SCAG. This group meets to coordinate on advanced technology initiatives 

including applying for advanced technology funding, evaluating new technology proposals 

and collaborating on technology demonstrations.

Determine a set of market criteria to move trucks forward to successful 

commercialization

See examples listed in Phase 1.

Secure funding commitments for the development of vehicle prototypes

and infrastructure demonstrations

Since 2012, the region has secured several funding commitments to continue with zeroemission technology research and demonstration. For instance, the POLA and POLB 

Technology Advancement Program (TAP), provides funding to test new technologies in 

ongoing terminal operations. Ports partner with industry and provide $3 million annually to 

develop and test new clean air technologies. The TAP addresses clean air technologies for 

rail, truck, ship, cargo handling equipment and harbor craft. In addition, several grants have 

been secured including:

**PHASE 1 ACTION STEPS ACCOMPLISHED SINCE 2012:

Continue to research goods movement user-markets and associated infrastructure needs 

while exploring a range of technologies as appropriate with equipment manufacturers.

In the past four years, many studies have been done to evaluate new technologies and the 

role that they may play in the SCAG region as well as to better understand market criteria 

and operational parameters. At least two studies were conducted that began to define 

operational criteria for trucks in the SCAG region. These studies analyzed performance 

parameters and operational needs for drayage and regional truck trips. One key finding 

was that flexibility is critical as trucks often rotate between routes and markets. Operators 

commonly reported that a vehicle must have sufficient power for operation (400 horsepower 

[HP], 1,200-1,800 foot pounds [ft-lbs] of torque) and be able to travel at least a 200 

mile range. Additionally, vehicles generally refuel every 2-3 days and have a lifespan of 

approximately 600,000 miles. Please see the studies below for additional information:

z Characterization of Drayage Truck Duty Cycles at the POLB and POLA, (TIAX, 

LLC, prepared for POLA and POLB); March 2011.45

z Key Performance Parameters for Drayage Trucks Operating at the Ports of Los 

Angeles and Long Beach, (CALSTART, prepared for LACMTA and Gateway Cities 

COG); November, 2013.46

The studies listed below are a sampling of work that has been completed to date to evaluate 

technological readiness, emissions benefits and potential operational performance. This 

work continues to date as technologies evolve towards full commercialization. Please see 

the following studies for more information:

z Evaluation of Environmental Mitigation Strategies, (ICF on behalf 

of SCAG); April 2012

z Zero Emission Catenary Hybrid Truck Market Study (Gladstein Neandross & 

Associates (GNA) on behalf of SCAQMD); March 2012

z Moving California Forward, Zero and Low Emission Freight Pathways (GNA on 

behalf of the California Cleaner Freight Coalition); November, 2013

z Pathways to Near-Zero-Emission Natural Gas Heavy Duty Vehicles (GNA on 

behalf of Southern California Gas Company); May 2014

z DRAFT–Port of Los Angeles Zero Emission White Paper, (POLA), June 2015.

PHASE 2: EVALUATION, DEVELOPMENT AND PROTOTYPE 

DEMONSTRATIONS

As technology development progresses, Phase 2 includes the development, design 
 45 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 45

are critical to test and evaluate larger vehicle fleets in everyday business operations. In 

addition, these tests may serve in part as initial deployment of cleaner vehicles. Assuming a 

successful demonstration, the industry partner may opt to continue to use these emergent 

technologies. Another opportunity for initial deployment is the use of incentive programs, 

where all, or a portion of, the incremental cost of the new technology is subsidized. For 

instance, the CARB Multi-Source Facility Demonstration Project, provides over $23 million 

to demonstrate technologies that are within three years of commercialization.47 This type of 

program provides an opportunity to see how new technologies work in practice, while at the 

same time hastening their placement into service. In the initial deployment phase, incentive 

programs can continue to support industry in this transition.

PHASE 4: FULL SCALE DEMONSTRATIONS, COMMERCIAL 

DEPLOYMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION

(IF WAYSIDE POWER IS NEEDED)

The prior stages of technology testing and demonstrations will have prepared the region for 

Phase 4 deployment using the commercialization, regulatory and market steps determined 

in prior phases. Any new technology deployment must be coordinated with infrastructure 

planning, and key decisions will be incorporated into RTP updates and future State 

Implementation Plan revisions. During Phase 4, technologies will be deployed as they meet 

the criteria for deployment established by regional stakeholders. As various technologies 

are currently in different stages of readiness, it is assumed that their deployment will be 

staggered throughout the 2020-2040 timeframe.

In this stage, there may be a greater role for planning agencies as it will be critical to provide 

infrastructure that supports the deployment of new technologies. If wayside power is 

deemed applicable, this may be incorporated into infrastructure planning. Additionally, 

the public sector must continue to use incentives, regulatory and market mechanisms to 

facilitate full commercialization and work with private sector users and developers to make 

sure that advanced technologies are integrated into regional transportation networks.

TIMELINE AND KEY ACTION STEPS

FIGURE 12 shows updated action steps and time frames to implement the phases outlined 

previously. Further details are provided in TABLE 15 and TABLE 16. The time frames 

suggested in this plan are broad and will likely capture a majority of technologies that can 

serve the region’s needs. However, as innovation is continuous, these time frames may 

not catch all technologies, and the development of particular technologies may either 

exceed or lag behind proposed time frames. The ability to create partnerships and procure 

funding for research and development efforts will also influence the timeline for technology 

z Several funders (including the SCAQMD, the California Energy Commission (CEC), 

the U.S. EPA and several regional partners) have contributed roughly $13.5 million 

to construct and demonstrate a one-mile Overhead Catenary System (OCS) in the 

City of Carson and develop prototype trucks to assess compatibility with the OCS. 

In-kind contributions from OEMs increase the total value of this project.

z In 2012, the SCAQMD received a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) grant 

of $4.2 million to develop and test 13 zero-emission drayage trucks using 

various technologies.

z In 2014, a second DOE grant of $9.5 million was granted to SCAQMD for the 

development and demonstration of zero-emission fuel cell range extended electric 

drayage trucks and hybrid electric drayage trucks.

Moreover, the state Cap-and-Trade Program’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund may 

also emerge as a funding source for the development of clean vehicle prototypes and 

infrastructure demonstrations. Regional partners have submitted applications in response 

to recent competitive grant solicitations for various categories of low carbon transportation 

initiatives. 

Develop and demonstrate truck and truck wayside power prototypes

The 2012 RTP/SCS included a $35 million line item for a wayside power system to be 

demonstrated in two phases. Phase 1, a one-mile test track, has begun in the City of Carson.

Further study of operational impacts of zero-emission rail technologies/

Evaluate practicability of applying existing electrified rail technologies

Regional and state efforts such as the CARB Technology Assessments for rail and 

the SCAQMD Goods Movement White Paper have continued to explore operational 

impacts of zero-emission rail technologies. Additionally, several demonstration projects 

have been completed.

Select truck technologies for continued fleet evaluation under Phase 3/

Identify vehicle technologies and wayside power applications to be tested 

under operational demonstrations in Phase 3

Evaluation of technologies has begun throughout the course of several demonstration 

projects. As technologies evolve and more is learned about them, SCAG maintains a 

technology neutral position.

PHASE 3: INITIAL DEPLOYMENT AND OPERATIONAL 

DEMONSTRATION

Phase 3 is an opportunity to scale up research and development efforts to evaluate not just 

a prototype, but the performance of a larger fleet of vehicles. In this phase, industry partners 
 46 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

development. As explained below, this plan of technology development, evaluation and 

eventual deployment will be undertaken in close cooperation with regional partners and 

industry stakeholders.

AGENCY AND PARTNER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FOR ACTION

In addition to the phases described above, significant regional actions will be needed in order 

to realize this vision of a zero- and near zero-emission freight transportation system that 

meets regional objectives for long-term sustainability and can also meet the performance 

objectives required by industry. SCAG may act together with key partner agencies such 

as the Port of Los Angeles, the Port of Long Beach, the SCAQMD and the region’s county 

transportation commissions to update and implement this plan as needed. Stakeholders 

must work together to share and evaluate new information as it becomes available.

Important roles for these partners include:

z Identify funding to support technology evaluation and demonstration efforts in the 

financially constrained RTP.

z Advocate for additional federal funding to support technology evaluation and 

demonstration efforts.

z Advocate for additional state funding to support technology evaluation and 

demonstration efforts.

z Advocate for state funding to support deployment incentives to keep costs 

manageable for industry.

z Demonstrate the holistic importance of new technology development for cobenefits such as energy security, energy cost certainty, climate protection and 

green-sector job development.

z Evaluate mechanisms for advanced technology implementation such as 

incentives, differential tolls and public private partnerships.

z Continue to lead demonstration projects and evaluate and share the results with 

partner agencies and private sector partners.

z Continue to engage and collaborate with the private sector to continuously solicit 

feedback on operational parameters and real world operating conditions.

z Encourage private sector partners to participate in operational demonstrations. 

Partners are needed to evaluate the performance of technologies in 

a real world setting.

z Support partnerships with OEMS for technology development and send 

a consistent signal to OEMs that there will be market demand for the new 

technologies they are investing in and creating.

Truck+Rail Technology Development+

Deployment

TIMELINE

PHASES

I II

2012-2016 

• Formation of Zero-Emissions 

 Trucks Collaborative

• Definition of Desired Technology

 Characteristics

• Initiation of Several Technology 

 Development and Demonstration Projects 

• Continue Deployment of Existing 

 Near-Zero Emissions Truck 

 Technologies 

• Continue Evaluation of 

 Zero-Emission Truck Technologies 

 in Operational Service

• Deployment of Tier 4 Engines 

 and Other Existing Clean Rail 

 Technologies 

• Continue Work with OEMS

 to Develop and Demonstrate 

 Rail Technologies

• Full Deployment of

 All Commercially 

 Viable Truck 

 and Rail Technologies

PHASES

I II

2015-2025 

PHASES

I II III

2016-2025 

PHASES

I II III IV

2020-2040 

Figure 12 Timeline and Key Actions Steps
 47 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 47

Table 15 Timeline for Zero-Emission Truck Deployment

Years Phase Trucks

2012-2016 1, 2

The 2012 RTP/SCS includes an environmental action plan for a zero- and 

near zero-emission freight transportation system, including a line item 

for a near-term demonstration of the Zero Emission Container Movement 

System project for $35 million.

The Zero-Emission Trucks Collaborative comprising LACMTA, 

SCAQMD, Port of LA and Port of Long Beach, Gateway Cities Council of 

Governments, and SCAG is formed. 

Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) continue development and 

testing of zero- and near zero-emission truck models, including battery 

electric and fuel cell models. 

Several technology development and demonstration projects are 

initiated. See “Phase 2” description above for more detail. 

2016-2020 1, 2, 3

Continue deployment of existing near zero-emission truck technologies 

(described below under “Near-Term Truck Technologies”) 

Continue development and evaluation of wayside power and other 

technologies. 

Continue to partner with federal, state and private funding partners to 

finance technology development. 

Continue to collect and evaluate information from ongoing zero-emission 

technology demonstrations. 

As feasibility is demonstrated, ensure that the “tests” remain in service 

and begin to scale up efforts. 

Begin initial deployment, with industry partners who can put test trucks 

into immediate service. 

Continue investigation of mechanisms (i.e., regulatory, market based, 

incentive based) to facilitate technology deployment.

2020-2040 1,2, 3, 4*

If applicable, plan for wayside power system. 

Begin deployment of appropriate zero- and near zero-emission trucks 

(see examples under “Long Term Truck Technologies” below) and 

continue operational demonstration.

*Stages 1 and 2 will likely be completed prior to this time frame. However, to allow for continuous innovation in new and 

improved products, we assume that project scoping and early phases of the development/deployment cycle will continue to 

occur as new products and technologies are considered. 

Table 16 Timeline for Zero Emission Rail Deployment

Years Phase Rail

2012-2016 1, 2

The 2012 RTP/SCS includes an environmental 

action plan for a zero- and near zero-emission 

freight transportation system, including nearterm measures for genset and switcher engines 

and recommends further study of viable zeroand near zero-emission rail technologies.

Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) 

finalize development of Tier 4 engines and 

continue to build hybrid electric locomotive 

prototypes.

Partner agencies continue demonstration 

projects. 

2015-2025 1, 2

As old locomotives are replaced, Tier 4 will be 

deployed as required by the U.S. EPA. 

Encourage use of retrofit kits on 

existing engines as they are serviced or 

re-manufactured. 

Continue to work with OEMs to develop and 

demonstrate zero- and near zero-emission 

technologies. 

2020-2040 1, 2, 3, 4* 

As zero- and near zero-emission rail 

technologies can be practicably applied to the 

region, fully deploy such technologies.

*Stage 1 will likely be completed prior to this timeframe. However, to allow for continuous innovation in new and improved 

products, we assume that project scoping and early phases of the development/deployment cycle will continue to occur as 

new products and technologies are considered.
 48 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

For rail, near -erm technologies for switcher locomotives can reduce emissions at railyards. 

With cleaner Tier 4 locomotive engines currently available, accelerated replacements 

of locomotives with Tier 4 engines are also needed to reduce emissions. A longer-term 

objective of a zero-emission rail system, or the ability to operate in zero-emissions mode 

while in the region, can be reached through further technology development. This section 

will briefly describe both near- and long-term technologies that have the potential to reduce 

emissions and help the region meet attainment deadlines. The technologies identified in this 

section serve as examples of potential near- and long-term options for further study and do 

not constitute specific technologies under the financially constrained RTP/SCS.

NEAR-TERM TRUCK TECHNOLOGIES

The trucking market offers unique challenges due to heavy weights, operational 

performance requirements and high incremental costs. However, several reduced-emissions 

trucks are currently commercially available and many zero- and near zero-emission trucks 

are under development for future deployment. Three categories of potential near-term 

improvements are trucks using a cleaner fuel, such as natural gas, hybrid-electric trucks and 

improvements to the existing combustion engine.

CLEANER FUEL TRUCKS

Alternative fuels include compressed and liquefied natural gas (CNG, LNG), liquefied 

petroleum gas (LPG, i.e., propane), ethanol, methanol, dimethyl ether (DME), hydrogen 

and nonpetroleum biodiesel fuels.48 Natural gas trucks use compressed natural gas (CNG) 

or liquefied natural gas (LNG) to power an internal combustion engine. Natural gas trucks 

have already been deployed and may experience greater market penetration if more fueling 

infrastructure is provided. Range may be a concern due to limited on-board fuel storage and 

there are remaining concerns with vehicle cost and methane emissions.49 Nevertheless, 

several efforts are underway to expand use of natural gas trucks in the region as a nearterm solution and a few notable success stories have occurred within the SCAG region. 

For instance, Ryder trucks has secured over $20 million in grant funding from US DOE’s 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the California Energy Commission and the 

SCAQMD to deploy 200 natural gas trucks operating within the SCAG region. Additionally, 

two publicly available natural gas fueling stations were constructed.50 Southern California 

Gas Company (SoCalGas) has also been involved in several technology development 

projects and has worked with OEMs to develop and test several engines and vehicles. These 

projects have been funded by partners including the CEC, DOE, SCAQMD, in addition to 

funding invested by SoCalGas.

Renewable natural gas, also known as biomethane, is another alternative fuel source and 

is widely used by United Parcel Service (UPS) in their fleet of compressed natural gas 

vehicles. RNG is produced as organic matter from landfills, wastewater treatment plants and 

In addition to facilitation of development, demonstration and deployment, it is important that 

SCAG and other regional partners continue to advocate for additional funding for technology 

development efforts as well as the proper regulatory and market structure to deploy these 

technologies. In the past, the Southern California National Freight Gateway Collaboration 

has successfully advocated for additional technology investment with the National Freight 

Advisory Committee, FHWA and CALTRANS. In fact, the California Freight Mobility Plan 

includes a $3 billion line-item for the development of new technologies.

Regional partners may also facilitate a greater understanding of potential market and 

regulatory mechanisms to support and enable zero- and near zero-emission truck 

commercialization and widespread deployment. Models may include incentives, buydown rebates, preferred or exclusive access to port service, exclusive or preferred access to 

corridors, etc. Truck manufacturers and technology developers will be included to determine 

a set of market criteria (i.e. the minimum market size and volumes of vehicles needed to 

move forward to successful commercialization.) Incentive structures may be financial, 

such as subsidies or financing of incremental capital costs of new clean technologies; or 

non-financial, such as reduced tolls for zero-emission vehicles, expedited access to freight 

facilities, dedicated lanes for advanced clean technology trucks, or public recognition 

programs for companies utilizing advanced clean technologies.

NEAR-TERM AND LONG-TERM TECHNOLOGIES FOR 

COMMERCIAL DEPLOYMENT

The 2016 RTP/SCS recommends a two-pronged environmental strategy to be implemented 

in the four phases outlined in the previous section. SCAG recognizes that not all technologies 

have advanced to the stage where they can be implemented immediately. As the region 

works to advance and deploy current prototype technologies (i.e., those that are currently 

in Phase 2), focus should be placed on commercializing and implementing existing 

solutions as well (i.e., implementing those that are currently in Phases 3 & 4). For trucks, 

several near-zero emission clean-fuel trucks and hybrid trucks are currently available but 

require a more aggressive deployment. Technological advancement also has increased 

efficiency and reduced emissions of the conventional combustion engine. Additional zeroemission vehicle types are in the prototype stage but need further testing to advance to full 

commercialization. It is worth pointing out that operational strategies discussed elsewhere 

in this Appendix can also reduce emissions by improving overall system efficiency. For 

instance, the bottleneck strategy described in earlier sections and the rail strategy, which 

proposes new grade separations, can reduce emissions by improving operating conditions 

and reducing congestion.
 49 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 49

emission vehicles, charging and fueling infrastructure is also a consideration that must be 

planned over the long term.

BATTERY-ELECTRIC TRUCKS

Battery-electric trucks replace the entire engine and drive train of a conventional vehicle with 

an electric motor and generator. The battery can provide all the power needed to power the 

truck and would ideally be recharged through normal operations; for instance, regenerative 

breaking could recharge the battery. However, this would likely not be enough power and 

therefore battery-powered electric trucks could allow for the battery to be recharged through 

plugging into the grid, using an on-board hydrogen fuel cell or connecting to a wayside 

power system. Several prototype models of battery-powered electric trucks exist but current 

obstacles include cost, charging time and range. Current battery charges are estimated to 

allow for a 100-mile range.57

FUEL-CELL TRUCKS

There are many applications for a fuel cell vehicle. For instance, a battery-powered electric 

vehicle may have an electric motor that is powered by a battery. In addition to charging 

the battery through the means described above, a fuel cell would draw hydrogen from an 

onboard storage tank and then generate the electricity needed to recharge the battery. 

Calstart estimates that by using a charged battery, then recharging the battery onboard via 

the fuel cell, this configuration could have a range of up to 400 miles. This would be limited 

only by the amount of on-board hydrogen storage.58 While fuel cells offer greater range, the 

system is more complicated and adds infrastructure cost (i.e., hydrogen fueling in addition 

to charging equipment) and possibly additional maintenance costs. Fuel cells are also less 

efficient from a wells-to-wheels perspective, because of the electrolysis needed to make H2

and the need to transport and distribute the fuel. A fuel cell truck will require 2.5 times the 

energy cost as a battery-powered electric truck.59

CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE FOR ZERO-EMISSION TRUCK 

TECHNOLOGIES

The deployment of the technologies discussed above cannot be completed without 

supporting infrastructure to provide either fuel or power to the vehicle. For electric 

technologies, this implies a network of electric heavy-duty vehicle charging stations. Fuel 

cell vehicles, and alternative fuel near zero-emission vehicles, such as hydrogen and natural 

gas, would require their own unique refueling infrastructure. Alternatively, wayside power 

systems could allow a vehicle to charge or draw power during on-road operations.

Wayside power technologies allow a vehicle to charge while in operation, drawing power 

as it moves along the road. Ideally, these systems would allow for trucks to enter and exit 

seamlessly and change lanes, and they could be shared with standard trucks. They offer the 

potential to extend the range of a vehicle that is charged from a stationary power source by 

agricultural sources decomposes and is thus viewed by some as a more sustainable fuel.51

As of 2013, AQMD reports 526 heavy duty natural gas public fleet vehicles in operation and 

an additional 3,692 medium and light duty public fleet vehicles.52

HYBRID-ELECTRIC TRUCKS

Hybrid-electric trucks contain an internal combustion engine as well as an electric motor, 

generator and energy storage device (e.g., a battery). The electric motor and generator 

absorb energy via regenerative braking and store that energy to offset acceleration and 

power demands of the vehicle. However, when battery power is insufficient, the truck draws 

power from a conventional engine. The incremental cost of this truck remains a barrier to 

market penetration, though some of this has been offset through incentive programs. In 

Southern California53 there were 603 hybrid and 66 zero-emission vehicles deployed 

through the State Hybrid Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project (HVIP) since January 

1, 2012.54 CARB estimates that an additional 420 vehicles will be funded statewide in 

2015. A full report of CARB’s Technology Assessment for this category is not available. 

However a summary power point can be found at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/

presentation/hybridtrucks.pdf.55

COMBUSTION ENGINE IMPROVEMENTS

While the majority of this Environmental Strategy seeks to develop and deploy a 

regional fleet of zero-emission trucks, it is important to recognize the value of near-term 

improvements to the existing combustion engine. Improvements to engine efficiency will 

reduce fuel used and emissions produced in the near-term and lessons learned will help 

in the design of more power efficient zero-emission vehicles as the fleet converts to full 

zero-emissions. Improvements to internal combustion engines are discussed at length in 

the CARB Draft Technology Assessment: Engine/Powerplant and Drivetrain Optimization 

and Vehicle Efficiency, released June 2015. This report discusses the potential to obtain 

increased efficiency in the existing internal combustion engine through engine technologies 

(such as waste heat recovery) and vehicle efficiency technologies (such as automatically 

inflating tires and improved aerodynamics). For a complete list, please see the CARB 

report.56 Technologies to improve engine efficiency have already been developed and 

advanced through the US DOE Supertruck program (see description above).

LONG-TERM TRUCK TECHNOLOGIES

The long-term goal is to develop and deploy a fleet of zero-emission trucks, or trucks 

that can operate in zero-emission range while in the region. Two broad categories of 

trucks are under development to meet this goal including battery-powered electric and 

fuel cell. Depending on the truck design and compatibility, wayside power solutions 

may be used to extend the range of these configurations. In addition to developing zero-
 50 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

than all in the front, making the train less prone to derailments and facilitating more even 

braking. These units also provide a fuel savings of four to six (4-6) percent compared to 

standard locomotive power. 64

TECHNOLOGIES IN DEVELOPMENT

To go beyond the Tier 4 standard, Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) for NOx and Diesel 

Oxidation Catalysts (DOCs) and Diesel Particulate Filters (DPFs) for PM are estimated 

to reduce NOx

 and PM emissions 70 percent beyond the Tier 4 standard at a cost of 

approximately $4 million per unit.65 These units may require additional maintenance 

costs, but are otherwise compatible with the national fleet. These units, as applied to Tier 4 

locomotives, are still in the conceptual phase. However, DOCs, DPFs and a third technology 

called Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) have all been tested by UP in intermediate length 

halls of approximately 200 miles. The smaller size of this engine allowed for all after 

treatment to be applied simultaneously.66

Liquid natural gas has also been considered as a fuel for rail locomotives. It is estimated that 

use of LNG with a Tier 4 locomotive would lead to NOx

 and PM reductions of 70 percent 

beyond the Tier 4 locomotive.67 Tender car prototypes currently exist; however, there are 

operational considerations such as the need to carry an additional tender car to store the 

LNG fuel and the need for fueling infrastructure.

UP and BNSF are working with stakeholders such as locomotive and engine 

manufacturers, cryogenic fuel tank suppliers, natural gas/LNG suppliers, the Federal 

Railroad Administration and first responders to evaluate how natural gas could safely and 

economically be incorporated into their operations.

LONG TERM EMISSION REDUCTIONS STRATEGIES FOR RAIL

The longer term goal of a fully zero-emission system could potentially be accomplished 

with an electric catenary or linear synchronous motor system. A hybrid-electric engine or 

a battery tender car could also provide additional battery power to allow for locomotives to 

operate in zero-emissions mode where battery power is available. The CARB Sustainable 

Freight Strategy promotes a long-term vision of zero-emission rail as the technology 

permits. Without a full system conversion, this goal would allow for zero-emission track 

miles where possible as facilitated by battery or fuel cell tender cars to allow locomotives to 

operate in zero-emission mode when these tender cars can provide power. Similarly, LNG 

tender cars may allow for operation in near zero-emission mode.

providing additional power in motion. An example of this is the Overhead Catenary System 

(OCS) that is currently the subject of a demonstration project led by SCAQMD (see above 

for more detail on the demonstration project). This system allows vehicles to charge through 

use of an overhead pantograph that is connected to overhead wires drawing power from the 

electric grid. Catenary systems are well-established and efficient in light-rail applications, 

trolley cars and buses and even mining trucks. For in-road power, the roadway itself provides 

power to the vehicles, which must be equipped with pick-up devices. Examples include inroad power such as third rail or linear synchronous motor (LSM).

Both in-road or distributed charging systems draw power, which leads to emissions being 

produced during electricity generation. Therefore, the increased use of renewable energy 

sources will help move the vehicles described above which are designed to be zero tailpipe 

emissions closer to a truly zero-emissions vehicle.

NEAR-TERM RAIL EMISSION REDUCTION STRATEGIES

A fully zero-emission rail system offers unique challenges as freight rail operates as a 

national system and locomotives cannot remain captive to the region. For instance, CARB 

estimates that 8,400 of 10,000 interstate line-haul locomotives operated in the SCAB in 

2013.60 Any new technology will require an operational strategy to change out locomotive 

types, or will require compatible infrastructure nationwide to provide power and/or fuel to 

locomotives. Even near term improvements are difficult, as the normal life of a locomotive 

may be up to 50 years.61 Even given these challenges, several near zero- and zeroemission rail technologies are under development and investigation. Near zero-emission 

opportunities include acceleration of Tier 4 engines, use of after-treatment technologies that 

can be compatible with Tier 4 and earlier engine types, and further development of liquid 

natural gas tender cars.

EXISTING TECHNOLOGIES

EPA standards for locomotives became effective in 2015, requiring that all new locomotives 

purchased after that date must meet Tier 4 standards. In addition, any re-manufactured 

locomotive must be retrofited with stricter emission controls. In 2015 General Electric 

released a commercially viable Tier 4 line-haul locomotive. Relative to Tier 2 engines, Tier 

4 engines produce between 75-85 percent less NOx

 and PM emissions62; they also offer 

combustion improvements, enhanced cooling and exhaust gas recirculation. While Tier 2 

locomotives are estimated to cost $2.3 million per unit, Tier 4 locomotives are estimated to 

cost $3 million.63 CARB anticipates full scale commercialization in 2017. SCAG encourages 

partnerships to accelerate the transition to these new engines.

Distributed power units are currently in use by Union Pacific Railroad (UP) on two thirds 

(2/3) of its gross ton miles. Distributed power units are spread throughout the train rather 
 51 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 51

ELECTRIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES

Electrification technologies require further evaluation to more precisely address questions 

about cost, funding and how to best implement such systems with minimal operational 

impacts. Because of the cost and potential operational challenges associated with mainline 

electrification, such a strategy should be considered a longer-term initiative, requiring 

further studies as well as proof of concept and prototype testing of zero-emission locomotive 

technologies that have the potential to minimize cost and operational impacts, as discussed 

under the phased implementation section of this Appendix. Construction of any electrified 

rail system in Southern California would be a large investment and would need the 

participation of the BNSF and UP railways.

ELECTRIC CATENARY RAIL SYSTEMS

These are perhaps the most technologically ready; however, construction of an electrified 

rail system in Southern California would be a major undertaking in terms of labor, timeline 

and cost for the SCAG region and would require a large investment as well as cooperation 

and investment by the BNSF and UP railways. Though electric catenary systems are widely 

used for passenger and light rail and electric freight rail has been used in other countries, 

locomotives would need to be re-engineered for use with trains of the size and length 

operated in the United States.68

DUAL-MODE LOCOMOTIVES

These have been deployed for passenger rail applications, but would need development for 

freight applications. They have the ability to operate on a catenary or with traditional diesel 

power. The ability to operate in both modes could potentially reduce operational difficulties 

associated with the need to remove the engine at the end of the electrified system. However, 

additional operational considerations remain to be addressed.

LINEAR SYNCHRONOUS MOTORS

This technology propels rail cars by creating an electromagnetic field from motors 

embedded in the railway. One advantage of LSM is that overhead electric lines would not be 

needed, allowing the electric rail system to extend further into ports and railyards. Because 

the propulsion comes from the track, locomotives would not need to be switched when 

leaving the electrified portion of the system. LSM technology is in its early stages and costs 

cannot be estimated, however demonstration projects are underway.

OPTIONS FOR ZERO-EMISSIONS OPERATION

While the scale of a fully electrified system may be challenging, opportunities may exist 

to supplement locomotive power with zero-emissions options. One option is the hybrid 

electric locomotive engine, where a battery is built into the frame of the engine and can 

recharge through regenerative braking. Prototypes of this model currently exist.69 Battery 

tender cars could also supplement a main engine with zero-emission propulsion by using 

the battery power. In contrast with the hybrid electric locomotive, the tender car would need 

to be charged prior to use, likely at railyards. The number of tender cars required to move a 

train long distances is challenging as space is at a premium on interstate trains. Similarly, 

facilitating the change out of the tender car is a big operational challenge for this type of 

system. Conventional locomotives generally refuel every 1,000 miles70, so a tender car 

system that offered less power would create operational challenges. Currently these are in 

the conceptual stage.

Hydrogen Fuel Cell locomotives would also allow for zero-emission miles, but would require 

a national fueling infrastructure and have similar challenges as described above. These are 

conceptual for line-haul locomotives but prototypes exist for a switcher and a green goat.

IMPLEMENTING THE ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGY

Broad deployment of zero- and near zero-emission transportation technologies in the 

2023 to 2040 time frame is a critical and significant undertaking with technological, cost 

and operational challenges. As outlined above, the 2016 RTP/SCS describes a process 

to develop and deploy needed technologies, along with key action steps for public sector 

agencies to help move the region to that objective. Industry stakeholder participation will 

be necessary, including the efforts of numerous state and federal resources agencies, 

transportation agencies, commercial technology developers/manufacturers, and logistics 

experts. The 2016 RTP/SCS reaffirms zero- and near zero-emission technologies as a 

priority, and establishes the regional path forward to such a goods movement system.
 52 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Source: SCAG

County Crossing Street Under 

Construction Complete Planned

LOS ANGELES VALLEY VIEW AVENUE X

LOS ANGELES REEVES AVE X

LOS ANGELES S. WILMINGTON X

LOS ANGELES MONTEBELLO/MAPLE X

LOS ANGELES BALDWIN AVENUE X

LOS ANGELES RAMONA ST X

LOS ANGELES MISSION RD X

LOS ANGELES DEL MAR AVE X

LOS ANGELES SAN GABRIEL BLVD X

LOS ANGELES PUENTE AVENUE X

LOS ANGELES NOGALES ST X

LOS ANGELES TURNBULL CYN RD X

LOS ANGELES FAIRWAY DRIVE X

LOS ANGELES FULLERTON RD X

LOS ANGELES DURFEE AVE X

LOS ANGELES DEL AMO BLVD X

LOS ANGELES PASSONS BLVD X

Table 17 Constrained Grade Separations (Not Listed in Priority Order)

County Crossing Street Under 

Construction Complete Planned

LOS ANGELES ROSECRANS AVE X

ORANGE KRAEMER BLVD X

ORANGE LAKEVIEW AVENUE X

ORANGE PLACENTIA AVENUE 

UNDERCROSSING X

ORANGE RAYMOND AVENUE X

ORANGE STATE COLLEGE X

ORANGE TUSTIN AVENUE/ROSE 

DRIVE X

ORANGE JEFFERY ROAD X

ORANGE ORANGETHORPE 

AVENUE X

ORANGE STATE COLLEGE BLVD X

ORANGE SANTA ANA BLVD X

ORANGE 17TH STREET X

RIVERSIDE AUTO CENTER DRIVE X

RIVERSIDE IOWA AVENUE X

RIVERSIDE MAGNOLIA AVENUE X

RIVERSIDE MARY STREET X

RIVERSIDE MCKINLEY ST X
 53 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 53

TABLE 17 Constrained Grade Separations (Not Listed in Priority Order) Continued

County Crossing Street Under 

Construction Complete Planned

RIVERSIDE CLAY STREET X

RIVERSIDE RIVERSIDE AVENUE X

RIVERSIDE STREETER AVENUE X

RIVERSIDE AVENUE 52 X

RIVERSIDE AVENUE 56 X

RIVERSIDE SUNSET AVENUE X

RIVERSIDE CHICAGO AVE X

RIVERSIDE PIERCE ST X

RIVERSIDE BELLGRAVE AV X

RIVERSIDE MADISON ST X

RIVERSIDE SPRUCE ST X

RIVERSIDE JURUPA RD X

RIVERSIDE TYLER ST X

RIVERSIDE RADIO ST X

RIVERSIDE ADAMS ST X

RIVERSIDE VIELE AVE X

RIVERSIDE CALIFORNIA AVE X

County Crossing Street Under 

Construction Complete Planned

RIVERSIDE 22ND ST X

RIVERSIDE SAN GORGONIO AVE X

RIVERSIDE HARGRAVE ST X

RIVERSIDE AVENUE 62 X

RIVERSIDE AVENUE 66 X

RIVERSIDE 3RD STREET X

SAN BERNARDINO GLEN HELEN PARKWAY X

SAN BERNARDINO GREEN TREE BLVD 

EXTENSION X

SAN BERNARDINO LENWOOD ROAD X

SAN BERNARDINO PALM AVE X

SAN BERNARDINO LAUREL ST. X

SAN BERNARDINO MT. VERNON X

SAN BERNARDINO MAIN ST X

SAN BERNARDINO N. VINEYARD AVE X

SAN BERNARDINO S. MILLIKEN AVE X

SAN BERNARDINO SOUTH ARCHIBALD 

AVE X

SAN BERNARDINO CAMPUS AVE X

Source: SCAG
 54 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

TABLE 17 Constrained Grade Separations (Not Listed in Priority Order) Continued

County Crossing Street Under 

Construction Complete Planned

SAN BERNARDINO HUNTS LANE X

SAN BERNARDINO SAN ANTONIO AVE X

SAN BERNARDINO RAMONA AV AT STATE 

AVE X

SAN BERNARDINO CENTRAL AVENUE X

SAN BERNARDINO MONTE VISTA X

SAN BERNARDINO EUCALYPTUS ST X

SAN BERNARDINO VISTA ROAD X

SAN BERNARDINO LEMON ST/MAUNA 

LOA ST X

SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY BOULEVARD X

SAN BERNARDINO N. MILLIKEN AVE X

SAN BERNARDINO BEAUMONT X

VENTURA RICE AVE/FIFTH 

STREET X

Source: SCAG
 55 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 55

Source: SCAG

Table 18 Strategic Grade Separations (Not Listed in Priority Order)

County Crossing Street

Imperial Ward Rd (Imperial County)

Imperial SR-78/SR-111 (Brawley)

Imperial Malan St (Brawley)

Imperial Mead Rd (Brawley)

Imperial Keystone Rd (Imperial County)

Imperial Aten Rd (Imperial)

Imperial Evan Hewes Hwy (Imperial County)

Imperial Dog Wood Rd (Imperial County)

Imperial Herber Ave (Imperial County)

Imperial West Cole Rd (Calexico)

Los Angeles San Antonio Ave (Pomona)

Los Angeles Lemon Ave (LA Subdivision)

Orange Jefferson St (Anaheim)

Orange Van Buren Ave (Placentia)

Orange Richfield Rd (Placentia)

Orange Kellogg Dr Undercrossing (Anaheim)

San Bernardino Hinckley Ave (San Bernardino County)

San Bernardino Shadow Mountain Rd (San Bernardino County)

San Bernardino Phelan Rd (San Bernardino County)

San Bernardino Archibald Ave (Rancho Cucamonga)

San Bernardino Vine Ave (Ontario)

San Bernardino Sultana Ave (Ontario) 

San Bernardino Bon View Ave (Ontario)

San Bernardino Olive St (San Bernardino)

San Bernardino Alessandro Rd (Redlands)

Ventura Route 118 (Ventura County)

County Crossing Street

Riverside Smith Ave (Corona)

Riverside Railroad St (Corona)

Riverside Cota St (Corona)

Riverside Buchanan St (Riverside)

Riverside Rutile St (Jurupa Valley)

Riverside Harrison St (Riverside)

Riverside Gibson St (Riverside)

Riverside Jackson St (Riverside)

Riverside Washington St (Riverside)

Riverside Brockton Ave (Riverside)

Riverside Apache Trail (Riverside County)

Riverside Panorama Rd (Riverside)

Riverside Cridge St (Riverside)

Riverside Palmyrita Ave (Riverside)

Riverside Center St (Riverside County)

Riverside Main St (Riverside County)

Riverside San Timoteo Canyon (Calimesa)

Riverside Shetidan St (Corona)

Riverside Pennsylvania Ave (Beaumont)

Riverside 7th St (Riverside)

Riverside Broadway (Riverside County)

Riverside Tipton Rd (Palm Springs)

Riverside Ave 54 (Coachella)

Riverside Ave 58 (Riverside County)
405

5

10

210

10

405

605

710

110

105

5

57

22

60

170

71

55

91

91

San Bernardino

County

Rivers

Coun

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

ura

nty

Alhambra

Arcadia

Artesia

Azusa

Baldwin Park

Bell

Bell

Gardens

Bellflower

Beverly Hills

Bradbury

Burbank

Carson

Cerritos

Claremont

Commerce

Compton

Covina

Cudahy

Culver

City

Diamond Bar

Downey

Duarte

El Monte

El Segundo

Gardena

Glendale

Glendora

Hawthorne

den

lls

Huntington Park

Industry

Inglewood

Irwindale

La Habra Heights

La Mirada

La

Puente

La Verne

Lakewood

Lomita

Los Angeles

Lynwood

Malibu

Maywood

Monrovia

Montebello

Monterey Park

Norwalk

Paramount

Pasadena

Pico Rivera

Pomona

Ran cho Palos Ve rdes

Redondo

Beach

Rolling

Hills

Rosemead

San Dimas

San

Gabriel

San Marino

Santa Fe Springs

Santa Monica

Sierra Madre

Signal

Hill

So uth El Monte

South Gate

South

Pasadena

Temple City

Torrance

Vernon

Walnut

West Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long Beach

Manhattan

Beach

3

5

13

14

18

1

8910

2

16

4

6

15

12

11

17

Source: SCAG

0 0.75 1.5 3

Miles

9 8 7 10 San Gabriel

Alhambra Los Angeles County

*Not listed in the order of priority 

Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): Complete Under Construction Planned Regional Rail Lines 

Number Project*

1 Del Amo Blvd - Torrance

2 S.Wilmington Ave - Los Angeles

3 Reeves Ave - Long Beach

4 Valley View Ave - La Mirada

5 Passons Blvd - Pico Rivera

6 Greenwood - Montebello

7 Ramona St - San Gabriel

8 Mission Rd - San Gabriel

9 Del Mar Ave - San Gabriel

10 San Gabriel Blvd - San Gabriel

11 Baldwin Ave - El Monte

12 Durfee Ave - Pico Rivera

13 Puente Ave - Industry

14 Turnbull Cyn Rd - Los Angeles County

15 Fullerton Rd - Industry

16 Nogales St - Industry

17 Rosecrans Ave - Santa Fe Springs

18 Fairway Dr - Los Angeles County

Exhibit 14 Los Angeles County Grade Separations–

Constrained Plan 
241

73

22

55

91

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

405

5

Aliso Viejo

Anaheim

Buena Park

Costa Mesa

Cypress

Fountain Valley

Fullerton

Garden Grove

Huntington Beach

Irvine

La Palma

Laguna Beach

Laguna Hills

Laguna Niguel

Laguna Woods

Lake Forest

Los Alamitos

Mission Viejo

Newport Beach

Orange

Placentia

San Juan Capistrano

Santa Ana

Seal Beach

Stanton

Tustin

Villa Park

Westminster

Yorba Linda

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8

9

10

11

Source: SCAG

0 1 2 0.5

Miles

Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015):

*Not listed in the order of priority 

Complete Under Construction Planned Regional Rail Lines

Number Project*

1 Raymond Ave - Fullerton

2 State College Blvd - Anaheim

3 Placentia Avenue Undercrossing - Placentia

4 Kraemer Blvd - Anaheim

5 Orangethorpe Ave - Anaheim

6 Tustin Ave/Rose Dr - Anaheim

7 Lakeview Ave - Placentia

8 Jeffery Rd - Irvine

9 State College Blvd - Anaheim

10 17th Street - Santa Ana

11 Santa Ana Blvd - Santa Ana

Exhibit 15 Orange County Grade Separations–

Constrained Plan (Not Listed in Priority Order)
241

60

71

74

79

30

62

206

Riverside

County

15

15

215

10

10

0

5

10

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet

Indio

Indian Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho Mirage

Corona

Coachella

Jurupa Valley

Desert Hot Springs

San Jacinto

Beaumont

Banning

Calimesa

Palm Desert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La Quinta

Palm Springs

21

1

18

11

8

14

15

13

4

10

1617

12

9

3 5

22 2324

6

25

27

20

2

26

19

7

28

Source: SCAG

21 22 23 24 20 19 Riverside

County Beaumont

Banning

7

2

6

5

3

9

4

8

1

12

17

16

10

13

15

11 14

18

Riverside

Jurupa Valley

Corona

Norco

Eastvale

15

Riverside County

San Bernardino County

*Not listed in the order of priority 

Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): Complete Under Construction Planned Regional Rail Lines

Number Project* Number Project*

1 Auto Center Dr - Corora 15 3rd St - Riverside

2 Radio Rd - Corora 16 Spruce St- Riverside 

3 McKinley St - Corora 17 Chicago Ave - Riverside 

4 Magnolia Ave - Riverside County 18 Iowa Ave - Riverside 

5 Pierce St - Riverside 19 Viele Ave - Beaumont

6 Bellegrave Ave - Jurupa Valley 20 California Ave - Beaumont

7 Jurupa Rd - Jurupa Valley 21 Sunset Ave - Banning

8 Clay St - Jurupa Valley 22 22nd St - Banning

9 Tyler St - Riverside 23 San Gorgonia Ave - Banning

10 Adams St - Riverside 24 Hargrave St - Banning

11 Streeter Ave - Riverside 25 Avenue 52 - Coachella

12 Madison St- Riverside 26 Avenue 56 - Riverside County

13 Mary St - Riverside 27 Avenue 62 - Riverside County

14 Riverside Ave - Riverside 28 Avenue 66 - Riverside County

0 1.5 3 6

Miles

Exhibit 16 Riverside County Grade Separations–Constrained Plan 

(Not Listed in Priority Order)
57

91

60 

138

71

58

30

18

91

62

206

395

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

15

215

10

10

210

15

40

15

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Colton

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Linda

Ontario

Rancho Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto

San Bernardino

Twentynine Palms

Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

1

10 11

9

3

13

12

7

2

5

6 8 14

4

Source: SCAG

0 3 6 1.5

Miles

15

16

17

19

21 20

22

18

*not listed in the order of priority 

Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): Complete Under Construction Planned Regional Rail Lines 

Number Project*

1 Lenwood Rd - San Bernardino County

2 Green Tree Blvd - San Bernardino County

3 Glen Helen Pkwy - San Bernardino County

4 Palm Ave - San Bernardino County

5 Mt. Vernon Ave - San Bernardino

6 Ramona Ave - Montclair

7 San Antonio Ave - Ontario

8 Campus Ave - Ontario

9 N. Vineyard Ave - Ontario

10 South Archibald Ave - Ontario

11 S. Milliken Ave - Ontario

12 Laurel St - Fontana

13 Main St - Grand Terrace

14 Hunts Ln - Colton

15 Central Ave - Montclair

16 Monte Vista Ave - Montclair

17 Eucalyptus St - Hesperia

18 Vista Rd - Hesperia

19 Lemon St/Mauna Loa St - San Bernardino County

20 Valley Blvd - Colton

21 N. Milliken Ave - Ontario

22 Beaumont Ave - Loma Linda

Exhibit 17 San Bernardino County Grade Separations–

Constrained Plan (Not Listed in Priority Order)
118

126

23

126

33

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

101

101

101

Camarillo

Fillmore

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand Oaks

Port

Hueneme

Oxnard

Santa

Paula

San Buenaventura

1

Source: SCAG

0 1.5 3 0.75

Miles

Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): Planned Regional Rail Lines 

Number Project

1 Rice Ave/Fifth St - Oxnard

Exhibit 18 Ventura County Grade Separations–Constrained Plan
Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxna rd

Arca dia Azusa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

La

Mi rada

Los Angeles Monrovia

Mo nterey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Colton

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto San

Bernardino Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert H ot Sp rings

San

Jacinto

Beaum ont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

Desert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La 

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Huntingto n

Beach

Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

Sa n

Clemente

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yorba Linda 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

110

134

91

22

101

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

105

5

10

405

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Grade Seperations Regional Rail Lines

Source: SCAG

8

10

10

0 5 10 2.5

Miles

Regional Grade Seperations Identified under Strategic Plan (as of November 2015):

Exhibit 19 Regional Grade Separations–Strategic Plan 

(Not Listed in Priority Order) 
 62 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Table 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

A. ROADWAY ACCESS TO MAJOR GOODS MOVEMENT FACILITIES 

A.1 Los Angeles

ROUTE 005: PHASE 1 OF 3-- IN SANTA CLARITA FROM ROUTE 14 TO PICO 

CANYON/LYONS AVENUE IN THE SOUTHBOUND DIRECTION AND FROM 

ROUTE 14 TO GAVIN CANYON ROAD IN THE NORTHBOUND DIRECTION. CONST 

TRUCK CLIMBING LANES. (EA 2332A, PPNO 3189), (SAFTETEA-LU#465 

FUNDED PAED FOR THIS PHASE INCLUDED IN LA0G440).

$131,000 S

A.2 Los Angeles

ROUTE 005: PHASE 2,FROM SR-14 TO PARKER ROAD, CONSTRUCT HOV/

HOT, TRUCK & AUX LANES (EA 2332C, PPNO 3189A & EA 2332E PPNO 3189B), 

SAFTETEA-LU#465. PE & RW $ ARE PROGRAMMED FOR EA 2332E ONLY.

$46,877 S

A.3 Los Angeles

SR-47 EXPRESSWAY: REPLACEMENT OF SCHUYLER HEIM BRIDGE (Segment 1): 

ACTA completing PE, ROW, and Design Support during Construction; SAFETEA-LU 

#712 & #3797.

$91,583 S

A.3 Los Angeles SR-47 EXPRESSWAY: CONSTRUCT 4 LANE EXPRESSWAY AND 2-LANE 

FLYOVER TO SCHUYLER HEIM BRIDGE $420,000 L

A.4 Los Angeles

ROUTE 047: REPLACEMENT OF SCHUYLER HEIM BRIDGE TO INCLUDE 2 

THRU LANES AND 1 AUX LANE NB; AND 3 THRU LANES AND 1 AUX LANE SB EA 

13820, PPNO 0444E).

$278,993 S

A.5 Los Angeles

WIDEN AND RECONSTRUCT WASHINGTON BOULEVARD FROM WESTERN CITY 

BOUNDARY AT VERNON [350' WEST OF INDIANA STREET] TO I-5 FREEWAY 

AT TELEGRAPH RD., WIDEN FROM 2 LANES TO 3 LANES IN EACH DIRECTION, 

INCREASE TURN RADIUS AND MEDIANS, UPGRADE TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND 

STREET LIGHTING AND IMPROVE SIDEWALKS.

$32,000 S

A.6 Los Angeles

BRIDGE NO. 53C0065, OCEAN BLVD, OVER ENTRANCE CHANNEL, UP RR, 1.0 

MI E STATE ROUTE 47. REPLACE EXISTING 5 LANE GERALD DESMOND BRIDGE 

(GDB) WITH NEW 6 LANE BRIDGE.

$1,288,101 S

A.7 Los Angeles

COMMERCE GOODS MOVEMENT ATLANTIC BOULEVARD: WASHINGTON 

BOULEVARD TO COMO STREET : (1) IMPLEMENTS SOUTHBOUND RIGHTTURN OVERLAP SIGNAL PHASING FROM ATLANTIC BL ONTO WASHINGTON 

BL TO IMPROVE MOBILITY FOR TRUCKS AND VEHICLES. (2) STREETSCAPE 

IMPROVEMINTS, SUCH AS RAISED MEDIANS, CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS, 

AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS TO IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND 

REDUCE PEDESTRIAN/VEHICLE CONFLICT. 

$1,172 S

A.8 Los Angeles

OLYMPIC BL AND MATEO STREET GOODS MOVEMENT IMP-PHASE II. 

IMPROVEMENT OF FREEWAY ACCESS BY WIDENING WB OLYMPIC BL BET 

MATEO ST & SANTA FE AV FOR A RIGHT-TURN LANE, AND NB MATEO ST BET 

OLYMPIC BL & PORTER ST FOR INCREASED CURB RETURN.

$4,421 S

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+) 
 63 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 63

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

A.9 Los Angeles

AT I-110 NB AT JOHN S GIBSON BLVD NB RAMPS & NB SR-47/I-110 

CONNECTOR. WIDEN SB 47 TO NB 110 CONNECTOR FROM 1 TO 2 LNS BEGIN 

AT SB 47 PM 0.72 (STATION 535+00) JUST W OF FRONT ST ON-RAMP. ADDL 

THROUGH LN CONTINUES ON NB 110 & ENDS JUST N OF THE J S GIBSON 

OFF-RAMP. WIDEN NB 110/J S GIBSON ON-RAMP TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO 

FWY & INTERSECTION OF J S GIBSON/110 NB RAMPS W/IMPROVED TURN 

RADII & RE-STRIPING.

$34,733 S

A. 10 Los Angeles

PROJECT WILL IMPROVE FLOW OF TRAFFIC FROM I-110 FWY ON/OFF-RAMPS 

AT C STREET BY CONSOLIDATING TWO CLOSELY SPACED INTERSECTIONS 

INTO ONE.

$23,980 S

A.11

Los Angeles

WB SR-60/SB SR-57 GRAND AVENUE OFF RAMP INTERCHANGE : ADD WB 

SR-60 AUXILIARY LANE FROM SB SR-57 TO GRAND AVENUE OFF-RAMP TO 

IMPROVE TRUCK MOBILITY AND REDUCE CONGESTION.

$21,303 M

Los Angeles

RECONSTRUCT SR 60/GRAND AV INTERCHANGE - WIDEN GRAND AV: 

SB ADD 1THRU LN (2 EXSTNG); NB ADD 1 THRU LN (3 EXSTNG), REPLACE 

GRAND AV OC, ADD EB LOOP ON-RAMP, CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL EB THRU 

LN FROM GRAND AVE TRAP LN TO SR57 ADD LN, ADD TWO BYPASS RAMP 

CONNECTORS, ADD AUX LANES EB AND WB FROM EAST TO WEST JUNCTION 

OF THE CONFLUENCE.

$257,900 S

A.12 Los Angeles I-605 CORRIDOR "HOT SPOT" INTERCHANGES IN GATEWAY CITIES $3,200,000 L

A.13 Los Angeles I-710 EARLY ACTION PROJECTS $711,600 M

A.14 Los Angeles

SR 47/NAVY WAY INTERCHANGE: CONSTRUCTION OF INTERCHANGE AT SR-47 

/ NAVY WAY TO ELIMINATE TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND MOVEMENT CONFLICTS; 

THIS PROJECT WAS A S.CA TRADE CORRIDOR TIER II TCIF PROJECT AS 

SUBMITTED TO THE CTC IN 2008; PROJECT REMOVES LAST SIGNAL ON 

SR 47 BETWEEN DESMOND AND V. THOMAS BRIDGES, NHS INTERMODEL 

CONNECTOR ROUTE

$57,593 M

A.15 Los Angeles

SR 47-V. THOMAS BRIDGE/FRONT ST INTERCHANGE: NEW WESTBOUND SR 

47 ON- AND OFF-RAMPS AT FRONT STREET JUST WEST OF THE VINCENT 

THOMAS BRIDGE AND ELIMINATE THE EXISTING NON-STANDARD RAMP 

CONNECTION TO THE HARBOR BOULEVARD OFF-RAMP; FRONT STREET IS AN 

NHS CONNECTOR. THE PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES REALIGNED EASTBOUND 

AND WESTBOUND SR47 ON-RAMPS.

$37,285 M

A.16 Los Angeles

ALAMEDA STREET DOWNTOWN LA: GOODS MOVEMENT, PHASE I. THIS 

PROJECT WILL PROVIDE CONGESTION RELIEF, IMPROVE MOBILITY/REDUCE 

CONFLICTS, AND IMPROVE SAFETY FOR BOTH AUTOS AND TRUCKS BY 

PROVIDING INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS. PROJECT WILL ALSO REMOVE 

ABANDONED RAIL LINES, REPAIR PAVEMENT, ADD NEW STREET LIGHTING, 

AND CONSTRUCT PEDESTRIAN IMRPOVEMENTS.

$7,132 S

TABLE 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List Continued

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+)
 64 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

TABLE 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List Continued

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

A.17 Los Angeles

ALAMEDA STREET WIDENING FROM ANAHEIM STREET TO 300 FT. SOUTH OF 

PCH : (1) WIDENS ALAMEDA ST BETWEEN ANAHEIM ST AND 300 FT SOUTH 

OF PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY FROM 2 TO 3 LANES IN EACH DIRECTION FOR 

CONGESTION RELIEF AND IMPROVE GOODS MOVEMENT MOBILITY.

$9,709 S

A.18 Los Angeles

ANAHEIM STREET WIDENING - FARRAGUT AVENUE TO DOMINGUEZ CHANNEL 

: WIDEN ANAHEIM ST BETWEEN FARRAGUT AV AND DOMINGUEZ CHANNEL 

FROM 2 TO 3 LANES IN EACH DIRECTION FOR CONGESTION RELIEF AND 

IMPROVE GOODS MOVEMENT MOBILITY. THIS UPGRADES THE ARTERIAL TO 

MAJOR HIGHWAY STANDARDS.

$6,566 S

A.19 Los Angeles

PHASE 2 AND 3 OF 3: IN LA/SANTA CLARITA: PHASE 2: CONSTRUCT HOV 

LANE NORTHBOUND FROM ROUTE 14 TO WELDON CANYON RD; PHASE 3: 

CONSTRUCT HOV, TRUCK, & AUX LANES FROM SR-14 TO PARKER RD OC.

$410,000 S

A.20 Los Angeles

HARBOR BLVD IMPROVEMENTS - AS PART OF THE SAN PEDRO WATERFRONT 

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, HARBOR BLVD WILL BE RESTRIPED, AND THE 

MEDIAN IS REMOVED/RECONSTRUCTED AS NEEDED TO PROVIDE THREE NBT 

AND SBT LANES BETWEEN THE RECONSTRUCTED SAMPSON WAY/HARBOR 

BLVD. INTERSECTION AND THE WB ON RAMP/FRONT STREET INTERSECTION. 

THIS WILL RESULT IN THE REMOVAL OF PARKING AND THE BIKE LANE 

ON THE NORTHBOUND SIDE. THE PARKING AND 5' BIKE LANE ON THE 

SOUTHBOUND SIDE, SOUTH OF O'FARRELL STREET WILL BE PRESERVED. 

NORTH OF O'FARRELL STREET, THE PARKING AND THE PARKING LANE ON 

THE SOUTHBOUND SIDE WOULD NEED TO BE REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATE 

THE NORTHBOUND DUAL LEFT-TURN LANE. THE INNERMOST NORTHBOUND 

THROUGH LANE AT THE EB OFF-RAMP INTERSECTION WOULD BECOME A 

FORCED LEFT-TURN LANE AT THE SR 47 WB ON-RAMP. THIS IMPROVEMENT 

IS PROJECTED TO BE NEEDED BY THE YEAR 2024.

$1,134 M

A.21 Los Angeles

HARBOR BLVD. & 7TH STREET INTERSECTION- THE PROJECT INCLUDES 

A RECONFIGURED INTERSECTION AT THE JUNCTION OF HARBOR BLVD, 

SAMPSON WAY, AND 7TH STREET. WORK INCLUDES RETAINING WALL, 

STREET WORK, GRADING, PAVING, LIGHTING, RESTRIPING AND A NEW 

SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION.

$15,905 S

A.22 Los Angeles

SAMPSON WAY TO 22ND STREET & MINER STREET - SAMPSON WAY WOULD 

BE REALIGNED AND EXPANDED TO TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION AND 

WOULD CURVE NEAR THE MUNICIPAL FISH MARKETS TO MEET WITH 22ND 

STREET IN ITS WESTWARD ALIGNMENT EAST OF MINER STREET. IN THE 

PROPOSED PROJECT, HARBOR BLVD. WOULD REMAIN IN PLACE AT ITS 

CURRENT CAPACITY WITH TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION. PROPOSED 

ENHANCEMENTS WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH DESIGN STANDARDS FOR 

THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) PACIFIC CORRIDOR AND 

THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES PLANNING DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DESIGN 

OVERLAY. ALIGNMENT EAST OF MINER STREET.

$34,614 M

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+)
 65 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 65

TABLE 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List Continued

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

A.23 Los Angeles ALAMEDA CORRIDOR SOUTH TERMINUS/HENRY FORD AVE. RAIL CROSSING 

ADVANCED WARNING SYSTEM. $5,000 M

A.24 Los Angeles

PIER B STREET FREIGHT CORRIDOR RECONSTRUCTION : (1) REALIGNS PIER 

B ST BETWEEN PICO AV AND PIER A WY AND WIDENS INTO 2 LANES IN EACH 

DIRECTION TO IMPROVE GOODS MOVEMENT MOBILITY AND ENHANCE 

PEDISTRIAN TRAVEL. (2) CONSTRUCTS NEW SIDEWALK ON THE SOUTH SIDE 

OF PIER B ST. (3) CONSTRUCTS J-HOOK FLYOVER TO CONNECT PIER B ST 

WITH ANAHEIM ST.

$105,791 S

A.25 Orange SR-57 FROM LAMBERT TO LA COUNTY LINE - ADD 1 NB TRUCK CLIMBING LANE 

(PE ONLY)(PPNO 3847A) $124,600 L

A.26 Orange

ADD ONE MF LANE ON N/B SR-57 FROM 0.4 MI N/O SR-91 TO 0.1 MI N/O 

LAMBERT RD (5.1 MILES) EA 0F0321 (YORBA LINDA TO LAMBERT SEGMENT) 

SPLIT PROJECT WITH ORA120332

$50,550 COMPLETE

A.27 Orange

ADD ONE MF LANE ON N/B SR-57 FROM 0.4 MI N/O SR-91 TO 0.1 MI N/O 

LAMBERT RD (5.1 MILES) EA 0F0311 (SR91/ORANGETHORPE TO YORBA LINDA 

SEGMENT) SPLIT PROJECT WITH ORA081901

$49,828 COMPLETE

A.28 Orange

CONNECT EXISTING AUXILIARY LANE THROUGH INTERCHANGES ON WB 

SR-91 BETWEEN SR-57 AND I-5 WITH ITS ELEMENTS PPNO 4516A EA 

0C5700

$65,677 S

A.29 Orange

SR-91: ADD 1 MF LANE E/B BTWN 91/55 CONNECTOR & SR-241 -- W/B BTWN 

SR-241 & IMPERIAL HWY; MODIFY W/B ON RAMPS FROM LAKEVIEW AVE TO 

IMPRV MERGE (ADD AUX LANE BETWEEN NB 55 - TO - EB 91 ON-RAMP AND 

LAKEVIEW OFF RAMP). PROJECT SPLIT PARENT

$85,986 COMPLETE

A.30 Orange ADD 1 ML LANE EACH DIRECTION (I5 FROM 57 TO 91) $305,924 L

A.31 Orange SR-91 WB (SR-55 THROUGH TUSTIN INTERCHANGE) EXTEND LANE AND 

RECONSTRUCT AUX. LANE. PPNO 4587A EA 0C560) $46,270 S

A.32 Orange EXIST 4 MF N/B; WIDEN TO 5 MF LANES N/B FROM 0.3 MI S/O KATELLA TO 0.3 

MI N/O LINCOLN (2.92 MILES) -- 0F0400 $41,086 COMPLETE

A.33 Orange ADD 1 MF LANE EACH DIRECTION FROM I-5 TO SR-55 AND ADD SB AUX LANES 

FROM 133 TO IRV CTR DR $424,620 L

A.34 Orange

I-405 FROM SR-73 TO I-605 ADD 1 MF LANE IN EACH DIRECTION, AND 

ADDITIONAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. COMBINED WITH ORA045, ORA151, 

ORA100507 AND ORA120310. PHASE 1 PROJECT LISTED UNDER ORA030605.

