65976 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 210 / Tuesday, November 1, 2005 / Notices 

Issued: October 26, 2005. 

Stephen P. Wood, 

Acting Chief Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 05–21725 Filed 10–31–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Surface Transportation Board 

[STB Finance Docket No. 34658] 

The Alaska Railroad Corporation—

Petition for Exemption to Construct 

and Operate a Rail Line Between 

Eielson Air Force Base (North Pole) 

and Fort Greely (Delta Junction), 

Alaska 

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board, 

DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement, 

Notice of Availability of Draft Scope of 

Study for the Environmental Impact 

Statement, Notice of Scoping Meetings, 

and Request for Comments. 

SUMMARY: The Alaska Railroad 

Corporation plans to file a petition with 

the Surface Transportation Board 

(Board) pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502 for 

authority to construct and operate a new 

rail line between Eielson Air Force Base 

(located south of Fairbanks) and the 

Delta Junction/Fort Greely area. The 

project would involve the construction 

and operation of approximately 80 miles 

of new main line track and could 

include an approximately 15-mile rail 

spur to the U.S. Air Force’s Blair Lakes 

training area. Because the construction 

and operation of this project has the 

potential to result in significant 

environmental impacts, the Board’s 

Section on Environmental Analysis 

(SEA) has determined that the 

preparation of an Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) is appropriate. The 

purpose of this Notice of Intent is to 

notify individuals and agencies 

interested in or affected by the proposed 

project of the decision to require an EIS. 

SEA is holding public scoping meetings 

as part of the EIS process. Additionally, 

as part of the scoping process, SEA has 

developed a draft Scope of Study for the 

EIS. 

DATES AND LOCATIONS: Scoping meetings 

will be held on: 

December 6, 2005, 4–8 pm at the City 

Council Chambers, 125 Snowman Lane, 

North Pole, Alaska 

December 7, 2005, 4–8 pm at Jarvis 

West Building, Mile 1420.5 Alaska 

Highway, Delta Junction, Alaska 

December 8, 2005, 4–8 pm at Lousaac 

Library Public Conference Room, 3600 

Denali Street, Anchorage, Alaska 

The public scoping meetings will be 

informal meetings in a workshop format 

during which interested persons may 

ask questions about the proposal and 

the Board’s environmental review 

process, and advise the Board’s 

representative about potential 

environmental effects of the project. In 

keeping with the workshop format of 

the scoping meetings, there will no 

formal presentations made by agency 

representatives. Rather, staff will be 

available to answer questions and 

receive comments individually. SEA has 

made available for public comment the 

draft Scope of Study contained in this 

notice. 

The meeting locations comply with 

the Americans With Disabilities Act. 

Persons that need special 

accommodations should telephone 

SEA’s toll-free number for the project at 

1–800–359–5142. 

SEA will issue a final Scope of Study 

after the close of the scoping comment 

period. Written comments on the Scope 

of Study and potential environmental 

effects of the project are due January 13, 

2005. 

Filing Environmental Comments: 

Interested persons and agencies are 

invited to participate in the EIS scoping 

process. Comments should be submitted 

to: Surface Transportation Board, Case 

Control Unit, 1925 K Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20423–0001. 

To ensure proper handling of your 

comments, please mark your 

submission: Attention: David Navecky, 

Environmental Filing. 

Environmental comments may also be 

filed electronically on the Board’s Web 

site, www.stb.dot.gov, by clicking on the 

‘‘E–FILING’’ link. Please refer to STB 

Finance Docket No. 34658 in all 

correspondence, including e-filings, 

addressed to the Board. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background: The proposed Northern 

Rail Extension Project includes 

construction of approximately 80 miles 

of new rail line connecting the existing 

rail line near Eielson AFB near North 

Pole, Alaska to a point near Fort Greely 

and the Donnelly Training Area near 

Delta Junction, Alaska. The proposed 

project could also include the 

construction of a 15-mile spur line from 

Flag Hill to the Blair Lakes Military 

Training Area. As a result of this 

project, the U.S. Army would have year 

round access to the Tanana Flats and 

Donnelly training areas and all the 

major military installations in Alaska 

would be accessible by rail through Fort 

Greely. The EIS will analyze the 

potential impacts of the proposed route, 

the ‘‘no-build’’ alternative and possible 

alternative routes. 

Environmental Review Process: The 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) process is intended to assist the 

Board and the public in identifying and 

assessing the potential environmental 

consequences of a proposed action 

before a decision on the proposed action 

is made. SEA is responsible for ensuring 

that the Board complies with NEPA and 

related environmental statutes. The first 

stage of the EIS process is scoping. 

Scoping is an open process for 

determining the scope of environmental 

issues to be addressed in the EIS. As 

part of the scoping process, SEA has 

developed, and is making available in 

today’s notice, a draft Scope of Study for 

the EIS. Concurrently, scoping meetings 

will be held to provide further 

opportunities for public involvement 

and input during the scoping process. 

At the conclusion of the scoping and 

comment period, SEA will issue a final 

Scope of Study for the EIS. 

After issuing the final Scope of Study, 

SEA will prepare a Draft EIS (DEIS) for 

the project. The DEIS will address those 

environmental issues and concerns 

identified during the scoping process. It 

will also contain SEA’s preliminary 

recommendations for environmental 

mitigation measures. The DEIS will be 

made available upon its completion for 

review and comment by the public, 

government agencies and other 

interested parties. SEA will prepare a 

Final EIS (FEIS) that considers 

comments on the DEIS. In reaching its 

decision in this case, the Board will take 

into account the DEIS, the FEIS, and all 

environmental comments that are 

received. 

SEA has recently invited several other 

Federal agencies to participate in this 

EIS process as cooperating agencies on 

the basis their special expertise or 

jurisdiction by law. These agencies 

include: U.S. Department of Defense, 

Alaskan Command; U.S. Department of 

Defense, U.S. Army Garrison—Alaska; 

U.S. Department of Defense, 354th 

Fighter Wing Command; U.S. Army 

Engineers District—Alaska; U.S. 

Department of Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management—Northern Field Office; 

U.S. Coast Guard, Seventeenth Coast 

Guard District; U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Federal Railroad 

Administration; and U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Federal Transit 

Administration—Region 10. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Navecky, Section of 

Environmental Analysis, Surface 

Transportation Board, 1925 K Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20423–0001, or 

call SEA’s toll-free number for the 

project at 1–800–359–5142. Assistance 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 210 / Tuesday, November 1, 2005 / Notices 65977 

for the hearing impaired is available 

through the Federal Information Relay 

Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339. The 

website for the Surface Transportation 

Board is www.stb.dot.gov. 

Draft Scope of Study for the EIS 

Proposed Action and Alternatives 

The proposed Northern Rail 

Extension Project includes construction 

of approximately 80 miles of new rail 

line connecting the existing rail line 

near Eielson AFB near North Pole, 

Alaska to a point near Fort Greely and 

the Donnelly Training Area near Delta 

Junction, Alaska. The proposed project 

could also include the construction of a 

15-mile spur line from Flag Hill to the 

Blair Lakes Military Training Area. The 

proposed line would provide freight and 

passenger rail services for defense 

facilities, commercial interests, and 

communities in or near the project 

corridor. The proposed rail line would 

also provide the U.S. Army with year 

round access to the Tanana Flats and 

Donnelly training areas and all the 

major military installations in Alaska 

would be accessible by rail. 

The reasonable and feasible 

alternatives that will be evaluated in the 

EIS are (1) construction and operation of 

the proposed project along the proposed 

alignments, (2) other alternatives that 

might be identified during the scoping 

process, and (3) the no-action 

alternative. 

Environmental Impact Analysis 

Proposed New Construction 

Analysis in the EIS will address the 

proposed activities associated with the 

construction and operation of new rail 

facilities and their potential 

environmental impacts, as appropriate. 

Impact Categories 

The EIS will address potential 

impacts from the proposed construction 

and operation of new rail facilities on 

the human and natural environment. 

Impact areas addressed will include the 

categories of land use, biological 

resources, water resources, geology and 

soils, air quality, noise, energy 

resources, socioeconomics as they relate 

to physical changes in the environment, 

safety, transportation systems, cultural 

and historic resources, subsistence, 

recreation, aesthetics, and 

environmental justice. The EIS will 

include a discussion of each of these 

categories as they currently exist in the 

project area and will address the 

potential impacts from the proposed 

project on each category as described 

below: 

1. Land Use 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe existing land use patterns 

within the project area and identify 

those land uses that would be 

potentially impacted by new rail line 

construction. 

b. Describe the potential impacts 

associated with the proposed new rail 

line construction to land uses identified 

within the project area. Such potential 

impacts may include incompatibility 

with existing land uses, and conversion 

of land to railroad uses. 

c. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts to land use, as appropriate. 

