Savage Tooele Railroad Company-Construction and Operation Exemption-Line of Railroad in Tooele County, Utah, 24079-24084 [2024-07255]

Agencies

• Surface Transportation Board

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 67 (Friday, April 5, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24079-24084]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-07255]


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

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

[Docket No. FD 36616]


Savage Tooele Railroad Company--Construction and Operation 
Exemption--Line of Railroad in Tooele County, Utah

    On June 30, 2022, Savage Tooele Railroad Company (STR),\1\ a 
noncarrier, filed a petition for exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 from 
the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 10901 to construct and 
operate approximately 11 miles of rail line in Tooele County, Utah (the 
Line), connecting the Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) Shafter 
Subdivision mainline at approximately milepost 897.94 near Burmester, 
Utah, to the new Lakeview Business Park in Grantsville, Utah (the 
Park). STR explains that the Line would reestablish the former Warner 
Branch connection to UP's Shafter Subdivision at Burmester, Utah, and 
that STR would provide common carrier service over the Line to enable 
tenants of the industrial park to ship and receive commodities and 
other products by rail. STR asked the Board to issue a preliminary 
decision addressing the transportation merits of the Line while the 
environmental review process was underway.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ STR is a wholly owned subsidiary of Savage Enterprises, LLC, 
and both are subsidiaries of Savage Companies. (Pet. 3.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a decision served on August 24, 2022, the Board instituted a 
proceeding under 49 U.S.C. 10502(b) and sought clarification on the 
plans for the right-of-way and track located between milepost 0.0 and 
milepost 1.04. Savage Tooele R.R.--Const. & Operation Exemption--Line 
of R.R. in Tooele Cnty., Utah, FD 36616, slip op. at 2 (STB served Aug. 
24, 2022). Later, in a decision served on March 30, 2023, the Board 
denied STR's request for the Board to preliminarily address the 
transportation merits of the proposed Line prior to the completion of 
the environmental review process. See Savage Tooele R.R., FD 36616 (STB 
served Mar. 30, 2023) (with Board Members Fuchs and Schultz 
dissenting). The Board concluded that STR had not shown any ``unique or 
compelling circumstances'' to justify a conditional grant. Id. at 2-3. 
No comments opposing the transportation merits of STR's petition were 
filed.
    The Board's Office of Environmental Analysis (OEA) issued a Draft 
Environmental Assessment (Draft EA) on September 29, 2023, analyzing 
the potential environmental impacts of the Line and requesting public 
comments, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 
42 U.S.C. 4321-4370m-11. A Final Environmental Assessment (Final EA) 
containing additional environmental analysis and responding to the 
comments received on the Draft EA was issued on March 1, 2024. The 
Final EA recommends environmental conditions, including voluntary 
mitigation measures proposed by STR and mitigation developed by OEA, to 
avoid, minimize, or mitigate the potential environmental impacts of the 
proposed construction and operation of the Line.
    After considering both the rail transportation merits and the 
potential environmental impacts, the Board will grant STR's petition 
for exemption, authorizing STR to construct and operate over the Line, 
subject to the environmental mitigation measures set forth in the Final 
EA (attached as Appendix A).

Background

    According to STR, the Line would extend from the Park to an 
approximately 1.04-mile segment of track owned by UP connecting to UP's 
Shafter Subdivision at Burmester, Utah.\2\ (Pet. 4-5; STR Supp. 1-2, 
Sept. 20, 2022.) The Line comprises a portion of the former Warner 
Branch, which was owned and operated by UP's predecessor, Western 
Pacific Railroad Company (WP). (Pet. 4.) WP sought and received 
authority to abandon the Warner Branch in 1983. (Id. (citing W. Pac. 
R.R.--Aban. Exemption--in Tooele Cnty., Utah, FD 30208 (ICC served Aug. 
9, 1983); see also id. at 2 n.1 (representing that due diligence by UP 
and STR indicated that the railroad line ``had been formally abandoned 
by . . . 1983'').) STR then acquired UP's rights and interests in the 
right-of-way and track between milepost 1.04 and milepost 6.94. (Id.) 
STR notes that the right-of-way and track of the Warner Branch have 
remained largely intact; however, in 2004 and 2015, UP deeded two 
parcels of the right-of-way--approximately 0.54 miles--to adjacent 
landowners. (Id. at 5.) STR states that these parcels will need to be 
reacquired

