Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 81519 

1On September 17, 2018, DesertXpress’ 

ownership group entered into an agreement to sell 

the company to Brightline Holdings LLC 

(Brightline). Fortress Inv. Grp. LLC—Continuance in 

Control—Cent. Me. & Que. Ry., FD 36225, slip op. 

at 1–2 (STB served Oct. 11, 2018). Brightline’s 

acquisition of DesertXpress was consummated on 

March 4, 2019. (DesertXpress Pet. 2 n.2.) 

2On July 21, 2023, DesertXpress filed a letter 

requesting that the Board expedite a final decision 

in this proceeding. On July 27, 2023, U.S. 

Representative Dina Titus filed a letter urging the 

Board to expeditiously consider DesertXpress’ 

petition. 

PROJECT MODIFICATIONS (SINCE THE SEPTEMBER 2020 REEVALUATION) 9—Continued 

Project feature Description of modification 

Sloan Vehicle Maintenance Facility (VMF) .............................................. The Project design evaluated in the DesertXpress EIS included an 

OMSF in close proximity to the original Victorville Station west of the 

I–15 freeway and included facilities for maintaining and storing trains. 

Project modifications evaluated in 2020 included relocating the 

Victorville Station to the south side of the I–15 freeway at Dale 

Evans Parkway in Apple Valley. At that time, it was proposed the 

OMSF would be collocated with the Victorville Station, and a separate location for vehicle maintenance and storage had not been identified. The current Project modifications include locating the vehicle 

maintenance and storage activities at a site located in Segment 6 

west of and within 1.5 miles of the I–15 freeway, and south of Sloan 

Road; the Victor Valley Station permanent footprint would remain unchanged. An additional freight track corridor will be constructed to 

connect the VMF to the adjacent UPRR. Brightline West have filed a 

connection request and are coordinating with UPRR regarding the 

connection design and operational concepts. UPRR have granted 

preliminary approval of this rail connection, which would be subject 

to additional design development. The Sloan VMF and adjacent 

UPRR connection would require 246 acres of permanent footprint 

and 105 acres of temporary footprint,6 and includes: 

• Storage and staging tracks and overhead catenary system from 

which trains would be mobilized for daily operations. 

• Equipment and operations associated with the Sloan VMF, including but not limited to a train car wash station, a train performance monitoring station, an Operations Control Center, a 

power substation and distribution lines, utility connections, circulation system, site control, fencing, and parking. 

The Sloan VMF will be a permanent workplace for approximately 100 

employees related to either the maintenance of the Brightline West 

train fleet or performing other functions such as driving the trains. 

These facilities would be located on land under BLM jurisdiction and 

would therefore require a ROW grant lease from BLM. 

Temporary Construction Areas (TCAS) ................................................... TCAs are areas that would be utilized for construction staging and storage. No permanent project features would be installed in these 

areas, and they would be restored/vacated upon completion of construction. The modified Project includes an additional 202 TCAs located within Caltrans/NDOT ROW along the I–15 freeway corridor 

for construction of the rail alignment. These are in addition to TCAs 

previously identified in the original project description and the September 2020 Reevaluation. Most of these additional TCAs are areas 

located within the existing I–15 freeway ROW. The addition of these 

TCAs adds 1,492 acres of temporary footprint to the project 11 The 

Sloan VMF facility footprint includes 105 acres of temporary footprint 

required for constructing the Sloan VMF and UPRR Connection. 

9Brightline West Victor Valley, CA to Las Vegas, NV High-Speed Rail Project Reevaluation (September 15, 2023) pgs. 4–7. 

10This Reevaluation has assumed full reconstruction and replacement of the overpass. Caltrans will determine the necessary modifications to 

the I–15/Dale Evans interchange which may not include full reconstruction and replacement of the overpass. 11As more of the alignment has been shifted to be within the I–15 freeway median, additional TCAs are proposed since room for construction 

within the I–15 freeway median is more limited and needs to be spread out throughout the alignment. 

[FR Doc. 2023–25789 Filed 11–21–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4915–01–P 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD 

[Docket No. FD 36488] 

Desertxpress Enterprises, LLC— 

Authority To Construct and Operate— 

Petition for Exemption From 49 U.S.C. 

10901—Passenger Rail Line Between 

the Victor Valley, Cal. and Rancho 

Cucamonga, Cal. 

On April 13, 2021, DesertXpress 

Enterprises, LLC, a Nevada limited 

liability company, d/b/a Brightline West 

(DesertXpress),1 filed a petition under 

49 U.S.C. 10502 for an exemption from 

the prior approval requirements of 49 

U.S.C. 10901 to construct and operate 

an approximately 50-mile high-speed 

passenger rail line between the Victor 

Valley, in Southern California, and 

Rancho Cucamonga, Cal. (the RC Line). 

DesertXpress plans to operate as a 

common carrier providing passenger rail 

service on the rail line to be 

constructed. DesertXpress does not plan 

to provide freight rail service. No 

comments opposing the transportation 

merits of DesertXpress’ petition were 

filed. 

On July 12, 2021, the Board instituted 

a proceeding under 49 U.S.C. 10502.2

As discussed below, the Board, through 

the Office of Environmental Analysis 

(OEA), participated in the 

environmental and historic review of 

the RC Line as a cooperating agency 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
81520 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 

3The LV Line has not yet been constructed. On 

March 27, 2019, DesertXpress filed a petition to 

reopen the Board’s October 25, 2011 decision, in 

which DesertXpress requested that the Board 

approve changes to the alignment of the LV Line, 

including moving the proposed terminus 

approximately four miles from the City of 

Victorville to the Town of Apple Valley, both 

situated in the Victor Valley. The Board will 

address the proposed alignment changes to the LV 

Line in a separate decision. 

4An additional DesertXpress station in the City 

of Hesperia, Cal. (south of Victorville) is also 

planned. (DesertXpress Pet. 5.) 

5The Allied Rail Unions is a group of unions 

composed of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of 

Way Employes Division/IBT; Brotherhood of 

Railroad Signalmen; International Association of 

Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation WorkersMechanical Division; and National Conference of 

Firemen and Oilers, 32BJ/SEIU. 

6See Mid States Coal. for Progress v. Surface 

Transp. Bd., 345 F.3d 520, 552 (8th Cir. 2003). 

under the lead of the Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA). This thorough 

environmental review took a ‘‘hard 

look’’ at environmental impacts, 

selected a preferred alternative, and 

recommended environmental mitigation 

conditions to avoid or minimize the 

selected alternative’s potential 

environmental impacts. After 

considering the entire record on both 

the transportation and the 

environmental issues, the Board will 

grant DesertXpress’ petition for 

exemption, subject to environmental 

conditions. 