2. Biological Resources 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the existing biological 

resources within the project area, 

including vegetative communities, 

wildlife and fisheries, wetlands, and 

Federal and state threatened or 

endangered species and the potential 

impacts to these resources resulting 

from construction and operation of new 

rail facilities. 

b. Describe any wildlife sanctuaries, 

refuges, and national or state parks, 

forests, or grasslands within the project 

area and the potential impacts to these 

resources resulting from construction 

and operation of new rail line. 

c. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts to biological resources, as 

appropriate. 

3. Water Resources 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the existing surface water 

and groundwater resources within the 

project area, including lakes, rivers, 

streams, stock ponds, wetlands, and 

floodplains and the potential impacts on 

these resources resulting from 

construction and operation of new rail 

line. 

b. Describe the permitting 

requirements for the proposed new rail 

line construction regarding wetlands, 

stream and river crossings, water 

quality, and erosion control. 

c. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts to water resources, as 

appropriate. 

4. Geology and Soils 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the geology, soils, and 

permafrost found within the project 

area, including unique or problematic 

geologic formations or soils and prime 

farmland and hydric soils and the 

potential impacts on these resources 

resulting from the construction and 

operation of new rail line. 

b. Describe measures employed to 

avoid or construct through unique or 

problematic geologic formations, soils, 

or permafrost. 

c. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts to geology and soils, as 

appropriate. 

5. Air Quality 

The EIS will: 

a. Evaluate rail-related air emissions, 

if the proposed project affects a Class I 

or non-attainment area as designated 

under the Clean Air Act. 

b. Discuss and evaluate the potential 

air emissions increases from vehicle 

delays at new at-grade road/rail 

crossings. Emissions from vehicle 

delays will be factored into the 

emissions estimates for the affected 

area, as appropriate. 

c. Describe the potential air quality 

impact resulting from new rail line 

construction activities. 

d. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts to air quality, as appropriate. 

6. Noise 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the potential noise 

impacts during new rail line 

construction. 

b. Describe the potential noise 

impacts of new rail line operation. 

c. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts to sensitive noise receptors, as 

appropriate. 

7. Energy Resources 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the potential impact of the 

new rail line on the distribution of 

energy resources in the project area, 

including petroleum and gas pipelines 

and overhead electric transmission 

lines. 

b. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts to energy resources, as 

appropriate. 

8. Socioeconomics 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the effects of a potential 

influx of construction workers and the 

potential increase in demand for local 

services interrelated with natural or 

physical environmental effects. 

b. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

adverse impacts to social and economic 

resources, as appropriate. 

9. Safety 

The EIS will: 

65978 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 210 / Tuesday, November 1, 2005 / Notices 

1Transtar explains that this transaction was 

consummated on May 31, 2005, under the mistaken 

belief that it was an inter-corporate transaction 

involving parties for which exemption authority 

had previously been secured, and that additional 

approval or exemption was not required. 

a. Describe existing road/rail grade 

crossing safety and the potential for an 

increase in accidents related to the new 

rail operations, as appropriate. 

b. Describe existing rail operations 

and the potential for increased 

probability of train accidents, as 

appropriate. 

c. Describe hazardous materials safety 

factors for the transportation of 

hazardous materials and the potential 

for a release of those materials, as 

appropriate. 

d. Describe the potential for 

disruption and delays to the movement 

of emergency vehicles due to new rail 

line construction and operation. 

e. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts to safety, as appropriate. 

10. Transportation Systems 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the potential impacts of 

new rail line construction and operation 

on the existing transportation network 

in the project area, including vehicular 

delays at grade crossings. 

b. Describe potential impacts to 

navigation associated with new bridges. 

c. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts to transportation systems, as 

appropriate. 

11. Cultural and Historic Resources 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the potential impacts to 

historic structures or districts 

previously recorded and determined 

potentially eligible, eligible, or listed on 

the National Register of Historic Places 

within or immediately adjacent to the 

right-of-way for the proposed rail 

alignments. 

b. Describe the potential impacts to 

archaeological sites previously recorded 

and either listed as unevaluated or 

determined potentially eligible, eligible, 

or listed on the National Register of 

Historic Places within the right-of-way 

for the proposed rail alignments. 

c. Describe the potential impacts to 

historic structures or districts identified 

by ground survey and determined 

potentially eligible, eligible, or listed on 

the National Register of Historic Places 

within or immediately adjacent to the 

right-of-way for the proposed rail 

alignments. 

d. Describe the potential impacts to 

archaeological sites identified by ground 

survey and determined potentially 

eligible, eligible, or listed on the 

National Register of Historic Places 

within the right-of-way for the proposed 

rail alignments. 

e. Describe the potential general 

impacts to paleontological resources in 

the project area due to project 

construction, if necessary and required. 

f. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts to cultural and historic 

resources, as appropriate. 

12. Subsistence 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the potential impacts of 

the proposed new rail line construction 

and operation on subsistence activities 

in the project area. 

b. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts on subsistence activities, as 

appropriate. 

13. Recreation 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the potential impacts of 

the proposed new rail line construction 

and operation on recreational 

opportunities provided in the project 

area. 

b. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts on recreational opportunities, 

as appropriate. 

14. Aesthetics 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the potential impacts of 

the proposed new rail line construction 

on any areas identified or determined to 

be of high visual quality. 

b. Describe the potential impacts of 

the proposed new rail line construction 

on any waterways considered for or 

designated as wild and scenic. 

c. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts on aesthetics, as appropriate. 

15. Environmental Justice 

The EIS will: 

a. Describe the demographics in the 

project area and the immediate vicinity 

of the proposed new construction, 

including communities potentially 

impacted by the construction and 

operation of the proposed new rail line. 

b. Evaluate whether new rail line 

construction or operation would have a 

disproportionately high and adverse 

impact on any minority or low-income 

groups. 

c. Propose mitigative measures to 

minimize or eliminate potential project 

impacts on environmental justice 

populations, as appropriate. 

16. Cumulative Impacts 

The EIS will address the impact on 

the environment which results from the 

incremental impact of the action when 

added to other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable future actions 

regardless of what agency (Federal or 

non-federal) or person undertakes such 

actions. 

Decided: October 26, 2005. 

By the Board, Victoria Rutson, Chief, 

Section of Environmental Analysis. 

Vernon A. Williams, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 05–21718 Filed 10–31–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4915–00–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Surface Transportation Board 

[STB Finance Docket No. 34767] 

Transtar, Inc.—Continuance in Control 

Exemption—Delray Connecting 

Railroad Company 

Transtar, Inc. (Transtar), a noncarrier, 

has filed a verified notice of exemption 

to continue in control of Delray 

Connecting Railroad Company (Delray), 

a Class III rail carrier, upon Transtar’s 

acquiring all of Delray’s issued and 

outstanding stock from Transtar’s 

parent, United States Steel Corporation 

(USS). 

The exemption became effective on 

October 18, 2005 (7 days after the date 

of filing). 1

USS, a noncarrier, owns all of the 

issued and outstanding stock of 

Transtar, which is a noncarrier holding 

company. Transtar in turn owns all of 

the issued and outstanding stock of five 

common carrier railroads: Elgin, Joliet 

and Eastern Railway Company (Class II); 

Birmingham Southern Railroad 

Company (Class III); The Lake Terminal 

Railroad Company (Class III); 

McKeesport Connecting Railroad 

Company (Class III); and Union Railroad 

Company (Class III) (collectively, the 

Transtar Railroads). The common 

control of the Transtar Railroads by USS 

(formerly USX Corporation) through 

Transtar was the subject of exemption 

proceedings before the agency in USX 

Corporation—Control Exemption—

Transtar, Inc., STB Finance Docket No. 

33942 (STB served Nov. 30, 2000) and 

Transtar Holdings, L.P.—Corporate 

Family Exemption—Transtar, Inc., 

Finance Docket No. 32411 (ICC served 

Dec. 29, 1993). USS acquired through 

stock acquisition, and assumed control 

of, Delray pursuant to a notice of 

exemption in United States Steel 

Corporation—Acquisition of Control 

Exemption—Delray Connecting 

Railroad Company, STB Finance Docket