[[Page 24080]]

and the track reconstructed, along with two at-grade rail crossings at 
State Highway 138 and Erda Way. (Id.) STR states that it plans to 
construct approximately five miles of new track extending the former 
Warner Branch into the Park, along with interchange and ancillary track 
within the Park, as well as approximately 2,500 feet of new interchange 
and ancillary track within the right-of-way near milepost 1.04. (Id. at 
5-6.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ UP recently received an exemption from the Board to 
reinstitute common carrier service and operate over the 1.04-mile 
segment. See Union Pac. R.R.--Operation Exemption--in Tooele Cnty., 
Utah, FD 36741 (STB served Feb. 13, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    STR argues that construction and operation of the Line would 
provide common carrier freight service to and from the 1,700-acre Park 
through interchange with UP, thus providing tenant shippers with 
greater mode optionality, lower total emissions due to fewer truck 
movements, reduced overall truck traffic, improved road longevity, and 
greater business diversity within the Park itself. (Id. at 3-6; STR 
Supp. 1-2, Sept. 20, 2022.) The Board has received separate letters 
supporting STR's petition from the State of Utah and the Utah 
Department of Transportation, the World Trade Center Utah, Congressman 
John Curtis, and Congressman Chris Stewart. (See State of Utah Ltr., 
July 20, 2022; Utah Dep't of Transp. Ltr., July 15, 2022; World Trade 
Center Utah Ltr., July 15, 2022; Curtis Ltr., July 18, 2022; Stewart 
Ltr. July 27, 2022.) Following issuance of the Draft EA, the Board 
received a letter in support of the project, jointly signed by Utah 
Congressmen Burgess Owens, Blake D. Moore, and John Curtis. (See Owens, 
Moore, Curtis Ltr., Oct. 24, 2023.)
    On February 27, 2024, STR's counsel filed a letter asking the Board 
issue a final decision on the merits of the petition no later than 
April 3, 2024. (See STR Ltr., Feb. 27, 2024.)

Discussion

    Rail Transportation Policy Analysis. The construction and operation 
of new railroad lines requires prior Board authorization, either 
through a certificate under 49 U.S.C. 10901 or--as requested here--an 
exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 from the prior approval requirements of 
section 10901. Section 10901(c) directs the Board to grant rail 
construction proposals unless it finds the proposal ``inconsistent with 
the public convenience and necessity.'' See Alaska R.R.--Constr. & 
Operation Exemption--A Rail Line Extension to Port MacKenzie, Alaska, 
FD 35095, slip op. at 5 (STB served Nov. 21, 2011) (addressing the 
Board's construction exemption process), aff'd sub nom. Alaska Survival 
v. STB, 705 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir. 2013).
    Under section 10502(a), the Board shall, to the maximum extent 
permissible, exempt a proposal to construct and operate a new rail line 
from the prior approval requirements of section 10901 when the Board 
finds that: (1) application of those procedures is not necessary to 
carry out the rail transportation policy (RTP) of 49 U.S.C. 10101; and 
(2) either (A) the proposal is of limited scope, or (B) the full 
application procedures are not necessary to protect shippers from an 
abuse of market power.
    Based on the record, the proposed construction and operation--which 
was unopposed on the transportation merits--qualifies for an exemption 
under section 10502 from the formal application procedures of section 
10901. The record shows that the Line, if constructed, would provide a 
rail transportation option to shippers and promote business diversity 
within the Park, as well as provide ``greater mode optionality for 
business park tenants, lower total emissions due to fewer truck 
movements, reduced overall truck traffic, and improved road longevity 
due to less wear and tear from trucks.'' (Pet. 3-4.) There is currently 
no rail service at the Park, forcing the shippers to use trucks for 
their transportation needs and limiting the Park's appeal to new 
businesses. (Id. at 3.) Moreover, no issues about the Line's current or 
future financial viability have been raised.
    For all of these reasons, construction and operation of the Line 
clearly supports the RTP. By providing the Park's shippers with a 
freight rail option that does not currently exist, the Line would 
enhance the development and continuation of a sound rail transportation 
system with effective competition and coordination between rail 
carriers and other transportation modes, to meet the needs of the 
public. 49 U.S.C. 10101(4), (5). Introducing a new, competitive option 
to the truck-served park would also facilitate competition and the 
demand for service to establish reasonable rates for rail 
transportation. 49 U.S.C. 10101(1). Also, by supporting truck-to-rail 
diversions, the Line would increase overall energy efficiency, thereby 
encouraging and promoting energy conservations. 49 U.S.C. 10101(14). 
And as explained further below, because there would be no or de minimis 
environmental impacts with the final environmental mitigation 
recommended by OEA, exempting the proposed construction and operation 
would be consistent with 49 U.S.C. 10101(8). In addition, by exempting 
the proposed construction and operation from the requirements of 
section 10901, the Board would promote the RTP by minimizing the need 
for Federal regulatory control over the rail transportation system, 
reducing regulatory barriers to entry, and providing for the 
expeditious handling and resolution of regulatory proceedings. 49 
U.S.C. 10101(1), (2), (15).
    Consideration of the proposed construction and operation of the 
Line under section 10901 also is not necessary to protect shippers from 
an abuse of market power.\3\ As explained, the Line would enhance 
competition by providing rail service where it does not currently 
exist, thereby creating an alternative mode of transportation for 
current and future shippers at the Park.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Given this finding regarding the lack of need for shipper 
protection, the Board need not determine whether the transaction is 
limited in scope. 49 U.S.C. 10502(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Environmental Analysis. NEPA requires Federal agencies to examine 
the environmental impacts of proposed Federal actions and to inform the 
public concerning those effects. See Balt. Gas & Elec. Co. v. Nat. Res. 
Def. Council, 462 U.S. 87, 97 (1983). Under NEPA and related 
environmental laws, the Board must consider significant potential 
beneficial and adverse environmental impacts in deciding whether to 
authorize the construction and operation of a new rail line as 
proposed, deny the proposal, or grant it with conditions (including 
environmental mitigation conditions). Lone Star R.R.--Track Constr. & 
Operation Exemption--in Howard Cnty., Tex., FD 35874, slip op, at 4 
(STB served Mar. 3, 2016). While NEPA prescribes the process that must 
be followed, it does not mandate a particular result. See Robertson v. 
Methow Valley Citizens Council, 490 U.S. 332, 350 (1989). Once the 
adverse environmental effects have been adequately identified and 
evaluated, the Board may conclude that other values outweigh the 
environmental costs. Id. at 350-51.
    There has been a thorough environmental and historic review in this 
case. The Draft EA considered both STR's proposed action and the no-
action alternative. The Draft EA explained that because the Line would 
be built on existing rail right-of-way, there would be fewer 
environmental impacts than would be the case with construction on an 
entirely new right-of-way. (Draft EA S-3.) The Draft EA concluded that 
STR's proposed action would have no or de minimis impacts in several 
environmental resource areas, including air quality, energy, land use, 
and historic resources. For resource areas that have the potential to 
be impacted,

[[Page 24081]]

including noise and grade crossing safety and delay, OEA proposed 
preliminary mitigation, including both voluntary mitigation and 
mitigation developed by OEA, to minimize those impacts. (Id. at S-5 to 
S-10.) The Draft EA also explained that an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) is unnecessary and that an EA is the appropriate level 
of environmental documentation for this case. (Id. at 1-6.)
    OEA received 21 comments on the Draft EA. (See Final EA App. I.) 
The Final EA, issued on March 1, 2024, responded to all comments 
received on the Draft EA. (Id. at S-6.) In response to comments arguing 
that environmental impacts from development of the Park should be 
treated as indirect impacts from construction of the Line, the Final EA 
explained that the Park already exists, is operating and serving 
shippers by truck, and that local jurisdictions have been supporting 
the Park and other industrial development projects in the area 
regardless of whether the Line is built. (See, e.g., Final EA 3-74 to 
3-76; id., App. I at S-18.; see also Final EA 3-77 (explaining that 
impacts from development of an inland port located adjacent to the 
northern end of the Line would not be indirect impacts from the Line 
because, among other things, STR ``does not plan to serve the inland 
port development or any new or existing businesses outside the 
[Park]'').) In these circumstances, the Final EA considered reasonably 
foreseeable impacts from the Park and certain other projects located 
near the Line within its cumulative impacts analysis, and not as 
indirect impacts. (Final EA at 3-79.) The Final EA also recommended 
that any final decision by the Board authorizing the construction and 
operation of the Line be subject to the environmental mitigation 
conditions in the Final EA. (Id.)
    The Board will adopt the analysis and conclusions made by OEA in 
both the Draft EA and Final EA, including OEA's final recommended 
environmental mitigation measures. (See id. at 4-1 to 4-12.) The Board 
is satisfied that OEA has taken the requisite hard look at the 
potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed 
construction and operation of the Line and properly determined that 
with the recommended environmental mitigation in the Final EA, the 
proposed Line will not have potentially significant environmental 
impacts, and that preparation of an EIS is unnecessary.

Conclusion

    Construction and operation of the Line will give shippers a new 
freight rail option, which will support business diversification within 
the Park and more competitive transportation rates. With OEA's final 
recommended mitigation, there will be no potential for significant 
environmental impacts; indeed, the Line will facilitate the diversion 
of traffic from truck to rail, thereby increasing overall energy 
efficiency and reducing emissions from trucks. After carefully 
considering the transportation merits and environmental issues, the 
Board, considering the entire record, finds that the petition for 
exemption to allow STR's construction and operation of the 
approximately 11-mile line of railroad in Tooele County assessed in the 
Draft and Final EAs should be granted, subject to compliance with the 
environmental mitigation measures in Appendix A.
    It is ordered:
    1. Under 49 U.S.C. 10502, the Board exempts STR's construction and 
operation of the Line from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 
10901.
    2. The Board adopts the environmental mitigation measures set forth 
in appendix A to this decision and imposes them as conditions to the 
exemption granted here.
    3. Notice will be published in the Federal Register.
    4. Petitions for reconsideration must be filed by April 22, 2024.
    5. This decision is effective May 1, 2024.

    Decided: April 1, 2024.

    By the Board, Board Members Fuchs, Hedlund, Oberman, Primus, and 
Schultz. Board Member Schultz, joined by Board Member Fuchs, 
dissented in part with a separate expression.

Board Member Schultz, With Whom Board Member Fuchs Joins, Dissenting in 
Part

    I join the majority's decision except for the last mitigation 
measure. In response to EPA's environmental comments, OEA proposed, and 
the Board now adopts, language stating that STR's climate change plan 
``shall use'' certain CEQ guidance to achieve objectives in an 
executive order. I would not include that requirement as it is drafted. 
For one, it is vague in what it requires. Moreover, relatedly, and more 
importantly, its impacts are uncertain. I do not know whether guidance 
designed for Federal agencies should be wholesale applied to 
businesses; whether that guidance could be better tailored to the 
specifics of this particular project; or whether STR has the 
information that would be necessary to implement that guidance 
effectively. Absent more detail and more information about likely 
compliance strategies, including both their effectiveness and burden, I 
would not impose the condition in its current form.

Kenyatta Clay,
Clearance Clerk.

Appendix A

General Mitigation Measures

STR's Voluntary Mitigation Measures

    VM-General-01. STR will follow all applicable Federal 
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Federal Railroad 
Administration, and operational safety regulations to minimize the 
potential for accidents and incidents during project-related 
construction and operation.
    VM-General-02. STR's contractors(s) will limit ground 
disturbance to only the areas necessary for project-related 
construction.
    VM-General-03. STR's contractor(s) will stockpile excavated soil 
in areas away from environmentally or culturally sensitive areas and 
will use appropriate erosion control measures to prevent or contain 
erosion.
    VM-General-04. STR's contractors(s) will perform finish grading 
and surface disturbed areas with appropriate best management 
practices, where practical and in consultation with the City of Erda 
when construction is completed.
    VM-General-05. Prior to project-related construction, STR will 
secure agreements with utility owners to establish responsibility 
for protecting or relocating existing utilities, if impacted by 
construction.
    VM-General-06. STR will appoint a liaison to consult with 
communities, businesses, agencies, tribal governments, educational 
institutions, and nonprofit organizations to provide general project 
information, progress on construction, information on rail 
operations and safety as needed and will seek to develop cooperative 
solutions to local concerns regarding project-related construction.
    VM-General-07. STR and its contractor(s) will consult with 
appropriate adjacent landowners for coordination of construction 
schedules and temporary access during project- related construction.
    VM-General-08. STR will install construction warning and detour 
signs throughout the corridor and at recreation sites around the 
project area as needed.
    VM-General-09. During project-related construction activities, 
STR and its contractors will comply with speed limits and applicable 
laws and regulations when operating vehicles and equipment on public 
roadways.
    VM-General-10. STR will design and construct any new temporary 
or permanent access roads and road realignments to comply with the 
reasonable requirements of the UDOT Roadway Design Manual (UDOT 
2020), other applicable road construction guidance (e.g., county 
road right-of-way encroachment standards), and agency or landowner 
requirements regarding the establishment of safe roadway conditions.

OEA's Final Recommended Mitigation

    MM-General-01. If there is a material change in the facts or 
circumstances upon

[[Page 24082]]

which the Board relied in imposing specific environmental mitigation 
conditions, and upon petition by any party who demonstrates such 
material change, the Board shall consider revising its final 
mitigation, if warranted and appropriate.

Noise

STR's Voluntary Mitigation Measures

    VM-Noise-01. STR will comply with Federal Railroad 
Administration regulations (49 CFR part 210) establishing decibel 
limits for train operation.
    VM-Noise-02. STR will work with its contractor(s) to make sure 
that project-related construction and maintenance vehicles are 
maintained in good working order, with properly functioning mufflers 
to control noise.
    VM-Noise-03. Prior to commencing construction activities STR 
will confer with the City of Erda, UDOT, and Tooele County about the 
establishment of Quiet Zones at Route 138 and Erda Way and will 
assist the City of Erda and Tooele County in identifying appropriate 
supplemental or alternative safety measures, practical operational 
methods, or technologies that lead to the establishment of Quiet 
Zones at those locations, in accordance with FRA's rules and 
procedures.
    VM-Noise-04. During project-related construction, STR's daily 
construction schedule will adhere to time restrictions that limit 
construction noise prior to 7:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m. to the 
maximum extent practicable, with the exception of road crossing 
construction, which may occur on a 24/7 schedule to lessen traffic 
interruptions.
    VM-Noise-05. Prior to project-related construction outside of 
local time restrictions within the city limits of the City of Erda, 
STR will consult with and comply with the reasonable requirements of 
the City of Erda for a special use permit to allow nighttime 
construction.

OEA's Final Recommended Mitigation

    MM-Noise-01. STR shall employ reasonable and feasible noise 
mitigation, such as building sound insulation where OEA identified 
one receptor (receptor #6) that would experience noise impacts at or 
greater than the regulatory analytical threshold of 65 day-night 
average sound level (DNL)/+3 A-weighted decibels (dBA). STR shall 
implement the following in developing the building sound insulation:
     Using industry standard loudspeaker testing, the 
existing building sound insulation performance shall be determined 
in accordance with ASTM 966-90, Standard Guide for Field 
Measurements of Airborne Sound Insulation of Building Facades and 
Fa[ccedil]ade Elements.
     The design goal for the sound insulation shall be a 10 
dBA noise reduction. The calculated Noise Level Reduction (NLR) 
improvement shall be at least 5 dBA. If the calculated NLR 
associated with acoustical replacement windows and doors is less 
than 5 dBA then no additional mitigation shall be required since the 
improvement would be minor and likely not noticeable. The overall 
goal of the required sound insulation analysis is to demonstrate 
that interior noise levels (with the Proposed Action) at receptor #6 
would be 45 DNL or lower, and to implement sound insulation to 
result in an NLR improvement of 5 dBA or more, where feasible and 
reasonable based on the characteristics of the property.
    MM-Noise-02. Because the modeled noise contour also comes close 
to adversely affecting several other receptors, STR shall measure 
train horn and wayside noise levels from actual train operations to 
verify the modeled noise contour location used in this Draft EA 
within one month of train operations reaching one roundtrip per day. 
STR shall take enough measurements of the actual train horn and 
wayside noise levels to demonstrate that Sound Exposure Level (SEL) 
values achieve a 90 percent confidence interval of 3 dBA or less. If 
the average measured SEL value is greater than the assumed 110 dBA 
for horn noise (measured at 100 feet), STR shall calculate the 
actual 65 DNL contour using the methodology in this Draft EA and 
comply with the mitigation in MM-Noise-01 for any newly affected 
receptors.
    MM-Noise-03. STR shall maintain rail and rail beds according to 
American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association 
(AREMA) standards.
    MM-Noise-04. STR shall consider lubricating curves, where doing 
so would both be consistent with safe and efficient operating 
practices and significantly reduce noise for residential or other 
noise sensitive receptors.
    MM-Noise-05. STR shall employ safe and efficient operating 
procedures that, in lieu of or as a complement to other noise 
mitigation measures, can have the collateral benefit of effectively 
reducing noise from train operations. Specifically, STR shall 
inspect rail car wheels and maintain wheels in good working order to 
minimize the development of wheel flats, inspect new and existing 
rail for rough surfaces and, where appropriate, grind these surfaces 
to provide a smooth rail surface during operations, and regularly 
maintain locomotives.

Grade Crossing Safety and Delay

STR's Voluntary Mitigation Measures

    VM-Grade Crossing-01. STR will consult with appropriate Federal, 
State, and local transportation agencies to determine the final 
design of the at-grade crossing warning devices. Warning devices on 
public roadways will be subject to review and approval, depending on 
location, by the Utah Department of Transportation, City of Erda, 
and Tooele County. STR will follow standard safety designs for each 
at-grade crossing for proposed warning devices and signs. These 
designs will follow the Federal Highway Administration's Manual on 
Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (2022) and 
the American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way 
Association's guidelines for railroad warning devices. STR will also 
comply with applicable UDOT and local requirements.
    VM-Grade Crossing-02. Prior to construction of road crossings, 
when reasonably practical, STR and its contractor(s) will consult 
with local transportation officials regarding construction phasing 
and temporary traffic control. STR's contractor(s) will be 
responsible for local agency coordination of construction schedules, 
detours, and temporary traffic control, as well as obtainment of 
necessary temporary traffic control permits from the City of Erda 
and Tooele County. As appropriate, STR's contractor(s) will maintain 
egress or traffic routing to allow for passage of emergency and 
other vehicles.
    VM-Grade Crossing-03. Prior to project-related construction, STR 
will consult with UDOT and other appropriate agency(s) to determine 
the final details and reasonable signage for private at-grade 
crossings along access roads.
    VM-Grade Crossing-04. Prior to project-related construction, STR 
will consult with UDOT and applicable road authority regarding 
roadway safety and user expectations, which includes items such as 
pavement markings, signing, delineators, and active warning devices 
for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists at proposed at-grade 
crossings.
    VM-Grade Crossing-05. Prior to and during project-related 
construction, in accordance with project plans, specifications, and 
permits, STR's contractor(s) will install temporary traffic control, 
including pavement markings, signing, and detours, throughout the 
project limits and applicable work zones.
    VM-Grade Crossing-06. Prior to and during construction and 
operation of the project, STR will work with local agencies to 
facilitate the development of cooperative agreements with emergency 
service providers to share services areas and emergency call 
response.
    VM-Grade Crossing-07. STR will consult with affected communities 
regarding ways to improve visibility at highway-rail at-grade 
crossings, including by clearing vegetation or installing lights at 
the crossing during construction.
    M-Grade Crossing-08. STR will obtain and abide by the reasonable 
requirements of applicable permits and approvals for any project-
related construction activities within UDOT rights-of way or State 
highways where UDOT has jurisdiction and off-system roads that are 
maintained by UDOT.
    VM-Grade Crossing-09. For each of the public at-grade crossings 
on the proposed rail line, STR will provide and maintain permanent 
signs prominently displaying both a toll-free telephone number and a 
unique grade-crossing identification number in compliance with 
Federal Highway Administration regulations (23 CFR part 655). The 
toll-free number will enable drivers to report promptly any 
accidents, malfunctioning warning devices, stalled vehicles, or 
other dangerous conditions.
    VM-Grade Crossing-10. STR will coordinate with Operation 
Lifesaver to provide educational programs available to communities, 
schools, and other organizations located along the proposed rail 
line. Operation Lifesaver is a nationwide, nonprofit organization 
that provides public education programs to help prevent collisions, 
injuries, and fatalities at highway/rail grade crossings.

[[Page 24083]]

OEA's Final Recommended Mitigation

    MM-Grade Crossing-01. STR shall consult with and comply with 
reasonable UDOT requirements for creating new rail/roadway crossings 
at SR 138 and Erda Way. Specifically, STR shall abide by UDOT's 
reasonable requirements for new crossings under Administrative Rule 
R930-5, and specifically R930-5-7.6.
    MM-Grade Crossing-02. STR shall not block at-grade crossings for 
more than 10 minutes at a time, when reasonably practical, unless 
mechanical failure, an obstruction on the track, or a similar 
emergency condition prevents a train from being moved clear of the 
crossing.
    MM-Grade Crossing-03. STR shall notify appropriate emergency 
services dispatching centers if grade crossings become blocked by 
trains that may be unable to move for a prolonged period.

Biological Resources

OEA's Final Recommended Mitigation

    MM-Biological-01. STR shall use temporary barricades, fencing, 
and/or flagging in habitats to contain construction related impacts 
to the area within the construction right-of-way. To the extent 
possible, staging areas shall be located in previously disturbed 
sites and not in habitat areas.
    MM-Biological-02. STR shall limit ground disturbance to only the 
areas necessary for construction.
    MM-Biological-03. STR shall ensure that all disturbed soils are 
landscaped, seeded with a native seed mix, or otherwise permanently 
stabilized following project-related construction.
    MM-Biological-04. Prior to any project-related construction, STR 
shall develop and implement a mitigation plan to address the spread 
and control of non-native invasive plants during the construction. 
This plan shall address the following: (a) planned seed mixes, (b) 
weed prevention and eradication procedures, (c) equipment cleaning 
protocols, (d) revegetation methods, and (e) protocols for 
monitoring revegetation.
    MM-Biological-05. STR shall only use herbicides in right-of-way 
maintenance to control vegetation that are approved by EPA and are 
applied by trained individuals, following the instructions on the 
pesticide label, who will limit application to the extent necessary 
for safe rail operations and not use the pesticides near wetlands. 
Herbicides shall be applied to prevent or minimize drift off of the 
right-of-way into adjacent areas.
    MM-Biological-06. STR shall review updated U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service and Utah species lists prior to the start of 
project-related construction to see if any special status species 
were added after issuance of the Final EA. If new species are 
identified, STR shall notify OEA so that appropriate action can be 
taken if warranted.
    MM-Biological-07. STR shall clear vegetation in preparation for 
construction before or after the breeding bird nesting season to 
avoid inadvertent removal of active nests (nesting adults, young, or 
eggs) and to ensure compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. 
If clearing is required during nesting season, STR shall consult 
with OEA and the local office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
(USFWS) on appropriate nest survey methods for that area.

Water Resources

STR's Voluntary Mitigation Measures

    VM-Water-01. STR's contractor(s) will submit a Notice of Intent 
to request permit coverage under Utah Pollutant Discharge 
Elimination System (UPDES) Construction General Permit (CGP) or 
Common Plan Permit (CPP) for construction stormwater management.
    VM-Water-02. STR's contractor(s) will submit an application for 
coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 
stormwater construction permit pursuant to Section 402 of the Clean 
Water Act for construction stormwater management.
    VM-Water-03. STR will develop a stormwater pollution prevention 
plan, which will include construction BMPs to control erosion and 
reduce the amount of sediment and pollutants entering surface 
waters, groundwater, and waters of the United States. STR will 
require its construction contractor(s) to follow all water quality 
control conditions identified in all permits that might be required, 
including the Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers (Corps) and the Section 401 Water Quality Certification 
from the Utah Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency.
    VM-Water-04. STR's contractor(s) will construct stream crossings 
during low-flow periods, when practical.

OEA's Final Recommended Mitigation

    MM-Water-01. STR shall design drainage crossing structures for a 
100-year storm event. STR shall design culverts to maintain existing 
surface water drainage patterns to the extent practicable and not 
cause or exacerbate flooding.
    MM-Water-02. STR shall coordinate with the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency (FEMA) if construction of the culverts would 
result in an unavoidable increase greater than 1 foot to the 100-
year water surface elevations.
    MM-Water-03. STR shall obtain a permit if applicable from the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water 
Act before initiating project-related construction in wetlands and 
other jurisdictional waters of the United States. STR shall comply 
with all conditions of the Section 404 permit.
    MM-Water-04. STR shall minimize impacts to wetlands to the 
extent practicable in the final design. After all practicable steps 
have been taken to minimize impacts to wetlands, STR shall prepare a 
mitigation plan for any remaining wetland impacts in consultation 
with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, if applicable.
    MM-Water-05. STR shall compensate for the loss of any wetlands 
through any one, or a combination of, the following purchasing 
credits from an authorized wetland mitigation bank, restoring a 
previously existing wetland or other aquatic site, enhancing an 
existing aquatic site's function, preserving an existing aquatic 
site, and/or creating a new aquatic site.
    MM-Water-06. STR shall obtain a Section 401 Water Quality 
Certification from the Utah Department of Environmental Quality. STR 
shall incorporate the conditions of the Section 401 Water Quality 
Certification into its construction contract specifications and 
shall monitor the project for compliance.

Hazardous Materials

STR's Voluntary Mitigation Measures

    VM-HazMat-01. Prior to initiating any project-related 
construction, STR's contractor(s) will prepare a hazardous waste 
management plan detailing the manner in which hazardous wastes will 
be managed and describing the types and volumes of hazardous wastes 
anticipated to be managed. There will be no export of hazardous 
materials off-site other than used rail ties. The hazardous waste 
management plan will address both onsite and offsite hazardous waste 
management and include the following: description of the methods to 
be used to ensure accurate piece counts or weights of shipments; 
waste minimization methods; facilities to be used for treatment, 
storage, and disposal; onsite areas designated where hazardous 
wastes are to be handled; identify whether transfer facilities are 
to be used, and if so, how the wastes will be tracked to ultimate 
disposal. Additionally, STR's contractor(s) will document hazardous 
waste inspections on a weekly basis.
    VM-HazMat-02. In accordance with STR contractor(s)'s hazardous 
waste management plan and emergency management plan, and in the 
event of a spill over the applicable reportable quantity, each STR's 
contractor will comply with its spill prevention, control, and 
countermeasures plan and applicable Federal, State, and local 
regulations pertaining to spill containment, appropriate clean-up, 
and notifications.
    VM-HazMat-03. STR will document all activities associated with 
hazardous material spill sites and hazardous waste sites and will 
notify the appropriate State and local agencies according to 
applicable regulations. The goal of the measures is to ensure the 
proper handling and disposal of contaminated materials, including 
contaminated soil, groundwater, and stormwater, if such materials 
are encountered. STR will use disposal methods that comply with 
applicable solid and hazardous water regulations.
    VM-HazMat-04. STR's contractor(s) will responsibly handle and 
store gasoline, diesel fuel, oil, lubricants, and other petroleum 
products to reduce the risk of spills contaminating soils or surface 
waters. If a petroleum spill occurs in the project limits as a 
result of project-related construction, operation, or maintenance 
and exceeds specific quantities or enters a waterbody, STR's 
contractor(s) will be responsible for promptly cleaning the spill 
and notifying responsible agencies in accordance with Federal and 
State regulations.
    VM-HazMat-05. STR's hazardous materials emergency response plan 
will address potential derailments or spills. This plan will address 
the requirements of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 
Administration

[[Page 24084]]

and Federal Railroad Administration requirements for comprehensive 
oil spill response plans. STR will distribute the plan to Federal, 
State, and local emergency response agencies. This plan will include 
a roster of agencies and people to be contacted for specific types 
of emergencies during project-related construction, operation and 
maintenance activities, procedures to be followed by particular rail 
employees, emergency routes for vehicles, and the location of 
emergency equipment.
    VM-HazMat-06. In the event of a reportable hazardous materials 
release, STR will notify appropriate Federal and State environmental 
agencies as required under Federal and State law.
    VM-HazMat-07. STR will comply with applicable Federal Railroad 
Administration, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 
Administration, and Transportation Security Administration 
regulations for the safe and secure transportation of hazardous 
materials.

OEA's Final Recommended Mitigation

    MM-HazMat-01. If STR encounters contamination (or signs of 
potential contamination) during construction activities, STR shall 
perform a Phase 2 environmental following American Society of 
Testing and Materials E1527-05, Standard Practice for Environmental 
Site Assessments, in addition to the Phase 1 previously performed by 
STR. Should findings of a Phase 2 environmental investigation 
identify contamination in soil and/or groundwater, STR shall 
coordinate with relevant State agencies on regulatory obligations 
and comply with those agencies' reasonable requirements for avoiding 
impacts related to soil and/or groundwater contamination.

Cultural Resources

OEA's Final Recommended Mitigation

    MM-Cultural-01. STR shall prepare and provide to OEA a 
construction monitoring plan no later than 30 days prior to the 
start of construction and shall abide by the provisions of the plan, 
including any revisions by OEA, during construction activities. The 
plan shall address the following:
    1. Training procedures to familiarize construction personnel 
with the identification and appropriate treatment of historic 
properties,
    2. Monitoring of construction activities by a qualified 
professional archaeologist,
    3. Provisions for the unanticipated discovery of archaeological 
sites or associated artifacts during construction activities, 
including procedures for notifying OEA and the Utah State Historic 
Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer 
(THPO), pursuant to 36 CFR 800.13(b) in the event of an 
unanticipated discovery; and,
    4. Provisions for complying with the Native American Graves 
Protection and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. 3001-3013) and other 
applicable Federal, State, and local laws and regulations in the 
event of an unanticipated discovery of unmarked human remains during 
construction activities.

Air Quality

STR's Voluntary Mitigation Measures

    VM-Air-01. In accordance with Utah or local agency dust control 
permitting requirements, STR's contractor(s) will implement 
appropriate dust control measures to reduce fugitive dust emissions 
created during project-related construction. STR will require its 
construction contractor(s) to regularly operate water trucks on haul 
roads to reduce dust generation.
    VM-Air-02. STR will work with its contractor(s) to make sure 
that construction equipment is properly maintained, and that 
mufflers and other required pollution-control devices are in working 
condition in order to limit construction-related air pollutant 
emissions.

Climate Change

OEA's Final Recommended Mitigation

    MM-Climate-01. STR shall prepare a climate change plan 
documenting how the effects of climate change on rail infrastructure 
will be considered and addressed by STR in the final engineering 
design and construction of the rail line. The plan shall account for 
the extreme heat, drought, and wildfires that are anticipated in 
this region, which can cause track buckling, warping/melting, and 
electrical equipment disruptions. The plan shall also cover 
protective health and safety measures for rail personnel exposed to 
extreme heat. The plan shall use the Council on Environmental 
Quality's National Environmental Policy Act Guidance on 
Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change to 
achieve the objectives laid out in Executive Order 14008, Tackling 
the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad.

[FR Doc. 2024-07255 Filed 4-4-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P