Tri-City Railroad Company-Petition for Declaratory Order, 29390-29391 [2015-12409]

Download as PDF 29390 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 98 / Thursday, May 21, 2015 / Notices An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to Docket No. FD 35917, must be filed with the Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20423–0001. In addition, a copy of each pleading must be served on applicant’s representative, John D. Heffner, Strasburger & Price, LLP, 1025 Connecticut Ave. NW., Suite 717, Washington, DC 20036. Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at WWW.STB.DOT.GOV. Decided: May 18, 2015. By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, Director, Office of Proceedings. Raina S. Contee, Clearance Clerk. [FR Doc. 2015–12368 Filed 5–20–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915–01–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [Docket No. AB 550 (Sub-No. 3X)] tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES R.J. Corman Railroad Company/ Allentown Lines, Inc.—Abandonment Exemption—in Lehigh County, PA On April 30, 2015, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Allentown Lines, Inc. (RJC) filed with the Surface Transportation Board (Board) a petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 for exemption from provisions of 49 U.S.C. 10903 to abandon approximately 3.5 miles of rail line extending between milepost 93.18 in Allentown, Pa., and milepost 96.709 in or near Whitehall, Pa. (the Line). The Line traverses United States Postal Service Zip Codes 18102 and 18052. According to RJC, there is one shipper, American Carbonation (AC), which leases property adjacent to the right-of-way to conduct a transload operation. RJC states that AC is aware of RJC’s proposed abandonment and does not object. RJC and AC have worked to relocate AC’s transloading operation to a nearby RJC yard track not included within the scope of this abandonment. From the new location, RJC will serve AC directly at (or before) such time as RJC officially terminates operations over the Line. AC expects to be able to ship and receive carload traffic to and from this new location on or before May 31, 2015. After receiving Board authority to abandon the Line, RJC intends to salvage the rails, ties, and other track material and then convey its right, title, and interest, if any, in the portion of the subject right-of-way to Trestle Redevelopment Partners (Trestle). Trestle plans to use that portion of the VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:28 May 20, 2015 Jkt 235001 corridor in connection with a multifaceted riverfront redevelopment project. According to RJC, the Line does not contain federally granted rights-of-way. Any documentation in RJC’s possession will be made available promptly to those requesting it. The interest of railroad employees will be protected by the conditions set forth in Oregon Short Line Railroad— Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch Between Firth & Ammon, In Bingham & Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. 91 (1979). By issuing this notice, the Board is instituting an exemption proceeding pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A final decision will be issued by August 19, 2015. Any OFA under 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2) will be due by August 29, 2015, or 10 days after service of a decision granting the petition for exemption, whichever occurs first. Each OFA must be accompanied by a $1,600 filing fee. See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25). All interested persons should be aware that, following abandonment, the Line may be suitable for other public use, including interim trail use. Any request for a public use condition under 49 CFR 1152.28 or for trail use/rail banking under 49 CFR 1152.29 will be due no later than June 10, 2015. Each trail request must be accompanied by a $300 filing fee. See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(27). All filings in response to this notice must refer to Docket No. AB 550 (SubNo. 3X) and must be sent to: (1) Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20423–0001; and (2) Audrey L. Brodrick, Fletcher & Sippel LLC, 29 North Wacker Drive, Suite 920, Chicago, IL 60606–2832. Replies to the petition are due on or before June 10, 2015. Persons seeking further information concerning abandonment procedures may contact the Board’s Office of Public Assistance, Governmental Affairs and Compliance at (202) 245–0238 or refer to the full abandonment regulations at 49 CFR part 1152. Questions concerning environmental issues may be directed to the Board’s Office of Environmental Analysis (OEA) at (202) 245–0305. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Information Relay Service at 1–800– 877–8339. An environmental assessment (EA) (or environmental impact statement (EIS), if necessary) prepared by OEA will be served upon all parties of record and upon any other agencies or persons who comment during its preparation. Other interested persons may contact OEA to PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 obtain a copy of the EA (or EIS). EAs in abandonment proceedings normally will be made available within 60 days of the filing of the petition. The deadline for submission of comments on the EA generally will be within 30 days of its service. Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at ‘‘WWW.STB.DOT.GOV.’’ Decided: May 15, 2015. By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, Director, Office of Proceedings. Brendetta S. Jones, Clearance Clerk. [FR Doc. 2015–12314 Filed 5–20–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915–01–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [Docket No. FD 35915] Tri-City Railroad Company—Petition for Declaratory Order By petition filed on March 19, 2015, Tri-City Railroad Company, LLC (TCRY) seeks a declaratory order concerning efforts by two Washington State communities to bisect TCRY’s tracks with a proposed at-grade street crossing. TCRY, a Class III rail carrier, operates on approximately 16 miles of track, which is owned by the Port of Benton.1 The track runs through the City of Kennewick and the City of Richland (collectively the Cities).2 TCRY asks for a finding that 49 U.S.C. 10501(b) preempts actions by the Cities to condemn and acquire a right-of-way for a proposed at-grade crossing, which would bisect TCRY’s main and passing tracks.3 TCRY claims that the proposed at-grade crossing would unreasonably interfere with current and planned railroad operations by rendering portions of the tracks unusable for switching and railcar storage operations.4 Moreover, TCRY asserts that the proposed at-grade crossing would create new hazards for both rail crews and members of the public.5 TCRY states that the Cities filed two petitions with the Washington State Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) to approve the atgrade crossing at issue here. TCRY claims that the first petition, filed in 2006, was denied because the UTC found that the Cities had failed to meet their burden to demonstrate that the 1 TCRY Pet. 4, Mar. 19, 2015. 2 Id. 3 Id. 4 Id. at 1–2 and 46–7. at 1. 5 Id. E:\FR\FM\21MYN1.SGM 21MYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 98 / Thursday, May 21, 2015 / Notices inherent and site-specific dangers of the crossing could be mitigated with the installation of safety devices.6 The Cities filed a second petition in 2013. TCRY notes that the UTC initially denied the 2013 petition, but that it ultimately reversed itself and approved the crossing.7 The Cities subsequently served a precondemnation notice outlining the Cities’ plan for condemning the right-ofway and offered $38,500 in compensation.8 On April 7, 2015, TCRY filed a supplemental affidavit of counsel with the Board and attached the Cities’ Notice of Planned Final Action and the proposed condemnation ordinances. According to the Cities, approval of these ordinances would authorize the commencement of eminent domain (condemnation) proceedings against TCRY.9 Although the Cities were scheduled to consider the condemnation ordinances in April, the record is silent concerning the outcome. The Cities did not file a reply to the petition for declaratory order as provided for in 49 CFR1104.13(a), but they did file a notice of appearance on March 20, 2015. 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, a controversy exists as to whether the proposed condemnation action to construct an at-grade crossing is preempted under 10501(b), and the record is incomplete. The Board will therefore institute a declaratory order proceeding and consider the matter under the modified procedure rules at 49 CFR pt. 1112. The Board will treat TCRY’s March 19 petition as its opening statement. Replies and comments from interested parties are due June 8, 2015. TCRY’s rebuttal to all replies and comments shall be due June 17, 2015. It is ordered: 1. A declaratory order proceeding is instituted. This proceeding will be handled under the modified procedure on the basis of written statements submitted by the parties. All parties must comply with the Rules of Practice, including 49 CFR parts 1112 and 1114. 2. Replies are due June 8, 2015. 3. TCRY’s rebuttal is due June 17, 2015. 4. Notice of the Board’s action will be published in the Federal Register. 5. This decision is effective on its service date. 6 Id. at 13–4. Pet. 18–20, Mar. 19, 2015. 8 Id. at 23. 9 TCRY’s Supplemental Aff. Ex. 1, Apr. 7, 2015. 7 TCRY VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:28 May 20, 2015 Jkt 235001 Decided: May 18, 2015. By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, Director, Office of Proceedings. Raina S. White, Clearance Clerk. [FR Doc. 2015–12409 Filed 5–20–15; 8:45 am] 29391 years. See 31 CFR 103.125, 103.130, and 103.135. Affected Public: Private Sector: Businesses or other for-profits. Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 341,216. BILLING CODE 4915–01–P Dated: May 18, 2015. Dawn D. Wolfgang, Treasury PRA Clearance Officer. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY [FR Doc. 2015–12307 Filed 5–20–15; 8:45 am] Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request BILLING CODE 4810–02–P Department of the Treasury. Notice. AGENCY: ACTION: The Department of the Treasury will submit the following information collection request 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 June 22, 2015 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding the burden estimate, or any other aspect of the information collection, 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 8140, Washington, DC 20220, or email at PRA@treasury.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by emailing PRA@treasury.gov, calling (202) 927–5331, or viewing the entire information collection request at www.reginfo.gov. SUMMARY: Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) OMB Number: 1506–0020. Type of Review: Extension without change of a currently approved collection. Title: Anti-Money Laundering Programs for Money Services Business, Mutual Funds, Operators of Credit Card Systems, and Providers of Prepaid Access. Abstract: Money services businesses, mutual funds, and operators of credit card systems, and providers of prepaid access are required to develop and implement written anti-money laundering program. A copy of the program must be maintained for five PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE Notice of Intent To Release a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Facility Management Services; for Immediate Release May 15, 2015. United States Institute of Peace. Notice of Intent to Release a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Facility Management Services. AGENCY: ACTION: United States Institute of Peace (USIP) is intending to release a Request for Proposal (RFP) on June 30, 2015, for Facility Management Services. The following information provides background information for the intended RFP as well as high level view of the ‘‘Expected Scope of Services.’’ Also included with this notice is a summary of estimated key dates to enable appropriate planning by the vendor community. The purpose of this notice is to provide early awareness of this impending RFP in our effort to support broad and fair competition for this procurement. Please note that USIP will not entertain questions regarding this RFP until the REP is released. Expected Scope of Services: Below are targeted objectives for the facility management services contract for the USIP Campus. The objectives have been organized under the following: • Facilities Management Services Æ Facility Management Æ External Maintenance Æ Interior Maintenance Æ Event Support Æ Oversee/Monitor subcontractor(s) for the building • Contractor relations • Negotiated contracts • Facility Management direct contracts Estimated Key Action Dates: The dates in the following table are only estimates and are provided to illustrate the current expectations for timing of actions related to this RFP and the resultant contract for services. SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\21MYN1.SGM 21MYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 98 (Thursday, May 21, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29390-29391]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12409]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[Docket No. FD 35915]


Tri-City Railroad Company--Petition for Declaratory Order

    By petition filed on March 19, 2015, Tri-City Railroad Company, LLC 
(TCRY) seeks a declaratory order concerning efforts by two Washington 
State communities to bisect TCRY's tracks with a proposed at-grade 
street crossing. TCRY, a Class III rail carrier, operates on 
approximately 16 miles of track, which is owned by the Port of 
Benton.\1\ The track runs through the City of Kennewick and the City of 
Richland (collectively the Cities).\2\ TCRY asks for a finding that 49 
U.S.C. 10501(b) preempts actions by the Cities to condemn and acquire a 
right-of-way for a proposed at-grade crossing, which would bisect 
TCRY's main and passing tracks.\3\ TCRY claims that the proposed at-
grade crossing would unreasonably interfere with current and planned 
railroad operations by rendering portions of the tracks unusable for 
switching and railcar storage operations.\4\ Moreover, TCRY asserts 
that the proposed at-grade crossing would create new hazards for both 
rail crews and members of the public.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ TCRY Pet. 4, Mar. 19, 2015.
    \2\ Id.
    \3\ Id. at 1-2 and 46-7.
    \4\ Id. at 1.
    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    TCRY states that the Cities filed two petitions with the Washington 
State Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) to approve the at-
grade crossing at issue here. TCRY claims that the first petition, 
filed in 2006, was denied because the UTC found that the Cities had 
failed to meet their burden to demonstrate that the

[[Page 29391]]

inherent and site-specific dangers of the crossing could be mitigated 
with the installation of safety devices.\6\ The Cities filed a second 
petition in 2013. TCRY notes that the UTC initially denied the 2013 
petition, but that it ultimately reversed itself and approved the 
crossing.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id. at 13-4.
    \7\ TCRY Pet. 18-20, Mar. 19, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Cities subsequently served a pre-condemnation notice outlining 
the Cities' plan for condemning the right-of-way and offered $38,500 in 
compensation.\8\ On April 7, 2015, TCRY filed a supplemental affidavit 
of counsel with the Board and attached the Cities' Notice of Planned 
Final Action and the proposed condemnation ordinances. According to the 
Cities, approval of these ordinances would authorize the commencement 
of eminent domain (condemnation) proceedings against TCRY.\9\ Although 
the Cities were scheduled to consider the condemnation ordinances in 
April, the record is silent concerning the outcome.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id. at 23.
    \9\ TCRY's Supplemental Aff. Ex. 1, Apr. 7, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Cities did not file a reply to the petition for declaratory 
order as provided for in 49 CFR1104.13(a), but they did file a notice 
of appearance on March 20, 2015.
    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, a controversy exists as to whether the 
proposed condemnation action to construct an at-grade crossing is 
preempted under 10501(b), and the record is incomplete. The Board will 
therefore institute a declaratory order proceeding and consider the 
matter under the modified procedure rules at 49 CFR pt. 1112.
    The Board will treat TCRY's March 19 petition as its opening 
statement. Replies and comments from interested parties are due June 8, 
2015. TCRY's rebuttal to all replies and comments shall be due June 17, 
2015.
    It is ordered:
    1. A declaratory order proceeding is instituted. This proceeding 
will be handled under the modified procedure on the basis of written 
statements submitted by the parties. All parties must comply with the 
Rules of Practice, including 49 CFR parts 1112 and 1114.
    2. Replies are due June 8, 2015.
    3. TCRY's rebuttal is due June 17, 2015.
    4. Notice of the Board's action will be published in the Federal 
Register.
    5. This decision is effective on its service date.

    Decided: May 18, 2015.

    By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Raina S. White,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2015-12409 Filed 5-20-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P