Background 

In DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC— 

Construction & Operation Exemption— 

in Victorville, Cal. and Las Vegas, Nev., 

FD 35544 (STB served Oct. 25, 2011), 

the Board exempted from the prior 

approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 

10901 DesertXpress’ proposal to 

construct and operate an approximately 

190-mile high-speed passenger rail line 

between Las Vegas, Nev., and the Victor 

Valley (the LV Line).3 The RC Line will 

extend from a point of connection with 

the southern terminus of the LV Line in 

the Victor Valley to Rancho Cucamonga. 

(DesertXpress Pet. 4.) The RC Line’s 

alignment will be entirely within the I– 

15 right-of-way except for the final mile 

at Rancho Cucamonga, which will exit 

the I–15 right-of-way, proceed west 

along 8th Street and terminate adjacent 

to the Southern California Regional Rail 

Authority’s (Metrolink’s) Rancho 

Cucamonga train station on the south 

side of 8th Street west of Milliken 

Avenue.4 (Id. at 5.) DesertXpress’ 

Rancho Cucamonga station will link 

DesertXpress’ train services with the 

passenger services operated by 

Metrolink and the bus rapid transit 

system. (Id. at 6.) DesertXpress states 

that connecting its service to 

Metrolink’s rail system in this manner 

will create a seamless all-rail option for 

travel between Las Vegas and points 

throughout the greater Los Angeles, Cal., 

Orange County, Cal., and San 

Bernardino, Cal. metropolitan areas. (Id. 

at 14.) The RC Line will be built and 

operated on a dedicated, fully gradeseparated right-of-way with no at-grade 

crossings. (Id. at 4.) It will consist of a 

single main-line track with passing 

sidings and will be dedicated 

exclusively to high-speed passenger 

service. (Id. at 4, 18.) 

DesertXpress currently plans to 

operate 50 trains per day (25 in each 

direction) between Las Vegas and 

Rancho Cucamonga. (Id. at 7.) Trains 

will depart from both Las Vegas and 

Rancho Cucamonga at 45-minute 

intervals and will operate at speeds up 

to 180 miles per hour. (Id.) The first 

trains will depart Rancho Cucamonga 

and Las Vegas at 5:30 a.m. with the final 

trains arriving in Rancho Cucamonga 

and Las Vegas at approximately 11:30 

p.m. and 1:00 a.m., respectively. (Id.) 

The RC Line is forecasted to attract 

approximately 1.5 million additional 

passengers to DesertXpress’ train 

service, compared to the LV Line 

standing alone, by the third year of 

revenue operations. (Id. at 6.) Travelers 

on the RC Line will include both 

passengers traveling between Las Vegas 

and Southern California and passengers 

traveling between the Victor Valley and 

Rancho Cucamonga stations. (Id.) 

According to DesertXpress, the service 

between Victor Valley and Rancho 

Cucamonga is expected to attract more 

than half a million riders annually by 

the second year of service and the RC 

Line is expected to double the number 

of westbound passengers who choose 

DesertXpress train service for their 

travel from Las Vegas to Southern 

California. (Id.) 

DesertXpress plans to commence 

construction of the RC Line as soon as 

practicable following approval of its 

petition. (Id. at 11.) According to 

DesertXpress, the estimated cost of 

constructing the RC Line is 

approximately $2 billion and Brightline 

plans to finance the construction with a 

blend of tax-exempt bonds, taxable debt, 

and equity. (Id.) 

Several parties filed comments in 

response to DesertXpress’ petition. The 

only comment on the transportation 

merits was filed on May 13, 2021 by the 

Allied Rail Unions 5 stating that they 

support DesertXpress’ petition. On May 

5, 2021, the San Manuel Band of 

Mission Indians (San Manuel Band) 

filed comments on environmental issues 

and a request for an extension of time 

to file further comments. The Board 

granted that request in a decision served 

on May 19, 2021. In addition, the San 

Manuel Band, Morongo Band of Mission 

Indians (Morongo Band), and the 

National Parks Conservation 

Association (NPCA) filed comments 

regarding environmental issues on June 

3, 2021, June 4, 2021, and June 8, 2021, 

respectively. On June 22, 2021, 

DesertXpress filed a reply to the 

comments of San Manuel Band, 

Morongo Band, and NPCA. 

Discussion and Conclusions 

Rail Transportation Analysis. The 

construction of new rail lines requires 

prior Board authorization through 

issuance of a certificate under 49 U.S.C. 

10901 or, as requested here, through an 

exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 from 

the prior approval requirements of 

section 10901. Section 10901(c) directs 

the Board to authorize rail line 

construction proposals unless it finds 

the proposal ‘‘inconsistent with the 

public convenience and necessity.’’ See 

Alaska R.R.—Constr. & Operation 

Exemption—a Rail Line Extension to 

Port MacKenzie, Alaska, FD 35095, slip 

op. at 5 (STB served Nov. 21, 2011), 

aff’d sub nom. Alaska Survival v. STB, 

705 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir. 2013). Thus, 

Congress has established a presumption 

that rail construction projects are in the 

public interest unless shown otherwise. 

See N. Plains Res. Council v. STB, 668 

F.3d 1067, 1091–92 (9th Cir. 2011); Mid 

States Coal. for Progress v. STB, 345 

F.3d 520, 557 (8th Cir. 2003). 

Under section 10502(a), the Board 

‘‘shall exempt’’ a proposed rail line 

construction from the detailed 

application procedures of section 10901 

when it finds that: (1) those procedures 

are not necessary to carry out the rail 

transportation policy of 49 U.S.C. 10101 

(RTP); and (2) either (a) the proposal is 

of limited scope, or (b) the full 

application procedures are not 

necessary to protect shippers from an 

abuse of market power. 

Based on the record in this 

proceeding, the Board concludes that 

the proposed construction qualifies for 

an exemption from the section 10901 

prior approval requirements. Simply 

put, this is a project with a lot of upside 

and little, if any, downside, one that has 

the potential for broad public benefits, 

and one for which no issues about the 

project’s current or future financial 

viability, including any negative effects 

of financial nonviability, have been 

raised.6 Extending DesertXpress’ 

previously approved service between 

Las Vegas and Victor Valley further 

south to Rancho Cucamonga and 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 81521 

7Because regulation of the proposed construction 

and operation is not needed to protect shippers 

from the abuse of market power, the Board need not 

determine whether the transaction is limited in 

scope. 49 U.S.C. 10502(a)(2). 

8The Board participated as a consulting party in 

FRA’s Section 106 consultation process, along with 

the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 

DesertXpress, Caltrans, City of Fontana, City of 

Ontario, City of Rancho Cucamonga, City of Rialto, 

City of Victorville, Federal Highway 

Administration, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and 

the United States Forest Service. (FONSI 13). As 

part of that process, FRA consulted with the 

Chairpersons of and/or Tribal Historic Preservation 

Officers for the Chemheuvi Indian Tribes, the 

Colorado River Indian Tribes, the Morongo Band of 

Mission Indians, the San Fernando Band of Mission 

Indians, the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, and 

the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians, 

and identified tribal contacts for the Yuhaaviatam 

of San Manuel Nation (formerly the San Manuel 

Band). (Id.) 

providing a connection to Metrolink’s 

rail service there supports the RTP. It 

will provide additional transportation 

options for travelers throughout the 

greater Los Angeles, Orange County and 

San Bernardino metropolitan areas, 

thereby reducing congestion on the I–15 

freeway, while also reducing air 

pollution and overall fuel consumption. 

Thus, the RC Line will help ‘‘to ensure 

the development and continuation of a 

sound rail transportation system with 

effective competition among rail carriers 

and with other modes,’’ 49 U.S.C. 

10101(4), and will ‘‘encourage and 

promote energy conservation.’’ 49 

U.S.C. 10101(14). In addition, 

constructing the RC line to extend 

DesertXpress’ service will help ‘‘foster 

sound economic conditions in 

transportation,’’ 49 U.S.C. 10101(5), by 

increasing demand for DesertXpress’ 

service. As noted above, it is projected 

that the RC Line will attract an 

additional 1.5 million passengers to 

DesertXpress’ train service annually. An 

exemption will also minimize the time 

and administrative expense associated 

with obtaining Board approval and 

expedite the introduction of a new rail 

service for millions of travelers and will 

therefore both ‘‘reduce regulatory 

barriers to entry into and exit from the 

industry,’’ 49 U.S.C. 10101(7), and 

‘‘provide for the expeditious handling 

and resolution of . . . proceedings 

required or permitted to be brought 

[before the Board].’’ 49 U.S.C. 

10101(15). Other aspects of the RTP 

would not be adversely affected. 

In addition, consideration of the RC 

Line under section 10901 here is not 

necessary to protect shippers from an 

abuse of market power. The RC Line 

will not be used to provide freight rail 

transportation to shippers, nor will it 

cause any shipper to lose access to any 

rail options.7

Environmental Analysis. The National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

requires federal agencies to examine the 

environmental effects of proposed 

federal actions and to inform the public 

concerning those effects. Balt. Gas & 

Elec. Co. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, 462 

U.S. 87, 97 (1983). Under NEPA and 

related environmental laws, the Board 

must consider significant potential 

beneficial and adverse environmental 

impacts in deciding whether to 

authorize a railroad construction project 

as proposed, deny the proposal, or grant 

it with conditions (including 

environmental mitigation conditions). 

Lone Star R.R. Track Constr. & 

Operation Exemption—in Howard 

Cnty., Tex., FD 35874, slip op at 4 (STB 

served Mar. 3, 2016). While NEPA 

prescribes the process that must be 

followed, it does not mandate a 

particular result. Robertson v. Methow 

Valley Citizens Council, 490 U.S. 332, 

350 (1989). Once the adverse 

environmental effects have been 

adequately identified and evaluated, an 

agency may conclude that ‘‘other values 

outweigh the environmental costs.’’ Id. 

In every exemption case, the Board 

considers both the transportation merits 

and the environmental impacts in 

deciding whether to authorize the 

proposed action. With respect to 

environmental issues, the Board, 

through OEA, participated in the 

environmental and historic review of 

the RC Line as a cooperating agency 

under the lead of FRA. FRA prepared an 

Environmental Assessment (EA) in 

accordance with NEPA, the National 

Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and 

related environmental laws to evaluate 

the potential environmental and historic 

impacts of the RC Line. The EA 

analyzed both a Build Alternative and 

No-Build Alternative (i.e., No-Action 

Alternative), and FRA identified the 

Build Alternative as the preferred 

alternative. (EA xv, 10–14.) The EA also 

identified mitigation measures to reduce 

potential environmental impacts. (EA 

57–58, 61–63, 67, 90–102, 137–38, 173– 

76, 192, 198–200.) The EA was made 

available for public review and 

comment between October 28, 2022, 

and November 28, 2022. 

On July 12, 2023, FRA issued a 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

(FONSI), which incorporated the EA by 

reference. The FONSI concluded that 

the Build Alternative would not 

significantly impact the quality of the 

human environment and should be 

authorized subject to appropriate 

environmental mitigation (FONSI 15 & 

Attach. A). The FONSI also addressed 

the public comments on the EA. The 

comments received on the EA were 

minor and the responses to the 

comments were limited to factual 

corrections or explanations of why the 

comments did not warrant further 

response. (FONSI 2.) 

Concurrently with preparation of the 

EA, FRA initiated consultation under 

Section 106 of NHPA, which included 

efforts to identify, evaluate, and assess 

effects to historic properties that could 

be impacted by the RC Line.8 (EA 138– 

58.) FRA concluded that construction 

and operation of the RC Line would 

have no adverse effects on resources 

listed in or eligible for listing in the 

National Register of Historic Places. (Id.) 

The California State Historic 

Preservation Officer (SHPO) did not 

object to FRA’s finding of no adverse 

effect for the RC Line. FRA issued a 

final Finding of Effect report and made 

a finding of no adverse effect for the RC 

Line on June 30, 2023. (Id. at 13–14.) 

Accordingly, no historic mitigation was 

imposed. (Id. at 8, 10 & Attach. A.) 

OEA prepared a memorandum 

making final environmental 

recommendations for this proceeding 

(Environmental Memo), which is 

attached to this decision. The 

Environmental Memo summarizes the 

environmental and historic review 

process, the potential environmental 

impacts of the construction and 

operation of the RC Line, and FRA’s 

mitigation measures to minimize those 

impacts. (Environmental Memo 3–8.) 

The Environmental Memo recommends 

that the Board adopt FRA’s EA and the 

conclusions in the FONSI, and that it 

impose the environmental mitigation 

measures set forth in Attachment A to 

the FONSI as conditions to any decision 

authorizing construction and operation 

of the RC Line. (Environmental Memo 

8–9.) 

The Board’s Analysis of the 

Environmental Issues. The Board adopts 

FRA’s analysis and conclusions in both 

the EA and FONSI. The Board is 

satisfied that OEA, together with FRA 

and the cooperating agencies, has taken 

the requisite ‘‘hard look’’ at the 

potential environmental impacts 

associated with DesertXpress’ proposal 

and properly determined that, with the 

recommended environmental mitigation 

in the FONSI, the RC Line will not have 

potentially significant environmental 

impacts and that preparation of an 

Environmental Impact Statement is 

unnecessary. 

