54318 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 184 / Monday, September 24, 2007 / Notices 

the FAA has decided to designate EWR 

as an IATA Level 2 Schedules 

Facilitated Airport for the summer 2008 

scheduling season. The FAA 

understands EWR is currently Level 2 

for certain international passenger 

terminal facilities, and this notice does 

not replace that schedule facilitation 

process done at the local airport level. 

The FAA intends to work with 

carriers to review operations, 

particularly during the morning hours of 

7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and afternoon and 

evening hours from 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. 

local time. The FAA is considering 

options to further address congestion 

and improve operational performance at 

EWR, including the timing of flights at 

the airport, and their impact on the 

airport’s operation. 

DATES: Schedules must be submitted no 

later than October 11, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Schedules may be 

submitted by mail to Slot 

Administration Office, AGC–240, Office 

of the Chief Counsel, 800 Independence 

Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

facsimile: 202–267–7277; ARINC: 

DCAYAXD; or by e-mail to: 7–AWAslotadmin@faa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Komal Jain, Regulations Division, Office 

of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone number: 202–267–3073. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

19th, 2007. 

James W. Whitlow, 

Deputy Chief Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 07–4711 Filed 9–19–07; 2:26 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Highway Administration 

Environmental Impact Statement: 

Proposed Dickson Southwest Bypass 

from US–70 to State Route 46 and/or 

Interstate 40, Dickson County, TN 

AGENCY: Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) is issuing this 

notice to advise the public that an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

will be prepared for a proposed 

transportation project in Dickson 

County, Tennessee. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Laurie S. Leffler, Assistant Division 

Administrator, Federal Highway 

Administration—Tennessee Division 

Office, 640 Grassmere Park Road, Suite 

112, Nashville, TN 37211, or by phone 

at 615–781–5770. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

FHWA in cooperation with the 

Tennessee Department of 

Transportation will prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

on a proposal to construct a bypass 

around the southwest side of the City of 

Dickson, for a distance of approximately 

10 miles. 

Alternatives to be considered include: 

(1) No-build; (2) a Transportation 

System Management (TSM) alternative 

(3) one or more build alternatives that 

could include constructing a roadway 

on a new location, upgrading existing 

US–70 and State Route 46, or a 

combination of both, and (4) other 

alternatives that may arise from public 

input. Public scoping meetings will be 

held for the project corridor. As part of 

the scoping process, federal, state, and 

local agencies and officials; private 

organizations; citizens; and interest 

groups will have an opportunity to 

identify issues of concern and provide 

input on the purpose and need for the 

project, range of alternatives, 

methodology, and the development of 

the Environmental Impact Statement. A 

Coordination Plan will be developed to 

include the public in the project 

development process. This plan will 

utilize the following outreach efforts to 

provide information and solicit input: 

Newsletters, an internet website, e-mail 

and direct mail, informational meetings 

and briefings, public hearings, and other 

efforts as necessary and appropriate. A 

public hearing will be held upon 

completion of the Draft Environmental 

Impact Statement and public notice will 

be given of the time and place of the 

hearing. The Draft EIS will be available 

for public and agency review and 

comment prior to the public hearings. 

To ensure that the full range of issues 

related to this proposed action are 

identified and taken into account, 

comments and suggestions are invited 

from all interested parties. Comments 

and questions concerning the proposed 

action should be directed to the FHWA 

contact person identified above at the 

address provided above. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning 

and Construction. The regulations 

implementing Executive Order 12372 

regarding intergovernmental consultation on 

Federal programs and activities apply to this 

proposed program). 

Issued on: September 18, 2007. 

Laurie S. Leffler, 

Assistant Division Administrator, Nashville, 

TN. 

