Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Notices 62107

1Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway Company and

Transtar, Inc. are referred to collectively as EJE. I

& M Rail Link, LLC is referred to as IMRL.

2The responsive application filed jointly by

NYDOT and NYCEDC purports to be filed both in

STB Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 69) (this

being the sub-number docket reserved by NYDOT)

and in STB Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 54)

(this being the sub-number docket reserved by

NYCEDC). Although there are two responsive

applicants there is only one responsive application,

and we will treat this single application as if it had

been filed in STB Finance Docket No. 33388 (SubNo. 69) only.

3CSXC and CSXT, and their wholly owned

subsidiaries, are referred to collectively as CSX.

NSC and NSR, and their wholly owned

subsidiaries, are referred to collectively as NS. CRR

and CRC, and their wholly owned subsidiaries, are

referred to collectively as Conrail or CR. CSX, NS,

and Conrail are referred to collectively as the

primary applicants.

4The responsive applications filed in STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-Nos. 35, 36, 39, 59,

61, 62, 63, 69, 72, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80, and 81) and

the notice of exemption filed in STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 83) are hereinafter

referred to collectively as the ‘‘responsive filings.’’

aspect signal system and improvements

in track and structures that will benefit

all NEC users through more efficient

operations and improved safety.

The proposed order would require

that controlling locomotives (including

electrical multiple-unit vehicles and cab

cars) on the NEC be equipped with onboard ACSES equipment. This burden

would fall on commuter railroads,

freight railroads, and Amtrak, in

proportion to the number of trains those

entities operate on the NEC. A risk

assessment study conducted for Amtrak

and discussed with other NEC interests

in the Northeast Corridor Safety

Committee illustrated the importance of

a more secure train control system in

avoiding any increase in system risk as

train movements and speeds increase on

the North End over the coming decades.

One on-board ACSES unit is expected

to cost approximately $40,000. North

End users exclusive of Amtrak are

expected to require approximately 450

units, for a total cost of about

$18,000,000. Each of these users will

experience direct benefits in safety and

liability avoidance. Potential benefits

could result from higher average train

speeds if the proposed higher levels of

unbalance in the Track Safety Standards

NPRM are adopted.

FRA has considered the proposed

system’s effect on small entities. Only

one small entity, the Providence and

Worcester Railroad (PW), will be

affected. To minimize the impact on this

small freight railroad, FRA will limit the

hours of application of the proposed

order to allow the PW to continue

operations without equipping most of

its fleet with new ACSES units.

Proceedings on This Proposed Order

FRA seeks public comment on this

proposed order and related matters,

including any authorization that may be

required for Amtrak to implement a

modified cab signal system on the NEC.

FRA has placed in the docket of this

proceeding copies of Amtrak’s program

description for the ACSES system,

proposed operating rules for use in

conjunction with the system, and other

related information, including current

Amtrak projections for operating speeds

over highway-rail crossings on the

North End.

No public hearing is presently

planned in this proceeding. However,

FRA will convene such a hearing if a

request is received within 45 days from

publication of this notice. FRA does

intend to convene the Northeast

Corridor Safety Committee following the

close of the comment period to consider

public comments received and provide

advice for resolving remaining issues.

FRA will provide notice of this meeting,

which will be open to the public, and

will include the minutes of the meeting

in the docket of this proceeding.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20501–

20505 (1994); and 49 CFR 1.49 (f), (g), and

(m).

Issued in Washington, D.C. on November

17, 1997.

Donald M. Itzkoff,

Deputy Administrator, Federal Railroad

Administration.

[FR Doc. 97–30505 Filed 11–19–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No.

35) et al.]

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; et al.

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.

ACTION: Decision No. 54; Notice of

acceptance of responsive applications

and related filing.

SUMMARY: The Board is accepting for

consideration the responsive

applications filed: by New York State

Electric and Gas Corporation (NYSEG)

in STB Finance Docket No. 33388 (SubNo. 35); jointly by Elgin, Joliet & Eastern

Railway Company, Transtar, Inc., and I

& M Rail Link, LLC, in STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 36); 1 by

Livonia, Avon & Lakeville Railroad

Corporation (LAL) in STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 39); by

Wisconsin Central Ltd. (WCL) in STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 59);

by Bessemer and Lake Erie Railroad

Company (BLE) in STB Finance Docket

No. 33388 (Sub-No. 61); by Illinois

Central Railroad Company (IC) in STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 62);

by R.J. Corman Railroad Company/

Western Ohio Line (RJCW) in STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 63);

jointly by (i) the State of New York,

acting by and through its Department of

Transportation (NYDOT), and (ii) the

New York City Economic Development

Corporation (NYCEDC) in STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 69); 2 jointly

by the Belvidere & Delaware River

Railway (BDRV) and the Black River &

Western Railroad (BRW) in STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 72); by New

England Central Railroad, Inc. (NECR),

in STB Finance Docket No. 33388 (SubNo. 75); by Indiana Southern Railroad,

Inc. (ISRR), in STB Finance Docket No.

