48814 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 

State Rail Plan also identified several 

potential investments to expand, 

enhance and grow intercity passenger 

rail services in the Empire HSR corridor. 

The FRA and NYSDOT will establish 

specific goals for train frequency, trip 

time, and on-time performance on a 

corridor-wide basis and identify the 

operational changes and investments in 

infrastructure and equipment necessary 

to achieve those goals. 

Environmental Review Process: The 

EIS will be developed in accordance 

with the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321, and 

the New York State Environmental 

Quality Review Act (SEQR), 17 NYCRR 

Part 15. The FRA and the NYSDOT will 

use a tiered process, as provided for in 

40 CFR 1508.28 and in accordance with 

FRA regulations, in the completion of 

the environmental review of the Project. 

‘‘Tiering’’ is a staged environmental 

review process applied to 

environmental reviews for complex 

projects. The initial phase (‘‘Tier 1 EIS’’) 

of this process will address broad 

corridor-level issues and proposals. 

Subsequent phases or tiers will analyze, 

at a greater level of detail, narrower sitespecific proposals based on the 

decisions made in Tier 1. 

Tier 1: Although open to refinement 

based on public and agency review and 

comment, the Tier 1 assessment will 

result in a NEPA and SEQR document 

with the appropriate level of detail for 

corridor-level decisions and will 

address broad overall issues of concern, 

including but not limited to: 

• Confirm the purpose and need for 

the proposed action. 

• Define the study area appropriate to 

assess reasonable alternatives. 

• Identify a comprehensive set of 

goals and objectives for the corridor in 

conjunction with Stakeholders and 

Steering Committee members. These 

goals and objectives will be crafted to 

allow comprehensive evaluation of all 

aspects of the project necessary to 

achieve the goals, including train 

operations, vehicles and infrastructure. 

• Identify the range of reasonable 

alternatives to be considered, consistent 

with the current and planned use of the 

corridor and the existing services within 

and adjacent to the study area. 

• Develop criteria and screen 

alternatives to eliminate those that do 

not meet the purpose and need of the 

proposed action. 

• Identify the general alignment(s) of 

the reasonable alternatives. 

• Identify right-of-way requirements 

for the reasonable alternatives. 

• Identify the infrastructure and 

equipment investment requirements for 

the reasonable alternatives. 

• Identify the operational changes 

required for the reasonable alternatives. 

• Describe the environmental impacts 

associated with proposed changes in 

passenger rail train frequency, speed, 

and on-time performance. 

• Characterize the environmental 

consequences of the reasonable 

alternatives. 

• Establish the timing and sequencing 

of independent actions to maintain a 

state of good repair and to implement 

the proposed action. 

Tier 2: The second tier assessment 

will address component projects to be 

implemented within the general 

corridor identified in the Tier 1 EIS, and 

incorporate by reference the data and 

evaluations included in the Tier 1 EIS. 

Subsequent evaluations will concentrate 

on the issues specific to the component 

of the selected alternative identified in 

the Tier 1 EIS; determine the project 

alternative that best meets the purpose 

and need for each proposed action; and 

identify the environmental 

consequences and measures necessary 

to mitigate environmental impacts at a 

site-specific level of detail. 

Scoping and Comments: FRA 

encourages broad participation in the 

EIS process during scoping and review 

of the resulting environmental 

documents. Comments and suggestions 

are invited from all interested agencies 

and the public at large to insure the full 

range of issues related to the proposed 

action and all reasonable alternatives 

are addressed and all significant issues 

are identified. In particular, FRA is 

interested in determining whether there 

are areas of environmental concern 

where there might be the potential for 

significant impacts identifiable at a 

corridor level. Letters describing the 

proposed project and soliciting 

comments were sent to appropriate 

Federal, State, and local agencies, and 

appropriate railroads. Public agencies 

with jurisdiction are requested to advise 

the FRA and NYSDOT of the applicable 

environmental review requirements of 

each agency, and the scope and content 

of the environmental information that is 

germane to the agency’s statutory 

responsibilities in connection with the 

proposed project. 

A public scoping meeting is 

scheduled for September 24, 2009, from 

1:30 to 2:30 p.m., at 50 Wolf Road, 

Conference Rooms A, B and C on the 

first floor, Albany, NY 12232 for the 

purpose of introducing the proposed 

project to regulatory agencies and other 

interested parties. No formal NEPA 

scoping meeting is planned. A series of 

public information meetings will be 

held in Eastern and Western New York 

in November and December 2009. 

