Major Issues in Rail Rate Cases, 11015-11016 [E6-3049]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2006 / Notices
Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477–78). The Statement may also be
found at https://dms.dot.gov.
RSPPs
BNSF
Docket Number FRA–2006–23686
(Other Docket Numbers that may
contain relevant information: FRA
2006–23687 and FRA 2006–FRA 2003–
15432).
BNSF submitted a petition for
approval of an RSPP. The petition, the
RSPP, and any related documents have
been placed in the requisite docket and
are available for public inspection.
CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSX)
Docket Number FRA 2006–23685
(Other Docket Numbers that may
contain relevant information: FRA).
CSX submitted a petition for approval
of an RSPP. The petition, the RSPP, and
any related documents have been placed
in the requisite docket and are available
for public inspection.
Union Pacific Railroad (UP)
Docket Number FRA 2006–24002
(Other Docket Numbers that may
contain relevant information: FRA).
UP submitted a petition for approval
of an RSPP. The petition, the RSPP, and
any related documents have been placed
in the requisite docket and are available
for public inspection.
Issued in Washington, DC on February 23,
2006.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety
Standards and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E6–3071 Filed 3–2–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping
Requirements Agency Information
Collection Activity Under OMB Review
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice
announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted
below has been forwarded to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and comment. The ICR describes
the nature of the information collection
and the expected burden. The Federal
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:43 Mar 02, 2006
Jkt 208001
Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period was published on July 11, 2005
(70 FR 39851–39852).
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before April 3, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30
days, to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503,
Attention: NHTSA Desk Officer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alan Block at the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, Office of
Research and Technology (NTI–131),
202–366–6401, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Room 5119, Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Title: 2006 Motor Vehicle Occupant
Safety Survey.
OMB Number: 2121–New.
Type of Request: New information
collection request.
Abstract: The Motor Vehicle
Occupant Safety Survey (MVOSS) is
conducted on a periodic basis for the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration to obtain a status report
on attitudes, knowledge, and behavior
related to motor vehicle occupant
protection. It is a national telephone
survey composed of two questionnaires,
each administered to a randomly
selected sample of approximately 6,000
persons age 16 and older. One
questionnaire focuses on seat belt issues
while the other focuses on child
restraint use. Additional topics
addressed by the survey include air
bags, emergency medical services,
wireless phone use in motor vehicles,
and crash injury experience. The
proposed survey is the sixth in the
MVOSS series. The 2006 MVOSS will
collect data on topics included in the
preceding surveys in order to monitor
change over time in the use of occupant
protection devices and in attitudes and
knowledge related to motor vehicle
occupant safety. The survey will also
include new questions that address
emergent issues in occupant protection.
Affected Public: Randomly selected
members of the general public aged
sixteen and older in telephone
households.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
4,016 hours (9 cognitive interviews
averaging 40 minutes each, 30 pre-test
interviews averaging 20 minutes each,
and 12,000 final interviews averaging 20
minutes each).
Coments are invited on: Whether the
proposed collection of information is
necessary for the performance of the
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11015
functions of the Department, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; the accuracy of the
Department’s estimate of the burden of
the proposed information collection;
ways to enhance the quality, utility and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
A Comment to OMB is most effective if
OMB receives it within 30 days of
publication.
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A).
Marilena Amoni,
Associate Administrator, Program
Development and Delivery.
[FR Doc. 06–1986 Filed 3–2–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Ex Parte No. 657 (Sub-No. 1)]
Major Issues in Rail Rate Cases
Surface Transportation Board.
Notice of proposed guidelines.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Surface Transportation
Board has instituted a proceeding to
seek public comments on proposed
changes to its stand-alone cost
methodology, on whether to continue to
permit movement-specific adjustments
to its Uniform Railroad Costing System
in rail rate reasonableness cases, and on
the proper standards for reopening and
vacating a prior rate decision that is
based upon a stand-alone cost analysis.
These changes are intended to resolve
major issues common to all rail rate
complaints seeking relief under the
agency’s stand-alone cost test.
DATES: Notices of intent to participate
are due on March 20, 2006. Comments
are due on May 1, 2006. Replies are due
on May 31, 2006. Rebuttals are due on
June 30, 2006.
ADDRESSES: All notices of intent to
participate and comments may be
submitted either via the Board’s e-filing
format or in the traditional paper
format. Any person using the e-filing
should comply with the instructions
found on the Board’s Web site, https://
www.stb.dot.gov, at the ‘‘E-FILING’’
link. Any person submitting a filing in
the traditional paper format should send
an original and 20 paper copies of the
filing (referring to STB Ex Parte No. 657
(Sub-No. 1) to: Surface Transportation
Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20423–0001.
E:\FR\FM\03MRN1.SGM
03MRN1
11016
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2006 / Notices
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph Dettmar, 1–202–565–1609.
[Assistance for the hearing impaired is
available through the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–
800–877–8339.]