33388 (Sub-No. 76); by Indiana & Ohio

Railway Company (IORY) in STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 77);

by Ann Arbor Acquisition Corporation,

d/b/a Ann Arbor Railroad (AA), in STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 78);

by Wheeling & Lake Erie Railway

Company (W&LE) in STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 80); and

jointly by Canadian National Railway

Company (CN) and Grand Trunk

Western Railroad Incorporated (GTW) in

STB Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No.

81). The Board is also accepting for

consideration the notice of exemption

filed by GTW in STB Finance Docket

No. 33388 (Sub-No. 83). The responsive

applications filed in STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-Nos. 35, 36, 39,

59, 61, 62, 63, 69, 72, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80,

and 81) are responsive to the primary

application filed June 23, 1997, in STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 by CSX

Corporation (CSXC), CSX

Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), Norfolk

Southern Corporation (NSC), Norfolk

Southern Railway Company (NSR),

Conrail Inc. (CRR), and Consolidated

Rail Corporation (CRC).3 The notice of

exemption filed in STB Finance Docket

No. 33388 (Sub-No. 83) is related to the

responsive application filed in STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No.

81).4

DATES: The effective date of this

decision is November 20, 1997.

Comments regarding the responsive

filings must be filed with the Board by

December 15, 1997. Rebuttal in support

of these responsive filings must be filed

with the Board by January 14, 1998.

Briefs (not to exceed 50 pages) must be
62108 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Notices

5 In order for a document to be considered a

formal filing, the Board must receive an original

and 25 copies of the document, which must show

that it has been properly served on all other parties

of record. Documents transmitted by facsimile

(FAX) will not be considered formal filings and are

not encouraged because they will result in

unnecessarily burdensome, duplicative processing

in what has already become a voluminous record.

6Members of the United States Congress and

Governors are not parties of record and therefore

need not be served with copies of filings, unless any

such Member or Governor is designated as a party

of record. See Decision No. 12 (served July 23, 1997,

and published that day in the Federal Register at

62 FR 39577), slip op. at 19, 62 FR at 39588.

7 If exercised by NSR, modification of NSR’s

trackage rights over CSXT and New York Central

Lines LLC (NYC), as shown on pp. 220–52 and 329–

35 of Volume 8B of the primary application, would

also be required to eliminate any restrictions

contained therein that would prevent transportation

to NYSEG’s Kintigh Station, including, but not

confined to, limitations against interchanging with,

or operating over, property of Somerset Railroad

Corporation.

8Milepost is abbreviated MP. Control point is

abbreviated CP.

9 If exercised by a third-party carrier, these rights

would include full access over: The Chicago Line

between CP–2 and FW Tower (CP–437) and the Belt

Line Branch owned by NYC and operated by CSX

between the connection at FW Tower (CP–437),

Buffalo, NY, at or near MP 0.0, and the connection

with the Niagara Branch (CP–1) at or near MP 7.2,

and the Niagara Branch operated by CSX between

the connection with the Belt Line Branch, at or near

MP 7.5, ‘‘and to’’ Tuscarora Wye to CP–69 at MP

69.6 of the Lockport Branch to MP 58.8 (CP–59) and

connection track to MP 0.0 of the Somerset Railroad

Corporation. This would cover a total distance of

approximately 33.2 miles.

filed with the Board by February 23,

1998.

ADDRESSES: An original and 25 copies of

all comments referring to STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 35), STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 36),

STB Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No.

39), STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 59), STB Finance Docket No.

33388 (Sub-No. 61), STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 62), STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 63),

STB Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No.

69), STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 72), STB Finance Docket No.

33388 (Sub-No. 75), STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 76), STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 77),

STB Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No.

78), STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 80), STB Finance Docket No.

33388 (Sub-No. 81), and/or STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-No. 83) must be

filed with the Surface Transportation

Board, Office of the Secretary, Case

Control Unit, ATTN.: STB Finance

Docket No. 33388, 1925 K Street, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20423–0001.5

In addition to submitting an original

and 25 paper copies of each document

filed with the Board, parties are also

requested to submit one electronic copy

of each such document. Further details

respecting such electronic submissions

are provided below.

