Indiana Rail Road Company-Petition for Declaratory Order, 73384-73385 [E8-28460]

Download as PDF 73384 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 2, 2008 / Notices Application No. Reason for delay Applicant Estimated date of completion 4 1 12–31–2008 12–31–2008 3 1 2,3 11–30–2008 02–28–2009 11–30–2008 Modification to Special Permits 14167–M ..... 8723–M ....... Trinityrail, Dallas, TX .................................................................................................................................. Alaska Pacific Powder Company, Anchorage, AK .................................................................................... New Special Permit Applications 14643–N ...... 14668–N ...... 14689–N ...... World Airways, Inc., Peachtree City, GA ................................................................................................... Lincoln Composites, Lincoln, NE ............................................................................................................... Trinity Industries, Inc., Dallas, TX .............................................................................................................. [FR Doc. E8–28399 Filed 12–1–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–60–M DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Finance Docket No. 35181] Indiana Rail Road Company—Petition for Declaratory Order Surface Transportation Board. Institution of declaratory order proceeding; request for comments. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: In response to a petition filed by Indiana Rail Road Company (INRD) on October 7, 2008, the Board is instituting a declaratory order proceeding under 49 U.S.C. 721 and 5 U.S.C. 554(e). The Board seeks to determine whether a track INRD proposes to construct from its east-west main line at Dugger, IN, to a new coal operation south of that main line will be a spur track exempt from Board approval under 49 U.S.C. 10906 or a line of railroad subject to the Board’s jurisdiction and requiring Board approval under 49 U.S.C. 10901. The Board seeks public comment on this matter. Comments are due by January 16, 2009. Replies are due by February 5, 2009. ADDRESSES: Send an original and 10 copies of any comments, referring to STB Finance Docket No. 35181, to: Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20423– 0001. In addition, send one copy of comments to INRD’s representative, John Broadley, 1054 31st Street NW., Suite 200, Washington, DC 20007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph H. Dettmar, (202) 245–0395. [Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at: 1– 800–877–8339]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: INRD’s petition for declaratory order concerns jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES DATES: VerDate Aug<31>2005 20:52 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 217001 the proposed construction of a track approximately 5 miles long from INRD’s east-west main line at Dugger to a new coal operation in the coal bearing area south of the INRD east-west main line. INRD requests that the Board issue a decision stating that the proposed track will be a ‘‘spur,’’ and thus would be exempt from Board regulation pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10906. The proposed track, which INRD will construct, will serve a coal mining operation run by a subsidiary of Peabody Energy—the Black Beauty Coal Company (collectively, Peabody). The track will run west from INRD’s eastwest main line for approximately one mile, then turn south and run almost directly to a coal loadout and loop track that Peabody will construct to serve the new mine, the Farmsburg Mine, Bear Run Pit. The Board does not exercise licensing authority ‘‘over construction, acquisition, operation, abandonment, or discontinuance of spur * * * tracks.’’ 49 U.S.C. 10906. The determination of whether a particular track segment is a ‘‘railroad line’’ requiring Board authorization under 49 U.S.C. 10901(a), or an exempt spur turns on the intended use of the track segment. Nicholson v. I.C.C., 711 F.2d 364, 368 (DC Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1056 (1984). Exempt spurs are ‘‘commonly constructed either to improve the facilities required by shippers already served by the carrier or to supply the facilities to others, who being within the same territory and similarly situated are entitled to like service from the carrier.’’ Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. v. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 270 U.S. 266, 278 (1926) (Texas & Pacific). In contrast, if a railroad constructs tracks that extend substantially its line into new territory, then the new track is an extension subject to Board licensing requirements and not an exempt ‘‘spur.’’ Id. Petitioner asserts that the track proposed to be constructed here meets the test for spur track set forth in Texas & Pacific because the track: (1) Will not PO 00000 Frm 00145 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 invade the territory of any other railroad, as the closest railroad is a CSXT main line track located approximately 6.2 miles west of the new Peabody coal mine, and (2) will not constitute a significant extension of INRD’s line into new territory as INRD and its predecessors have historically served this area through other spurs off the existing INRD main lines.1 INRD further argues that finding this track to be an exempt spur would be consistent with the Supreme Court’s holding in United States v. Idaho, 298 U.S. 105 (1936) because: (1) The track will be built pursuant to an agreement with the shipper—Peabody, (2) either Peabody or its customers will enter into contracts for transportation that will make financing possible, (3) the shipper to be served by the track, Peabody, will provide a large part of the right-ofway—4.2 of the approximate 5 miles, (4) the proposed track will be stub-ended, and (5) the track will serve only one shipper. Under 5 U.S.C. 554(e), the Board has discretionary authority to issue a declaratory order to terminate a controversy or remove uncertainty. A declaratory order proceeding is thus instituted in this proceeding to invite broad public comment. Any person seeking to participate in support of, or in opposition to, INRD’s petition may submit written comments to the Board regarding whether the proposed track is a ‘‘spur.’’ Board decisions, notices, and filings in this and other Board proceedings are available on our Web site at https:// www.stb.dot.gov. Decided: November 25, 2008. 1 Regarding this last factor, petitioner also cites the Board’s holding in New York City Economic Development Corporation—Petition for Declaratory Order, STB Finance Docket No. 34429 (STB served July 15, 2004). E:\FR\FM\02DEN1.SGM 02DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 2, 2008 / Notices By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of Proceedings. Jeff Herzig, Clearance Clerk. [FR Doc. E8–28460 Filed 12–1–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915–01–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of Foreign Assets Control Unblocking of Specially Designated Narcotics Traffickers Pursuant to Executive Order 12978 Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (‘‘OFAC’’) is publishing the names of five individuals whose property and interests in property have been unblocked pursuant to Executive Order 12978 of October 21, 1995, Blocking Assets and Prohibiting Transactions With Significant Narcotics Traffickers. DATES: The unblocking and removal from OFAC’s ‘‘Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons’’ list (‘‘SDN list’’) of five individuals identified in this notice whose property and interests in property were blocked pursuant to Executive Order 12978 of October 21, 1995, is effective on November 25, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Assistant Director, Compliance Outreach & Implementation, Office of Foreign Assets Control, Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC 20220, tel.: 202–622–2490. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES Electronic and Facsimile Availability This document and additional information concerning OFAC are available from OFAC’s Web site (https://www.treas.gov/ofac) or via facsimile through a 24-hour fax-on demand service, tel.: (202) 622–0077. Background On October 21, 1995, the President, invoking the authority, inter alia, of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–1706), issued Executive Order 12978 (60 FR 54579, October 24, 1995) (the ‘‘Order’’). In the Order, the President declared a national emergency to deal with the threat posed by significant foreign narcotics traffickers centered in Colombia and the harm that they cause in the United States and abroad. Section 1 of the Order blocks, with certain exceptions, all property and VerDate Aug<31>2005 20:52 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 217001 interests in property that are in the United States, or that hereafter come within the United States or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United States persons, of: (1) The persons listed in an Annex to the Order; (2) any foreign person determined by the Secretary of Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and Secretary of State: (a) To play a significant role in international narcotics trafficking centered in Colombia; or (b) to materially assist in, or provide financial or technological support for or goods or services in support of, the narcotics trafficking activities of persons designated in or pursuant to the Order; and (3) persons determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, to be owned or controlled by, or to act for or on behalf of, persons designated pursuant to the Order. On November 25, 2008, the Director of OFAC removed from the SDN list five individuals listed below, whose property and interests in property were blocked pursuant to the Order: 1. ARMERO RIASCOS, Jose Eliecer, Carrera 5 No. 8–00, Buenaventura, Colombia; c/o INDUSTRIA DE PESCA SOBRE EL PACIFICO S.A., Buenaventura, Colombia; Cedula No. 16471549 (Colombia) (individual) [SDNT]. 2. GARCES GARCIA, Carlos, c/o SISTEMAS INTEGRALES DEL VALLE LTDA., Cali, Colombia; Cedula No. 14949883 (Colombia); Passport 14949883 (Colombia) (individual) [SDNT]. 3. PADILLA MEZA, Tulio Roberto, c/o SISTEMAS INTEGRALES DEL VALLE LTDA., Cali, Colombia; Cedula No. 16737603 (Colombia); Passport 16737603 (Colombia) (individual) [SDNT]. 4. ROA GUTIERREZ, Andres Felipe, c/o COLIMEX LTDA., Cali, Colombia; c/o DISTRIBUIDORA SANAR DE COLOMBIA S.A., Cali, Colombia; c/o MEDIA MARKETING E.U., Cali, Colombia; c/o SERVICIOS MYRAL E.U., Cali, Colombia; c/o SISTEMAS INTEGRALES DEL VALLE, LTDA., Cali, Colombia; c/o ALERO S.A., Cali, Colombia; DOB 14 Mar 1968; Cedula No. 16752582 (Colombia); Passport 16752582 (Colombia) (individual) [SDNT]. 5. ROA MEJIA, Alfredo, c/o SISTEMAS INTEGRALES DEL VALLE LTDA., Cali, Colombia; c/o ALERO S.A., Cali, Colombia; Cedula No. 2439912 (Colombia); Passport 2439912 (Colombia) (individual) [SDNT]. PO 00000 Frm 00146 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 73385 Dated: November 25, 2008. Adam J. Szubin, Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control. [FR Doc. E8–28516 Filed 12–1–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4811–45–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 4419 Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Form 4419, Application for Filing Information Returns Magnetically/Electronically. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 2, 2009 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn P. Kirkland Internal Revenue Service, Room 6512, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the form and instructions should be directed to R. Joseph Durbala at Internal Revenue Service, Room 6129, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224, or at (202) 622– 3634, or through the Internet at RJoseph.Durbala@irs.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title: Application for Filing Information Returns Magnetically/ Electronically. OMB Number: 1545–0387. Form Number: 4419. Abstract: Under section 6011(e)(2)(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, any person, including corporations, partnerships, individuals, estates and trusts, who are required to file 250 or more information returns must file such returns magnetically or electronically. Payers required to file on magnetic media or electronically must complete Form 4419 to receive authorization to file. Current Actions: There are no changes being made to the form at this time. E:\FR\FM\02DEN1.SGM 02DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 232 (Tuesday, December 2, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73384-73385]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-28460]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Finance Docket No. 35181]


Indiana Rail Road Company--Petition for Declaratory Order

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.

ACTION: Institution of declaratory order proceeding; request for 
comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In response to a petition filed by Indiana Rail Road Company 
(INRD) on October 7, 2008, the Board is instituting a declaratory order 
proceeding under 49 U.S.C. 721 and 5 U.S.C. 554(e). The Board seeks to 
determine whether a track INRD proposes to construct from its east-west 
main line at Dugger, IN, to a new coal operation south of that main 
line will be a spur track exempt from Board approval under 49 U.S.C. 
10906 or a line of railroad subject to the Board's jurisdiction and 
requiring Board approval under 49 U.S.C. 10901. The Board seeks public 
comment on this matter.

DATES: Comments are due by January 16, 2009. Replies are due by 
February 5, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Send an original and 10 copies of any comments, referring to 
STB Finance Docket No. 35181, to: Surface Transportation Board, 395 E 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, send one copy of 
comments to INRD's representative, John Broadley, 1054 31st Street NW., 
Suite 200, Washington, DC 20007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph H. Dettmar, (202) 245-0395. 
[Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at: 1-800-877-8339].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: INRD's petition for declaratory order 
concerns the proposed construction of a track approximately 5 miles 
long from INRD's east-west main line at Dugger to a new coal operation 
in the coal bearing area south of the INRD east-west main line. INRD 
requests that the Board issue a decision stating that the proposed 
track will be a ``spur,'' and thus would be exempt from Board 
regulation pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10906.
    The proposed track, which INRD will construct, will serve a coal 
mining operation run by a subsidiary of Peabody Energy--the Black 
Beauty Coal Company (collectively, Peabody). The track will run west 
from INRD's east-west main line for approximately one mile, then turn 
south and run almost directly to a coal loadout and loop track that 
Peabody will construct to serve the new mine, the Farmsburg Mine, Bear 
Run Pit.
    The Board does not exercise licensing authority ``over 
construction, acquisition, operation, abandonment, or discontinuance of 
spur * * * tracks.'' 49 U.S.C. 10906. The determination of whether a 
particular track segment is a ``railroad line'' requiring Board 
authorization under 49 U.S.C. 10901(a), or an exempt spur turns on the 
intended use of the track segment. Nicholson v. I.C.C., 711 F.2d 364, 
368 (DC Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1056 (1984). Exempt spurs 
are ``commonly constructed either to improve the facilities required by 
shippers already served by the carrier or to supply the facilities to 
others, who being within the same territory and similarly situated are 
entitled to like service from the carrier.'' Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. v. 
Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 270 U.S. 266, 278 (1926) (Texas & 
Pacific). In contrast, if a railroad constructs tracks that extend 
substantially its line into new territory, then the new track is an 
extension subject to Board licensing requirements and not an exempt 
``spur.'' Id.
    Petitioner asserts that the track proposed to be constructed here 
meets the test for spur track set forth in Texas & Pacific because the 
track: (1) Will not invade the territory of any other railroad, as the 
closest railroad is a CSXT main line track located approximately 6.2 
miles west of the new Peabody coal mine, and (2) will not constitute a 
significant extension of INRD's line into new territory as INRD and its 
predecessors have historically served this area through other spurs off 
the existing INRD main lines.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Regarding this last factor, petitioner also cites the 
Board's holding in New York City Economic Development Corporation--
Petition for Declaratory Order, STB Finance Docket No. 34429 (STB 
served July 15, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    INRD further argues that finding this track to be an exempt spur 
would be consistent with the Supreme Court's holding in United States 
v. Idaho, 298 U.S. 105 (1936) because: (1) The track will be built 
pursuant to an agreement with the shipper--Peabody, (2) either Peabody 
or its customers will enter into contracts for transportation that will 
make financing possible, (3) the shipper to be served by the track, 
Peabody, will provide a large part of the right-of-way--4.2 of the 
approximate 5 miles, (4) the proposed track will be stub-ended, and (5) 
the track will serve only one shipper.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 554(e), the Board has discretionary authority to 
issue a declaratory order to terminate a controversy or remove 
uncertainty. A declaratory order proceeding is thus instituted in this 
proceeding to invite broad public comment. Any person seeking to 
participate in support of, or in opposition to, INRD's petition may 
submit written comments to the Board regarding whether the proposed 
track is a ``spur.''
    Board decisions, notices, and filings in this and other Board 
proceedings are available on our Web site at https://www.stb.dot.gov.

    Decided: November 25, 2008.


[[Page 73385]]


    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Jeff Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. E8-28460 Filed 12-1-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.