Public notices will be given of the time 

and place of the meetings. 

Persons interested in providing 

comments on the scope of the Tier 1 EIS 

should do so by October 30, 2009. 

Comments can be sent in writing to Ms. 

Melissa Elefante DuMond at the FRA 

address identified above. Comments 

may also be addressed to Ms. Ann R. 

Purdue, of NYSDOT, at the address 

identified above. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

18, 2009. 

Mark E. Yachmetz, 

Associate Administrator for Railroad 

Development, Federal Railroad 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E9–23002 Filed 9–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

the California High-Speed Train Project 

From Los Angeles to San Diego via the 

Inland Empire, CA 

AGENCY: Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement. 

SUMMARY: This notice is to advise the 

public that FRA and the California 

High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority) 

will jointly prepare a project 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

and project Environmental Impact 

Report (EIR) for the Los Angeles to San 

Diego (LA–SD) Section of the 

Authority’s proposed California HighSpeed Train (HST) System in 

compliance with relevant State and 

Federal laws, in particular the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and 

the California Environmental Quality 

Act (CEQA). 

In 2001, the Authority and FRA 

started a tiered environmental review 

process for the HST system and in 2005, 

completed the first tier California HighSpeed Train Program EIR/EIS 

(Statewide Program EIR/EIS) and 

approved the statewide HST System for 

intercity travel in California between the 

major metropolitan centers of 

Sacramento and the San Francisco Bay 

Area in the north, through the Central 

Valley, to Los Angeles and San Diego in 

the south. The approved HST System 

would be about 800 miles long, with 

electric propulsion and steel-wheel-onsteel-rail trains capable of maximum 

operating speeds of 220 miles per hour 

(mph) on a mostly dedicated steelVerDate Nov<24>2008 16:27 Sep 23, 2009 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24SEN1.SGM 24SEN1

srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 48815 

wheel-on-steel rail system of fully 

grade-separated, access controlled track 

with state-of-the-art safety, signaling, 

communication, and automated train 

control systems. In approving the HST 

System, the Authority and FRA also 

selected corridors/general alignments 

and station location options throughout 

most of the system. In 2008, the 

Authority and FRA completed a second 

program EIR/EIS to evaluate and select 

general alignments and station locations 

within the broad corridor between and 

including the Altamont Pass and the 

Pacheco Pass to connect the Bay Area 

and Central Valley portions of the HST 

System. The preparation of the LA–SD 

HST Project EIR/EIS will involve the 

development of preliminary engineering 

designs and the assessment of potential 

environmental effects associated with 

the construction, operation, and 

maintenance of the HST system, 

including track and ancillary facilities 

along the Union Pacific Railroad 

Company (UPRR)/Interstate 215/ 

Interstate 15 corridor from Los Angeles 

to San Diego. 

DATES: Written comments on the scope 

of the LA–SD HST Project EIR/EIS 

should be provided to the Authority by 

5 p.m., Friday, November 20, 2009. 

Public scoping meetings are scheduled 

from October 13, 2009, to November 3, 

2009, as noted below in the cities of San 

Diego, Escondido, Murrieta, Corona, 

Monterey Park, Riverside, West Covina, 

El Monte, Pomona, Ontario, and San 

Bernardino, California. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

scope of this EIR/EIS should be sent to 

Mr. Dan Leavitt, Deputy Director, 

ATTN: LA–SD HST Project EIR/EIS, 

California High-Speed Rail Authority, 

925 L Street, Suite 1425, Sacramento, 

CA 95814, or via e-mail with subject 

line ‘‘LA–SD HST Section via the Inland 

Empire’’ to: comments@hsr.ca.gov. 

Comments may also be provided orally 

or in writing at the scoping meetings 

scheduled from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. at the 

following locations: 

San Diego County 

• October 13, 2009—Lawrence 

Family Jewish Community Center, 4126 

Executive Drive, La Jolla, CA 92037. 

• October 14, 2009—Ramada Limited 

San Diego Airport, 1403 Rosecrans 

Street, San Diego, CA 92106. 

• October 15, 2009—Escondido 

Center for the Arts, 340 N. Escondido 

Blvd., Escondido, CA 92025. 

Riverside County 

• October 19, 2009—Murrieta Public 

Library, Eight Town Square, 24700 

Adams Avenue, Murrieta, CA 92562. 

• October 20, 2009—Corona Public 

Library, West Room, 650 S. Main Street, 

Corona, CA 92882. 