[FR Doc. E7–18796 Filed 9–21–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Transit Administration 

Preparation of an Environmental 

Impact Statement for the Van Ness 

Avenue Bus Rapid Transit Project in 

San Francisco, CA 

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration 

(FTA), Department of Transportation 

(DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) 

of the National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA), the Council of 

Environmental Quality Regulations (40 

CFR part 1505.6), and the California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 

Section 151710, the Federal Transit 

Administration (FTA), in cooperation 

with the San Francisco County 

Transportation Authority (SFCTA), will 

prepare a joint Environmental Impact 

Statement/Environmental Impact Report 

(EIS/EIR) for the Van Ness Avenue Bus 

Rapid Transit (BRT) Project, an 

approximately two-mile transit 

improvement along Van Ness Avenue 

through the City and County of San 

Francisco, California. The Project would 

create dedicated bus lanes from 

approximately South Van Ness Avenue 

and Mission Street (south end) to Van 

Ness Avenue and Lombard Street (north 

end). The project would also establish 

high capacity stations with passenger 

amenities and low-level boarding 

platforms; real time bus arrival 

information systems; proof-of-payment 

fare verification; transit signal priority; 

and modern, high-capacity, low-floor, 

multi-door buses. 

The EIS/EIR will evaluate the 

following alternatives: (1) No-Project/ 

Baseline Alternative; (2) Van Ness 

Avenue BRT Project, which will include 

design options for the configuration of 

the BRT transitway and stations; and (3) 

any additional reasonable alternatives 

that emerge from the study process. The 

EIS will be prepared in accordance with 

FTA regulations (23 CFR 771 et seq.) 

implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) as 

well as provisions of the Safe, 

Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users (SAFETEA–LU). The EIR will be 

prepared in accordance with the 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 184 / Monday, September 24, 2007 / Notices 54319 

California Environmental Quality Act 

(California Code of Regulation, Title 14, 

Chapter 3). As part of the EIS/EIR 

process, an evaluation of potential 

transit improvement alternatives will be 

completed (‘‘alternatives analysis’’) in 

accordance with 23 CFR Part 450 and 

inform the development of project 

alternatives. 

Previous studies and documents 

relevant to this action include the 

recently completed Van Ness Avenue 

BRT Feasibility Study (December 2006); 

2005 Prop K Strategic Plan (March 

2005); 2004 San Francisco Countywide 

Transportation Plan (adopted July 20, 

2004), and the New Transportation 

Expenditure Plan for San Francisco 

(Proposition K, approved November 4, 

2003). These documents describe the 

planning and funding for transportation 

improvements in San Francisco, 

including BRT in major bus corridors. 

These documents can be downloaded at 

the Web site www.sfcta.org, or requested 

from the Authority. 

EIS/EIR preparation will be initiated 

through a formal NEPA scoping process, 

which solicits input on issues and 

potential project impacts to consider in 

the environmental studies. Scoping will 

be accomplished through meetings and 

correspondence with interested persons, 

organizations, the general public, and 

Federal, State, and local agencies. 

Letters describing the proposed action 

and soliciting comments have been sent 

to the appropriate Federal, State, and 

local agencies, and to private 

organizations and individuals. 

Comments on issues and impacts to be 

considered in preparation of the EIS/EIR 

will be recorded in the project 

information database. 

DATES: Comment Due Date: Written 

comments on the scope of alternatives 

and impacts to be considered must be 

postmarked no later than October 18, 

2007 and should be sent to SFTA at the 

contact address below. 

NEPA Scoping Meeting Date: The 

public scoping meetings will be held on 

October 2, 2007 at the Holiday Inn 

Golden Gateway, 1500 Van Ness 

Avenue, San Francisco, CA, from 6 p.m. 

to 8 p.m. The meeting agenda will 

include opportunities to speak with 

project staff, viewing of information on 

the project, a brief presentation of the 

project purpose and alternatives, and 

opportunity for meeting participants to 

comment on issues of interest. The open 

house will resume after the presentation 

and comment period. Project staff will 

be present to receive formal agency and 

public input regarding the scope of the 

environmental studies, key issues, and 

other suggestions. The meeting room is 

accessible to persons with disabilities. 

Any individual with a disability who 

requires special assistance, such as a 

sign language interpreter, or any 

individual who requires English 

language interpretation should contact 

the SFCTA at 415–593–1423 at least 48 

hours in advance of the meeting in order 

for the SFCTA to make necessary 

arrangements. 

ADDRESSES: The scoping meeting will be 

held at the locations identified in the 

NEPA Scoping Meeting Date section 

above. Written comments should be sent 

to: Rachel Hiatt, Senior Transportation 

Planner, San Francisco County 

Transportation Authority; 100 Van Ness 

Avenue, 26th Floor; San Francisco, CA 

94612. Phone: 415–522–4809 or 

Rachel.Hiatt@sfcta.org. To be added to 

the mailing list for the Van Ness Avenue 

BRT Project, contact Ms. Hiatt at the 

address listed above. Persons with 

special needs should leave a message at 

the phone number above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Donna Turchie, Federal Transit 

Administration, Office of Planning and 

Program Development; 201 Mission 

Street, Suite 1650; San Francisco, CA 

94105. Phone: 415–744–2737 or 

Donna.Turchie@dot.gov. Additional 

information on the Van Ness Avenue 

BRT Project can be found on the project 

Web site at: http://www.vannessbrt.org/ 

and by contacting Rachel Hiatt at the 

SFCTA. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Project Background 

The proposed project would be 

located in a key north-south 

transportation corridor in the heart of 

the City and County of San Francisco. 

Van Ness Avenue is an important 

roadway and transit route serving high 

density commercial, residential, and 

civic/institutional areas along its length 

from the U.S. and State Highway Route 

101 freeway on the south to San 

Francisco Bay on the north. It is an atgrade continuation of U.S. and State 

Highway Route 101 from the freeway to 

Lombard Street, which continues west 

to Doyle Drive and the Golden Gate 

Bridge. The roadway serves as a major 

thoroughfare for local traffic as well as 

through traffic, carrying over 50,000 

people in cars per day and about 4000 

people in vehicles during the pm peak 

hour. Transit service is provided by 

Muni routes 47 and 49, and by Golden 

Gate Transit (based in Marin County), 

which operates commute service and 

limited all-day service into San 

Francisco on Van Ness Avenue. About 

43,000 passengers use Muni Routes 47 

and 49 and the Golden Gate Transit Van 

Ness routes daily, with approximately 

15,000 passengers riding daily within 

the Van Ness Avenue segment of 

service. A number of major east-west 

transit routes cross Van Ness Avenue 

and generate major bus-to-bus and busto-rail transfers with Van Ness Avenue 

services, including the muni Metro lines 

and the Muni lines 38 (Geary) and 38L 

(Geary Limited). 

Traffic congestion in mix-flow traffic 

lanes and transit overcrowding result in 

poor transit service reliability and low 

average bus speeds, currently just 5 to 

7 miles per hour during commute 

periods. Bus reliability is poor, with 

high variation in headways and bus 

bunching. Transit mode shares are low 

relative to the potential transit market 

along this corridor, where housing 

densities within one-quarter mile of Van 

Ness Avenue average over 90 units per 

acre, where 46% of households do not 

own a car (relative to 29% citywide), 

and where the city expects to add about 

3,800 new housing units and 8,500 new 

jobs by 2025. 

Van Ness Avenue has been identified 

as a high priority transit improvement 

corridor in a number of planning studies 

and funding actions by the City. The 

Authority’s Four Corridors Plan (1995) 

and Muni’s Vision for Rapid Transit 

(2000) identified Van Ness as a priority 

corridor for rapid transit improvements. 

Along with two other key transit 

corridors, Van Ness Avenue was 

designated for BRT improvements in the 

New Expenditure Plan for San 

Francisco, approved by voters as 

Proposition K, the reauthorization of the 

City’s 1⁄2 cent transportation sales tax 

measure, in November 2003. The 

Expenditure Plan is the investment 

component of the 2004 San Francisco 

Countywide Transportation Plan, which 

sets forth the city’s ‘‘blueprint to guide 

the development of transportation 

funding priorities and policy’’ with a 

key objective being the promotion and 

implementation of San Francisco’s 

transit first policy through the 

development of a network of fast, 

reliable transit including bus rapid 

transit. The Van Ness Avenue BRT 

Feasibility Study was initiated in 2004, 

completed in 2006, and evaluated the 

feasibility of four alternative BRT 

configurations on Van Ness Avenue. 

Four BRT alternatives were developed 

and compared with a No Project 

scenario, in conjunction with a 

comprehensive public and agency 

participation program. The Feasibility 

Study found that all four BRT 

configurations are feasible on Van Ness 

and recommended an environmental 

analysis to identify a preferred 

alternative. The alternatives form the 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
54320 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 184 / Monday, September 24, 2007 / Notices 

foundation for the BRT improvements to 

be evaluated in the proposed project 

EIS/EIR. 

II. Purpose and Need 

The City and County of San Francisco 

adopted as part of the 2004 Countywide 

Transportation Plan and its investment 

component, the New Expenditure Plan 

for San Francisco, a bus rapid transit 

strategy for expanding rapid transit 

service in San Francisco. The BRT 

network is intended to address the 

following purpose: 

1. Support the city’s growth and 

development needs 

2. Better serve existing transit riders 

and stem and reverse the trend toward 

transit mode share loss 

3. Improve the operational efficiency 

and cost effectiveness of the 

transportation system. 

A BRT network can meet those goals 

by:—

• Improving transit levels of service 

cost effectively. 

• Strengthening rapid transit services 

• Raising the cost effectiveness of 

Muni service and operational efficiency 

of transit preferential streets 

• Contributing to livability of BRT 

corridors 

Specific Van Ness BRT project 

purpose and need statements linked to 

these goals were subsequently 

established to guide the development of 

a BRT project for the Van Ness Avenue 

corridor. They guided preparation of the 

Van Ness Avenue BRT Feasibility Study 

(2005–2006), and include: 

• Close the performance gap between 

transit and automobile travel on Van 

Ness Avenue. For transit, this means 

reducing travel time (including wait 

time); significantly increasing reliability 

and reducing bunching; reducing 

crowding; and improving connectivity 

and safety. 

• Raise the operational efficiency of 

Van Ness Avenue. San Francisco has 

limited roadway capacity and no space 

to expand the network. It is also 

difficult in many areas to travel by auto 

given the obstacles—limited capacity 

and resulting congestion on key 

roadway segments. It is city policy to 

encourage travel by higher capacity 

modes to expand the transportation 

network’s carrying capacity and use it 

more efficiently. BRT offers a means to 

expand the overall capacity of Van Ness 

Avenue. However, transit buses must be 

separated from the existing traffic and 

pedestrian congestion and other 

impediments to efficient, fast travel. 

Transit infrastructure improvements 

would allow Muni to operate buses 

more efficiently and improve the 

productivity of buses by enabling each 

bus to complete more runs per hour. 

Frequent stops and starts and slowed, 

sometimes uneven, operations in 

congested conditions increase the wear 

and tear on buses and also fuel 

consumption. Improving average bus 

speeds would lead to more efficient 

operations and allow Muni to serve 

more passengers at a lower cost per 

passenger. 

• Raise the level of amenities and 

urban design of Van Ness Avenue. Van 

Ness Avenue is currently not an 

appealing urban environment for 

pedestrians. The Van Ness Avenue BRT 

Project incorporates elements that 

enhance the urban design and identity 

of Van Ness Avenue, especially at major 

transit nodes such as Mission Street and 

South Van Ness, Market Street, and 

Geary and O’Farrell streets. Transit 

capital improvements properly done 

and integrated with other design 

initiatives would make the street more 

livable and attractive for residents and 

commercial and institutional uses along 

its length. The BRT on Van Ness 

Avenue Project would incorporate 

pedestrian safety and urban design 

features and help transform Van ness 

Avenue into a ‘‘signature Preferential 

Transit Street and distinctive gateway 

into San Francisco.’’

• Accommodate future mobility 

needs. This need is linked to the 

continuing growth in the San Francisco 

and the region. More housing and more 

households now exist than in 2000 and 

they are projected to continue growing, 

with population increasing almost 20 

percent by 2030 (Association of Bay 

Area Governments, Projections 2005; 

San Francisco’s 2000 population was 

776,733; 2030 population is projected to 

be 924,600). Employment is forecast to 

grown by 29 percent during the same 

period, to 829,090 jobs available by 

2030 (ABAG). Along the Van Ness 

Avenue corridor itself, over 3,800 new 

housing units and 8,500 new jobs are 

anticipated. Transit priority and other 

congestion management measures offer 

an important way to accommodate the 

resulting growth in travel demand, 

which will be focused on the major 

transportation corridors in the city. Van 

Ness Avenue is one of these critical 

corridors. 

III. Alternatives 

Alternatives to be reviewed in the 

include a (1) No-Project/Baseline 

Alternative, which would encompass 

low cost improvements to corridor bus 

services, such as bus stop amenities and 

limited transit signal priority; (2) Van 

Ness Avenue BRT Project, which would 

provide a full complement of BRT 

improvements in two or more crosssectional configurations for Van Ness 

Avenue between approximately Mission 

Street and Lombard Street; and (3) any 

other service, alignment or crosssectional alternatives that emerge from 

the scoping and alternatives analysis 

processes. 

The No-Project Alternative assumes a 

2030 condition of land use and 

transportation capital and service 

improvements that are programmed or 

planned to be implemented by the San 

Francisco Municipal Transportation 

Agency (MTA, which includes San 

Francisco Muni and the Department of 

Parking and Traffic) and other transit 

providers in the study area (e.g. Golden 

Gate Transit, Caltrain, the commuter rail 

service between San Francisco and San 

Jose, and the Bay Area Rapid Transit 

District, or BART, a regional rail service 

provider). For transit, these include 

upgraded bus stops and passenger 

information/communication systems. 

Other transportation system 

improvements, such roadway traffic 

management measures, street lighting 

upgrades, and street resurfacing/ 

landscaping projects that would be the 

responsibility of the San Francisco 

Department of Public Works (DPW), the 

Public Utilities Commission (PUC), or 

the California State Department of 

Transportation (Caltrans), will be 

included in the 2030 No-Project 

network. This network will also form 

the background network for the build 

alternatives. 

The Van Ness Avenue BRT Project 

would include, among other features, 

dedicated transit lanes within the 

existing Van Ness Avenue right-of-way; 

sheltered, low-platform passenger 

stations with real time bus arrival 

passenger information signs, lighting, 

and wayfinding; self-service fare 

vending on station platforms and onboard proof-of-payment verification; 

and advanced transit traffic signal 

priority and traffic management systems 

to reduce bus delays at signalized 

intersections yet maintain acceptable 

traffic flow. Passenger stations would be 

spaced on average every 940 feet with 

local bus service one block to the east. 

BRT transitway and stations 

improvements would be made entirely 

within existing public rights-of-way; 

improvements outside of existing public 

rights of way are not anticipated with 

the possible exception of required 

improvements to existing Muni bus 

storage and maintenance facilities and 

to off-alignment intersections and 

parking facilities for mitigation of 

project impacts. Variations in the crosssection for the BRT transitway and the 

locations of stations are anticipated and 

would comprise design options for the 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 184 / Monday, September 24, 2007 / Notices 54321 

basic BRT alignment. A two-way 

transitway either in the median of Van 

Ness Avenue or along the outside curbs 

(one northbound BRT lane along the 

east curb/parking lane; one southbound 

BRT lane along the west curb/parking 

lane) and, correspondingly, stations in 

the median or as extensions of the 

sidewalk were considered in the Van 

Ness Avenue BRT Feasibility Study and 

warrant further evaluation as part of the 

EIS/EIR and alternatives analysis. 

The SFCTA in association with Muni 

will evaluate the procurement of 

modern low-floor high-capacity vehicles 

that would be assigned to the BRT 

service and have added features, such as 

two-sided multidoor access, passenger 

station docking assist, and other 

amenities. Streetscape improvements, 

such as enhanced landscaping and 

pedestrian access along Van Ness 

Avenue, are also included in the 

proposed BRT project. 

IV. Probable Effects 

FTA and SFCTA will evaluate the 

transportation, environmental, social, 

and economic impact of each 

alternative. Effects of the Van Ness 

Avenue BRT Project will be compared 

to the No Project/Baseline. The overall 

benefits of the Van Ness Avenue BRT 

Project, including on transit speeds and 

reliability, new riders, and 

transportation system user benefits, will 

be relative to the No Project/Baseline 

Alternative. The Van Ness Avenue BRT 

Project Alternative is expected to 

improve transit speeds and increase 

transit reliability; increase bus transit 

ridership; improve access and mobility 

for San Francisco residents, many of 

whom are highly dependent on transit; 

and provide competitive transit access 

to major employment and activity 

centers relative to the No Project/ 

Baseline Alternative. 

Increased congestion and worsening 

conditions for transit service along Van 

Ness Avenue are expected without a 

significant improvement. The No 

Project/Baseline Alternatives would not 

eliminate the main impediments to 

efficient and effective service in the 

corridor—auto/transit conflicts in 

mixed-flow lanes. The Van Ness Avenue 

BRT Project may affect the following 

areas: Traffic operations; parking; local 

access and circulation; visual and 

aesthetic effects; historic and cultural 

resources; disturbance of pre-existing 

hazardous wastes; and temporary 

construction-phase impacts. Impacts of 

the Van Ness Avenue BRT Project will 

be evaluated for both the construction 

period and for the long-term period of 

operation. Mitigation measures will be 

identified and evaluated for avoiding 

and reducing adverse effects. 

To ensure all significant issues related 

to the proposed project are identified 

and addressed in the ESI/EIR and 

alternatives analysis, comments and 

suggestions are invited from all 

interested parties. Comments, 

suggestions, and questions concerning 

the proposed action should be directed 

to the contacts listed above. 

V. FTA Procedures 

In accordance with the FTA policy, 

all Federal laws, regulations and 

executive orders affecting project 

development, including but not limited 

to the regulations of the Council on 

Environmental Quality and FTA 

implementing NEPA (40 CFR parts 

1500–1508 and 23 CFR part 771); the 

conformity requirements of the Clean 

Air Act; section 4040 of the Clean Water 

Act; Executive Order 12898 regarding 

environmental justice; the National 

Historic Preservation Act; the 

Endangered Species Act; and section 

4(f) of the Department of Transportation 

Act, will be addressed to the maximum 

extent practicable during the NEPA 

process. Prior transportation planning 

studies may be pertinent to establishing 

the purpose and need for the proposed 

action and the range of alternatives to be 

evaluated in detail in the EIS/EIR. The 

Draft EIS/EIR will be prepared 

simultaneously with conceptual 

engineering for the alternatives, 

including bus stop and alignment 

options. The Draft EIS/EIR process will 

address the potential use of Federal 

funds for the proposed action, as well as 

assessing social, economic, and 

environmental impacts of the proposed 

Van Ness Avenue BRT Project. The 

Project will be refined to minimize and 

mitigate any adverse impacts. 

After publication, the Draft EIS/EIR 

will be available for public and agency 

review and comment, and a public 

hearing will be held. Based on the Draft 

EIS/EIR and comments received, the 

San Francisco County Transportation 

Authority Board will select a locally 

preferred alternative (LPA) for further 

assessment in the Final EIS/EIR, which 

will be based on further engineering of 

the LPA and other remaining 

alternatives. SFCTA intends to request 

FTA approval to enter Project 

Development and secure funding under 

the Small Starts program prior to 

initiating further engineering (e.g., 

preliminary engineering) and preparing 

the Final EIS/EIR. 

Issued on September 19, 2007. 

Leslie T. Rogers, 

Regional Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 07–4713 Filed 9–21–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–57–M 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Surface Transportation Board 

[STB Docket No. AB–43 (Sub-No. 180X)] 

Illinois Central Railroad Company—

Abandonment Exemption—in Adams 

County, MS 

Illinois Central Railroad Company 

(ICR) has filed a notice of exemption 

under 49 CFR Part 1152 Subpart F—

Exempt Abandonments to abandon 

approximately 0.46 miles of rail line, 

between milepost 148.67 and milepost 

148.21, in Natchez, Adams County, MS. 

The line traverses United States Postal 

Service Zip Code 39120. 

ICR has certified that: (1) No local 

traffic has moved over the line for at 

least 2 years; (2) there is no overhead 

traffic on the line to be rerouted; (3) no 

formal complaint filed by a user of rail 

service on the line (or by a state or local 

government entity acting on behalf of 

such user) regarding cessation of service 

over the line either is pending with the 

Surface Transportation Board or with 

any U.S. District Court or has been 

decided in favor of complainant within 

the 2-year period; and (4) the 

requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7 

(environmental report), 49 CFR 1105.8 

(historic report), 49 CFR 1105.11 

(transmittal letter), 49 CFR 1105.12 

(newspaper publication), and 49 CFR 

1152.50(d)(1) (notice to governmental 

agencies) have been met. 

As a condition to this exemption, any 

employee adversely affected by the 

abandonment shall be protected under 

Oregon Short Line R. Co.—

Abandonment—Goshen, 360 I.C.C. 91 

(1979). To address whether this 

condition adequately protects affected 

employees, a petition for partial 

revocation under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) 

must be filed. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES