28550 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 100 /Tuesday, May 26, 1998 / Notices

alternative amendments to existing

legislation.

Areas of Significant Environmental

Concern

FRA’s review of the current practice

of sounding locomotive horns at

highway-rail grade crossings and the

comments received thus far in the

public docket of this rulemaking have

identified two primary areas of

environmental concern associated with

the proposed regulation, noise (and

related impacts) and safety.

Scoping and Comments

FRA encourages broad participation

in the EIS process during scoping and

review of the resulting environmental

documentation. Comments and

suggestions are invited from all

interested agencies and the public at

large to insure the full range of issues

related to the proposed action and all

reasonable alternatives are addressed

and all significant issues are identified.

In particular, FRA is interested in

determining whether there are any other

reasonable alternatives consistent with

the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 20153 and

whether there are other areas of

environmental concern where there

might be the potential for significant

impacts, either adverse or favorable, as

a result of promulgating the proposed

rule.

Due to the national scope of the

proposed regulation, FRA does not plan

to hold public scoping meetings.

Notices soliciting comments have been

and will be sent to appropriate Federal,

State, and local agencies, private

organizations and citizens who have

expressed an interest in this rulemaking

and made available to the media in

areas that have been identified to date

as currently subject to whistle bans or

where whistle bans have been

preempted by FRA order. Persons

interested in providing comments on

the scope of this environmental

document should do so by June 19,

1998. Comments can be sent in writing

to Mr. David Valenstein at the address

identified above. Comments can also be

sent via the Internet at:

FRAEIS@fra.dot.gov.

The Remaining Environmental Review

Process

Comments received on the scope and

methodology to be used in preparation

of the EIS will be reviewed by FRA to

develop the final scope of the

environmental review. A summary of

the comments received will be provided

to agencies and members of the public

expressing an interest in this

environmental review. FRA and its

consultants will then undertake

preparation of a draft EIS which will be

made available to the public for

comment. This is presently scheduled

for the late fall 1998. It is FRA’s

intention that the comment period for

the draft EIS will occur during the

comment period associated with the

proposed rule so that interested

agencies and the public can combine

their comments and that the

environmental issues can be fully

considered as FRA develops the final

rule. After reviewing comments on the

draft EIS, FRA will prepare a final EIS

that addresses these comments and

incorporates any additional analyses

and material deemed necessary. The

final EIS will be made available for

public review for not less than 30 days

before FRA takes any final action on the

proposed rule.

Internet

This notice and all subsequent

documents prepared as part of this

environmental review will be available

in the environmental pages of the FRA

Internet website, located at: http://

www.fra.dot.gov

Issued in Washington, D.C. on: May 19,

1998.

Donald M. Itzkoff,

Deputy Administrator.

[FR Doc. 98–13804 Filed 5–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Application for Approval of

Discontinuance or Modification of a

Railroad Signal System or Relief from

the Requirements of Title 49 Code of

Federal Regulations Part 236

Pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) Part 235 and 49

U.S.C. App. 26, the following railroads

have petitioned the Federal Railroad

Administration (FRA) seeking approval

for the discontinuance or modification

of the signal system or relief from the

requirements of 49 CFR Part 236 as

detailed below.

Block Signal Application (BS–AP)-No.

3463

Applicants: Houston Belt and

Terminal Railway Company, Mr. J. B.

Mathis, General Manager, 501 Crawford,

Room 515, Houston, Texas 77002–2192.

Burlington Northern and Santa Fe

Railway Company, Mr. William G.

Peterson, Director Signal Engineering,

4515 Kansas Avenue, Kansas City,

Kansas 66106.

Union Pacific Railroad Company, Mr.

Bruce E. Williams, Director Signal

Design, 1416 Dodge Street, Room 1000,

Omaha, Nebraska 68179–1000.

The Houston Belt and Terminal

Railway Company, Burlington Northern

and Santa Fe Railway Company, and

Union Pacific Railroad Company, jointly

seek approval of the proposed

discontinuance and removal of the

traffic control system, on the East Main

Track, between Control Point 169,

milepost 9.6 and Control Point 183,

milepost 10.9, on the West Belt

Subdivision, in Houston, Texas,

including removal of Control Points 175

and 178, and associated signals, poweroperated switch machines, and track

circuits.

The reasons given for the proposed

changes are that the track serves yards

and the signal system is no longer

required.

BS–AP–No. 3464

Applicants: Southern California

Regional Rail Authority, Mr. David

Solow, Deputy Executive Director, 700

South Flower Street, Suite 2600, Los

Angeles, California 90017–4101.

Santa Clarita Railroad, Mr. James

Clark, Manager of Operations, 25135

Anza, Santa Clarita, California 91355.

Union Pacific Railroad Company, Mr.

Bruce E. Williams, Director Signal

Design, 1416 Dodge Street, Room 1000,

Omaha, Nebraska 68179–1000.

The Southern California Regional Rail

Authority, Santa Clarita Railroad, and

Union Pacific Railroad Company jointly

seek approval of the proposed reduction

to the interlocking limits of CP Saugus,

milepost 32.4, Saugus, California, Valley

Subdivision, consisting of the

conversion of the No. 3 power-operated

switch to hand operation, conversion of

interlocked signal ‘‘2WC’’ to absolute

signal ‘‘3240,’’ in lieu of an electric lock,

removal of signal ‘‘2WA,’’ and

installation of a new interlocked signal

‘‘W,’’ 642 feet west of the 2WA location.

The reason given for the proposed

changes is to modify the interlocking to

reflect change in operating practices.

BS–AP–No. 3465

Applicant: Long Island Rail Road, Mr.

Frederick E. Smith, P.E., Chief Engineer,

Hillside Maintenance Complex, 93–59

183 Street, Hollis, New York 11423.

The Long Island Rail Road seeks

approval of the proposed temporary

discontinuance of Cabin ‘‘M’’

Interlocking, on the Montauk Branch, in

Queens County, New York, until June

1999, and govern train movements

through the interlocking by issuance of

a Clearance Card Form C, Rule 331 of
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 100 /Tuesday, May 26, 1998 / Notices 28551

Long Island Rail Road’s ‘‘Rules of The

Operating Department.’’

The reason given for the proposed

changes is that the location was

destroyed by fire and is currently being

redesigned. Upon completion of the

design work, the signal enclosure will

be wired by a third party vendor, with

installation, testing, and completion

expected during the first half of 1999.

BS–AP–No. 3466

Applicant: Central Michigan Railway

Company, Mr. James P. Pitz, Chief

Operating Officer, 1410 S. Valley Center

Drive, Bay City, Michigan 48706–9998.

The Central Michigan Railway

Company seeks approval of the

proposed modification of the signal

system, on the single main track, near

Carrollton, Michigan, on the Saginaw

Subdivision, consisting of the relocation

of the southbound approach signal from

milepost 41.9 to milepost 41.3. The

proposed changes are associated with

the replacement of the existing pole line

with polarized track circuits, and

installation of a new signal to govern

movements from the Old GT Spur Track

to the Saginaw Subdivision Main Track.

The reason given for the proposed

changes is the elimination of a pole line

for signal control circuits and relocation

of the approach signal for improved

visibility.

BS–AP–No. 3467

Applicant: CSX Transportation,

Incorporated, Mr. R. M. Kadlick, Chief

Engineer Train Control, 500 Water

Street (S/C J–350), Jacksonville, Florida

32202.

CSX Transportation, Incorporated

seeks approval of the proposed

modification of the signal system, on all

tracks, between milepost CA–520.7 and

milepost CA–527.7, near Russell,

Kentucky, on the Kanawha and Russell

Subdivisions, Huntington Division,

consisting of the following:

1. Discontinuance and removal of

absolute controlled signals 2L and 2R at

West End ‘‘RU,’’ milepost CA–524.3;

2. Discontinuance and removal of

absolute controlled signals 14RA, 14RB,

16R, 16L, 18L, 20RA, 20RB, 20RC,

20RD, 20L, 22L, 24RA, 24RB, 24RC, and

24L at ‘‘RU’’ Tower, milepost CA–524.3

to CA–524.0; and

3. Discontinuance and removal of

absolute controlled signals 50R, 50L,

52R, 52L, and power crossover 51 at

East End ‘‘RU,’’ milepost CA–523.2.

The reason given for the proposed

changes is to eliminate facilities no

longer needed in present day operation

and increase operating efficiency.

BS–AP–No. 3468

Applicant: CSX Transportation,

Incorporated, Mr. R. M. Kadlick, Chief

Engineer Train Control, 500 Water

Street (S/C J–350), Jacksonville, Florida

32202.

CSX Transportation, Incorporated

seeks approval of the proposed

modification of the traffic control

system, on the single main track,

milepost BA–81.44, near Harpers Ferry

Interlocking, West Virginia, Cumberland

Subdivision, Baltimore Service Lane,

consisting of the discontinuance and

removal of the interconnected, single

wire loop, bridge fire detection system.

The reason given for the proposed

changes is the poor reliability of this

type of system, along with the advances

in communication systems in today’s

environment, renders this type of

system obsolete.

BS–AP–No. 3469

Applicants: CSX Transportation,

Incorporated, Mr. R. M. Kadlick, Chief

Engineer Train Control, 500 Water

Street (S/C J–350), Jacksonville, Florida

32202.

Norfolk Southern Corporation, Mr. W.

C. Johnson, Chief Engineer S&E

Engineering, 99 Spring Street, S.W.,

Atlanta, Georgia 30303.

CSX Transportation, Incorporated

(CSXT) and Norfolk Southern

Corporation (NS) jointly seek approval

of the proposed discontinuance and

removal of the power-operated derails,

on the NS single main track, at Wilson

North Carolina, where two main tracks

of CSXT cross at grade the NS single

main track, on the CSXT Florence

Service Lane, South End Subdivision,

milepost A–136.5, and on the NS

Piedmont Division, NS District,

milepost NS–182.3.

The reason given for the proposed

changes is to improve operations and

increase efficiency.

BS–AP–No. 3470

Applicant: Burlington Northern and

Santa Fe Railway, Mr. William G.

Peterson, Director Signal Engineering,

4515 Kansas Avenue, Kansas City,

Kansas 66106.

The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe

Railway seeks approval of the proposed

modification of the signal system, on

Main Track No. 1, at Stockton,

California, milepost 1121.8, Northern

California Division, consisting of the

conversion of power-operated switch

No. 73 to hand operation, equipped

with an electric lock, and removal of

associated signals No.’s 73, 76A, and

76B.

The reason given for the proposed

changes is that the power-operated

switch is no longer needed for

operations and removal would

accommodate and simplify the

replacement of Stockton Tower.

BS–AP–No. 3471

Applicant: Union Pacific Railroad

Company, Mr. P. M. Abaray, Chief

Engineer-Signals, 1416 Dodge Street,

Room 1000, Omaha, Nebraska 68179–

1000.

The Union Pacific Railroad Company

(UP) seeks approval of the proposed

temporary discontinuance of signal

system, on the main track between

Littleton, milepost 727.1 and South

Denver, milepost 733.4, at Denver,

Colorado, on the Colorado Springs

Subdivision, for the duration of the

track and signal construction project,

and operate trains by track warrant

control. The proposal involves the

removal of all signals and remote

controlled switches on the UP trackage

between Signal 1E at Littleton and

Signal 9 at South Denver, execution of

the major track construction,

installation of two new control points,

and restoration of the signal system to

service.

The reason given for the proposed

changes is to perform major track

construction.

Rules, Standards, and Instructions

Application (RS&I–AP)–No. 1103

Applicants: Consolidated Rail

Corporation, Mr. J. F. Noffsinger, Chief

Engineer—C&S Assets, 2001 Market

Street, P.O. Box 41410, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania 19101–1410.

Connecticut Southern Railroad, Mr.

Louis J. Szabo, Assistant General

Manager, 191 Park Avenue, East

Hartford, Connecticut 06108.

Consolidated Rail Corporation

(Conrail) and the Connecticut Southern

Railroad jointly seek relief from section

236.566 of the Rules, Standards, and

Instructions (49 CFR, Part 236) to the

extent that the Connecticut Southern

Railroad be permitted to operate nonequipped locomotives, in automatic cab

signal territory, between ‘‘CP 96’’,

milepost 96.1 and ‘‘CP 100.0’’, milepost

100.0, on the Boston Line, Albany

Division of Conrail, near Springfield,

Massachusetts, for the following

operations:

1. Work trains, wreck trains, and

ballast cleaners;

2. Engines moving to and from shops;

and

3. Engines used in switching and

transfer service, with or without cars,

not exceeding 20 mph.

The justification for relief is the

acquisition of track by the Connecticut

Southern Railroad, and an exemption is
28552 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 100 /Tuesday, May 26, 1998 / Notices

already authorized for the operation of

Guilford Transportation Industries nonequipped locomotives over the exact

same trackage.

Any interested party desiring to

protest the granting of an application

shall set forth specifically the grounds

upon which the protest is made, and

contain a concise statement of the

interest of the Protestant in the

proceeding. The original and two copies

of the protest shall be filed with the

Associate Administrator for Safety,

FRA, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Mail

Stop 25, Washington, D.C. 20590 within

45 calendar days of the date of

publication of this notice. Additionally,

one copy of the protest shall be

furnished to the applicant at the address

listed above.

FRA expects to be able to determine

these matters without an oral hearing.

However, if a specific request for an oral

hearing is accompanied by a showing

that the party is unable to adequately

present his or her position by written

statements, an application may be set

for public hearing.

Issued in Washington, D.C. on May 19,

1998.

Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety

Standards and Program Development.

[FR Doc. 98–13890 Filed 5–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Submission to OMB for Review;

Comment Request

May 13, 1998.

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,

Public Law 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.

DATES: Written comments should be

received on or before June 25, 1998 to

be assured of consideration.

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

OMB Number: 1545–1586.

Revenue Procedure Number: Revenue

Procedure 98–17.

Type of Review: Extension.

Title: Contributions to Foreign

Partnerships Under Section 6038B.

Description: This notice provides

simplified reporting for transfers by U.S.

persons to foreign partnerships under

section 6038B, as amended by the

Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. These

reporting requirements can be relied on

by transferors not subject to section

6038B to avoid a penalty under section

1494(c).

Respondents: Business or other forprofit, Individuals or households, Notfor-profit institutions.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

500.

Estimated Burden Hours Per

Respondent: 30 minutes.

Frequency of Response: Annually.

Estimated Total Reporting Burden:

250 hours.

OMB Number: 1545–1591.

Revenue Procedure Number: Revenue

Procedure 98–23.

Type of Review: Extension.

Title: Qualified Subchapter S Trust

Conversions to Electing Small Business

Trusts.

Description: This revenue procedure

provides a method for taxpayers to

obtain the Secretary’s consent to convert

a Qualified Subchapter S Trust (QSST)

to an Electing Small Business Trust

(ESBT) as well as to convert an ESBT to

a QSST.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

2,500.

Estimated Burden Hours Per

Respondent: 1 hour.

Frequency of Response: Other (once).

Estimated Total Reporting Burden:

2,500 hours.

OMB Number: 1545–1595.

Revenue Procedure Number: Revenue

Procedure 98–25.

Type of Review: Extension.

Title: Automatic Data Processing.

Description: Revenue Procedure 98–

25 specifies the basic requirements that

the IRS considers to be essential in cases

where a taxpayer’s records are

maintained within an Automatic Data

Processing System (ADP).

If machine—sensible records are lost,

stolen, destroyed, or materially

inaccurate, the Revenue Procedure

requires that a taxpayer promptly notify

its District Director and submit a plan to

replace the affected records. The District

Director will notify the taxpayer of any

objection(s) to the taxpayer’s plan. Also,

the Revenue Procedure provides that a

taxpayer who maintains machinesensible records may request to enter

into a Record Retention Limitation

Agreement (RRLA) with its District

Director. The taxpayer’s request must

identify and describe those records the

taxpayer proposes not to retain and

explain why those records will not

become material to the administration of

any internal revenue law. The District

Director will notify the taxpayer

whether or not the District Director will

enter into an RRLA.

Finally, Revenue Procedure 98–25

provides that the District Director may

conduct an evaluation of a taxpayer’s

machine-sensible records and may

initiate testing to establish the

authenticity, readability, completeness,

and integrity of such records.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit, Individuals or households, Notfor-profit institutions, Farms, Federal

Government, State, Local or Tribal

Government.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

3,000.

Estimated Burden Hours Per

Respondent: 40 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Estimated Total Reporting Burden:

120,000 hours.

Clearance Officer: Garrick Shear (202)

622–3869, Internal Revenue Service,

Room 5571, 1111 Constitution Avenue,

NW, Washington, DC 20224.

OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt

(202) 395–7860, Office of Management

and Budget, Room 10226, New

Executive Office Building, Washington,

DC 20503.

Dale A. Morgan,

Departmental Reports Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 98–13824 Filed 5–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

May 14, 1998.

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,

Public Law 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.

DATES: Written comments should be

received on or before June 25, 1998 to

be assured of consideration.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and

Firearms (BATF)

OMB Number: 1512–0007.