45696 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 167 / Thursday, August 28, 1997 / Notices

Inc. (Vermont), of Burlington, VT],

jointly seek approval of a revenue

pooling agreement under 49 U.S.C.

14302 with respect to their pooled

motor passenger and package express

transportation services between various

points in New York, including services

extending between New York, NY, and

Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

DATES: Comments on the proposed

agreement may be filed with the Board

in the form of verified statements on or

before September 29, 1997. If comments

are filed, applicants’ rebuttal statement

is due on or before October 17, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send an original and 10

copies of any comments referring to STB

Docket No. MC–F–20910 to: Surface

Transportation Board, Office of the

Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K

Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20423–

0001. In addition, send one copy of any

comments to each of applicants’

representatives: (1) Lawrence E.

Lindeman, Suite 311, 218 N. Lee Street,

Alexandria, VA 22314–2531; (2) Mark E.

Southerst, Greyhound Lines, Inc., P.O.

Box 660362, Dallas, TX 75266–0362;

and (3) Fritz R. Kahn, Suite 750 West,

1100 New York Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20005–3934.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Beryl Gordon, (202) 565–1600. [TDD for

the hearing impaired: (202) 565–1695.]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In

Adirondack Transit Lines, Inc., Pine

Hill-Kingston Bus Corp., and Passenger

Bus Corporation—Pooling—Greyhound

Lines, Inc., and Vermont Transit

Company, Inc., STB No. MC–F–19190

(Sub-No. 1) (STB served Nov. 26, 1996),

the Board approved, in addition to their

existing pooled route between New

York City and Albany, NY, a service

pooling agreement between the

Adirondack Group and the Greyhound

System over routes that they both

operate: (1) Between New York City,

and Buffalo, NY; (2) between Albany

and Buffalo; (3) between Albany and

Long Island, NY; and (4) between New

York City and Montreal, Quebec,

Canada. These routes serve such

intermediate points as Syracuse and

Rochester, NY. Under the proposed

arrangement, the Adirondack Group and

the Greyhound System will also pool

their passenger and package express

revenues over all of these pooled routes.

Adirondack holds operating authority

in No. MC–2835; Pine Hill, in No. MC–

2060; and PBC, in No. MC–276393. The

Adirondack Group operates more than

1,500 miles of intercity bus routes,

predominantly in New York.

Greyhound holds operating authority

in No. MC–1515; and Vermont, in No.

MC–45626. The Greyhound System

operates more than 90,000 miles of

intercity bus routes throughout the

nation.

Applicants formerly were direct

competitors over the pooled routes.

Under their service pooling agreements,

they state that they have been able to

reduce the number of schedules each of

them operates, while providing

additional departure times. Applicants

note that load factors on their buses

have improved, making their operations

more economical and efficient than they

otherwise would have been. By pooling

their revenues as well as their services

on these routes, applicants expect to

strengthen their commitment to

providing safe, convenient, and

comfortable bus transportation at

reasonable and competitive fares, as

each applicant will share financially in

the vicissitudes of the pooled-route

operations of the other. Applicants

assert that their revenue pooling

agreement will also facilitate the sharing

of certain terminals, to the benefit of the

traveling public. They note that they

continue to experience keen

competition from other modes of

passenger travel in the region, including

rail passenger service operated by

Amtrak, air service operated by at least

four airlines, and automobile travel over

interstate highways.

Copies of the pooling application may

be obtained free of charge by contacting

applicants’ representatives. A copy of

this notice will be served on the

Department of Justice, Antitrust

Division, 10th Street & Pennsylvania

Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20530.

Decided: August 20, 1997.

By the Board, Chairman Morgan and Vice

Chairman Owen.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–22957 Filed 8–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915–00–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Ex Parte No. 552 (Sub–No. 1)]

Railroad Revenue Adequacy—1996

Determination

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board,

DOT.

ACTION: Notice of decision.

SUMMARY: On August 28, 1997, the

Board served a decision announcing the

1996 revenue adequacy determinations

for the Nation’s Class I railroads. Three

carriers (Illinois Central Railroad

Company, Norfolk Southern Railroad

Company, and Soo Line Railroad

Company) are found to be revenue

adequate.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This decision is

effective August 28, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Leonard J. Blistein, (202) 565–1529.

(TDD for the hearing impaired: (202)

565–1695.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board

is required to make an annual

determination of railroad revenue

adequacy. A railroad will be considered

revenue adequate under 49 U.S.C.

10704(a) if it achieves a rate of return on

net investment equal to at least the

current cost of capital for the railroad

industry for 1996, determined to be

11.9% in Railroad Cost of Capital—

1996, STB Ex Parte No. 558 (STB served

July 16, 1997). In this proceeding, the

Board applied the revenue adequacy

standards to each Class I railroad, and

it found 3 carriers, Illinois Central

Railroad Company, Norfolk Southern

Railroad Company, and Soo Line

Railroad Company, to be revenue

adequate.

Additional information is contained

in the Board’s formal decision. To

purchase a copy of the full decision,

write to, call, or pick up in person from:

DC NEWS & DATA, INC., Suite 210,

1925 K Street, N.W., Washington, DC

20423. Telephone: (202) 289–4357.

(Assistance for the hearing impaired is

available through TDD services (202)

565–1695.)

Environmental and Energy

Considerations

This action will not significantly

affect either the quality of the human

environment or the conservation of

energy resources.

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 603(b), we

conclude that our action in this

proceeding will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. The purpose

and effect of the action is merely to

update the annual railroad industry

revenue adequacy finding. No new

reporting or other regulatory

requirements are imposed, directly or

indirectly, on small entities.

Decided: August 14, 1997.

By the Board, Chairman Morgan and Vice

Chairman Owen.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–22960 Filed 8–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915–00–P