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