Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 233 / Thursday, December 4, 1997 / Proposed Rules 64193

1 In the embargo context, for example, a shipper

might dispute a railroad’s contention that it is

temporarily unable to provide service because of

unsafe operating conditions. The Board, in a recent

decision, declared that, in such situations, it would

secure an inspection from an FRA-certified safety

inspector before directing service over a line

embargoed for safety reasons. Service Obligations

Over Excepted Track, STB Ex Parte No. 564 (STB

served Oct. 22, 1997).

environment and that no detailed

statement is required pursuant to the

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969.

Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995

This proposed rule imposes no

unfunded mandates on any

governmental or private entity and is in

compliance with the provisions of the

Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995.

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 327

Lakeshore management, Public lands.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, we propose to withdraw the

amendment to 36 CFR Part 327,

Appendix C published at 62 FR 18307

(April 15, 1997) and to amend 36 CFR

Part 327, as follows:

PART 327 —RULES AND

REGULATIONS GOVERNING PUBLIC

USE OF WATER RESOURCE

DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

ADMINISTERED BY THE CHIEF OF

ENGINEERS

1. The authority citation for 36 CFR

Part 327 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 460d and 460l–6a.

2. Appendix C to § 327.30 is amended

by revising paragraph 14 to read as

follows:

Appendix C to § 327.30—Shoreline Use

Permit Conditions

* * * * *

14. Flotation for all docks and boat

mooring buoys shall be of materials

manufactured for marine use. Flotation will

be 100% warranted for a minimum of 8 years

to not sink, become waterlogged, crack, peel,

fragment or be subject to loss of beads.

Flotation materials will resist puncture and

penetration and will not be subject to damage

by animals. Flotation will be fire resistant.

Any flotation which is within 40 feet of a line

carrying fuel shall be 100% impervious to

water and fuel. Reuse of plastic, metal or

other previously used drums or containers

for encasement or flotation purpose is

prohibited. Existing flotation is authorized

until it has severely deteriorated and is no

longer serviceable, at which time it shall be

replaced with approved flotation. For any

floats installed after the effective date of this

specification, repair or replacement is

required when it no longer performs its

designated function or fails to meet the

specifications for which it was originally

warranted.

* * * * *

Dated: November 21, 1997.

For the Commander.

Robert W. Burkhardt,

Colonel, Corps of Engineers, Executive

Director of Civil Works.

[FR Doc. 97–31776 Filed 12–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–92–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board.

49 CFR Chapter X

[STB Ex Parte No. 574]

Safe Implementation of BoardApproved Transactions

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed

rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Board seeks comments

from all interested persons on the extent

to which railroads should be required to

provide detailed information setting

forth the manner in which they intend

to safely implement authority granted

by the Board in proceedings subject to

the Board’s jurisdiction.

DATES: Notices of intent to participate

are due by December 24, 1997. Shortly

thereafter, a list of participants will be

issued. Comments are due by January

19, 1998. Replies are due by February

12, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send an original and 10

copies of notices of intent to participate

and pleadings referring to STB Ex Parte

No. 574: Surface Transportation Board,

Office of the Secretary, Case Control

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

DC 20423.

Once the list of participants has been

issued by the Board, send one copy of

each comment and each reply to each

party on the list of participants.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joseph H. Dettmar, (202) 565–1600 [TDD

for the hearing impaired: (202) 565–

1695].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The rail

transportation policy (RTP) (49 U.S.C.

10101), which was adopted in the

Staggers Rail Act of 1980 and amended

in the ICC Termination Act of 1995,

establishes the basic policy directives

against which all of the statutory

provisions we administer must be

weighed. The RTP provides, in relevant

part, that, ‘‘[i]n regulating the railroad

industry, it is the policy of the United

States Government * * * to promote a

safe and efficient rail transportation

system’’ * * * [by allowing rail carriers

to] operate transportation facilities

without detriment to the public health

and safety * * *.’’ The rail

transportation policy applies to all

transactions subject to Board

jurisdiction.

Over the years, the Board and its

predecessor, the Interstate Commerce

Commission (ICC), have considered the

issue of safety along with other relevant

issues in individual cases. For example,

the ICC and the Board, in consultation

with the Federal Railroad

Administration (FRA), which has

primary responsibility over railroad

safety enforcement, have routinely

considered safety in their environmental

review of all rail mergers, acquisitions,

line constructions, and similar

transactions. In 1993, the ICC denied an

application because the agency believed

that no conditions could sufficiently

mitigate the unsafe conditions arising

out of the proposed construction of the

rail line in Construction and

Operation—Indiana and Ohio Ry. Co., 9

I.C.C.2d 783 (1993). In a similar vein,

we routinely address safety issues, with

the advice of the FRA, in the context of

rail embargoes.1

Recently, in a pending railroad merger

proceeding, we undertook to address

safety issues in a more systematic way.

Specifically, in response to a request in

the ongoing Conrail Acquisition

proceeding by the FRA, we required the

applicant railroads in that case to

prepare detailed plans addressing how

they propose to integrate their

operations to ensure continued safety if

the merger is approved by the Board.

CSX Corporation and CSX

Transportation, Inc., Norfolk Southern

Corporation and Norfolk Southern

Railway Company—Control and

Operating Leases/Agreements—Conrail,

Inc. and Consolidated Rail Corporation,

STB Finance Docket No. 33388,

Decision No. 52 (STB served Nov. 3,

1997) (Conrail Acquisition). In our

decision, we explained that the

railroads’ submissions would be made

part of the environmental record in that

proceeding and dealt with in the

ongoing environmental review process

in that case. We stated that the railroads’

submissions, which are due to be filed

December 3rd, will be incorporated in a

separate section of the Draft

Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)

that is to be issued by the end of the

year. We requested the FRA to provide

us with its analysis of the plans, and

invited comments from all other

interested persons, during the 45-day

comment period that will be provided

on the DEIS. After review of these

analyses and comments, the Board’s

environmental staff will address safety

implementation issues in the Final
64194 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 233 / Thursday, December 4, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Environmental Impact Statement for the

proposed Conrail Acquisition. We will

then consider the full environmental

record, including the information

concerning Applicants’ safety

implementation plans, in arriving at our

decision in the Conrail Acquisition

proceeding.

The approach outlined above will

assure our ability to fully address safety

implementation issues in the proposed

Conrail Acquisition proceeding. Having

developed a vehicle by which to

evaluate the impact on rail safety of one

transaction, we believe it is appropriate

to consider the advisability of

promulgating a rule to extend this

process to other rail transactions subject

to the Board’s jurisdiction. Accordingly,

we seek public comment on the

question of how the Board should

proceed in this regard in exercising its

jurisdiction over such transactions.

We are aware that the FRA has

suggested that rules of general

applicability might be appropriate for

future mergers. In our view, the process

adopted in STB Finance Docket No.

33388, which provides for full

utilization of the expertise of both the

Board and the FRA, establishes a

mechanism for handling future merger

cases. It might also have wider

applicability to other types of

transactions subject to the Board’s

jurisdiction; alternatively, different

procedures for implementing the

Board’s responsibilities under the RTP

to consider matters bearing on the safe

implementation of transactions might be

preferable outside the merger area. The

administrative process permits the

Board to proceed either by rule or on a

case-by-case basis, and to address some

kinds of transactions by rule and some

by reliance on the development of

precedent.

Accordingly, because the questions at

issue here are significant and of broad

interest, we are initiating sua sponte

this proceeding to address the extent to

which railroads should be required to

provide detailed information setting

forth the manner in which they intend

to safely implement authority granted

by the Board in proceedings subject to

the Board’s jurisdiction. We specifically

seek the views of the FRA and of any

other interested persons on these issues.

We seek public comments on whether

we should proceed broadly or on a caseby-case basis, and on specific standards

and procedures that the Board could

adopt by rule to assure the safe

implementation of rail transactions

subject to our jurisdiction. Parties filing

comments should indicate whether their

specific recommendations would apply

to all transactions or only to certain

types and, if the latter, which ones.

Depending on the nature of the

submissions presented, we will

determine at a future date whether to

propose formal rules, issue a policy

statement, or proceed on a case-by-case

basis, as we have done in the Conrail

Acquisition proceeding.

Decided: November 26, 1997.

By the Board, Chairman Morgan and Vice

Chairman Owen.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–31795 Filed 12–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915–00–P