• October 22, 2009—Cesar Chavez 

Community Center, Bobby Bonds Park, 

2060 University Avenue, Riverside, CA 

92507. 

Los Angeles County 

• October 21, 2009—Shepherd of the 

Hills United Methodist Church, Wesley 

Fellowship Hall, 333 South Garfield 

Avenue, Monterey Park, CA 91754. 

• October 26, 2009—City of West 

Covina City Hall, Community Room, 

First Floor, 1444 West Garvey Avenue, 

West Covina, CA 91790. 

• October 28, 2009—El Monte 

Community Center Grace T. Black 

Auditorium, 3130 Tyler Avenue, El 

Monte, California 91731. 

• October 29, 2009—Pomona First 

Baptist Church, Room E–202, 586 N. 

Main Street, Pomona, California 91768. 

San Bernardino County 

• November 2, 2009—Ontario Airport 

Administrative Conference Rooms, 1923 

E. Avion Street, Ontario, CA 91764. 

• November 3, 2009—Norman 

Feldheym Central Library, Kellogg 

Room, 555 West 6th Street, San 

Bernardino, CA 92410. 

Two regulatory agency scoping 

meetings have been scheduled on the 

following dates and times: 

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

6010 Hidden Valley Road, Room 1, 

Carlsbad, CA 92011. October 15, 2009 

from 9 a.m. to 

12 noon. 

• California Regional Water Quality 

Control Board, Santa Ana Region 8, 

Highgrove Room, 3737 Main Street, 

Suite 500, Riverside, CA 92501–3348. 

October 22, 2009 from 9 a.m. to 12 

noon. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

David Valenstein, Environmental 

Program Manager, Office of Railroad 

Development, Federal Railroad 

Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE. (Mail Stop 20), 

Washington, DC 20590; (telephone: 

(202) 493–6368); or Mr. Dan Leavitt, 

Deputy Director, ATTN: LA–SD HST 

Project EIR/EIS, California High-Speed 

Rail Authority, 925 L Street, Suite 1425, 

Sacramento, CA 95814 (telephone: (916) 

324–1541)). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Authority was established in 1996 and 

is authorized and directed by statute to 

undertake the planning and 

development of a proposed statewide 

HST network that is fully coordinated 

with other public transportation 

services. The Authority adopted a Final 

Business Plan in June 2000, which 

reviewed the economic feasibility of an 

800-mile-long HST capable of speeds in 

excess of 200 miles per hour on a mostly 

dedicated, fully grade-separated state-ofthe-art track. The Authority released an 

updated Business Plan in November 

2008. 

The FRA has responsibility for 

overseeing the safety of railroad 

operations, including the safety of any 

proposed high-speed ground 

transportation system. FRA is also 

authorized to provide Federal funding 

for intercity passenger rail capital 

investments, including high-speed rail. 

For the proposed HST, it is anticipated 

that FRA would need to take certain 

regulatory actions prior to operation and 

may provide financial assistance for the 

project including grant funding. 

In 2005, the Authority and FRA 

completed the Statewide Program EIR/ 

EIS for the Proposed California High 

Speed Train System, as the first phase 

of a tiered environmental review 

process. The Authority certified the 

Statewide Program EIR under CEQA and 

approved the proposed HST System. 

FRA issued a Record of Decision on the 

Statewide Program EIR/EIS as required 

under NEPA. The Statewide Program 

EIR/EIS established the purpose and 

need for the HST system, and compared 

the proposed HST System with a No 

Project/No Action Alternative and a 

Modal Alternative. In approving the 

Statewide Program EIR/EIS, the 

Authority and FRA selected the HST 

Alternative, selected certain corridors/ 

general alignments and general station 

locations for further study, incorporated 

mitigation strategies and design 

practices, and specified further 

measures to guide the development of 

the HST System during the site-specific 

project-level environmental review to 

avoid and minimize potential adverse 

environmental impacts. In the Statewide 

Program EIR/EIS, the Authority and 

FRA selected the UPRR/I–215/I–15 

corridor for the LA–SD via the Inland 

Empire section of the HST. 

The LA–SD HST Project EIR/EIS will 

tier from the Statewide Program EIR/EIS 

in accordance with Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ) 

regulations, (40 CFR 1508.28) and State 

CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of 

Regulations 15168(b)). Tiering ensures 

that the LA–SD HST Project EIR/EIS 

builds upon program analysis and 

decisions made with the Statewide 

Program EIR/EIS. 

The Project EIR/EIS will describe sitespecific environmental impacts, identify 

specific mitigation measures to address 

those impacts, and incorporate design 

features to avoid and minimize potential 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
48816 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 

adverse environmental impacts. The 

FRA and the Authority will assess the 

site characteristics, size, nature, and 

timing of the proposed project to 

determine whether the impacts are 

potentially significant and whether 

impacts can be avoided or mitigated. 

This project EIR/EIS will identify and 

evaluate reasonable and feasible sitespecific alignment alternatives, and 

evaluate the impacts of construction, 

operation, and maintenance of the HST 

System. Information and documents 

regarding this HST environmental 

review process will be made available 

through the Authority’s Internet site: 

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/. 

Purpose and Need: The purpose of the 

proposed HST System is to provide a 

new mode of high-speed intercity travel 

that would link major metropolitan 

areas of the State; interface with 

airports, mass transit, and highways; 

and provide added capacity to meet 

increased intercity travel demand in 

California in a manner sensitive to and 

protective of California’s unique natural 

resources. The need for a HST System 

is directly related to the expected 

growth in population, and increases in 

intercity travel demand in California 

over the next twenty years and beyond. 

With the growth in travel demand, there 

will be an increase in travel delays 

arising from the growing congestion on 

California’s highways and at its airports. 

In addition, there will be negative 

effects on the economy, quality of life, 

and air quality in and around 

California’s metropolitan areas from an 

increasingly congested transportation 

system that will become less reliable as 

travel demand increases. The intercity 

highway system, commercial airports, 

and conventional passenger rail serving 

the intercity travel market are currently 

operating at or near capacity, and will 

require large public investments for 

maintenance and expansion to meet 

existing demand and future growth. The 

proposed HST System is designed to 

address some social, economic and 

environmental problems associated with 

transportation congestion in California. 

Alternatives: The LA–SD HST Project 

EIR/EIS will consider a No Action or No 

Project Alternative and an HST 

Alternative for the LA–SD via the Inland 

Empire section. 

No Action Alternative: The No Action 

Alternative (No Project or No Build) 

represents the conditions in the corridor 

as it existed in 2009, and as it would 

exist based on programmed and funded 

improvements to the intercity 

transportation system and other 

reasonably foreseeable projects through 

2035, taking into account the following 

sources of information: the State 

Transportation Improvement Program 

(STIP) and Regional Transportation 

Plans (RTPs) for all modes of travel, 

airport plans, intercity passenger rail 

plans, city and county plans. 

HST Alternative: The Authority 

proposes to construct, operate and 

maintain an electric-powered steelwheel-on-steel-rail HST System, about 

800 miles long, capable of operating 

speeds of 220 mph on mostly dedicated, 

fully grade-separated, access controlled 

tracks, with state-of-the-art safety, 

signaling, communication and 

automated train control systems. In the 

Statewide Program EIR/EIS, the 

Authority and FRA selected the Inland 

Empire alignment, which was divided 

into three segments: (1) Los Angeles to 

March Air Reserve Base (ARB); (2) 

March ARB to Mira Mesa; and (3) Mira 

Mesa to San Diego. Between LA Union 

Station and March ARB, the selected 

alignment generally follows the UPRR 

Riverside/Colton corridor. From March 

ARB to Mira Mesa the selected I–215/ 

I–15 alignment generally follows the I– 

215 and then the I–15 corridor to Mira 

Mesa. There are two alignment options 

along Carroll Canyon and Miramar Road 

that would directly serve downtown 

San Diego. Both the Carroll Canyon and 

Miramar Road alignment options 

between Mira Mesa and San Diego are 

preferred for further investigation. 

Since 2008, the Authority has 

collaborated with the Southern 

California High-Speed Rail Inland 

Corridor Group (SoCal ICG), which was 

formed by a Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) signed by the 

Authority and Southern California 

Association of Governments, San Diego 

Association of Governments, San 

Bernardino Associated Governments, 

the Riverside County Transportation 

Commission and the San Diego County 

Regional Airport Authority. One of the 

purposes of the SoCal ICG is to 

demonstrate partnership with regional 

entities and to assist the Authority with 

the review of the Program EIR/EIS 

alternative alignments and station 

locations and in identifying additional 

alternative project alignments and 

optional station locations to be studied 

in the LA–SD Project EIR/EIS. The 

Authority has consulted with the SoCal 

ICG on a monthly basis since the 

summer of 2008. 

To support the Project EIR/EIS 

process, the SoCal ICG partner agencies 

formed four Technical Working Groups 

(TWGs) in Los Angeles, Riverside, San 

Bernardino, and San Diego Counties to 

assist the Authority in refining the 

programmatic LA–SD alignment 

adopted in 2005. The TWGs met with 

the Authority in November 2008, 

February 2009 and July/August 2009 to 

discuss additional alternative 

alignments and optional station 

locations to be further considered in the 

Project EIR/EIS along with the 

alignment alternatives and station 

locations selected with the Program EIR/ 

EIS. 

These alternative project alignments 

include: alternatives to the UPRR 

Riverside/Colton alignment in Los 

Angeles County and San Bernardino 

County along the Metrolink, I–10, I–605, 

Holt Avenue and State Route 60 (SR–60) 

corridors, an alternative alignment along 

the I–15 corridor through San 

Bernardino County and Riverside 

County, and an alternative alignment 

west of the University City corridor in 

San Diego County. Engineering studies 

will be undertaken as part of this Project 

EIR/EIS that will examine and refine 

alignments in the UPRR/I–215/I–15 

corridor. The entire alignment would be 

grade-separated from existing roadways. 

The options to be considered for the 

design of grade-separated roadway 

crossings would include (1) depressing 

the street to pass under the rail line; (2) 

elevating the street to pass over the rail 

line; and (3) leaving the street as-is and 

constructing rail line improvements to 

pass over or under the local street. In 

addition, alternative sites for right-ofway maintenance, train storage facilities 

and a train service and inspection 

facility will be evaluated in the LA–SD 

Section project area. 

Preferred station locations selected by 

the Authority and FRA through the 

Statewide Program EIR/EIS will be 

evaluated in the LA–SD HST Project 

EIR/EIS. These stations are East San 

Gabriel Valley Station in City of 

Industry, Ontario Airport Connector 

Station, and Riverside County/East San 

Bernardino County near the University 

of California Riverside. Station locations 

from Murrieta to San Diego include the 

Temecula Valley Station in Murrieta at 

the I–15/I–215 interchange, Escondido 

Station Area along the I–15, Mid-San 

Diego County Station at University City, 

and San Diego Station-Downtown at the 

Santa Fe Depot. As part of the early 

agency outreach and input from the 

TWGs, the following alternative station 

locations were identified for further 

evaluation: El Monte, West Covina, and 

Pomona via the I–605, Holt Avenue, and 

I–10 corridors; San Bernardino via the 

SANBAG/Metrolink corridor; RiversideUCR, Riverside-March ARB, and 

Murrieta via the I–215 corridor; Corona 

and Escondido Transit Center via the 

I–15 corridor, University Towne Center 

via the University City corridor; and San 

Diego International Airport at Lindbergh 

Field. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 48817 

Probable Effects: The purpose of the 

EIR/EIS process is to evaluate, in a 

public setting, the potential effects of 

the proposed project on the physical, 

human, and natural environment. The 

FRA and Authority will continue the 

tiered evaluation of significant 

environmental, social, and economic 

impacts of the construction and 

operation of the LA–SD Section of the 

HST System. Impact areas to be 

addressed include transportation 

impacts; safety and security; land use 

and zoning; land acquisition, 

displacements, and relocations; 

cumulative and secondary impacts; 

agricultural land impacts; cultural 

resources impacts, including impacts on 

historical and archaeological resources 

and parklands/recreation areas; 

neighborhood compatibility and 

environmental justice; natural resource 

impacts including air quality, wetlands, 

water resources, noise, vibration, 

energy, wildlife and ecosystems, 

including endangered species. Measures 

to avoid, minimize, and mitigate 

adverse impacts will be identified and 

evaluated. 

The LA–SD HST Project EIR/EIS will 

be prepared in accordance with FRA’s 

Procedures for Considering 

Environmental Impacts (64 FR 28545 

(May 26, 1999)) and will address, as 

necessary, other applicable statutes, 

regulations, and executive orders, 

including the Clean Air Act, Section 404 

of the Clean Water Act, Section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act of 

1966, Section 4(f) of the Department of 

Transportation Act, the Endangered 

Species Act, and Executive Order 12898 

on Environmental Justice. 

This EIR/EIS process will also 

continue the NEPA/Clean Water Act 

Section 404 integration process 

established through the Statewide 

Program EIR/EIS process. The EIR/EIS 

will evaluate project alignment 

alternatives, and station and 

maintenance facility locations to 

support a determination of the Least 

Environmentally Damaging Practicable 

Alternative (LEDPA) by the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers. 

Scoping and Comments: FRA 

encourages broad participation in the 

EIS process during scoping and review 

of the resulting environmental 

documents. Comments are invited from 

all interested agencies and the public to 

ensure the full range of issues related to 

the proposed action and reasonable 

alternatives are addressed and all 

significant issues are identified. In 

particular, FRA is interested in learning 

whether there are areas of 

environmental concern where there 

might be a potential for significant sitespecific impacts from the LA–SD 

Section of the HST System. Public 

agencies with jurisdiction are requested 

to advise FRA and the Authority of the 

applicable permit and environmental 

review requirements of each agency, 

and the scope and content of the 

environmental information germane to 

the agency’s statutory responsibilities 

relevant to the proposed project. Public 

agencies are requested to advise FRA if 

they anticipate taking a major action in 

connection with the proposed project 

and if they wish to cooperate in the 

preparation of the Project EIR/EIS. 

Public scoping meetings have been 

scheduled as an important component 

of the scoping process for both the State 

and Federal environmental review. The 

scoping meetings described in this 

Notice will also be the subject of 

additional public notification. 

FRA is seeking participation and 

input of all interested Federal, State, 

and local agencies, Native American 

groups, and other concerned private 

organizations or individuals on the 

scope of the EIR/EIS. Implementation of 

the LA–SD Section of the HST System 

is a Federal undertaking with the 

potential to affect historic properties. As 

such, it is subject to the requirements of 

Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 

470f). In accordance with regulations 

issued by the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation, 36 CFR part 800, 

FRA intends to coordinate compliance 

with Section 106 of this Act with the 

preparation of the EIR/EIS, beginning 

with the identification of consulting 

parties through the scoping process, in 

a manner consistent with the standards 

set out in 36 CFR 800.8. 

Issued in Washington, DC on 

September 18, 2009. 

Mark E. Yachmetz, 

Associate Administrator for Railroad 

Development, Federal Railroad 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E9–23003 Filed 9–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Approval of the Noise Compatibility 

Program for the Kansas City 

International Airport, Kansas City, MO 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) announces its 

findings on the Noise Compatibility 

Program (NCP) submitted by the Kansas 

City Aviation Department for the Kansas 

City International Airport under the 

provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47501 et seq. 

(formerly the Aviation Safety and Noise 

Abatement Act, hereinafter referred to 

as ‘‘the Act’’) and 14 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) Part 150 (hereinafter 

referred to as ‘‘Part 150’’). On March 20, 

2009, the FAA determined that the 

Noise Exposure Maps (NEM) submitted 

by the Kansas City Aviation Department 

under Part 150 were in compliance with 

applicable requirements. On September 

14, 2009, the FAA approved the Kansas 

City International Airport noise 

compatibility program. All but two of 

the recommendations of the program 

were approved. No program elements 

relating to new or revised flight 

procedures for noise abatement were 

proposed by the airport operator. 

DATES: The effective date of the FAA’s 

approval of the Noise Compatibility 

Program for Kansas City International 

Airport is September 14, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Todd Madison, 901 Locust, Kansas City, 

Missouri, 64106–2325, 

todd.madison@faa.gov, (816) 329–2640. 

Documents reflecting this FAA action 

may be reviewed at this same location. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice announces that the FAA has 

given its overall approval to the Noise 

Compatibility Program for Kansas City 

International Airport, effective 

September 14, 2009. 

Under section 47504 of the Act, an 

airport operator who has previously 

submitted a Noise Exposure Map may 

submit to the FAA a Noise 

Compatibility Program which sets forth 

the measures taken or proposed by the 

airport operator for the reduction of 

existing non-compatible land uses and 

prevention of additional non-compatible 

land uses within the area covered by the 

Noise Exposure Maps. The Act requires 

such programs to be developed in 

consultation with interested and 

affected parties including local 

communities, government agencies, 

airport users, and FAA personnel. 

Each airport noise compatibility 

program developed in accordance with 

Part 150 is a local program, not a 

Federal program. The FAA does not 

substitute its judgment for that of the 

airport proprietor with respect to which 

measures should be recommended for 

action. The FAA’s approval or 

disapproval of Part 150 program 

recommendations is measured 

according to the standards expressed in 

Part 150 and the Act and is limited to 

the following determinations: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES