81 FR 14929 - Great Lakes Basin Transportation, Inc: Authority To Construct and Operate a Rail Line in Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 53 (March 18, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 53 (March 18, 2016)
| Page Range | 14929-14932 | |
| FR Document | 2016-06151 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 53 (Friday, March 18, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 14929-14932] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-06151] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD [STB Docket No. FD 35952] Great Lakes Basin Transportation, Inc: Authority To Construct and Operate a Rail Line in Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board. ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement; Notice of Availability of the Draft Scope of Study for the Environmental Impact Statement; Notice of Scoping Meetings; and Request for Comments on Draft Scope of Study. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: Great Lakes Basin Transportation, Inc. (GLBT) plans to file either a petition for exemption pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502, or an application pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10901, seeking authority from the Surface Transportation Board (Board) to construct and operate an approximately 278-mile rail line. According to GLBT, the proposed rail line would extend generally from near La Porte, Indiana through Illinois to near Milton, Wisconsin and would connect with existing Class I railroads. [[Page 14930]] The construction and operation of the GLBT's proposed rail line has the potential to result in significant environmental impacts; therefore, the Board's Office of Environmental Analysis (OEA) has determined that the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is appropriate pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The purpose of this Notice of Intent is to inform stakeholders--including members of the public; Tribes; federal, state, and local agencies; environmental groups; potential shippers and other parties--interested in or potentially affected by the proposed project. OEA will hold public scoping meetings as part of the NEPA process. Comments submitted during scoping will assist OEA in defining the range of alternatives and potential impacts to be considered in the EIS. OEA has developed a Draft Scope of Study for the EIS for stakeholder review and comment. Public meeting dates and locations, along with the Draft Scope of Study, are provided below. This Notice of Intent initiates the EIS process and scoping. DATES: Dates and Locations: The public scoping meetings will be held at the following locations on the dates listed:April 11, 2016; 5:30-8:00 p.m.; Manteno Sportsmen's Club Banquet Hall, 851 North Main Street, Manteno, Illinois; April 12, 2016; 5:30-8:00 p.m.; Lowell Town Hall, 501 East Main Street, Lowell, Indiana; April 13, 2016; 5:30-8:00 p.m.; American Legion Banquet Hall, 203 South Washington Street, Wanatah, Indiana; April 14, 2016; 5:30-8:00 p.m.; Civic Auditorium Banquet Room, 1001 Ridge Street, LaPorte, Indiana; April 18, 2016; 5:30-8:00 p.m.; Craig High School Cafeteria, 401 South Randall Street, Janesville, Wisconsin; April 19, 2016; 5:30-8:00 p.m.; Cherry Valley Fire Station #2 Hall, 4919 Blackhawk Road, Rockford, Illinois; April 20, 2016; 5:30-8:00 p.m.; Rochelle Township High School Auditorium, 1401 Flagg Road, Rochelle, Illinois; and April 21, 2016; 5:30-8:00 p.m.; Seneca High School Auditorium, 307 East Scott Street, Seneca, Illinois. The scoping meetings will be held in an open house format for the first hour followed by a brief presentation by OEA. After the presentation, interested parties will be provided an opportunity for public comment at an open microphone for the balance of the scoping meeting. A court reporter will transcribe these oral public comments. The meeting locations comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.). Persons that need special accommodations should contact OEA's project manager listed below. OEA invites written public comments on all aspects of the Draft Scope of Study and is providing a 60-day public comment period which begins on March 18, 2016. These written comments may be submitted (1) during the scoping meetings, or (2) by mailing or electronic filing the comments using the filing instructions below. Comments should be submitted by May 16, 2016 to assure full consideration during the scoping process. OEA will issue a Final Scope of Study after the close of the scoping comment period. Summary of the Board's Environmental Review Process: The NEPA process is intended to assist the Board and the public in identifying and assessing the potential environmental consequences of a proposed action before a decision on the proposed action is made. OEA is responsible for ensuring that the Board complies with NEPA and related environmental statutes. The first stage of the EIS process is scoping. Scoping is an open process for determining the scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the EIS. As part of the scoping process, OEA has developed, and has made available for public comment in this notice, a Draft Scope of Study for the EIS. Scoping meetings will be held in the project area to provide further opportunities for public involvement and input during the scoping process. In addition to comments on the Draft Scope of Study, interested parties are also encouraged to comment on potential alternative routes for the proposed rail line. At the conclusion of the scoping period, OEA will issue a Final Scope of Study for the EIS. After issuing the Final Scope of Study, OEA will prepare a Draft EIS for the project. The Draft EIS will address the environmental issues and concerns identified during the scoping process and assess and compare potential alternatives including the no-action alternative. The Draft EIS will also contain OEA's preliminary recommendations for environmental mitigation measures. Upon its completion, the Draft EIS will be made available for review and comment by the public, government agencies, and other interested parties. OEA will prepare a Final EIS that considers comments on the Draft EIS. In reaching its decision in this case, the Board will consider the Draft EIS, the Final EIS, all environmental comments, and OEA's recommendations regarding the environmentally preferred alternative and environmental mitigation measures. OEA will be inviting several agencies to participate in this EIS process as cooperating agencies on the basis of their special expertise or jurisdiction by law. Filing Environmental Comments: Scoping comments submitted by mail should be addressed to: Dave Navecky, Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20423-0001, Docket No. FD 35952. Scoping comments may also be submitted electronically on the Board's Web site, www.stb.dot.gov, by clicking on the ``E-FILING'' link on the home page and then selecting ``Environmental Comments.'' Log-in accounts are not needed to file environmental comments electronically, and comments may be typed into the text box provided or attached as a file. If you have difficulties with the e-filing process, please call 202-245-0350. Please refer to Docket No. FD 35952 in all correspondence, including e-filings, addressed to the Board. Scoping Comments are due by May 16, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Navecky by mail at Office of Environmental Analysis, Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20423-0001; by email at [email protected], or by phone at 202-245-0294. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339. Members of the press should contact Dennis Watson in the Board's Office of Public Assistance, Governmental Affairs, and Compliance by email at [email protected], or by phone at 202-245-0234. The Web site for the Board is www.stb.dot.gov. Project specific information on the Board's Web site may be found by placing your cursor on the ``Environmental Matters'' button, then clicking on the ``Key Cases'' button in the drop down menu and then selecting ``Great Lakes Basin.'' For additional information about the Board's environmental review process and this EIS, you may also visit a Board-sponsored project Web site at GreatLakesBasinRailEIS.com. The project Web site includes a map of the project area including the potential route proposed by GLBT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Draft Scope of Study for the EIS Purpose and Need GLBT states that the principal purpose of the proposed rail line is to provide Class I railroads and a regional railroad utilizing the Chicago [[Page 14931]] metropolitan terminal area with more efficient options to route trains around the city. The Class I railroads include: BNSF Railway Company, Union Pacific Railroad Company, Canadian National Railway Company, Norfolk Southern Railway Company, Canadian Pacific Railway Company, and CSX Transportation, Inc. The regional railroad is the Wisconsin and Southern Railroad LLC. The proposed rail line would (1) allow freight traffic not destined for or originating in Chicago to bypass the existing congested Chicago terminal area, and (2) add capacity to accommodate existing and reasonably anticipated future growth while avoiding major population centers. GLBT anticipates that the proposed rail line would be utilized by unit commodity trains and mixed carload and intermodal trains that do not require transport to the Chicago terminal area for sorting or delivery. GLBT would construct a terminal for its rail operations near Manteno, Illinois to provide switching, servicing, and car and locomotive repair to its railroad customers. According to GLBT, transit times through the Chicago area, which currently can take up to 30 hours to complete, would be reduced to under 8 hours depending on the specific interchange points and applicable speed restrictions on the proposed rail line. The expected congestion relief would allow the railroads to better handle their Chicago proper and suburban traffic and make room for potential future growth within the existing terminal network. The proposed project is not a federal government-proposed or sponsored project. Thus, the Board has determined that the project's purpose and need should be informed by both the applicant's goals and the agency's enabling statute, here, 49 U.S.C. 10901. Section 10901 provides that the Board must approve a construction request unless it finds that the construction is ``inconsistent with the public convenience and necessity.'' Proposed Action and Alternatives GLBT's proposed rail line would involve a petition for exemption or application seeking authority from the Board to construct and operate an approximately 278-mile rail line. According to GLBT, the rail line would extend generally from near La Porte, Indiana through Illinois to near Milton, Wisconsin. The proposed rail line would consist mostly of double track. The tracks would use Centralized Traffic Control signals and Positive Train Control to allow for movements of up to 110 trains per day. Other major elements of the proposed project would include a 200-foot-wide right- of-way, flyovers at railroad crossings, four major river crossings in the State of Illinois (the Illinois, Kankakee, Fox, and Rock rivers), and grade-separated crossings of interstate highways and many roadways. The proposed project could include at-grade road crossings and the closure of some small rural roads. The EIS will analyze and compare the potential impacts of (1) construction and operation of all reasonable and feasible alternative routes for the proposed GLBT rail line and (2) the no-action alternative (denial of the petition or application). Environmental Impact Analysis Proposed Construction and Operation Analyses in the EIS will address the proposed activities associated with the construction and operation of the rail line and its potential environmental impacts, as appropriate. Impact Categories The EIS will analyze potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts \1\ of GLBT's proposed rail line construction and operation, including the range of reasonable and feasible alternatives, on the human and natural environment, or in the case of the no-action alternative, the lack of these activities. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ NEPA requires the Board to consider direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts. Direct and indirect impacts are both caused by the action. 40 CFR 1508.8(a)-(b). A cumulative impact is the ``incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions.'' 40 CFR 1508.7. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Impact areas addressed will include the categories of transportation systems, safety, land use, recreation, biological resources, water resources, including wetlands and other waters of the U.S., navigation, geology and soils, air quality, noise, energy resources, socioeconomics, cultural and historic resources, aesthetics and environmental justice. Other categories of potential impacts may also be included as a result of comments received during the scoping process or on the Draft EIS. The EIS will include a discussion of each of these categories as they currently exist in the project area and will address the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of each reasonable and feasible alternative on each category as described below: 1. Transportation Systems The EIS will: a. Describe existing transportation network in the project area. b. Analyze potential impacts resulting from each alternative on the existing transportation network in the project area. c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts to transportation systems, as appropriate. 2. Safety The EIS will: a. Describe road/rail grade crossing safety and analyze the potential for an increase in accidents related to the proposed rail operations, as appropriate. b. Describe existing rail operations and analyze the potential for increased probability of train accidents, as appropriate. c. Analyze the potential for disruption and delays to the movement of emergency vehicles from any new at-grade crossings and road closures that could accompany the construction and operation of the proposed rail line. d. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts on safety, as appropriate. 3. Land Use The EIS will: a. Describe existing land use patterns in the project area. Analyze potential impacts on existing land use patterns and land uses from each alternative including potential impacts on agricultural activities from rail line construction and operation. b. Evaluate consistency with Coastal Zone Management Program, as applicable. c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential impacts on land use, as appropriate. 4. Recreation The EIS will: a. Describe existing conditions and analyze the potential impacts of each alternative on recreational areas and opportunities provided in the project area. b. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts on recreational opportunities, as appropriate. 5. Biological Resources The EIS will: a. Evaluate the existing biological resources within the project area, including vegetative communities, wildlife, fisheries, wetlands, and federal and state threatened or endangered species, and the potential impacts to these resources resulting from each alternative. b. Describe any relevant wildlife sanctuaries, refuges, national or state [[Page 14932]] parks, forests, or grasslands, and analyze the potential impacts on these resources resulting from each alternative. c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts to biological resources, as appropriate. 6. Water Resources The EIS will: a. Describe the existing surface water and groundwater resources within the project area, including the lakes, rivers, streams, agricultural drainage tile systems, stock ponds, wetlands, and floodplains and analyze the potential impacts on these resources resulting from each alternative. b. Describe the permitting requirements for the various alternatives with regard to wetlands, river crossings, water quality, floodplains, and erosion control. c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts to water resources, as appropriate. 7. Navigation The EIS will: a. Describe existing navigable waterways within the project area and analyze the potential impacts on navigability resulting from each alternative. b. Describe the permitting requirements for the various alternatives with regard to navigation. c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential impacts on navigation, as appropriate. 8. Geology and Soils The EIS will: a. Describe the geology, soils, and seismic conditions found within the project area, including unique or problematic geologic formations or soils, prime farmland, and hydric soils, and analyze the potential impacts on these resources resulting from each alternative. b. Analyze potential measures employed to avoid or construct through unique or problematic geologic formations or soils. c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts on geology and soils, as appropriate. 9. Air Quality and Climate The EIS will: a. Analyze the potential air emissions from operations on each alternative, including potential changes in greenhouse gas emissions, as appropriate. b. Analyze the potential air quality impacts resulting from rail line construction activities. c. Analyze the potential impacts of the proposed project on global climate change and the potential impacts of global climate change on the proposed project. d. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts on air quality and global climate change, as appropriate. 10. Noise and Vibration The EIS will: a. Describe the potential noise and vibration impacts on noise sensitive receptors (e.g., residences, schools, and libraries) of each alternative. b. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts on sensitive noise receptors, as appropriate. 11. Energy Resources The EIS will: a. Describe and analyze the potential impact of the proposed project on the distribution of energy resources in the project area resulting from each alternative. b. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts on energy resources, as appropriate. 12. Socioeconomics The EIS will: a. Analyze the effects of a potential influx of construction workers to the project area and the potential increase in demand for local services interrelated with natural or physical environmental effects. b. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts on social and economic resources, as appropriate. 13. Cultural and Historic Resources The EIS will: a. Describe historic buildings, structures, sites, objects, or districts eligible for listing on or listed on the National Register of Historic Places (built-environment historic properties) within the area of potential effects for each alternative and analyze potential project impacts on them. b. Describe properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to Indian Tribes, Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs), and prehistoric or historic archaeological sites evaluated as potentially eligible, eligible, or listed on the National Register of Historic Places (archaeological and historic properties) within the area of potential effects for each alternative, and analyze potential project impacts on them. c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts to TCPs, and built-environment and archaeological historic properties, as appropriate. 14. Aesthetics The EIS will: a. Describe the potential impacts of the proposed rail line construction on any areas identified or determined to be of high visual quality. b. Describe the potential impacts of the proposed rail line construction on any waterways considered for or designated as wild and scenic. c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts on aesthetics, as appropriate. 15. Environmental Justice The EIS will: a. Describe minority and low-income populations in the project area. b. Analyze the potential impacts resulting from each alternative on those minority and low-income populations. c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate potential project impacts on environmental justice populations, as appropriate. 16. Cumulative Impacts The EIS will evaluate the cumulative and incremental impacts of the proposed project when added to impacts from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions in the project area, as appropriate. Decided: March 15, 2016. By the Board, Victoria Rutson, Director, Office of Environmental Analysis. Kenyatta Clay, Clearance Clerk. [FR Doc. 2016-06151 Filed 3-17-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2016 / Notices 14929
October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. materially contributed to, or pose a risk other support for, or goods or services
2459), Executive Order 12047 of March of materially contributing to, the in support of, any activity or transaction
27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and proliferation of weapons of mass described in clause (2) above or any
Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. destruction or their means of delivery person whose property and interests in
2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et (including missiles capable of delivering property are blocked pursuant to the
seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of such weapons), including any efforts to Order; and (4) any person determined
October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority manufacture, acquire, possess, develop, by the Secretary of the Treasury, in
No. 236–3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as transport, transfer or use such items, by consultation with the Secretary of State,
appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. any person or foreign country of the Attorney General, and other relevant
257–1 of December 11, 2015), I hereby proliferation concern. agencies, to be owned or controlled by,
determine that the object to be included DATES: The designation by the Secretary or acting or purporting to act for or on
in the exhibition ‘‘A Portrait of of State of the entity identified in this behalf of, directly or indirectly, any
Antinous: In Two Parts,’’ imported from notice pursuant to Executive Order person whose property and interests in
abroad for temporary exhibition within 13382 is effective on December 8, 2015. property are blocked pursuant to the
the United States, is of cultural FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Order.
significance. The object is imported Director, Office of Counterproliferation Information on the additional
pursuant to a loan agreement with the Initiatives, Bureau of International designee is as follows:
foreign owner or custodian. I also Security and Nonproliferation, Name: Strategic Force
determine that the exhibition or display Department of State, Washington, DC
of the exhibit object at The Art Institute 20520, tel.: 202–647–5193. AKA: Strategic Forces
of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, from on AKA: Strategic Rocket Force
about April 2, 2016, until on or about Background AKA: The Strategic Rocket Force
August 28, 2016, and at possible On June 28, 2005, the President, Command of KPA
additional exhibitions or venues yet to invoking the authority, inter alia, of the AKA: Strategic Rocket Force of the
be determined, is in the national International Emergency Economic Korean People’s Army
interest. I have ordered that Public Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–1706) Address: Pyongyang, North Korea
Notice of these Determinations be (‘‘IEEPA’’), issued Executive Order Dated: December 8, 2015.
published in the Federal Register. 13382 (70 FR 38567, July 1, 2005) (the John F. Kerry,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For ‘‘Order’’), effective at 12:01 a.m. eastern Secretary of State, Department of State.
further information, including an object daylight time on June 30, 2005. In the
list, contact the Office of Public Order the President took additional Note: This document was received by the
Diplomacy and Public Affairs in the Office of the Federal Register on March 10,
steps with respect to the national
2016.
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. emergency described and declared in
Department of State (telephone: 202– Executive Order 12938 of November 14, [FR Doc. 2016–05848 Filed 3–17–16; 8:45 am]
632–6471; email: section2459@ 1994, regarding the proliferation of BILLING CODE 4710–27–P
state.gov). The mailing address is U.S. weapons of mass destruction and the
Department of State, L/PD, SA–5, Suite means of delivering them.
5H03, Washington, DC 20522–0505. Section 1 of the Order blocks, with SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD
Dated: March 10, 2016. certain exceptions, all property and
interests in property that are in the [STB Docket No. FD 35952]
Mark Taplin,
United States, or that hereafter come
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Bureau Great Lakes Basin Transportation, Inc:
of Educational and Cultural Affairs, within the United States or that are or
Authority To Construct and Operate a
Department of State. hereafter come within the possession or
Rail Line in Indiana, Illinois and
control of United States persons, of: (1)
[FR Doc. 2016–06171 Filed 3–17–16; 8:45 am] Wisconsin
The persons listed in the Annex to the
BILLING CODE 4710–05–P
Order; (2) any foreign person AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.
determined by the Secretary of State, in ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an
DEPARTMENT OF STATE consultation with the Secretary of the Environmental Impact Statement;
Treasury, the Attorney General, and Notice of Availability of the Draft Scope
[Public Notice: 9464] other relevant agencies, to have of Study for the Environmental Impact
engaged, or attempted to engage, in Statement; Notice of Scoping Meetings;
Additional Designation of a North
activities or transactions that have and Request for Comments on Draft
Korean Entity Pursuant to Executive
materially contributed to, or pose a risk Scope of Study.
Order 13382
of materially contributing to, the
AGENCY: Department of State. proliferation of weapons of mass SUMMARY: Great Lakes Basin
ACTION:Designation of The Strategic destruction or their means of delivery Transportation, Inc. (GLBT) plans to file
Force Pursuant to E.O. 13382 (including missiles capable of delivering either a petition for exemption pursuant
such weapons), including any efforts to to 49 U.S.C. 10502, or an application
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authority in manufacture, acquire, possess, develop, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10901, seeking
section 1(ii) of Executive Order 13382, transport, transfer or use such items, by authority from the Surface
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
‘‘Blocking Property of Weapons of Mass any person or foreign country of Transportation Board (Board) to
Destruction Proliferators and Their proliferation concern; (3) any person construct and operate an approximately
Supporters’’, the State Department, in determined by the Secretary of the 278-mile rail line. According to GLBT,
consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the the proposed rail line would extend
Treasury and the Attorney General, has Secretary of State, the Attorney General, generally from near La Porte, Indiana
determined that The Strategic Force has and other relevant agencies, to have through Illinois to near Milton,
engaged, or attempted to engage, in provided, or attempted to provide, Wisconsin and would connect with
activities or transactions that have financial, material, technological or existing Class I railroads.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:50 Mar 17, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_14982/page/1.svg)
![14932 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2016 / Notices
parks, forests, or grasslands, and analyze b. Analyze the potential air quality c. Propose mitigation measures to
the potential impacts on these resources impacts resulting from rail line avoid, minimize or eliminate potential
resulting from each alternative. construction activities. project impacts to TCPs, and built-
c. Propose mitigation measures to c. Analyze the potential impacts of environment and archaeological historic
avoid, minimize or eliminate potential the proposed project on global climate properties, as appropriate.
project impacts to biological resources, change and the potential impacts of
global climate change on the proposed 14. Aesthetics
as appropriate.
project. The EIS will:
6. Water Resources d. Propose mitigation measures to a. Describe the potential impacts of
The EIS will: avoid, minimize or eliminate potential the proposed rail line construction on
a. Describe the existing surface water project impacts on air quality and global any areas identified or determined to be
and groundwater resources within the climate change, as appropriate. of high visual quality.
project area, including the lakes, rivers, 10. Noise and Vibration b. Describe the potential impacts of
streams, agricultural drainage tile the proposed rail line construction on
The EIS will: any waterways considered for or
systems, stock ponds, wetlands, and a. Describe the potential noise and
floodplains and analyze the potential designated as wild and scenic.
vibration impacts on noise sensitive c. Propose mitigation measures to
impacts on these resources resulting receptors (e.g., residences, schools, and
from each alternative. avoid, minimize or eliminate potential
libraries) of each alternative. project impacts on aesthetics, as
b. Describe the permitting b. Propose mitigation measures to
requirements for the various alternatives appropriate.
avoid, minimize or eliminate potential
with regard to wetlands, river crossings, project impacts on sensitive noise 15. Environmental Justice
water quality, floodplains, and erosion receptors, as appropriate.
control. The EIS will:
c. Propose mitigation measures to 11. Energy Resources a. Describe minority and low-income
avoid, minimize or eliminate potential populations in the project area.
The EIS will:
project impacts to water resources, as a. Describe and analyze the potential b. Analyze the potential impacts
appropriate. impact of the proposed project on the resulting from each alternative on those
distribution of energy resources in the minority and low-income populations.
7. Navigation project area resulting from each c. Propose mitigation measures to
The EIS will: alternative. avoid, minimize or eliminate potential
a. Describe existing navigable b. Propose mitigation measures to project impacts on environmental
waterways within the project area and avoid, minimize or eliminate potential justice populations, as appropriate.
analyze the potential impacts on project impacts on energy resources, as 16. Cumulative Impacts
navigability resulting from each appropriate.
The EIS will evaluate the cumulative
alternative. 12. Socioeconomics and incremental impacts of the
b. Describe the permitting proposed project when added to
requirements for the various alternatives The EIS will:
a. Analyze the effects of a potential impacts from other past, present, and
with regard to navigation. reasonably foreseeable future actions in
influx of construction workers to the
c. Propose mitigation measures to the project area, as appropriate.
project area and the potential increase
avoid, minimize or eliminate potential
in demand for local services interrelated Decided: March 15, 2016.
impacts on navigation, as appropriate.
with natural or physical environmental By the Board, Victoria Rutson, Director,
8. Geology and Soils effects. Office of Environmental Analysis.
b. Propose mitigation measures to Kenyatta Clay,
The EIS will:
avoid, minimize or eliminate potential
a. Describe the geology, soils, and Clearance Clerk.
project impacts on social and economic
seismic conditions found within the resources, as appropriate. [FR Doc. 2016–06151 Filed 3–17–16; 8:45 am]
project area, including unique or BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
problematic geologic formations or soils, 13. Cultural and Historic Resources
prime farmland, and hydric soils, and The EIS will:
analyze the potential impacts on these a. Describe historic buildings, SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD
resources resulting from each structures, sites, objects, or districts [Docket No. EP 290 (Sub-No. 5) (2016–2)]
alternative. eligible for listing on or listed on the
b. Analyze potential measures National Register of Historic Places Quarterly Rail Cost Adjustment Factor
employed to avoid or construct through (built-environment historic properties)
unique or problematic geologic within the area of potential effects for AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.
formations or soils. each alternative and analyze potential ACTION: Approval of rail cost adjustment
c. Propose mitigation measures to project impacts on them. factor.
avoid, minimize or eliminate potential b. Describe properties of traditional
project impacts on geology and soils, as religious and cultural importance to SUMMARY: The Board has approved the
appropriate. Indian Tribes, Traditional Cultural second quarter 2016 rail cost adjustment
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Properties (TCPs), and prehistoric or factor (RCAF) and cost index filed by
9. Air Quality and Climate the Association of American Railroads.
historic archaeological sites evaluated as
The EIS will: potentially eligible, eligible, or listed on The second quarter 2016 RCAF
a. Analyze the potential air emissions the National Register of Historic Places (Unadjusted) is 0.840. The second
from operations on each alternative, (archaeological and historic properties) quarter 2016 RCAF (Adjusted) is 0.356.
including potential changes in within the area of potential effects for The second quarter 2016 RCAF–5 is
greenhouse gas emissions, as each alternative, and analyze potential 0.336.
appropriate. project impacts on them. DATES: Effective Date: April 1, 2016.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:50 Mar 17, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_14982/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-02 15:14:14
Document Modified: 2018-02-02 15:14:14
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement; Notice of Availability of the Draft Scope of Study for the Environmental Impact Statement; Notice of Scoping Meetings; and Request for Comments on Draft Scope of Study. | |
| Dates | Dates and Locations: The public scoping meetings will be held at the following locations on the dates listed: | |
| Contact | Dave Navecky by mail at Office of Environmental Analysis, Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20423-0001; by email at [email protected], or by phone at 202-245-0294. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339. Members of the press should contact Dennis Watson in the Board's Office of Public Assistance, Governmental Affairs, and Compliance by email at [email protected], or by phone at 202-245-0234. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 14929 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR