California High Speed Rail Authority-Petition for Declaratory Order, 63220 [2014-25130]

Download as PDF 63220 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 204 / Wednesday, October 22, 2014 / Notices mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES VII. Conclusion Based upon its evaluation of the 46 exemption applications, FMCSA exempts the following drivers from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above 949 CFR 391.64(b)): James M. Brooks (VA) Gary L. Brown (PA) Richard E. Campney (IA) Steven J. Causie (MI) Wesley A. Chain (TX) Richard M. Cohen (NJ) Alex A. Comella (NJ) Jeffrey R. Courtright (CO) Dwayne P. Daniels (PA) James T. Dodge (CO) Richard D. Domingo (NV) John J. Dominguez (TX) Mark S. Duda (PA) Vernon L. Fulton, Jr. (OR) Gary W. Giles (TX) Benny B. Gonzales (TX) Jerry W. Gott (IA) James L. Hummel (WA) Matthew J. Jensen (MN) Joseph A. Kipus (OH) Kevin L. Kreakie (OH) Gerald D. Layton (TX) Steve F. Levicoff (PA) Kevin C. Lewis (LA) Timothy M. Malo (ME) Paul J. Marshall (UT) David L. Mc Donald (IL) Thomas K. Miszler (PA) Rusty A. Neal (IL) Jacob B. Newman (GA) Duke R. Pendergraft (TX) Timothy K. Price (WV) Michael C. Prue (ME) Juan C. Rodriguez-Martinez (CA) Bradlee R. Saxby (IL) Barry L. Schwab (MI) Geoffrey E. Showaker (PA) Nicholas J. Shultz (IN) Kevin J. Sparks (ME) George E. Thompson (NJ) Dale W. Tucker (VA) William C. Vickery (NY) Cheryl L. Weber Gambill (IL) Robert A. Whitcomb (MA) Rodney L. Wichman (IL) Richard D. Wiegartz (IL) In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 each exemption is valid for two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315. If the exemption is still effective at the end of the 2-year VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Oct 21, 2014 Jkt 235001 period, the person may apply to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in effect at that time. Issued on: October 10, 2014. Larry W. Minor, Associate Administrator for Policy. [FR Doc. 2014–25128 Filed 10–21–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [Docket No. FD 35861] California High Speed Rail Authority— Petition for Declaratory Order On October 9, 2014, the California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority) filed a petition requesting that the Board issue a declaratory order regarding the availability of injunctive remedies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to prevent or delay construction of an approximately 114mile high-speed passenger rail line between Fresno and Bakersfield, Cal. (the Line). The Board authorized construction of the Line, subject to certain conditions, in California HighSpeed Rail Authority—Construction Exemption—in Fresno, Kings, Tulare, & Kern Counties, California, FD 35724 (Sub-No. 1) (STB served August 12, 2014) (Vice Chairman Miller concurring and Commissioner Begeman dissenting). The Authority states that seven lawsuits have been filed against the Authority challenging its compliance with CEQA with respect to the Line and that the lawsuits seek injunctive remedies under CEQA that would prevent or delay construction of the Line. The Authority argues that 49 U.S.C. 10501(b) would preempt such CEQA remedies because injunctive relief would enjoin construction of a Board-authorized project. The Authority has requested that the Board issue an expedited declaratory order by November 20, 2014. The first case management conference for the lawsuits is scheduled for November 21, 2014, and the Authority claims that a declaratory order issued before that conference would remove uncertainty regarding the CEQA injunctive remedies available to the litigants. The Authority states that it served a copy of its petition on all counsel of record in the lawsuits. The Board has discretionary authority under 5 U.S.C. 554(e) and 49 U.S.C. 721 to issue a declaratory order to eliminate a controversy or remove uncertainty. Here, it is appropriate to institute a declaratory order proceeding so that the Board can consider the issues raised in PO 00000 Frm 00143 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 the Authority’s petition regarding whether 10501(b) would preempt CEQA injunctive remedies regarding the Line. The Board will therefore institute a proceeding to consider the matter. Interested persons may file substantive replies to the Authority’s petition by November 6, 2014. This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or the conservation of energy resources. It is ordered: 1. A declaratory order proceeding is instituted. 2. Interested persons may file substantive replies to the Authority’s petition by November 6, 2014. 3. This decision is effective on its service date. By the Board. Rachel D. Campbell, Director, Office of Proceedings. Brendetta S. Jones, Clearance Clerk. [FR Doc. 2014–25130 Filed 10–21–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915–01–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request October 17, 2014. The Department of the Treasury will submit the following information collection requests to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13, on or after the date of publication of this notice. DATES: Comments should be received on or before November 21, 2014 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding the burden estimates, or any other aspect of the information collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to (1) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for Treasury, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, or email at OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.gov and (2) Treasury PRA Clearance Officer, 1750 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Suite 8141, Washington, DC 20220, or email at PRA@treasury.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Copies of the submissions may be obtained by emailing PRA@treasury.gov, calling (202) 622–1295, or viewing the entire information collection request at www.reginfo.gov. E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM 22OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 204 (Wednesday, October 22, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 63220]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25130]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[Docket No. FD 35861]


California High Speed Rail Authority--Petition for Declaratory 
Order

    On October 9, 2014, the California High-Speed Rail Authority 
(Authority) filed a petition requesting that the Board issue a 
declaratory order regarding the availability of injunctive remedies 
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to prevent or 
delay construction of an approximately 114-mile high-speed passenger 
rail line between Fresno and Bakersfield, Cal. (the Line). The Board 
authorized construction of the Line, subject to certain conditions, in 
California High-Speed Rail Authority--Construction Exemption--in 
Fresno, Kings, Tulare, & Kern Counties, California, FD 35724 (Sub-No. 
1) (STB served August 12, 2014) (Vice Chairman Miller concurring and 
Commissioner Begeman dissenting). The Authority states that seven 
lawsuits have been filed against the Authority challenging its 
compliance with CEQA with respect to the Line and that the lawsuits 
seek injunctive remedies under CEQA that would prevent or delay 
construction of the Line. The Authority argues that 49 U.S.C. 10501(b) 
would preempt such CEQA remedies because injunctive relief would enjoin 
construction of a Board-authorized project.
    The Authority has requested that the Board issue an expedited 
declaratory order by November 20, 2014. The first case management 
conference for the lawsuits is scheduled for November 21, 2014, and the 
Authority claims that a declaratory order issued before that conference 
would remove uncertainty regarding the CEQA injunctive remedies 
available to the litigants. The Authority states that it served a copy 
of its petition on all counsel of record in the lawsuits.
    The Board has discretionary authority under 5 U.S.C. 554(e) and 49 
U.S.C. 721 to issue a declaratory order to eliminate a controversy or 
remove uncertainty. Here, it is appropriate to institute a declaratory 
order proceeding so that the Board can consider the issues raised in 
the Authority's petition regarding whether 10501(b) would preempt CEQA 
injunctive remedies regarding the Line. The Board will therefore 
institute a proceeding to consider the matter. Interested persons may 
file substantive replies to the Authority's petition by November 6, 
2014.
    This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the 
human environment or the conservation of energy resources.
    It is ordered:
    1. A declaratory order proceeding is instituted.
    2. Interested persons may file substantive replies to the 
Authority's petition by November 6, 2014.
    3. This decision is effective on its service date.

    By the Board.
Rachel D. Campbell,
Director, Office of Proceedings.
Brendetta S. Jones,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2014-25130 Filed 10-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P

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