$1,300,000 M

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+)
 66 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

TABLE 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List Continued

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

A.35 Orange

I-5 (I-405 TO SR-55) - IN THE CITIES OF IRVINE AND TUSTIN. ADD 1 MF LANE NB 

FROM TRUCK BYPASS ON RAMP TO SR-55, ADD 1 MF LANE SB FROM SR-55 TO 

ALTON AND 1 AUX LANE FROM ALTON TO TRUCK BYPASS. (PA&ED AND PS&E 

PHASE) PROJECT WILL UTILIZE $917,600 TOLL CREDIT MATCH.

$452,000 M

A.36 Orange ADD 1 MF LANE EB FROM 55 TO 57, AND 1 MF LANE WB FROM KRAEMER TO 

STATE COLLEGE; IMPROVE INTERCHANGES; AND ADD AUX LANES. $481,827 L

A.37 Orange

ADD 1 LANE EACH DIRECTION FROM SR 241 TO COUNTY LINE, AND OTHER 

OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS. SEE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FOR ADDITIONAL 

DETAILS. 

Included in RIV071250B L

A.38 Riverside

ON I-10 NEAR BEAUMONT: ADD/CONSTRUCT NEW EASTBOUND TRUCK 

CLIMBING LANE FROM SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY LINE TO 1-10/SR60 JCT 

(EA: 35300)

$35,709 M

A.39 Riverside

ON SR-60 NEAR BEAUMONT: CONSTRUCT NEW EASTBOUND AND 

WESTBOUND TRUCK LANES FROM GILMAN SPRINGS RD TO 1.47 MILES 

WEST OF JACK RABBIT TRAIL AND UPGRADE EXISTING INSIDE AND OUTSIDE 

SHOULDERS TO STANDARD WIDTHS (10-FT INSIDE SHOULDER AND 10-FT 

OUTSIDE SHOULDER) (EA: 0N69U) - CMAQ PM2.5 BENEFITS PROJECT. 

$802.9 TC WILL BE UTILIZED FOR CMAQ ENG IN FY 14/15

$126,282 S

A.40 Riverside CONSTRUCT NEW INTERCHANGE $282,443 L

A.41 Riverside ON VAN BUREN BLVD NEAR MARCH AIR RESERVE BASE: WIDEN FROM 4 TO 6 

LANES FROM APPROXIMATELY 0.5 MILES WEST OF I-215 TO BARTON ST $6,700 COMPLETE

A.42 Riverside CONSTRUCT NEW IC AND RAMPS AND WIDEN OC FROM 2 TO 6 LANES $67,863 L

A.43 Riverside WIDEN FROM 2 TO 6 LANES $68,423 L

A.44 Riverside CONSTRUCT 4 LANE BRIDGE/INTERCHANGE AND RAMPS ACROSS SR-86S $92,843 L

A.45 Riverside RECONSTRUCT/WIDEN IC FROM 2 TO 4 LANES AND RECONSTRUCT/WIDEN 

RAMPS $26,851 M

A.46 Riverside

ON SR-91/I-15: SR91 - ADD 1 MFL EA DIR (SR241-SR71)(I15-PIERCE); I15 - ADD 

TEL MED DIR CONNCT SB15 TO WB91 & EB91 TO NB15, 1 TEL EA DIR HIDDEN 

VALLEY-SR91 DIR CONNCT.

$404,847 M

A.47 Riverside

AT SR86S/AVENUE 52: WIDEN AND CONSTRUCT NEW 6 THROUGH LANE IC 

FROM E/O COACHELLA STORMWATER CHANNEL BRIDGE TO E/O TYLER ST. 

IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE: REALIGN POLK ST AND RELOCATE AVE 52 AND 

POLK ST INTERSECTION, EXTENDED RAMP ACCELERATION/DECELERATION 

LANES, BIKE LANES, SIDEWALKS, AND RECONSTRUCT TRAFFIC SIGNALS (EA: 

OC960).

$33,000 M

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+)
 67 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 67

TABLE 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List Continued

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

A.48 Riverside

AT SR86S/AVENUE 50: WIDEN AND CONSTRUCT NEW 6THROUGH LANE IC 

FROM E/O COACHELLA STORMWATER CHANNEL BRIDGE TO E/O TYLER ST. 

IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE: EXTENDED RAMP ACCELERATION/DECELERATION 

LANES, RELOCATE/REALIGN AVE 50 AND TYLER ST, BIKE LANES, SIDEWALKS, 

SIDEWALKS, AND RECONSTRUCT TRAFFIC SIGNALS (SAFETEA LU 1702, 

CA583, #2543)(EA:OC970) 

$32,160 S

A.49 Riverside

IN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY IN THE CITY OF MORENO VALLEY ALONG 

SR 60 - WIDEN FROM TWO TO THREE LANES IN EACH DIRECTION IN THE 

EXISTING MEDIAN TO PROVIDE ONE ADDITIONAL GENERAL PURPOSE LANE IN 

EACH DIRECTION FROM REDLANDS BLVD. TO GILMAN SPRINGS RD.

$7,500 M

A.50 San Bernardino

I-10 AT CEDAR AVE. BETWEEN SLOVER AND VALLEY- RECONSTRUCT I/CWIDEN FROM 4-6 LANES WITH LEFT AND RIGHT TURN LANES. ADD AUX LANE 

ON E/B ON AND OFF RAMPS

$62,930 S

A.51 San Bernardino I-10 TIPPECANOE RECONFIGURE INTERCHANGE & LOCAL RD IMP/MOD (HP 

1366)(WESTBOUND - PHASE II)(FORMERLY PART OF RTP ID 44810) $57,358 COMPLETE

A.52 San Bernardino

SR210 LANE ADDITION - ADD 1 MIXED FLOW LANE IN EACH DIRECTION FROM 

HIGHLAND AVE(S/B). TO LUGONIA (REDLANDS) INCLUDES AUX. LANES 

BETWEEN BASE LINE AND 5TH STS AND AN ACCELERATION LANE AT 5TH ST. 

E/B ON RAMP AND DECELRATION LANE AT HIGHLAND AVE E/B OFF RAMP. 

(UNDER 1/4 MILES LENGTH)

$134,267 M

A.53 San Bernardino

I-10 AT GROVE INTERCHANGE AND GROVE AVE. CORRIDOR - RELOCATE I/10 & 

4TH ST. I/C TO GROVE AVE. AND WIDEN GROVE AVE BETWEEN I-10 TO HOLT 

(4-6 LNS); WIDEN GROVE AVE FROM STATE ST TO 350 FT N OF HOLT BLVD 

INCLUDING RR BRDGE(4-6 LNS); LEFT TURN LANES AT HOLT.

$13,034 M

A.54 San Bernardino

I-10/CHERRY AVENUE INTERCHANGE - INTERCHANGE RECONSTRUCT - 

REPLACE O/C, WIDEN O/H AND WIDEN I/C FROM SLOVER TO VALLEY FROM 

4-6 LANES WITH DOUBLE LEFT TURNS TO RAMPS

$76,114 COMPLETE

A.55 San Bernardino

I-15/I-215 I/C IMPROVMTS-DEVORE I/C S/O GLEN HELEN PARKWY TO N/O 

KENWOOD & I-215 FROM S/O DEVORE RD. I/C TO I-15 (16.0-17.8) ADD 1 M/F LN 

IN EA DIR TO EXISTG 3 M/F LNS FROM 3800 FT S/O GLEN HELEN PARKWY TO 

3100 FT N/O I-215 I/C ADD 1 DECEL LN FROM 3200 FT S/O 15/216I/C OFFRMP 

TO S/B DEVORE ON I-215. CONSTRUCT TRUCK BYPASS LNS.

$324,669 S

A.56 San Bernardino SR-60 AT ARCHIBALD AVENUE WIDEN ON AND OFF RAMPS (2-3 LANES EACH 

WAY) $7,900 M

A.57 San Bernardino

WIDEN 5TH ST FROM CITY CRK TO SR210; RESTRIPE 5TH ST FROM 4-6LNS 

BTW CHURCH AVE & SR210; RESTRIPE 210 UNDERCROSSING 4-5LNS BTW 

RAMPS WITH ADD. TURN LN. CONSTRUCT TRUCK ACCL. LN ON SB SR210 

ON-RAMP AND FWY MAINLINE INCLUDING WIDENING OF EXISTING FWY 

BRIDGE

$5,070 S

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+)
 68 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

TABLE 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List Continued

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

A.58 San Bernardino

I-10/PEPPER IC: WIDEN BRIDGE FROM FIVE TO SIX LANES TO PROVIDE FOR 

ONE ADDITIONAL SOUTHBOUND TURN LANE AND ADD AUXILIARY LANES TO 

FREEWAY

$39,815 S

A.59 San Bernardino I-10 @ MT VERNON AVE INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS $37,125 M

A.60 San Bernardino I-10/MOUNTAIN VIEW AVE INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS $82,889 L

A.61 San Bernardino

ON I-10 ADD/CONSTRUCT NEW EASBOUND TRUCK CLIMBING LANE FROM 

LIVE OAK CANYON ROAD TO SINGLETON RD INCLUDING TRANSITION 

BETWEEN COUNTY LINE AND CALIMESA BLVD

$50,024 M

A.62 San Bernardino I-10 @ CALIFORNIA ST INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS $73,137 L

A.63 Ventura

GROUPED PROJECTS FOR PAVEMENT RESURFACING AND/OR 

REHABILITATION - LOCAL STREETS & ROADS SCOPE: PROJECTS ARE 

CONSISTENT WITH 40 CFR PART 93.126 EXEMPT TABLES 2 CATEGORIES - 

PAVEMENT RESURFACING AND/OR REHABILITATION, EMERGENCY RELIEF (23 

U.S.C. 125), WIDENING NARROW PAVEMENTS OR RECONSTRUCTING BRIDGES 

(TO ADD TRAVEL LANES)

$31,167 S

A.64 Ventura HUENEME RD FROM OXNARD CITY LIMITS TO RICE RD - WIDEN FROM 2 TO 4 

LANES $6,953 M

A.65 Ventura IN OXNARD HUENEME RD SAVIERS TO ARCTURUS WIDEN AND CONSTRUCT 

FROM 2 TO 4 LANES (SAFETEA-LU PROJECT #735'TIP') $2,924 S

A.66 Ventura

IN OXNARD AT RICE AVE (SANTA CLARA) RECONSTRUCT INTERCHANGE 

(T21-#664) (SAFETEA-LU #1565) (SAFETEA-LU #2639 AND 'TIP') (TCSP - 2010 

APPROP EARMARK)

$83,997 COMPLETE

A.67 Imperial WIDEN AND IMPROVE TO 6 LANE FREEWAY WITH INTERCHANGES AT HEBER, 

MCCABE, AND JASPER AND OVERPASS AT CHICK RD. $999,136 L

A.68 Imperial

EXPANSION OF THE CALEXICO EAST PORT OF ENTRY - THE PROPOSED 

PROJECT IS TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLE 

INSPECTION LANES AND BOOTHS FROM EXISTING 3 TO 6 LANES AND 

BOOTHS; AND WIDEN BRIDGE OVER THE ALL-AMERICAN CANAL (CANAL 

SERVES AS U.S./MEXIC

$90,000 L

SUBTOTAL - ROADWAY ACCESS TO MAJOR GOODS MOVEMENT FACILITIES $14,025,890 

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+)
 69 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 69

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

B. FREIGHT CORRIDOR SYSTEM

B.1 Los Angeles

I-710 CORRIDOR USER-FEE BACKED CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT - WIDEN TO 5 

MIXED FLOW + 2 DEDICATED LANES FOR CLEAN TECHNOLOGY TRUCKS (EACH 

DIRECTION) AND INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS, FROM OCEAN BLVD IN 

LONG BEACH TO THE INTERMODAL RAILROAD YARDS IN COMMERCE/VERNON

$5,110,000 M

B.2 Various EAST-WEST FREIGHT CORRIDOR SEGMENT 1 (FROM I-710 TO JUST WEST OF 

I-605) $2,413,086 L

B.3 Various EAST-WEST FREIGHT CORRIDOR SEGMENT 2 (FROM JUST WEST OF I-605 TO 

JUST EAST OF SR-57) $9,102,359 L

B.4 Various EAST-WEST FREIGHT CORRIDOR SEGMENT 3 (FROM JUST EAST OF SR-57 TO 

I-15) $3,777,816 L

B.5 Various I-15 FREIGHT CORRIDOR (INITIAL SEGMENT) (SR-60 TO I-10) $856,570 L

SUBTOTAL - FREIGHT CORRIDOR SYSTEM $21,259,831 

C. ZERO-EMISSION TECHNOLOGY

NA Los Angeles

LOS ANGELES REGIONAL DIESEL EMISSIONS REDUCTION PROGRAM FOR 

ENGINE RETROFIT PROVIDES INCENTIVE GRANTS TO OWNER OPERATORS 

OLD DIESEL TRUCKS TO UPGRADE EQUIPMENT TO REDUCE EMISSIONS

$449 S

NA Los Angeles EXPAND DIESEL EMISSIONS REDUCTION PROGRAM OF GATEWAY CITIES COG $2,676 S

NA Various ZERO-EMISSION GOODS MOVEMENT $3,000,000 L

SUBTOTAL - ZERO EMISSION TECHNOLOGY $3,003,125 

D. OFF DOCK AND NEAR DOCK INTERMODAL YARD PROJECTS 

D.1

San Bernardino

TRACK AND INTERMODAL YARD IMPROVEMENTS (PHASES 1 THROUGH 4) $799,616 L

D.2

SCLA RAIL SERVICE FROM AIR EXPRESSWAY APPROX. 5 MILES N0 TO COLUSA 

RD. BETWEEN PHANTOM EAST & MOJAVE RIVER-PUT IN NEW RAIL LINE 

FROM BNSF TO SCLA.(FOR FREIGHT)PROJECT IN CONNECTION WITH NEW 

INTERMODAL/MULTIMODAL FACILITY ON SCLA PROPERTY

$250,000 S

D.3 Los Angeles INTERMODAL FACILITIES (SCIG/ICTF) $1,000,000 S

SUBTOTAL - OFF DOCK AND NEAR DOCK INTERMODAL YARD PROJECTS $2,049,616 

TABLE 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List Continued

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+)
 70 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

E. MAINLINE RAIL 

"E.1-A to

 E.1-N" Various

"Rail package — mainline rail capacity expansion:

Barstow to Keenbrook–BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision; Colton Crossing to 

Redondo Junction–UP Mojave Subdivision; Devore Road to West Colton (inc. 

Rancho Flying Junction)–UP Alhambra Subdivision; West Colton to City of 

Industry–UP Los Angeles Subdivision; UP Yuma Subdivision."

$3,092,400 -

E.2 San Bernardino

·        Colton Crossing: in Colton from 0.2 miles (0.3 KM) west of Rancho Avenue 

to 0.9 miles (1.5 KM) east of La Cadena Drive; construct railroad to railroad grade 

separation; (Cost included in the Rail package - mainline rail capacity expansion).

$201,994 COMPLETE

E.3 Orange 

·        BNSF Line - 10 miles of triple track from Fullerton to Orange/Riverside County 

line; (Same as Atwood to Fullerton and Esperanza to Fullerton); (Cost included in the 

Rail package - mainline rail capacity expansion).

$70,000 L

SUBTOTAL - MAINLINE RAIL $3,364,394 

TABLE 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List Continued

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+)
 71 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 71

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

F. ON-DOCK RAIL

-

Los Angeles

PORT OF LOS ANGELES

F.1 - LA WBCT On-Dock Rail: Addition of 2 new loading tracks

$806,021

F.2 - LA YTI On-Dock Rail: Addition of 1 new loading track

F.3 - LA Pier 400 Rail Expansion-Phase 1

F.4 - LA Pier 300 Rail Expansion: Addition of 2 new loading tracks

F.5 - LA Seaside Yard: Dedicated on-dock rail yard for Berth 226-236 terminal (Evergreen)

F.6 - LA Terminal Island Support Yard

F.7 - LA Berth 200 Railyard Expansion: Additional Storage/working tracks

F.8 - LA Evergreen/TICTF - adding 1 new loading track

F.9 - LA

Port of LA Container Movement Enhancement Program: WBCT wharf improvements, 

YTI wharf improvements, Pier 300 wharf improvements, and Evergreen/STS wharf 

improvements 

F.10 - LA Pier 400 Second Lead Track

- PORT OF LONG BEACH

F.1 - LB Pier G South Working Yard Rehabilitation.

$316,500

F.2 - LB Middle Harbor Terminal Rail Yard (3 Phases).

F.3 - LB Pier A On-Dock Rail Yard Expansion To Carrack.

F.4 - LB Pier A On-Dock Rail Yard East of Carrack.

F.5 - LB Pier G Metro Track Improvements.

SUBTOTAL - ON-DOCK RAIL $1,122,521 

TABLE 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List Continued

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+)
 72 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

G. RAIL ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS TO PORT OF LONG BEACH & PORT OF LOS ANGELES

G.1 - LA Los Angeles

PORT TRUCK TRAFFIC REDUCTION PROGRAM: WEST BASIN RAILYARD. 

INTERMODAL RAILYARD CONNECTING PORT OF LA WITH ALAMEDA CORRIDOR 

TO ACCOMMODATE INCREASED LOADING OF TRAINS AT THE PORT, THEREBY 

REDUCING TRUCK TRIPS TO OFF-DOCK RAILYARDS.(LAF5204)

$1,076,625

S

Los Angeles

PORT OF LOS ANGELES RAIL EFFICIENCY PROGRAM (ALAMEDA CORRIDORWEST BASIN AREA GAP CLOSURES) THIS PROJECT WILL ELIMINATE TWO 

SHORT GAPS IN TRACKAGE BETWEEN THE WEST BASIN AREA OF THE PORT 

OF LOS ANGELES AND THE ALAMEDA CORRIDOR (INCREASING THE NUMBER 

OF TRACKS FROM ONE TO TWO IN THIS AREA). THIS DOESN'T CHANGE ANY 

ON-DOCK RAILYARD CAPACITY ASSUMPTIONS, AND THUS DOESN'T CHANGE 

ANY PROJECTIONS OF TRAIN OR TRUCK VOLUMES IN THE RTP. THE PROJECT 

HOWEVER DOES REDUCE TRAIN DELAYS AND IDLING.

G.2 - LB Los Angeles

Pier B Street Realignment - Pier B Street Intermodal Railyard Expansion. Project will 

expand Pier B Street Intermodal Railyard to facilitate additional rail shipments and 

realign and widen Pier B Street.

M

G.3 - LB Los Angeles

Pier F Support Yard - this project provides storage tracks on the Pier F Road cul-desac, which are useful for support functions such as set out of bad order rail cars and 

possibly engine tie-up.

S

G.4 - LB Los Angeles Track Realignment at Ocean Blvd - this project will create improved lead tracks to the 

Metropolitan Stevedoring Co. (Metro) rail yard and to Pier F on-dock rail yard. S

G.5 - LB Los Angeles

Terminal Island Wye Track Realignment - this project will provide for double tracking 

the south leg of the Wye to accommodate simultaneous train switching moves from 

these various activities on Terminal Island.

S

G.6 - LB Los Angeles

Reconfiguration of Control Point (CP) Mole - the new control point at the Mole will 

enable increased train speeds and reduced train delays caused by manual switch 

operations.

S

G.7 - LB Los Angeles Navy Mole Road Storage Yard - the proposed project includes three new tracks along 

the west side of Pier T. This project will also involve relocating the existing utilities. S

G.8 - LB TO G.9 - LB Los Angeles Pier B Rail Yard (Phase III - 12th Street Alternative) expansion of Pier B Street 

intermodal railyard. M

G.10 - LB Los Angeles New Cerritos Channel Rail Bridge L

G.11 - LB Los Angeles TRIPLE TRACK S/O THENARD L

SUBTOTAL - RAIL ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS TO PORT OF LONG BEACH & PORT OF LOS ANGELES $1,076,625 

TABLE 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List Continued

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+)
 73 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT 73

Map ID County Project Description Project Cost 

($YOE, Thousands)

Timeframe

(Short, Medium, Long)

H. RAIL-HIGHWAY GRADE SEPARATIONS

SEE EXHIBITS B1 THROUGH 

B5 Various

RAIL PACKAGE- GRADE SEPARATIONS. (SEE DETAILED LIST) 

* Note: the total includes the non-goods movement grade separation total of 

$334,753,000

$4,795,109 S

SUBTOTAL - RAIL-HIGHWAY GRADE SEPARATIONS $4,795,109 

I. BOTTLENECK RELIEF PROJECTS

I.1-I.22 Various GOODS MOVEMENT - BOTTLENECK RELIEF STRATEGY $5,000,000 L

SUBTOTAL - BOTTLENECK RELIEF PROJECTS $5,000,000 

J. FUTURE INITIATIVE THAT COULD SERVE GOODS MOVEMENT

J.1 "Los Angeles/

San Bernardino"

HIGH DESERT CORRIDOR - CONSTRUCT NEW 4-6 LANE FACILITY: EAST-WEST 

FACILITY BETWEEN SR-14 AND US-395 (CONNECTING AT SAN BERNARDINO 

COUNTY); EAST-WEST FACILITY BETWEEN I-5 AND SR-14; AND NORTHSOUTH FACILITY BETWEEN SR-14 AND SR-138. (INCLUDES Project IDs 1122004 

& LA962212)

$5,000,000 L

NA Various GOODS MOVEMENT - ITS STRATEGY $3,000,000 L

NA Various FREIGHT ARTERIAL O&M $7,000,000 L

SUBTOTAL - FUTURE INITIATIVE THAT COULD SERVE GOODS MOVEMENT $15,000,000 

TOTAL GOODS MOVEMENT PROJECTS $70,697,111 

* Note: Map ID refers to maps in 2016 RTP/SCS Goods Movement Appendix (pgs. 74 to 77)

** Note: Short-term (S) (2012-2020); Medium-term (M) (2020-2030); Long-term (L) (2030-2040+)

TABLE 19 Regional Goods Movement Project List Continued
Exhibit 20 Goods Movement Project List - A. Roadway Access To Major 

Goods Movement Facilities
Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxnard

Arca dia Azusa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

La Mira da

Los Angeles Monrovia

Mo nterey

Park

Norwa lk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Colton

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto San

Bernardino Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastva le

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert H ot Springs

San

Jacinto

Beaum ont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

Desert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La 

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Huntingto n

Beach

Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

San

Clemente

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yorba Linda 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

I-710 Freight Corridor Potential East-West Freight Corridor I-15 Freight Corridor High Desert Corridor

Source: SCAG

0 5 10 2.5 ° Miles

B2 B3 B4

B5

J1

B1

Exhibit 21 Goods Movement Project List - B. Freight Corridor System 

and J. Future Initiative That Could Serve Goods Movement
Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxnard

Arca dia Azusa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

Glendale

Glendora

La M ira da

Los Angeles Monrovia

Mo nterey

Park

Norwa lk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Linda

Ontario

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto

Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastva le

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert H ot Springs

San

Jacinto

Beaum ont

Calimesa

Palm

Desert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La 

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Huntingto n

Beach Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

San

Clemente

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yorba Linda

14

60

126

71

57

60

110

134

22

101

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

105

5

10

405

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Source: SCAG

8

10

10

0 5 10 2.5

Miles

E1-D

E1-J

E1-K

E1-M

E1-L

E1-H

E1-I

E1-G

E1-F

E1-E

E1-C

E1-A

E1-B

D2

E2 - Completed

D3

E3

91

D - Off Dock and Near Dock Intermodal Yard Projects

D2

D3

E - Mainline Rail Enhancements

E1-A - Fourth Main Track from Silverwood to Frost

E1-B - Third Main Track Martinez to Barstow

E1-C - Devore Rd Crossovers

E1-D - Flying Junction at Rancho

E1-E - Second Main Track Devore to Rancho

E1-F - Third Main Track MP 2.9 to Highgrove MP 6.1

E1-G -Third Main Track West Riverside to Prado Dam

E1-H - Third Main Track Esperanza to Atwood

E1-I - Third Main Track Atwood to Fullerton

E1-J - Fourth Main Track Fullerton to Hobart

E1-K - Third Main Track Valley View to Serapis

E1-L -Second Main Track South Fontana to Reservoir

E1-M -Second Main Track Pomona to City of Industry

E2 - Colton Crossing Railroad Grade Separation

E3 - BNSF Line from Fullerton to County Line

H - Rail-Highway Grade Separations

Exhibit 22 Goods Movement Project List - D. Off-Dock and Near-Dock 

Intermodal Yard Projects, E. Mainline Rail and H. Rail-Highway Grade 

Separations
!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

Los Angeles

County

Lomita

Los Angeles

ancho Palos Verdes

Long Beach

!( F - On Dock Rail

!( G - Rail Access Improvements to Port of Long Beach and Port of Los Angeles

Port of Los Angeles (LA)

Port of Long Beach (LB)

Source: SCAG

° 0 0.25 0.5 0.125

Miles

F3-LA F10 - LA

F6 - LA

F8 - LA

F5-LA

F9 - LA

F4-LA

F2-LA

F1-LA

F7 - LA

G1 - LA

G6 - LB

G7 - LB

G11 - LB G10 - LB

G5 - LB

F3 - LB

F4 - LB

G2 - LB

G9 - LB

G8 - LB

G3 - LB

F2 - LB

F5 - LB

F1 - LB

G4 - LB

Exhibit 23 Goods Movement Project List - F. On-Dock Rail and G. Rail 

Access Improvements to Port of Long Beach and Los Angeles
 78

NOTES

1 American Association of Port Authorities and U.S. Trade Online, U.S. Census

2 U.S. Trade Online, U.S. Census and Port of Hueneme

3 U.S. Trade Online, U.S. Census

4 CoStar Reality Information, Inc. www.costar.com, based on November 2014 data downloads

5 Industrial Warehousing in the SCAG Region Study, SCAG, based on the Avison-Young methodology for port-related and non-port related warehousing needs

6 SCAG’s Regional Travel Demand Model

7 UPS Solutions: Defining Logistics, How It Relates to Your Supply Chain—and Why It’s Crucial for Your Company https://www.ups.com/content/us/en/bussol/browse/article/what-is-logistics.html

8 The U.S. Census, County Business Patterns, https://www.census.gov/econ/cbp/

9 Food manufacturing includes all sectors under the NAICS category for 311. This sector transforms livestock and agricultural products into products for intermediate or final consumption. It includes animal food manufacturing, cereal manufacturing, vegetable and fruit canning, etc

10 US Census County Business Patterns https://www.census.gov/econ/cbp/

11 The Industrial Warehousing in the SCAG Region Study, Task 3 Trend Report, SCAG, 2015

12 The U.S. Census, County Business Patterns, https://www.census.gov/econ/cbp/

13 2012 Annual Re-Shoring Report, MIT Forum.

14 Regional Economic Model Inc. TranSight SCAG, CA, US v3.6.5

15 Source: American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA).

16 The San Pedro Bay Ports QuickTrip–Train Builder, Oct 20, 2014, “By Lifts & TEUs Estimation” tab

17 Originally these FTZs were located primarily along the border, but recent changes to the Mexican Customs Law now allow them to operate anywhere in the Mexican territory and several FTZs have opened in mainland 

Mexico, creating logistic hubs such as San Luis Potosí and Guanajuato.

18 Regional Economic Model Inc. TranSight SCAG, CA US v3.6.5

19 Regional Economic Model Inc. TranSight SCAG, CA, US v3.6.5

20 E-commerce Evolutions–Element 4: Distribution and Fulfillment Centers, NAIOP, May 2015, http://www.naiop.org/en/E-Library/Business-Trends/Distribution-and-Fulfillment-Centers.aspx

21 Retailers must overcome logistics lag for same-day delivery, Kris Bjornson, JLL, April 2014, http://www.joneslanglasalleblog.com/investor/retailers-must-overcome-logistics-lag-for-same-day-delivery/

22 Same-day delivery is transforming the CRE industry, Kris Bjornson, JLL, June 2015, http://www.joneslanglasalleblog.com/investor/same-day-delivery-is-transforming-the-cre-industry/?utm_source=us-retailecom&utm_medium=jll-website&utm_campaign=featuredpost

23 Employment Development Department, Labor Force Data for May 2014 and May 2015

24 Ibid.

25 San Pedro Bay Ports Container Forecast, February, 2015

26 American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI). Cost of Congestion to the Trucking Industry. April 2014.

27 American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI). Congestion Impact Analysis of Freight Significant Highway Locations - 2015

28 For purposes of accounting and reporting, the Surface Transportation Board designates three classes of freight railroads based upon their operating revenues for three consecutive years using the following scale: Class 

I–$250 million or more; Class II–less than $250 million but more than $20 million; and Class III–$20 million or less. These operating revenue thresholds are stated in 1991 dollars and are adjusted annually for inflation 

using a Railroad Freight Price Index developed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

29 California Department of Transportation, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/paffairs/news/pressrel/13pr082.htm

30 Federal Communications Commission https://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/positive-train-control-ptc

31 Federal Railroad Administration

32 For further information on the Modified Status Quo Routing of UP Trains, see 2011 Regional Rail Study completed by Dr. Robert Leachman, Leachman and Associates, LLC for SCAG.

33 New Cerritos Channel Rail Bridge and Third Track at Thenard are joint port projects; however, the cost of these two projects are listed under the Port of Los Angeles.

34 See previous note.
 79

35 U.S. Trade Online, U.S. Census and Port of Hueneme

36 SCAQMD (June 2015) “Preliminary Draft AQMP White Paper Goods Movement.”

37 SCAQMD (April 20, 2011) The Need for Zero-Emission Technologies, presentation for Zero-Emission Transportation and Roundtable Discussion, April 20, 2011

38 SCAQMD (June 2015) “Preliminary Draft AQMP White Paper Goods Movement.”

39 White House Office of the Press Secretary (February 18, 2014) “Fact Sheet: Opportunity For All: Improving the Fuel Efficiency of American Trucks–Bolstering Energy Security, Cutting Carbon Pollution, Saving Money and 

Supporting Manufacturing Innovation” Retrieved at https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/02/18/fact-sheet-opportunity-all-improving-fuel-efficiency-american-trucks-bol

40 USEPA at http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/climate/regs-heavy-duty.htmWhite House Office of the Press Secretary (February 18, 2014) “Fact Sheet: Opportunity For All: Improving the Fuel Efficiency of 

American Trucks–Bolstering Energy Security, Cutting Carbon Pollution, Saving Money and Supporting Manufacturing Innovation” Retrieved at https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/02/18/

fact-sheet-opportunity-all-improving-fuel-efficiency-american-trucks-bol

41 CARB (March 14, 2014) “First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, Appendix C, Focus Group Working Papers, Transportation” Retrieved from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/transportation.

pdf

42 CARB (April 2015) “Sustainable Freight, Pathways to Zero and Near-Zero Emissions Discussion Document” Retrieved at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/gmp/sfti/sustainable-freight-pathways-to-zero-and-near-zero-emissions-discussion-document.pdf

43 CARB (April 2015) “Sustainable Freight, Pathways to Zero and Near-Zero Emissions Discussion Document” Retrieved at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/gmp/sfti/sustainable-freight-pathways-to-zero-and-near-zero-emissions-discussion-document.pdf

44 General Electric (2014) “Fact Sheet on Evolution Tier 4 Locomotive” Retrieved at http://www.getransportation.com/sites/default/files/3%20EvoSeries%20Tier%204_locomotives.pdf

45 TIAX, LLC, funded by POLA/POLB (March, 2011) “TIAX characterization of Drayage Truck Duty Cycles at the POLB and POLA”

46 CALSTART, prepared for Metro and GWC COG (November 15, 2013) “Key Performance Parameters for Drayage Trucks Operating at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach”

47 For more information on this program see http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/aqip/solicitations/msc1514solicit.pdf

48 Port of Los Angeles (July 2015) “Draft Port of Los Angeles Zero Emissions White Paper” Retrieved at: http://www.portoflosangeles.org/pdf/Zero_Emmissions_White_Paper_DRAFT.pdf

49 http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/presentation/trucksummary.pdf

50 Gladstein, Neandross and Associates (GNA), (2014), “Case Study, Ryder System Inc.” Retrieved from: http://www.gladstein.org/gna-casestudies/ryder-system-inc-2/

51 UPS (May 5, 2015) “Press Release: UPS Becomes Nation’s Largest User of Renewable Natural Gas in Shipping Industry” Retrieved from: https://www.pressroom.ups.com/pressroom/ContentDetailsViewer.

page?ConceptType=PressReleases&id=1430830163276-554

52 SCAQMD (February 6, 2013) Power Point from Clean Fuels Advisory Program, Mobile Source Update, Retrieved from: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/technology-research/clean-fuels-program/clean-fuels-program-advisory-group—-february-6-2013/mobile-source-update.pdf?sfvrsn=10

53 Zip codes covered include South Coast AQMD, San Diego APCD and Imperial County APCD

54 Figure provided by CALSTART, e-mail correspondence, July 2015

55 CARB (September 2, 2014) power point, Heavy Duty Hybrid Vehicles Technology Assessment, retrieved at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/presentation/hybridtrucks.pdf

56 http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/techreport/epdo_ve_tech_report.pdf

57 Calstart (prepared for Gateway Cities COG and LA County Metro) (November 20, 2013) “I-710 Project Zero-Emission Truck Commercialization Study Final Report” Retrieved at: http://www.calstart.org/Libraries/I-710_

Project/I-710_Project_Zero-Emission_Truck_Commercialization_Study_Final_Report.sflb.ashx

58 Calstart (prepared for Gateway Cities COG and LA County Metro) (November 20, 2013) “I-710 Project Zero-Emission Truck Commercialization Study Final Report” Retrieved at: http://www.calstart.org/Libraries/I-710_

Project/I-710_Project_Zero-Emission_Truck_Commercialization_Study_Final_Report.sflb.ashx

59 Port of Los Angeles (July 2015) “Draft Port of Los Angeles Zero Emissions White Paper” Retrieved at: http://www.portoflosangeles.org/pdf/Zero_Emmissions_White_Paper_DRAFT.pdf

60 CARB (September 3, 2014) Power point presentation: “ARB Freight Locomotive Advanced Technology Assessment,” (slide 20) Retrieved at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/presentation/rail.pdf

61 EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality (December 2013) “Fact Sheet: Control of Emissions from Idling Locomotives” Retrieved from: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/locomotv/420f13050.pdf

62 CARB (August 26, 2014) Draft Handout: “Rail Technology Assessment Summary of Results” Retrieved at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/presentation/railhandout.pdf

63 CARB (August 26, 2014) Draft Handout: “Rail Technology Assessment Summary of Results” Retrieved at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/presentation/railhandout.pdf

64 https://www.up.com/aboutup/environment/technology/index.htm#1

65 CARB (August 26, 2014) Draft Handout: “Rail Technology Assessment Summary of Results” Retrieved at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/presentation/railhandout.pdf

66 https://www.up.com/aboutup/environment/technology/index.htm#1
 80

67 CARB (August 26, 2014) Draft Handout: “Rail Technology Assessment Summary of Results” Retrieved at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/presentation/railhandout.pdf

68 CARB (March 14, 2014) “First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, Appendix C, Focus Group Working Papers, Transportation” Retrieved from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/transportation.

pdf

69 CARB (August 26, 2014) Draft Handout: “Rail Technology Assessment Summary of Results” Retrieved at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/presentation/railhandout.pdf

70 CARB (September 3, 2014) Power point presentation: “ARB Freight Locomotive Advanced Technology Assessment,” (slide 19) Retrieved at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/presentation/rail.pdf

ADOPTED | APRIL 2016

WWW.SCAGRTPSCS.NET

APPENDIX

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM I GOODS MOVEMENT

please recycle 2347 2016.03.31

MAIN OFFICE

818 West 7th Street, 12th Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90017

(213) 236-1800

www.scag.ca.gov

Imperial County

1405 North Imperial Avenue, Suite 1

El Centro, CA 92243

Phone: (760) 353-7800

Fax: (760) 353-1877

Orange County

OCTA Building

600 South Main Street, Suite 1233

Orange, CA 92868

Phone: (714) 542-3687

Fax: (714) 560-5089

Riverside County

3403 10th Street, Suite 805

Riverside, CA 92501

Phone: (951) 784-1513

Fax: (951) 784-3925

San Bernardino County

Santa Fe Depot

1170 West 3rd Street, Suite 140

San Bernardino, CA 92410

Phone: (909) 806-3556

Fax: (909) 806-3572

Ventura County

950 County Square Drive, Suite 101

Ventura, CA 93003

Phone: (805) 642-2800

Fax: (805) 642-2260

REGIONAL OFFICES