In addition, one copy of each

document filed in these proceedings

must be served on: the U.S. Secretary of

Transportation; the U.S. Attorney

General; Administrative Law Judge

Jacob Leventhal, Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, 888 First

Street, N.E., Suite 11F, Washington, D.C.

20426; Dennis G. Lyons, Esq., Arnold &

Porter, 555 12th Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20004–1202

(representing primary applicants CSXC

and CSXT); Richard A. Allen, Esq.,

Zuckert, Scoutt & Rasenberger, LLP,

Suite 600, 888 Seventeenth Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20006–3939

(representing primary applicants NSC

and NSR); and Paul A. Cunningham,

Esq., Harkins Cunningham, Suite 600,

1300 Nineteenth Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20036 (representing

primary applicants CRR and CRC).

In addition, one copy of all comments

filed in these proceedings must be

served on the appropriate responsive

applicant’s representative: William A.

Mullins, Esq., Troutman Sanders LLP,

1300 I Street, N.W., Suite 500 East,

Washington, D.C. 20005–3314

(representing NYSEG); Thomas J.

Litwiler, Esq., Oppenheimer Wolff &

Donnelly, Two Prudential Plaza, 45th

Floor, 180 North Stetson Avenue,

Chicago, IL 60601–6710 (representing

EJE, IMRL, BLE, IC, and WCL); Kevin M.

Sheys, Esq., Oppenheimer Wolff &

Donnelly, 1020 Nineteenth Street, N.W.,

Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20036–

6200 (representing LAL and RJCW);

William L. Slover, Esq., Slover & Loftus,

1224 Seventeenth Street, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20036–3003

(representing NYDOT); Charles A.

Spitulnik, Esq., Hopkins & Sutter, 888

Sixteenth Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20006 (representing NYCEDC);

Peter A. Greene, Esq., Thompson Hine

& Flory LLP, 1920 N Street, N.W., Suite

800, Washington, D.C. 20036

(representing BDRV and BRW); Karl

Morell, Esq., Ball Janik LLP, Suite 225,

1455 F Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

20005 (representing NECR, ISRR, IORY,

and AA); Charles H. White, Jr., Esq.,

Galland, Kharasch & Garfinkle, P.C.,

1054 Thirty-First Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20007–4492

(representing W&LE); and L. John

Osborn, Sonnenschein Nath &

Rosenthal, 1301 K Street, N.W., Suite

600 East, Washington, D.C. 20005

(representing CN and GTW).

In addition, one copy of all

documents filed in these proceedings

must be served on all other persons

designated parties of record on the

Board’s service list in STB Finance

Docket No. 33388. See the service list

attached to Decision No. 21 (served

August 19, 1997), as modified in

Decision No. 27 (served September 8,

1997), and as further modified in

Decision No. 43 (served October 7,

1997).6

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia

M. Farr, (202) 565–1613. [TDD for the

hearing impaired: (202) 565–1695.]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the

primary application filed with the Board

on June 23, 1997, primary applicants

CSXC, CSXT, NSC, NSR, CRR, and CRC

seek approval and authorization under

49 U.S.C. 11321–25 for: (1) The

acquisition by CSX and NS of control of

Conrail; and (2) the division of the

assets of Conrail by and between CSX

and NS. In various related filings also

filed June 23, 1997, the primary

applicants seek related relief contingent

upon approval of the primary

application. In Decision No. 12, the

Board accepted for consideration the

primary application and the various

related filings, and directed that

responsive applications be filed by

October 21, 1997.

Responsive Filings: Conditions

Requested.

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 35), NYSEG seeks: (1) on

behalf of NSR,7 or a third-party carrier

suitable to NYSEG, trackage rights over

the CRC lines between Buffalo, NY, and

NYSEG’s Kintigh Station; specifically,

from the Niagara Branch MP 19.0 (CP–

21) 8 to the Tuscarora Wye, for

approximately 4,200 feet, to Lockport

Branch MP 69.6 (CP–69) to the

connection with Somerset Railroad

Corporation at Lockport Branch MP 58.8

(CP–59) (a total distance of

approximately 11.2 miles);9 or (2) on

behalf of CSXT, or a third-party carrier

suitable to NYSEG, trackage rights over

the CRC lines between Buffalo, NY, and

NYSEG’s Milliken, Goudey, and

Greenidge plants; specifically, from

Chicago Line MP 1.7 (CP–DRAW) over

the Bison Running Track to Southern

Tier Line MP 419.8 to Binghamton MP

215.3 including Binghamton Running

Track and #4 Yard Track with

connections to: Vestal Industrial Track;

on Vestal Industrial Track from MP

192.3 to MP 195.4; and connections to

Lehigh Secondary at Southern Tier MP

255.2, Lehigh Secondary Track MP

269.5 to 271.6 and connection to Ithaca

Secondary; Ithaca Secondary from MP

271.6 to the end of line at Milliken

Station MP 321.0; connections to

Corning Secondary at Southern Tier

Line MP 290.1 and 290.8, Corning
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Notices 62109

10The ‘‘New Jersey/New York Shared Assets

Area’’ is apparently the area that applicants refer to

as the North Jersey Shared Assets Area.

11NECR’s use of the term ‘‘limited trackage

rights’’ is intended to include: (a) The right to

operate trains over the lines described in the text;

and (b) the right to interchange with all carriers,

including shortlines, at all junctions on the lines

thus described.

12 ISRR’s use of the term ‘‘local trackage rights’’

is intended to include: (a) The right to operate

trains over the lines described in the text; (b) the

right to interchange with all carriers, including

shortlines, at all junctions on the lines thus

described; and (c) the right to serve all shippers,

sidings, and team tracks located on the lines thus

described.

Secondary from MP 70.6 (CP–Glass) and

MP 70.9 (GP–Gibson/CP–Corning) to

MP 0 (CP–335), including sidings,

runarounds, and passing tracks (a total

distance of approximately 333.4 miles).

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 36), EJE and IMRL seek to

acquire, and thereafter to divide into

two equal parts, CRC’s 51% stock

ownership of the Indiana Harbor Belt

Railroad Company (IHB).

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 39), LAL seeks to acquire

ownership of or trackage rights on

approximately 1.0 route mile of trackage

constituting CRC’s Genesee Junction

yard in Chili, NY.

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 59), WCL seeks to acquire from

The Baltimore & Ohio Chicago Terminal

Railroad Company (B&OCT, a wholly

owned CSX subsidiary) a portion of

B&OCT’s Altenheim Subdivision,

including rail line, side track, yard

trackage, and associated right-of-way

and appurtenances, beginning at a

connection between WCL and B&OCT

trackage at B&OCT MP 37.4 at Madison

Street, Forest Park, IL, and extending to

a point of connection with Union

Pacific Railroad Company (UPRR) and

Conrail’s Panhandle Line in the vicinity

of Rockwell Street, Chicago, IL.

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 61), BLE seeks overhead

trackage rights over: (1) CRC’s Mon Line

between the connection with BLE

(Union Railroad Company, a BLE

affiliate) at Pittsburgh (Duquesne), PA,

and CRC’s Shire Oaks Yard in Shire

Oaks, PA (a distance of approximately

14 miles); and/or (2) CSXT’s line

(formerly the Pittsburgh & Lake Erie

Railroad Company) between the

connection with BLE (Union Railroad

Company) at Bessemer (Pittsburgh), PA,

and CSXT’s Newell Interchange Yard

near Brownsville, PA (a distance of

approximately 40 miles). The overhead

trackage rights sought by BLE would be

restricted to the transportation of coal

originating at current or future mines on

the former Monongahela Railway

Company lines and destined to the P&C

Dock at Conneaut, OH, for movement

beyond.

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 62), IC seeks to acquire CSXT’s

Leewood-Aulon Line in Memphis, TN,

which extends between CSXT MP F–

371.4 (IC MP 387.9) at Leewood and

CSXT MP F–373.4 (IC MP 390.0) at

Aulon, a distance of approximately 2

miles.

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 63), RJCW seeks to acquire

ownership of or trackage rights on

Conrail’s line of railroad between

approximately MP 54.4 and

approximately MP 52.1 in Lima, OH.

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 69), NYDOT and NYCEDC

seek: (1) Full service trackage rights in

favor of a rail carrier other than Conrail

or CSX, to be designated jointly by

NYDOT and NYCEDC, over the lines of

Conrail between points of connection

with the Delaware & Hudson Railway

(D&H) at CP–160 near Schenectady, NY,

and Selkirk Yard near Selkirk, NY, on

the one hand, and, on the other, CP–75

near Poughkeepsie, NY, together with

sufficient rights on tracks within Selkirk

Yard to permit the efficient interchange

of freight with D&H; (2) full service

trackage rights in favor of a rail carrier

other than Conrail or CSX, to be

designated jointly by NYDOT and

NYCEDC, over the lines of Conrail

between the point of Conrail ownership

at Mott Haven Junction (‘‘MO’’), NY,

and the point of connection with the

lines of the Long Island Railroad near

Fresh Pond (‘‘MONT’’), NY, via the

Harlem River Yard; and (3) to the extent

necessary to permit uninterrupted rail

freight transportation between CP–160

and/or Selkirk Yard, on the one hand,

and, on the other, Fresh Pond, a

declaration that, pursuant to 49 U.S.C.

11321(a), Metro-North Commuter

Railroad Company, a subsidiary of the

Metropolitan Transportation Authority

of the State of New York, may grant

unrestricted trackage rights over the

lines between CP–75 and Mott Haven

Junction to a rail carrier other than

Conrail or CSX, notwithstanding any

provisions of any agreements which

purport to limit or prohibit such a grant.

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 72), BDRV and BRW seek: (1)

Removal of the restriction on certain

D&H trackage rights that prevents

interchange between D&H and BDRV at

Phillipsburg, NJ, and between D&H and

BRW at Three Bridges, NJ; (2) a grant of

overhead trackage rights to BDRV over

lines to be acquired by NS from

Phillipsburg, NJ, to Manville, NJ (a

distance of 40 miles), or to some other

operationally feasible point at which

BDRV and CSXT can interchange traffic;

(3) a grant of overhead trackage rights to

BRW over lines to be acquired by NS

from Three Bridges, NJ, to Manville, NJ

(a distance of 13 miles), or to some other

operationally feasible point at which

BRW and CSXT can interchange traffic;

and (4) a grant of overhead trackage

rights to BDRV and BRW over lines to

be acquired by NS between the BDRV–

NS connection at Phillipsburg, NJ, and

the BRW–NS connection at Three

Bridges, NJ (a distance of 29 miles).

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 75), NECR seeks ‘‘limited

trackage rights’’: (1) Between Palmer,

MA, and West Springfield, MA, a

distance of 18 miles, over the CRC line

to be acquired by CSXT; (2) between

West Springfield, MA, on the one hand,

and, on the other, Albany, Selkirk, and

Mechanicville, NY, a distance of 98

miles, over the CRC line to be acquired

by CSXT; and (3) between Albany, NY,

and the New Jersey/New York Shared

Assets Area,10 a distance of 140 miles,

over the CRC line located on the west

side of the Hudson River that is to be

acquired by CSXT.11

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 76), ISRR seeks: (1) Overhead

trackage rights in Indianapolis, IN,

between MP 6.0 on ISRR’s Petersburg

Subdivision and Indianapolis Power &

Light’s Perry K facility, over the CRC

line to be acquired by CSXT; (2)

overhead trackage rights in

Indianapolis, IN, between MP 6.0 on

ISRR’s Petersburg Subdivision and

Indianapolis Power & Light’s Stout

facility located on the line of the

Indiana Rail Road Company (INRD),

over a segment of the CRC line to be

acquired by CSXT and a segment of the

INRD line; (3) local trackage rights over

CRC’s lines in Indianapolis, IN,

including the Indianapolis Belt Line, to

be acquired by CSXT (ISRR seeks

trackage rights over all CRC lines in

Indianapolis needed to access the 2-to1 shippers located in Indianapolis); (4)

local trackage rights between

Indianapolis and Shelbyville, IN, a

distance of 27 miles, over the CRC line

to be acquired by CSXT; (5) local

trackage rights between Indianapolis

and Crawfordsville, IN, a distance of 44

miles, over the CRC line to be acquired

by CSXT; and (6) local trackage rights

between Indianapolis and Muncie, IN, a

distance of 55 miles, over the CRC line

to be acquired by CSXT.12

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 77), IORY seeks: (1) Overhead

trackage rights over CSXT between East

Norwood, OH, and Washington Court

House, OH, a distance of 65 miles, with

the right to connect at Midland City

with IORY’s Greenfield branch; (2) local
62110 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Notices

13 IORY’s use of the term ‘‘local trackage rights’’

is intended to include: (a) The right to operate

trains over the lines described in the text; (b) the

right to interchange with all carriers, including

shortlines, at all junctions on the lines thus

described; and (c) the right to serve all shippers,

sidings, and team tracks located on the lines thus

described.

14AA’s use of the term ‘‘limited trackage rights’’

is intended to include: (a) The right to operate

trains over the line described in the text; and (b)

the right to interchange with all carriers, including

shortlines, at all junctions on the line thus

described.

15These rights would apparently run between

Chicago, on the west, and Carey and/or Bellevue,

OH, on the east.

16 Various additional W&LE condition requests

are scattered throughout the verified statements

submitted by W&LE witnesses in the WLE–4

pleading filed October 21, 1997.

17We reserve the right to require the filing of

supplemental information from any responsive

applicant or any other party or individual, if

necessary to complete the record in this matter. See

Decision No. 12, slip op. at 18 n.29, 62 FR at 39587

n.29.

trackage rights between Monroe, OH,

and Middletown, OH, a distance of 5

miles, over the CRC line to be acquired

by NSR (with the right to connect at

Middletown with CSXT and IORY’s

existing trackage rights through

Middletown over the CRC line between

Springfield and Cincinnati); (3) local

trackage rights between Sidney, OH, and

Quincy, OH, a distance of 10 miles, over

the CRC line to be acquired by CSXT;

(4) local trackage rights between

Sharronville, OH, and Columbus, OH, a

distance of 125 miles, over the CRC line

to be acquired by NSR; (5) local trackage

rights between Quincy, OH, and Marion,

OH, a distance of 52 miles, over the CRC

line to be acquired by CSXT; (6) local

trackage rights between Lima, OH, and

Fort Wayne, IN, a distance of 59 miles,

over the CRC line to be acquired by

CSXT; (7) local trackage rights over

CRC’s Erie track in Lima, OH; and (8)

local trackage rights between Quincy,

OH, and Marysville, OH, over the CRC

line to be acquired by CSXT.13

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 78), AA seeks: (1) ‘‘Limited

trackage rights’’ between Toledo, OH,

and Chicago, IL, via Elkhart, IN, a

distance of 230 miles, over the CRC line

to be acquired by NS; and (2) a

condition permitting AA to interchange

traffic with CP Rail System at Ann

Arbor, MI.14

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 80), W&LE seeks: (1) Haulage

and trackage rights to Chicago, IL,

including access to Belt Railway of

Chicago and rights for interchange with

all carriers, specifically including

WCL; 15 (2) haulage and trackage rights

from Bellevue, OH, to Toledo, OH, a

distance of 54 miles, for an interchange

with the Ann Arbor Railroad, Canadian

National, and the Indiana & Ohio

Railroad (also including access to

British Petroleum for movement of coke

to Cressup, WV); (3) haulage and

trackage rights to Erie, PA, with the

right to interchange with other railroads;

(4) the right ‘‘to lease to own’’ CRC’s

Randall Secondary from Cleveland, MP

2.5, to Mantua, MP 27.5; (5) the right ‘‘to

lease to own’’ the Huron Branch

(Shinrock to Huron) and Huron dock on

Lake Erie; (6) haulage and trackage

rights on CSX from Benwood to

Brooklyn Junction and its yard facilities

for commercial access to PPG and Bayer;

(7) access on the Conrail Fort Wayne

Line to the National Stone quarry near

Bucyrus, via the Spore Industrial Track,

a distance of 6.2 miles from CP Colsan,

MP 200.5, on the Fort Wayne Line

(access to the Fort Wayne line would be

from the W&LE at CP Orr, MP 124, and

from a point near Fairhope at MP 97.8);

(8) trackage rights on the NS Sandusky

District from Chatfield, OH, to Colsan,

OH (for a junction with the Conrail Fort

Wayne Line and access to the Spore

Industrial Track); (9) access (apparently

via trackage rights) to a stone quarry

located on the Northern Ohio Railway at

Maple Grove, via a junction on the NS

Fostoria District at MP 269.4; (10) access

(apparently via trackage rights over,

among other lines, the former Conrail

Akron Secondary) to the stone terminals

in the Macedonia, Twinsburg, and

Ravenna areas; (11) access, via haulage

and trackage rights, to Wheeling

Pittsburgh Steel at Allenport, PA; and

(12) access, via haulage and trackage

rights on the CSX New Castle

Subdivision, to the Ohio Edison Power

plant at Niles, OH, and to Erie, PA, for

interchange to the Buffalo & Pittsburgh.

W&LE also requests that provision be

made for an inclusion proceeding in the

event that W&LE fails during a postmerger oversight period.16

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 81), CN and GTW seek

trackage rights over the Conrail

northbound mainline between

approximately MP 16.5 and MP 18.0 at

Trenton, MI, a distance of

approximately 1.5 miles, for the purpose

of serving Detroit Edison’s Trenton

Channel power plant.

In STB Finance Docket No. 33388

(Sub-No. 83), GTW has filed a notice of

exemption under 49 CFR 1150.36 to

construct and operate, at Trenton, MI, a

connection between the Conrail

northbound mainline and the GTW

Shoreline Subdivision.

Responsive Filings Accepted

Because the responsive applications

filed by NYSEG, EJE/IMRL, LAL, WCL,

BLE, IC, RJCW, NYDOT/NYCEDC,

BDRV/BRW, NECR, ISRR, IORY, AA,

W&LE, and CN/GTW, and also the

notice of exemption filed by GTW, are

in substantial compliance with the

applicable regulations, we are accepting

for consideration such responsive

applications and such notice of

exemption.17

Public Inspection

The responsive filings are available

for inspection in the Docket File

Reading Room (Room 755) at the offices

of the Surface Transportation Board,

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

The responsive filing made by any

particular responsive applicant may also

be obtained upon request from that

applicant’s representative named above.

Proceedings Consolidated

The responsive filings in STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 (Sub-Nos. 35, 36, 39,

59, 61, 62, 63, 69, 72, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80,

81, and 83) are consolidated for

disposition with the primary

application in STB Finance Docket No.

33388 (and all embraced proceedings).

Comments May Be Submitted

Interested persons may participate

formally by submitting written

comments regarding any or all of these

responsive filings, subject to the filing

and service requirements specified

above. Such comments (referred to as

‘‘Response[s]’’ in the procedural

schedule, see Decision No. 12, slip op.

at 26, 62 FR at 39591) must be filed with

the Board by December 15, 1997.

Comments must include the following:

the commenter’s position in support of

or in opposition to the transaction

proposed in the responsive filing; any

and all evidence, including verified

statements, in support of or in

opposition to such proposed

transaction; and specific reasons why

approval of such proposed transaction

would or would not be in the public

interest.

Requests for Affirmative Relief Will Not

Be Accepted

Because the responsive applications

accepted for consideration in this

decision contain proposed conditions to

approval of the primary application in

STB Finance Docket No. 33388, the

Board will entertain no requests for

affirmative relief with respect to these

responsive applications. Parties may

only participate in direct support of or

in direct opposition to these responsive

applications as filed.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 1997 / Notices 62111

18Parties intending to submit spreadsheets in

formats other than Lotus 1–2–3 Version 7 may wish

to consult with our staff regarding such

submissions. Some (though not all) spreadsheets

prepared in other formats, though perhaps not

convertible by and into Lotus 1–2–3 Version 7, may

nevertheless be useable by our staff. For further

information, contact Julia M. Farr, (202) 565–1613.

19The protective order governing this proceeding

was entered in Decision No. 1 (served April 16,

1997), and has been modified, in minor respects, in

Decision Nos. 4, 15, 22, and 46 (served May 2, 1997,

August 1, 1997, August 21, 1997, and October 17,

1997, respectively).

20The electronic submission requirements set

forth in this decision supersede, for the purposes

of this proceeding, the otherwise applicable

electronic submission requirements set forth in our

regulations. See 49 CFR 1104.3(a), as amended in

Expedited Procedures for Processing Rail Rate

Reasonableness, Exemption and Revocation

Proceedings, STB Ex Parte No. 527, 61 FR 52710,

52711 (Oct. 8, 1996), 61 FR 58490, 58491 (Nov. 15,

1996).

Pleadings Not Treated as Responsive

Applications

A pleading styled as a ‘‘responsive

application’’ was filed on October 21,

1997, in a sub-number docket (Sub-No.

74) under the STB Finance Docket No.

33388 lead docket by Congressman

Dennis J. Kucinich. While titled as a

responsive application, this pleading

does not address the criteria for such

applications as required under 49 CFR

part 1180. Rather, this pleading

constitutes a comment on, and a request

for conditions with respect to, the CSX/

NS/CR primary application, and we will

treat it as such and will docket this

pleading in the STB Finance Docket No.

33388 lead docket.

Certain additional pleadings styled as

‘‘responsive applications’’ were filed in

the STB Finance Docket No. 33388 lead

docket on or about October 21, 1997, by:

Jacobs Industries Ltd.; the State of

Delaware Department of Transportation;

ASHTA Chemicals Inc.; Southern Tier

West Regional Planning and

Development Board; and Resources

Warehousing & Consolidation Services,

Inc. Because these pleadings also do not

satisfy the 49 CFR part 1180

requirements applicable to responsive

applications, we will treat these

pleadings as comments on, and/or

requests for conditions with respect to,

the CSX/NS/CR primary application.

Additional Pleadings Treated as Filed

in Lead Docket

Certain additional pleadings filed on

or about October 21, 1997, though not

labeled ‘‘responsive applications,’’ were

filed in various sub-number dockets

under the STB Finance Docket No.

33388 lead docket by: Northern Virginia

Transportation Commission and

Potomac and Rappahannock

Transportation Commission (in Sub-No.

37); New Jersey Department of

Transportation and New Jersey Transit

Corporation (in Sub-No. 38); the Rhode

Island Department of Transportation (in

Sub-No. 42); Buffalo & Pittsburgh

Railroad, Inc., Allegheny & Eastern

Railroad, Inc., Rochester & Southern

Railroad, Inc., and Pittsburgh &

Shawmut Railroad, Inc. (in Sub-Nos. 43,

44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, and

56); the Eastern Shore Railroad, Inc. (in

Sub-No. 57); Louisville & Indiana

Railroad Company (in Sub-No. 64);

Housatonic Railroad Company, Inc. (in

Sub-No. 70); the Canadian Pacific

Railway Company, Delaware and

Hudson Railway Company, Inc., Soo

Line Railroad Company, and St.

Lawrence & Hudson Railway Company

Limited (in Sub-No. 85); and the

Commonwealth of Massachusetts (in

Sub-No. 86). Because these pleadings

contain comments on, and/or requests

for conditions with respect to, the CSX/

NS/CR primary application, they will be

docketed in, and they will be treated as

having been filed in, the STB Finance

Docket No. 33388 lead docket.

Electronic Submissions

In addition to submitting an original

and 25 paper copies of each document

filed with the Board, parties are also

requested to submit, on diskettes (3.5-

inch IBM-compatible floppies) or

compact discs, one electronic copy of

each such document. Textual materials

must be in, or be convertible by and

into, WordPerfect 7.0. Spreadsheets

must be in, or be convertible by and

into, Lotus 1–2–3 Version 7.18 Each

diskette or compact disc should be

clearly labeled with the identification

acronym and number of the

corresponding paper document, see 49

CFR 1180.4(a)(2), and a copy of such

diskette or compact disc should be

provided to any other party upon

request. The data contained on the

diskettes and compact discs submitted

to the Board will be subject to the

protective order applicable to this

proceeding,19 and will be for the

exclusive use of Board employees

reviewing substantive and/or procedural

matters in this proceeding. The

flexibility provided by such computer

data will facilitate timely review by the

Board and its staff.20

This action will not significantly

affect either the quality of the human

environment or the conservation of

energy resources.

It is ordered:

1. The responsive applications in STB

Finance Docket No. 33388 (Sub-Nos. 35,

36, 39, 59, 61, 62, 63, 69, 72, 75, 76, 77,

78, 80, and 81), and the notice of

exemption in STB Finance Docket No.

33388 (Sub-No. 83), are accepted for

consideration, and are consolidated for

disposition with the primary

application in STB Finance Docket No.

33388 (and all embraced proceedings).

2. The parties shall comply with all

provisions as stated above.

3. This decision is effective on

November 20, 1997.

By the Board, Chairman Morgan and Vice

Chairman Owen.

Decided: November 12, 1997.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–30543 Filed 11–19–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915–00–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

November 10, 1997.

The Department of Treasury has

submitted the following public

information collection requirement(s) to

OMB for review and clearance under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub.

L. 104–13. Copies of the submission(s)

may be obtained by calling the Treasury

Bureau Clearance Officer listed.

Comments regarding this information

collection should be addressed to the

OMB reviewer listed and to the

Treasury Department Clearance Officer,

Department of the Treasury, Room 2110,

1425 New York Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20220.

Bureau of the Public Debt (BPD)

OMB Number: 1535–0089.

Form Number: None.

Type of Review: Extension.

Title: Implementing Regulations:

Government Securities Act of 1986, As

Amended.

Description: The regulations require

government securities broker/dealers to

make and keep certain records

concerning government securities

activities, to submit financial reports

and make certain disclosures to

investors. The regulations also require

financial depository institutions to keep

certain records of non-fiduciary

custodial holdings of government

securities. The regulations and

associated collections are fundamental

to customer protection and financial

responsibility.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit.

Estimated Number of Recordkeepers:

35,506.

Frequency of Response: On occasion,

Monthly, Quarterly, Annually, Other

(one-time file).