The
Surface Transportation Board (Board) is
instituting a proceeding in STB Ex Parte
No. 657 (Sub-No. 1) to obtain public
comments on proposed changes to its
stand-alone cost (SAC) methodology, on
whether to continue to permit
movement-specific adjustments to its
Uniform Railroad Costing System
(URCS) in rail rate reasonableness cases,
and on the proper standards for
reopening and vacating a prior rate
decision that is based upon a SAC
analysis. First, the Board presents two
alternatives to the percent reduction
method to determine maximum
reasonable rates. Second, the Board
proposes a new cost-based method for
allocating revenue from cross-over
traffic. Third, the Board proposes a
method for forecasting future operating
expenses of a stand-alone railroad
(SARR) that would reflect anticipated
future productivity gains. Fourth, the
Board proposes to no longer permit
movement-specific adjustments to
URCS when calculating the 180%
revenue-to-variable cost (R/VC)
jurisdictional floor for rail rate relief.
Fifth, the Board proposes to shorten the
time frame for SAC analyses and
corresponding rate prescriptions from
20 years to 10 years. Finally, the Board
proposes new standards for reopening
and vacating a prior Board decision
(including any resulting rate
prescription) that is based on a SAC
analysis.
In a decision served on February 27,
2006, the Board has discussed each of
these issues in detail and set forth
proposed solutions to the identified
problems. Each of these issues is being
revisited to ensure that both the SAC
test and the jurisdictional floor for rate
relief are applied fairly and in
conformity with the Board’s statutory
charge. Because these issues go to the
heart of the SAC test and have industrywide significance for rail carriers and
their captive shippers, all interested
parties are invited to comment on these
proposed changes.
Additional information is contained
in the Board’s decision. To obtain a free
copy of the full decision, visit the
Board’s Web site at https://
www.stb.dot.gov. A service list will be
available at the Board’s Web site by
March 31, 2006. Comments, replies and
rebuttals should be served on all
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:43 Mar 02, 2006
Jkt 208001
persons designated on the list as a party
of record.
This action should not have a
significant economic impact upon a
substantial number of small entities,
within the meaning of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). To
the extent that small entities may be
affected, the impact should be
beneficial, because these proposals will
resolve several contentious issues in
SAC proceeding, and simplify the
jurisdictional inquiry. The Board,
however, invites comments on whether
there would be effects on small entities
that should be considered.
This action will not significantly
affect either the quality of the human
environment or the conservation of
energy resources.
Decided: February 27, 2006.
By the Board, Chairman Buttrey and Vice
Chairman Mulvey.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–3049 Filed 3–2–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Finance Docket No. 34554 (Sub-No.
4)]
Union Pacific Railroad Company—
Temporary Trackage Rights
Exemption—BNSF Railway Company
BNSF Railway Company (BNSF),
pursuant to a modified written trackage
rights agreement entered into between
BNSF and Union Pacific Railroad
Company (UP), has agreed to extend the
expiration date of the local trackage
rights granted to UP 1 over BNSF’s line
of railroad extending from BNSF
milepost 579.3 near Mill Creek, OK, to
BNSF milepost 631.1 near Joe Junction,
TX, a distance of approximately 51
miles.2
The transaction was scheduled to be
consummated on February 20, 2006.
The purpose of this transaction is to
modify the temporary trackage rights
exempted in STB Finance Docket No.
34554 (Sub-No. 2) to further extend the
expiration date to on or before
December 31, 2006. The modified
trackage rights will permit UP to
continue to move loaded and empty
ballast trains for use in its maintenanceof-way projects.
As a condition to this exemption, any
employees affected by the trackage
rights will be protected by the
conditions imposed in Norfolk and
Western Ry. Co.—Trackage Rights—BN,
354 I.C.C. 605 (1978), as modified in
Mendocino Coast Ry., Inc.—Lease and
Operate, 360 I.C.C. 653 (1980).
This notice is filed under 49 CFR
1180.2(d)(7). If it contains false or
misleading information, the exemption
is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the
exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d)
may be filed at any time. The filing of
a petition to revoke will not
automatically stay the transaction.
An original and 10 copies of all
pleadings, referring to STB Finance
Docket No. 34554 (Sub-No. 4), must be
filed with the Surface Transportation
Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20423–0001. In addition, one copy
of each pleading must be served on
Gabriel S. Meyer, 1400 Douglas Street,
STOP 1580, Omaha, NE 68179.
Board decisions and notices are
available on our Web site at https://
www.stb.dot.gov.
Decided: February 22, 2006.
By the Board, David M. Konschnik,
Director, Office of Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06–1861 Filed 3–2–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
1 UP
submits that the trackage rights being
granted here are only temporary rights, but, because
they are ‘‘local’’ rather than ‘‘overhead’’ rights, they
do not qualify for the Board’s class exemption for
temporary trackage rights at 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(8).
See Railroad Consolidation Procedures—Exemption
for Temporary Trackage Rights, STB Ex Parte No.
282 (Sub-No. 20) (STB served May 23, 2003).
Therefore, UP and BNSF concurrently have filed a
petition for partial revocation of this exemption in
STB Finance Docket No. 34554 (Sub-No. 5), Union
Pacific Railroad Company—Temporary Trackage
Rights Exemption—BNSF Railway Company,
wherein UP and BNSF request that the Board
permit the proposed local trackage rights
arrangement described in the present proceeding to
expire on or about December 31, 2006. That petition
will be addressed by the Board in a separate
decision.
2 The original trackage rights granted in Union
Pacific Railroad Company—Trackage Rights
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Exemption—The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe
Railway Company, STB Finance Docket No. 34554
(STB served Oct. 7, 2004), also extended from BNSF
milepost 579.3 near Mill Creek, OK, to BNSF
milepost 631.1 near Joe Junction, TX. By decisions
served on November 24, 2004, in STB Finance
Docket No. 34554 (Sub-No. 1) and on March 25,
2005, in STB Finance Docket No. 34554 (Sub-No.
3), the Board granted exemptions to permit the
trackage rights authorized in STB Finance Docket
No. 34554 and extended in STB Finance Docket No.
34554 (Sub-No. 2), served on Feb. 11, 2005, to
expire. At the time of that extension, it was
anticipated by the parties that the rights would
expire on or about December 31, 2005. However,
this authority has not yet been exercised.
E:\FR\FM\03MRN1.SGM
03MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 42 (Friday, March 3, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11015-11016]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-3049]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Ex Parte No. 657 (Sub-No. 1)]
Major Issues in Rail Rate Cases
AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.
ACTION: Notice of proposed guidelines.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Surface Transportation Board has instituted a proceeding
to seek public comments on proposed changes to its stand-alone cost
methodology, on whether to continue to permit movement-specific
adjustments to its Uniform Railroad Costing System in rail rate
reasonableness cases, and on the proper standards for reopening and
vacating a prior rate decision that is based upon a stand-alone cost
analysis. These changes are intended to resolve major issues common to
all rail rate complaints seeking relief under the agency's stand-alone
cost test.
DATES: Notices of intent to participate are due on March 20, 2006.
Comments are due on May 1, 2006. Replies are due on May 31, 2006.
Rebuttals are due on June 30, 2006.
ADDRESSES: All notices of intent to participate and comments may be
submitted either via the Board's e-filing format or in the traditional
paper format. Any person using the e-filing should comply with the
instructions found on the Board's Web site, https://www.stb.dot.gov, at
the ``E-FILING'' link. Any person submitting a filing in the
traditional paper format should send an original and 20 paper copies of
the filing (referring to STB Ex Parte No. 657 (Sub-No. 1) to: Surface
Transportation Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001.
[[Page 11016]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Dettmar, 1-202-565-1609.
[Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Surface Transportation Board (Board) is
instituting a proceeding in STB Ex Parte No. 657 (Sub-No. 1) to obtain
public comments on proposed changes to its stand-alone cost (SAC)
methodology, on whether to continue to permit movement-specific
adjustments to its Uniform Railroad Costing System (URCS) in rail rate
reasonableness cases, and on the proper standards for reopening and
vacating a prior rate decision that is based upon a SAC analysis.
First, the Board presents two alternatives to the percent reduction
method to determine maximum reasonable rates. Second, the Board
proposes a new cost-based method for allocating revenue from cross-over
traffic. Third, the Board proposes a method for forecasting future
operating expenses of a stand-alone railroad (SARR) that would reflect
anticipated future productivity gains. Fourth, the Board proposes to no
longer permit movement-specific adjustments to URCS when calculating
the 180% revenue-to-variable cost (R/VC) jurisdictional floor for rail
rate relief. Fifth, the Board proposes to shorten the time frame for
SAC analyses and corresponding rate prescriptions from 20 years to 10
years. Finally, the Board proposes new standards for reopening and
vacating a prior Board decision (including any resulting rate
prescription) that is based on a SAC analysis.
In a decision served on February 27, 2006, the Board has discussed
each of these issues in detail and set forth proposed solutions to the
identified problems. Each of these issues is being revisited to ensure
that both the SAC test and the jurisdictional floor for rate relief are
applied fairly and in conformity with the Board's statutory charge.
Because these issues go to the heart of the SAC test and have industry-
wide significance for rail carriers and their captive shippers, all
interested parties are invited to comment on these proposed changes.
Additional information is contained in the Board's decision. To
obtain a free copy of the full decision, visit the Board's Web site at
https://www.stb.dot.gov. A service list will be available at the Board's
Web site by March 31, 2006. Comments, replies and rebuttals should be
served on all persons designated on the list as a party of record.
This action should not have a significant economic impact upon a
substantial number of small entities, within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). To the extent that
small entities may be affected, the impact should be beneficial,
because these proposals will resolve several contentious issues in SAC
proceeding, and simplify the jurisdictional inquiry. The Board,
however, invites comments on whether there would be effects on small
entities that should be considered.
This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the
human environment or the conservation of energy resources.
Decided: February 27, 2006.
By the Board, Chairman Buttrey and Vice Chairman Mulvey.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-3049 Filed 3-2-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P