As noted above, San Manuel Band, 

Morongo Band, and NPCA filed 

comments regarding environmental 

issues. However, those comments raise 

concerns regarding FRA’s 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
81522 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 

9Although the California High-Speed Rail 

Authority conducted an environmental review 

under CEQA as well as NEPA for the California 

High-Speed Train System—a project within the 

Board’s jurisdiction—it ‘‘elected’’ to apply CEQA on 

its own volition and, in its environmental 

documentation, reserved the right to assert federal 

preemption in response to any potential legal 

challenge to its CEQA compliance. Cal. High-Speed 

Rail Auth.—Pet. for Declaratory Ord., FD 35861, 

slip op. at 1–2, 11 (STB served Dec. 12, 2014); see 

also Cal. High-Speed Rail Auth.—Constr. 

Exemption—in Merced, Madera, & Fresno Cntys., 

Cal., FD 35724 et al., slip op. at 3 n.6 (STB served 

Dec. 20, 2022) (finding that the ‘‘Board is only 

required to comply with NEPA’’ and related federal 

environmental laws despite FRA and California 

High-Speed Rail Authority conducting joint NEPA 

and CEQA review). 

10While the RC Line will be an intrastate line 

located completely within California, it will 

connect to the LV Line, which will extend into 

Nevada. Therefore, the RC Line will be part of the 

interstate rail network and will be subject to the 

Board’s jurisdiction. See e.g., 49 U.S.C. 

10501(a)(2)(A) (stating that the Board has 

jurisdiction over rail transportation between a place 

in ‘‘a State and a place in the same or another State 

as part of the interstate rail network’’); Cal. HighSpeed Rail Auth.—Pet. for Declaratory Ord., FD 

35724, slip op. at 13–14 (STB served June 13, 2013) 

(finding that a rail line to be located completely 

within California was subject to Board jurisdiction 

because it would have extensive interconnectivity 

with Amtrak, an interstate passenger rail carrier). 

1The FONSI attached an errata sheet making 

certain corrections to the EA. (FONSI, Attachment 

B.) FRA used an errata sheet in lieu of a Final EA 

because the comments received on the EA were 

minor and the responses to the comments were 

limited to factual corrections or explanations of 

why the comments did not warrant further 

response. (FONSI 2.) 

environmental and historic review 

process with respect to the proposed 

modified alignment of the LV Line. (San 

Manuel Band Comments 1–2, May 5, 

2021; Morongo Band Comments 1–2; 

NPCA Comments 1.) The LV Line is not 

at issue in this proceeding and parties 

were given the opportunity in 

DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC, Docket 

No. FD 35544, to provide comments in 

the LV Line proceeding. See 

DesertXpress Enters., LLC, FD 35544, 

slip op. 1–2 (STB served Dec. 3, 2020) 

(providing 20-day period for filing of 

public comments). Accordingly, 

comments regarding the modified 

alignment of the LV Line will not be 

considered in this proceeding. 

In addition, San Manuel Band and 

NPCA urge the Board not to permit an 

exemption from review under the 

California Environmental Quality Act 

(CEQA). (San Manuel Band Comments 

2–3, June 3, 2021; NPCA Comments 2.) 

However, the only issue for the Board in 

this case is whether to grant 

DesertXpress’ petition seeking an 

exemption from 49 U.S.C. 10901. 

Moreover, state permitting or 

preclearance requirements like CEQA 

are categorically preempted under 49 

U.S.C. 10501(b) as to any lines and 

facilities that are an integral part of the 

national rail transportation system. 

EPA—Pet. for Declaratory Ord., FD 

35803, slip op. at 7 (STB served Dec. 30, 

2014); see also City of Auburn v. United 

States, 154 F.3d 1025, 1031 (9th Cir. 

1998). Indeed, the Board previously 

found that section 10501 preempted the 

application of CEQA to the LV 

Line.9 DesertXpress Enters., LLC—Pet. 

for Declaratory Ord., FD 34914, slip op. 

at 5 (STB served June 27, 2007). Because 

CEQA’s permitting requirements could 

be used to deny or significantly delay 

construction of the RC Line, CEQA 

review is preempted in this proceeding 

as well.10

The project’s transportation merits— 

expanding the broader DesertXpress 

passenger service to provide more 

seamless transportation to and from 

Southern California and Las Vegas, as 

well as providing a passenger rail option 

between Rancho Cucamonga and Victor 

Valley—are manifest. And the 

environmental and historic impacts 

have been thoroughly analyzed as 

required under NEPA and NHPA, with 

environmental mitigation imposed as 

appropriate. Accordingly, the Board 

grants DesertXpress’ petition for 

exemption. 

This action, as conditioned, will not 

significantly impact the quality of the 

human environment or the conservation 

of energy resources. 

It is ordered: 

1. Under 49 U.S.C. 10502, the Board 

exempts DesertXpress’ construction and 

operation of the RC Line from the prior 

approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 

10901, subject to the requirement that 

DesertXpress build the FRA-preferred 

Build Alternative. 

2. The Board adopts the 

environmental mitigation measures set 

forth in Attachment A to the FONSI and 

imposes them as conditions to the 

exemption granted here. 

3. Notice will be published in the 

Federal Register. 

4. Petitions for reconsideration must 

be filed by December 6, 2023. 

5. This decision is effective, December 

16, 2023. 

Decided: November 15, 2023. 

By the Board, Board Members Fuchs, 

Hedlund, Oberman, Primus, and Schultz. 

Jeffrey Herzig, 

Clearance Clerk. 

Appendix 

Surface Transportation Board 

Washington, DC 20423 

Office of Environmental Analysis 

MEMORANDUM 

TO: Martin Oberman, Chairman; Karen 

Hedlund, Vice Chairman; Patrick Fuchs, 

Member; Michelle Schultz, Member; Robert 

Primus, Member 

Cc: Mai Dinh, Director, Office of Proceedings 

FROM: Danielle Gosselin, Director, Office of 

Environmental Analysis 

DATE: October 20, 2023 

SUBJECT: Docket No. FD 36488, 

DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC—Construction 

and Operation Exemption—Passenger Rail 

Line Between Victor Valley and Rancho 

Cucamonga, Cal.: Environmental 

Memorandum 

This memorandum summarizes the 

environmental and historic review conducted 

for the proposed 49-mile high-speed rail line 

between the Victor Valley and Rancho 

Cucamonga, California (RC Line or Project). 

The proposed RC Line would be part of the 

electrified high-speed passenger railroad 

system that DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC, d/ 

b/a Brightline West (Brightline West) intends 

to construct and operate between Southern 

California and Las Vegas, Nevada. The 

memorandum also presents the Office of 

Environmental Analysis’ (OEA) final 

recommendations to the Board regarding 

adoption of the Environmental Assessment 

(EA) for the Project, including the selection 

of the build alternative as the preferred 

alternative, and the environmental mitigation 

that should be imposed if the Board 

authorizes the RC Line. 

Introduction 

The Board, through OEA, participated in 

the environmental review of the RC Line as 

a cooperating agency under the lead of the 

Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). FRA 

prepared an EA in accordance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 

the National Historic Preservation Act 

(NHPA), and related environmental laws to 

evaluate the potential environmental and 

historic impacts of the RC Line. The EA 

analyzed both a Build Alternative and NoBuild Alternative (i.e., No-Action 

Alternative), and FRA identified the Build 

Alternative as the Preferred Alternative. (EA 

xv, 10–14.) The EA also identified mitigation 

measures to reduce potential environmental 

impacts. (EA 57–58, 61–63, 67, 90–102, 137– 

38, 173–76, 192, 198–200.) The EA was made 

available for public review and comment 

between October 28, 2022, and November 28, 

2022. 

On July 12, 2023, FRA issued a Finding of 

No Significant Impact (FONSI), which 

incorporated the EA by reference,1 and 

which concluded that the Build-Alternative 

would not significantly impact the quality of 

the human environment and should be 

authorized subject to appropriate 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICESEN22NO23.254</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 81523 

2A station at Victorville connecting the RC Line 

to the separate high-speed passenger rail project 

between the Victor Valley and Las Vegas, Nevada, 

was approved by the Board in 2011. DesertXpress 

Enters., LLC, et al.—Constr. & Operation 

Exemption—in Victorville, Cal. & Las Vegas, Nev., 

FD 35544, slip op. at 2, 5 (STB served Oct. 25, 

2011). On March 27, 2019, Brightline West 

petitioned the Board to reopen the 2011 decision to 

permit construction of the Victor Valley-Las Vegas 

line along a different route than what had been 

previously approved. The project modifications also 

include moving the Victorville station to within the 

Town of Apple Valley. The Victor Valley-Las Vegas 

line has involved a separate environmental review 

and is currently pending before the Board. 

environmental mitigation. (FONSI 15, 17 & 

Attachment A.) The FONSI summarized the 

Project’s potential construction and 

operations impacts, as well as FRA’s 

proposed mitigation measures, and addressed 

the public comments on the EA. (FONSI 7– 

13 & Attachment C.) 

OEA has independently reviewed the EA 

and FONSI and agrees with FRA’s analysis 

and conclusions. Further, OEA has 

determined that the EA adequately assesses 

the potential environmental and historic 

impacts of the RC Line and complies with the 

Board’s responsibilities under NEPA, NHPA, 

and related environmental laws. OEA also 

concurs with FRA’s selection of the BuildAlternative as the Preferred Alternative. 

Therefore, in any decision authorizing 

construction and operation of the RC Line, 

OEA recommends that the Board: (1) adopt 

the EA and FRA’s conclusions in the FONSI; 

(2) approve construction and operation of 

FRA’s Build-Alternative for the RC Line; and 

(3) impose the environmental mitigation in 

Attachment A to the FONSI. 

Background 

On April 13, 2021, Brightline West filed a 

petition for exemption with the Board under 

49 U.S.C. 10502 to construct and operate the 

RC Line. Brightline West proposes to 

construct the RC Line within the Interstate15 (I–15) right-of way for 48 miles and on 

existing transportation corridors for the last 

mile into the proposed Rancho Cucamonga 

station. (FONSI 1.) The RC Line would 

include two new rail stations—one in 

Hesperia and one in Rancho Cucamonga, 

both in California.2 (Id.) 

The purpose of the RC Line is to provide 

an alternative transportation option (in 

addition to cars) between the Los Angeles 

metropolitan region and the High Desert of 

San Bernardino County. (FONSI 3.) Trains 

are expected to operate daily every 60 

minutes between the Victor Valley and 

Rancho Cucamonga. (Id. at 1.) The trip 

between the Victor Valley and Rancho 

Cucamonga will be approximately 35 

minutes. Service will be coordinated with 

existing and planned Metrolink service at the 

Rancho Cucamonga station to provide a 

convenient connection between the RC Line 

and commuter rail systems. (Id.) Trains 

traversing over the RC Line would be capable 

of reaching a top speed of approximately 140 

miles per hour. (Id.) 

Summary of Environmental Impacts and 

Mitigation Measures 

The charts below from FRA’s FONSI 

provide an overview of the potential 

construction and operations impacts of the 

RC Line, and the associated mitigation 

measures to minimize these impacts. 

Analysis area Long-term operational impacts of the selected alternative Mitigation 

Transportation ............... The Rancho Cucamonga station will result in traffic impacts to three 

intersections that are projected to operate at unacceptable level 

of service during the 2025 Opening Year conditions during peak 

periods and will also degrade the level of service at the Milliken 

Avenue/7th Street Intersection compared to the 2045 No Build 

scenario.

During Project design, Brightline West will coordinate with SBCTA, 

Caltrans, Rancho Cucamonga, and Hesperia to incorporate intersection improvements to lessen or avoid adverse impacts to traffic to the extent feasible, including optimizing signal timing to reflect changes in traffic flows in station areas during operation of 

the Project. 

Operation of the Project would increase demand for local transit at 

the Hesperia station, such that the hourly volume of passengers 

desiring to depart the station via bus will likely exceed the available bus capacity during any single hour. At the Rancho 

Cucamonga station, the Project will impact passengers utilizing 

regional rail on Sunday, when there is a 5-hour period in the late 

afternoon/early evening with only one train in each direction.

Based on ridership estimates, parking at the Hesperia and Rancho 

Cucamonga stations will exceed the amount of existing and 

planned spaces at the station in the 2045 Horizon Year.

Brightline West will coordinate with local transit agencies to identify 

opportunities to best serve the needs of transit users at the 

Hesperia and Rancho Cucamonga stations without significantly 

affecting other transit services. 

Brightline West will develop and implement a parking demand management plan prior to operation of the Project to manage increasing parking demand at the Hesperia and Rancho Cucamonga stations. 

Land Use and Community Facilities.None .................................................................................................... None. 

Socioeconomic Environment.None .................................................................................................... None. 

Cultural Resources ........ None .................................................................................................... None. 

Aesthetics ...................... The Project would have a permanent impact on views of the San 

Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains, as well as the Southern 

California Edison Boulder Dam-San Bernardino transmission lines 

from northbound I–15, looking north toward the split of northbound and southbound I–15 as it climbs toward the summit of 

Cajon Pass.

During the design phase, Brightline West will design rail features, 

including bridge pillars/columns, raised tracks, trains, catenary 

structures, crash barriers, retaining walls, abutments, fencing, and 

embankments to blend with or represent the surrounding desert 

or urban environment. Features will be created or stained in 

muted desert colors. Bright colors and highly reflective materials 

will be avoided, as feasible. Project elements defined in the design process will include visual elements that contribute to a 

sense of place and a memorable experience for motorists, pedestrians, and rail passengers. Concrete will be embossed with patterns, where appropriate, that are indicative of the surrounding 

environment and that create a visual link between the railway features and their surroundings and will be similar in character to recent nearby freeway projects. 

Water Quality ................ The Project will result in permanent increased impervious surface 

along the rail alignment and the proposed Hesperia station, which 

will increase the amount of stormwater runoff and nonpointsource pollution in some areas, affecting 48 ephemeral or intermittent drainage features.

To protect water quality, Brightline West will install permanent water 

quality treatment devices in accordance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit obtained for 

the Project (Mitigation Measure WQ–7). 

Brightline West will redesign and resize the existing drainage features to accommodate the potential increase in runoff along the 

rail alignment. Additionally, stormwater treatment will be designed 

in accordance with the Caltrans Project Planning and Design 

Guide (PPDG). The 100-year, 24-hour storm event will be used to 

determine the appropriate size of drainage facilities need for the 

Project (Mitigation Measure WQ–8). 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
81524 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 

Analysis area Long-term operational impacts of the selected alternative Mitigation 

Wetlands and Stream 

Areas.

During Project operation, railway crossings over Debris Cone 

Creek, Cajon Wash/Creek, and Lytle Creek will require new structures in the channels. All crossings will result in less than 0.1 acre 

of permanent fill. The Project will have no permanent impacts on 

the Mojave River itself, but a small portion (less than 0.01 acre) 

of wetlands associated with the Mojave River will be permanently 

impacted.

Prior to construction, Brightline West will coordinate with USACE to 

obtain a jurisdictional determination for aquatic resources. If applicable, Brightline West will obtain any required permits and implement all required permit conditions. 

Floodplains .................... None .................................................................................................... None. 

Biological Resources ..... Approximately 64 acres of native vegetation habitat types will be 

permanently converted to transportation uses by the Project. Permanent impacts occur in a wide variety of habitat types; most permanent impacts would occur in Desert Scrub habitats (37 acres).

Brightline West will implement mitigation and compensation strategies identified during consultation with USFWS and documented 

in USFWS’ Biological Opinion. Brightline West will also obtain an 

Incidental Take Permit for Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed 

species. Refer to Attachment A, for a list and description of Mitigation Measures BIO–1 through BIO–57. 

Geology, Soils, and 

Seismicity.

Seismic activity during operation could result in impacts related to 

surface fault rupture, ground shaking, and liquefaction because 

the Project alignment crosses or comes within 1,000 feet of four 

major faults: the Sierra Madre, the San Jacinto, the San Andreas, 

and the Cleghorn faults.

Brightline West will hire qualified geologists and geotechnical engineers to conduct geotechnical investigations along the Project 

alignment for potential hazards related to geology, soils, seismicity. Brightline West will incorporate recommendations of the 

evaluation that avoid or minimize hazardous impacts and will be 

implemented prior to design and construction. Refer to Attachment A for a list and description of Mitigation Measures GEO–2 

through GEO–8. 

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas.None. The Project will not result in exceedances of the de minimis 

thresholds for criteria pollutants in the applicable air basins. As 

ridership increases during the operation period, the Project will reduce emissions of both criteria pollutants and GHGs by providing 

an alternative to passenger car travel and reducing vehicle miles 

traveled within the South Coast Air Basin and Mojave Desert Air 

Basin, resulting in a beneficial impact to air quality and reductions 

in greenhouse gas emissions.

None. 

Energy Resources ......... None .................................................................................................... None. 

Noise and Vibration ....... None .................................................................................................... None. 

Safety and Security ....... None .................................................................................................... None. 

Environmental Justice ... The Project will not result in disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects on minority populations 

and low-income populations.

None. 

Analysis area Temporary construction-related impacts of the selected alternative Mitigation 

Transportation ............... None .................................................................................................... None. 

Land Use and Community Facilities.None .................................................................................................... None. 

Socioeconomic Environment.None .................................................................................................... None. 

Cultural Resources ........ None .................................................................................................... None. 

Aesthetics ...................... Changes in visual quality from construction will result from implementation of standard industry practices, including the use of 

temporary lighting, fences, barriers, stockpiling of materials, and 

the use of heavy equipment, and will result in temporary visual 

disturbances to natural visual resources.

Brightline West will implement measures to minimize nighttime light 

spillover onto adjacent properties, to reduce glare for freeway motorists, and to prevent visible lighting overflow into the natural 

dark sky of the desert at night. Visual screening, such as fences, 

will be erected along construction and staging areas as appropriate. 

Landscaping and native vegetation that is cleared for temporary 

construction areas (TCA) will be replaced by Brightline West within one year of the completion of construction at any location along 

the alignment. 

Water Quality ................ Construction of the Project will impact water quality from activities 

involving soil disturbance, excavation, cutting/filling, stockpiling, 

and grading. Grading could result in increased erosion and sedimentation of surface waters. Stormwater runoff from TCAs could 

contain sediment and other contaminants, and could carry contaminants to drainages, groundwater, and impaired water bodies.

Brightline West will implement Best Management Practices (BMP) 

during construction and operation of the Project to minimize impacts on aquatic resources (Mitigation Measure WQ–1), comply 

with the statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (Mitigation Measure WQ–2), implement a stormwater pollution prevention program (SWPPP) (Mitigation Measure WQ–3), 

implement a spill prevention, control and countermeasures plan 

(SPCC) (Mitigation Measure WQ–4), locate TCAs to avoid key 

water features (Mitigation Measure WQ–5), and obtain water from 

existing, commercially available water sources (Mitigation Measure WQ–6). 

Wetlands and Streams .. Construction of bridges over the Bell Mountain Wash, Mojave River, 

Brush Creek, Cleghorn Creek, Cajon Wash/Creek and Lytle 

Creek, will involve work in the Ordinary High Water Mark 

(OHWM). The Project may require temporary soil disturbance and 

vegetation clearing within the Mojave River riparian area and in 

and around other drainages along the corridor.

Brightline West will contract with a qualified biologist, who will be on 

site prior to and during construction of the Project to identify and 

protect aquatic resources. The biologist will define the boundaries 

of the aquatic resources and will supervise the placement of exclusion fencing to protect those areas during all project activities. 

Additionally, a silt fence around the construction areas adjacent to 

aquatic resources will protect the resources, including waters of 

the United States (WOTUS), from runoff and spills associated 

with construction activities, if any. 

Aquatic resources that are affected by construction activities (e.g., 

clearing, ground disturbance) will be restored by Brightline West 

with native vegetation within one year of the completion of construction at any location along the alignment. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 81525 

Analysis area Temporary construction-related impacts of the selected alternative Mitigation 

Floodplains .................... Project construction will involve the use of heavy, earth-moving 

equipment in the floodplains of the Mojave River and Lytle Creek, 

and near the floodplains of Etiwanda Channel and HawkerCrawford Channel Construction activities within floodplains will 

likely result in temporary impacts such and minor erosion and 

runoff on floodplains.

Brightline West will implement BMPs prior to construction to minimize the temporary effects on floodplains, and construction equipment and materials will not be stored within the floodplain. 

Brightline West will return any temporary effects on floodplains to 

preconstruction conditions. 

Biological Resources ..... Construction of the project would have temporary impacts on approximately 2,206 acres of various types of wildlife habitat. The 

most common habitat types would be Urban (1,787 acres), 

Desert Scrub (168 acres), and Mixed Chaparral (128 acres). Construction impacts would include disturbance of vegetation and 

soils, construction noise, hydrologic modifications, facilitation of 

invasive species, and changes in habitat elements that increase 

or decrease populations of predators or prey species.

Brightline West will implement mitigation and compensation strategies identified during consultation with USFWS and documented 

in USFWS’ Biological Opinion. Brightline West will also obtain an 

Incidental Take Permit for ESA-listed species. Refer to Attachment A, for a list and description of Mitigation Measures BIO–1 

through BIO–57. 

Geology, Soils, and 

Seismicity.

Construction of the Project may result in impacts related to ground 

fissures due to pile driving.

Brightline West will retain qualified geologists and geotechnical engineers to conduct geotechnical investigations along the Project 

alignment for potential hazards related to geology, soils, seismicity. Recommendations of the evaluation that avoid or minimize 

hazardous impacts will be implemented prior to design and construction (Mitigation Measure GEO–1). 

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas.Construction of the Project will temporarily generate emissions of 

both criteria pollutants and GHGs. However, the Project will not 

result in exceedances of the de minimis thresholds for criteria pollutants in the applicable air basins. The Project will result in shortterm increases in GHG emissions from construction activities.

Prior to construction activities, Brightline West will develop and implement a fugitive dust control plan and utilize additional means 

to reduce construction period emissions of air pollutants, such as 

solar powered signal boards. 

Energy Resources ......... None .................................................................................................... None. 

Noise and Vibration ....... Construction of the Project will result in short-term noise impacts to 

resources due to elevated noise levels associated with construction activities, including construction equipment, diesel engines, 

impact pile driving and jackhammering.

Brightline West will require the contractors to prepare a detailed 

Noise Control Plan (Mitigation Measure NOI–1) in coordination 

with a qualified noise monitor prior to construction. Brightline 

West will comply with all applicable local noise regulations to minimize temporary construction noise and vibration impacts (Mitigation Measure NOI–2). 

Hazardous Materials ..... Construction of the Project may result in the release of hazardous 

materials through disturbance of identified hazardous materials 

sites and using hazardous materials, either of which may result in 

impacts on human health. There is also the potential to encounter 

previously unidentified hazardous materials along the Project footprint.

Brightline West will prepare a Hazardous Materials Management 

Plan (HMMP) prior to application for permits for demolition, grading, or construction, as required by the State of California (Mitigation Measure HAZ–1). The HMMP shall be reviewed and approved by either the office of the State Fire Marshall or the San 

Bernardino County Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). Activities identified in the HMMP will be implemented by Brightline 

West throughout the construction period. 

Safety ............................ Construction of the Project will involve use of heavy equipment on 

site, earthwork, and other major construction activities, including 

the transportation of overweight and oversized materials. 

Throughout construction, workers and nearby community members could be exposed to hazards, which could affect human 

health or present to safety from construction site hazards and accidents, associated with construction site equipment and activities.

Project construction could temporarily increase fire risks in the high 

fire hazard severity zones (FHSZ) due to the storage and use of 

flammable or combustible materials, operation of vehicles and 

heavy machinery.

The Rancho Cucamonga and Hesperia stations will not be located 

within FSHZ zones.

Brightline West will implement construction safety requirements during construction, per regulatory requirements, including California 

Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal OSHA) Construction Safety Orders and California Public Utilities Commission 

(CPUC) General Order No. 176. 

Environmental Justice ... The Project will not result in disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects on minority populations 

and low-income populations.

None. 

Historic Review Under Section 106 

Concurrently with preparation of the EA, 

FRA initiated consultation under Section 106 

of the NHPA, which included efforts to 

identify, evaluate, and assess effects to 

historic properties that could be impacted by 

the RC Line. (EA 138–58.) As part of that 

process, FRA consulted with the 

Chairpersons of and/or Tribal Historic 

Preservation Officers for the Chemheuvi 

Indian Tribes, the Colorado River Indian 

Tribes, the Morongo Band of Mission 

Indians, the San Fernando Band of Mission 

Indians, the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, 

and the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission 

Indians, and identified tribal contacts for the 

Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation. (FONSI 

13.) The Board participated as a consulting 

party in FRA’s Section 106 consultation 

process, along with the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation, Brightline West, 

Caltrans, City of Fontana, City of Ontario, 

City of Rancho Cucamonga, City of Rialto, 

City of Victorville, Federal Highway 

Administration, United States Army Corps of 

Engineers, and the United States Forest 

Service. (Id.) 

FRA concluded that construction and 

operation of the RC Line would have no 

adverse effects on resources listed in or 

eligible for listing in the National Register of 

Historic Places. (Id.) On May 22, 2023, the 

California State Historic Preservation Officer 

did not object to FRA’s finding of no adverse 

effect for the RC Line. FRA issued a final 

Finding of Effect report and made a finding 

of no adverse effect for the Project on June 

30, 2023. (Id. at 13–14.) Accordingly, no 

historic mitigation was imposed. (Id. at 8, 10 

& Attachment A.) 

OEA’s Final Environmental 

Recommendations 

After participating in FRA’s environmental 

review, OEA concludes that the EA 

adequately assesses the potential 

environmental and historic impacts 

associated with the RC Line and concurs 

with the conclusions reached by FRA in the 

FONSI. Accordingly, OEA recommends that 

the Board adopt FRA’s EA and the 

conclusions in the FONSI, and that it impose 

the environmental mitigation attached to the 

FONSI at Attachment A as conditions to any 

decision authorizing construction and 

operation of the RC Line. OEA concludes that 

FRA’s mitigation measures are adequate to 

address the potential environmental and 

historic impacts of the RC Line. Therefore, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
81526 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2023 / Notices 

OEA does not recommend any additional 

environmental or historic mitigation. 

[FR Doc. 2023–25786 Filed 11–21–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4915–01–P 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES 

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE 

[Docket Number USTR–2023–0012; Dispute 

Number WT/DS617] 

WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding 

Regarding a United States AntiDumping Measure on Oil Country 

Tubular Goods From Argentina 

AGENCY: Office of the United States 

Trade Representative. 

ACTION: Notice with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Office of the United 

States Trade Representative (USTR) 

invites public comments concerning the 

issues raised in this World Trade 

Organization (WTO) dispute settlement 

proceeding regarding a United States 

anti-dumping measure on oil country 

tubular goods from Argentina. 

DATES: Although USTR will accept any 

comments submitted during the course 

of the dispute settlement proceedings, 

you should submit your comment on or 

before December 22, 2023, to be assured 

of timely consideration by USTR. 

ADDRESSES: USTR strongly prefers 

electronic submissions made through 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments in 

sections III and IV below. The Docket 

Number is USTR–2023–0012. For 

alternatives to on-line submissions, 

please contact Sandy McKinzy at (202) 

395–9483 in advance of the deadline. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Gagain, Senior Associate 

General Counsel, (202) 395–9529, or 

Matthew Jaffe, Senior Associate General 

Counsel, (202) 395–9512. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Section 127(b)(1) of the Uruguay 

Round Agreements Act (URAA) (19 

U.S.C. 3537(b)(1)) requires notice and 

opportunity for comment after the 

United States submits or receives a 

request for the establishment of a WTO 

dispute settlement panel. Accordingly, 

USTR is providing notice that Argentina 

has requested a dispute settlement panel 

pursuant to the WTO Understanding on 

Rules Procedures Governing the 

Settlement of Disputes (DSU). The panel 

established by the WTO will hold its 

meetings in Geneva Switzerland. 

II. Major Issues Raised by Argentina 

On May 17, 2023, Argentina requested 

consultations with the United States 

concerning the imposition of 

antidumping duties on oil country 

tubular goods from Argentina, following 

final determinations by the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (DOC) and 

U.S. International Trade Commission 

(ITC) in Oil Country Tubular Goods 

From Argentina: Final Affirmative 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value and Final Negative 

Determination of Critical Circumstances 

(DOC investigation number A–357–824), 

and Oil Country Tubular Goods From 

Argentina, Mexico, Russia, and South 

Korea (ITC investigation numbers 701– 

TA–671–672 and 731–TA–1571–1573), 

and section 771(7)(G) of the Tariff Act 

of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677(7)(G)). The 

consultation request can be found at 

www.wto.org in a document designated 

as WT/DS617/1. The United States and 

Argentina held consultations on July 6, 

2023. On September 1, 2023, Argentina 

made its request to the WTO to establish 

a dispute settlement panel under the 

Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the 

World Trade Organization (WTO 

Agreement). That request may be found 

at www.wto.org in a document 

designated as WT/DS617/3. On October 

26, 2023, the WTO established a panel 

to examine Argentina’s complaint. 

Argentina’s panel request appears to 

be concerned with the DOC’s 

examination of whether there was 

sufficient domestic industry support to 

justify initiation of its investigation; the 

ITC’s cumulation analysis in its material 

injury investigation; aspects of the ITC’s 

analyses of volume and imports and 

price effects in its investigation; and 

aspects of the ITC’s analyses of injury 

and causation. Argentina claims that the 

imposition of duties is inconsistent with 

Article VI of the WTO General 

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 

(GATT 1994); and Articles 1, 3.1, 3.2, 

3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 6.6, and 

18.1 of the WTO Agreement on 

Implementation of Article VI of the 

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 

1994 (Antidumping Agreement). 

Argentina further alleges that section 

771(7)(G) of the Tariff Act of 1930 is 

inconsistent with Articles 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 

3.4, and 3.5 of the Antidumping 

Agreement. 

III. Public Comments: Requirements for 

Submissions 

To be assured of consideration, 

submit your written comments by the 

December 22, 2023 deadline. All 

submissions must be in English. USTR 

strongly encourages submissions via 

Regulations.gov, using Docket Number 

USTR–2023–0012. 

To make a submission via 

Regulations.gov, enter Docket Number 

USTR–2023–0012 in the ‘search for’ 

field on the home page and click 

‘search.’ The site will provide a search 

results page listing all documents 

associated with this docket. Find a 

reference to this notice by selecting 

‘notice’ under ‘document type’ in the 

‘refine documents results’ section on the 

left side of the screen and click on the 

link entitled ‘comment.’ Regulations.gov 

allows users to make submissions by 

filling in a ‘type comment’ field, or by 

attaching a document using the ‘upload 

file’ field. USTR prefers that you 

provide submissions in an attached 

document and, in such cases, that you 

write ‘see attached’ in the ‘type 

comment’ field. USTR prefers 

submissions in Microsoft Word (.doc) or 

Adobe Acrobat (.pdf). If you use an 

application other than those two, please 

indicate the name of the application in 

the ‘type comment’ field. 

Please do not attach separate cover 

letters, exhibits, annexes, or other 

attachments to electronic submissions; 

rather, include any in the same file as 

the submission itself, not as separate 

files. You will receive a tracking number 

upon completion of the submission 

procedure at Regulations.gov. The 

tracking number is confirmation that 

Regulations.gov received your 

submission. Keep the confirmation for 

your records. USTR is not able to 

provide technical assistance for 

Regulations.gov. 

For further information on using 

Regulations.gov, please consult the 

resources provided on the website by 

clicking on ‘How to Use 

Regulations.gov’ on the bottom of the 

home page. Contact the Regulations.gov 

help desk with technical questions on 

submitting comments at 

regulationshelpdesk@gsa.gov or 1–866– 

498–2945. 

If you are unable to provide 

submissions as requested, please contact 

Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395–9483 in 

advance of the deadline to arrange for 

an alternative method of transmission. 

USTR may not consider submissions 

that you do not make in accordance 

with these instructions. 

IV. Confidential Submissions 

If you ask USTR to treat information 

you submit as business confidential 

information (BCI), you must certify that 

the information is business confidential 

and you would not customarily release 

it to the public. For any comments 

submitted electronically containing BCI, 

the file name of the business 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES