15814 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 58 / Monday, March 27, 1995 / Notices

schedules, Lykes contends, will permit

operational savings to be realized and

lend flexibility to Lykes’ itineraries.

Lykes states that addition of vessels to

the services of Lykes or Evergreen

beyond those currently operated or

under contract for construction for this

trade is not contemplated. Accordingly,

Lykes concludes, the agreement will

have no substantial impact on U.S.-flag

carriers in the North Atlantic trade. This

application may be inspected in the

Office of the Secretary, Maritime

Administration. Any person, firm, or

corporation having any interest in such

request within the meaning of section

804 of the Act and desiring to submit

comments concerning the application

must file written comments in triplicate

with the Secretary, Maritime

Administration, Room 7210, Nassif

Building, 400 Seventh Street SW.,

Washington, DC 20590. Comments must

be received no later than 5 p.m. on April

10, 1995. This notice is published as a

matter of discretion and publication

should in no way be considered a

favorable or unfavorable decision on the

application, as filed or as may be

amended. The Maritime Administrator

will consider any comments submitted

and take such action with respect

thereto as may be deemed appropriate.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program No. 20.804 (Operating-Differential

Subsidies)).

By Order of the Maritime Administrator.

Dated: March 22, 1995.

Joel C. Richard,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–7427 Filed 3–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P

FEDERAL RAILROAD

ADMINISTRATION

National High-Speed Ground

Transportation; Policy Outreach

Meetings

AGENCY: Federal Railroad

Administration, Office of Railroad

Development.

ACTION: Notice of Public Meetings.

SUMMARY: The Federal Railroad

Administration (FRA) will hold regional

public outreach meetings around the

United States to invite public input for

developing the National High Speed

Ground Transportation (HSGT) Policy,

as mandated by the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act. The

public is invited to attend and/or submit

written comments.

DATES: Written comments are invited at

any time until May 30, 1995. Comments

should be submitted by mail to the

address below and will be accepted in

person at each meeting. Comments

received by April 7, 1995 will be

considered in setting the agenda for the

outreach meetings.

The sessions will take place as

follows:

Dates: April 20, 1995.

Place: Knickerbocker Hotel, Grand

Ballroom, 163 E. Walton Place, Chicago,

Illinois 60611, (312) 751–8100.

Time: 5 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.

Local Contact: Merrill Travis, IDOT, (217)

782–2835.

Date: May 2, 1995.

Place: Shaker Ridge Club, 802 Albany

Shaker Road, Loudonville, New York 12211,

(518) 869–0246.

Time: 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.

Local Contact: Don Baker, New York DOT,

(518) 457–5521.

Date: May 4, 1995.

Place: Virginia DOT, Main Auditorium,

1221 East Broad Street, Richmond, Virginia

23219.

Time: 5 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.

Local Contact: Leo Bevon, Virginia DOT,

(804) 786–8410.

Date: May 15, 1995

Place: BPA Federal Office Building,

Auditorium, 911 N.E. 11th Avenue (at

Holladay St.) (Auditorium entrance on 9th St.

side), Portland, Oregon 97232, (503) 326–

2107.

Time: 5:30 p.m. to 8 p.m.

Local Contact: Donald Forbes, Oregon

DOT, (503) 378–3373.

Date: May 17, 1995.

Place: Grand Hall, 1215 J Street,

Sacramento, California 95814.

Time: 5 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.

Local Contact: Steve Zimrick, California

DOT, (916) 227–9409.

Date: May 25, 1995

Place: Marriott Hotel, 7499 Augusta

National Drive, Orlando, Florida 32822, (407)

851–9000.

Time: 5 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.

Local Contact: Charlie Smith, Florida DOT,

(904) 487–4261.

Registration: Attendees are asked to arrive

30 minutes prior to the beginning of the

meeting for registration.

In addition to the above sessions,

there will be a special session in Boston,

Massachusetts, during the annual

convention of the High Speed Rail/

Maglev Association. This is scheduled

for Monday, May 8 from 5:00 to 6:30 PM

at the Westin Hotel, Copley Place,

Boston, MA. The public is also invited

to this special session.

The addresses of the various sessions

are above.

Background

These meetings will comprise a key

part of the Department of

Transportation’s overall efforts to

develop policy in support of the

implementation of high-speed ground

transportation as an element of an

intermodal transportation system. The

Department is currently working to lay

the groundwork for the implementation

of HSGT through state and local

planning and investment and through a

federal partnership for technology

development.

The development of a HSGT policy is

particularly relevant at this time

because of the Secretary’s proposal to

consolidate current transportation

funding programs and increase

significantly the flexibility available to

State and local governments to finance

different types of projects with a unified

allocation of funds. In addition, the

Secretary has proposed developing State

Infrastructure Banks, capitalized in part

with Federal seed money, to leverage

further investment from private capital

and other sources. He has also proposed

that some discretionary funding would

be available for investments of regional

or national significance. How HSGT

investment would be treated in this

context is a topic of special importance

for HSGT policy.

The HSGT policy development will

also consider ongoing changes at

Amtrak. Since the future of HSGT,

particularly options to operate at up to

150 m.p.h. on existing rights-of-way

(Accelerail), is linked to the future of

conventional Amtrak service in corridor

markets, the recently announced

restructuring of Amtrak presents new

challenges as well as new opportunities,

for state participation. In particular, that

restructuring is designed to reduce

Amtrak’s cost structure by delivering

service more efficiently and to improve

customer service, and hence increase

revenues, by reorganizing the

corporation and empowering employees

and managers. These changes should

position Amtrak as a competitive

organization to deliver HSGT services

sponsored by State governments.

The HSGT policy development will

consider ongoing technology

development and corridor planning by

states and their partners. These

activities are currently authorized by the

Swift Rail Development Act of 1994.

The Swift Act, which was signed into

law by the President in November 1994,

authorizes matching grants up to a total

of $184 million over three years, to

assist HSGT technology development,

including projects such as positive train

control, non-electric high-speed

locomotive development, and corridor

planning, including engineering plans,

commercial feasibility and

environmental impact studies, and the

acquisition of right-of-way for upgrading

to HSGT. In FY 1995, $25 million
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 58 / Monday, March 27, 1995 / Notices 15815

dollars was appropriated for the Next

Generation High Speed Rail Program

which included five million for corridor

planning. For FY 1996, the

Administration requested $68 million

for the Next Generation High Speed Rail

Program and the High Speed Ground

Transportation Research and

Development.

Finally, the HSGT policy

development will consider the results of

a study of the potential performance and

commercial feasibility of HSGT. The

report, to be transmitted to Congress in

1995, will identify types of HSGT

systems that would be most beneficial

in various markets. It will also identify

the challenges that will need to be

addressed in order to implement HSGT

in the U.S.

Both the High Speed Ground

Transportation Commercial Feasibility

Study Report to Congress (Report) and

the National HSGT Policy are required

by Section 1036 of the Intermodal

Surface Transportation Efficiency Act

(ISTEA) [49 U.S.C. 309(d) and (e)].

The Report will examine several

illustrative corridors to obtain an

understanding of the potential for HSGT

around the nation. It will consider

several types of HSGT technology

systems, including Accelerail; new high

speed rail (new, electric, dedicated

high-speed only rail lines, 200 miles per

hour); and Maglev (magnetic levitation

vehicles on new lines, 300 mph). The

Report is not a replacement for the more

detailed analyses of individual corridors

by state and local governments. It will,

rather, be an assessment of HSGT

potential in the U.S. as a whole, to guide

national policy makers in HSGT-related

decisions.

Section 1036 calls for the Policy to

include ‘‘provisions to promote the

design, construction, and operation of

high-speed ground transportation

systems in the United States.’’

The public will be invited to

participate fully in discussions at these

regional outreach meetings. The public

is also invited to submit written

comments on any subject relevant to the

Policy before, after, or during the

meetings, but public input on certain

questions is of special interest to FRA.

The principal questions are listed

below, and FRA encourages the public

to comment on these questions on the

basis of each region’s specific

experience with transportation and

HSGT issues.

Among the topics to be considered in

the Policy, and at the regional outreach

meetings, are:

(1) The Role of HSGT in the National

Transportation System

Commenters on this topic are invited

to consider:

(a) Can HSGT fill transportation needs

in a cost effective manner not met by

your region’s current transportation

system?

(b) What HSGT technologies are being

considered, for what kinds of markets

[short-term and long-term] in your

region?

(c) How extensive a system makes

good economic or financial sense in

your region?

(d) How would your regional HSGT

system be connected to the rest of the

transportation system?

(2) Planning for HSGT

Commenters on this topic are invited

to consider:

(a) Is your region using existing

conventional rail service to prepare a

market for HSGT? How?

(b) Does the presence of conventional

rail service, including commuter rail,

offer benefits to the regional HSGT

system?

(c) To what extent and how are

corridors suitable for future HSGT being

preserved in your region?

(d) To what extent is there planning

for joint public use transportation

corridors in the region (e.g., highway

and HSGT)? What are the obstacles and

potential solutions?

(e) How will intermodal connections,

such as transit lines to existing stations

and right-of-way acquisitions near

airports be planned for your HSGT

system?

(f) What factors are key to the

planning and implementation of

interstate HSGT projects?

(g) What should be the roles of the

Federal, state, and local governments,

Metropolitan Planning Organizations,

and the private sector in HSGT

planning, construction, and operation in

this region?

(3) Funding HSGT

Commenters on this topic are invited

to consider:

(a) What non-Federal funds (local,

State, private) are being used and

considered for implementation in your

region?

(b) What other sources of non-Federal

funds (current or future) would you

recommend to support HSGT for your

region? (i.e., fuel tax, user fees, state/

local government grants or loans, impact

fees, private efforts and debt.)

(c) Federal law currently allows the

issuance of tax-free bonds to finance

HSGT projects for 150 miles per hour

operation and above. If this were to

include HSGT projects below 150

m.p.h., would this type of financing be

utilized for HSGT in this region?

(d) What are the obstacles or

impediments to the funding of HSGT

projects under the current ISTEA

legislation?

(e) How extensively would the

Secretary’s proposed unified allocation

of funds for transportation investment

be used for HSGT in your state or

region?

(f) How could the Secretary’s

proposed program provide additional

leverage for private capital to participate

in funding HSGT projects?

(g) How could the new program

structure be used most effectively to

foster the kind of HSGT investment

envisioned in your region?

(4) Implementing HSGT

Commenters on this topic are invited

to consider:

(a) How should the issue of liability

for host railroads be dealt with? Should

insurance be purchased for HSGT

operations? Should total liability or

punitive damages be capped by statute?

Should this be accomplished at the

Federal or State level?

(b) Does the mechanism now

embodied in Section 403(b) of the Rail

Passenger Service Act (State-assisted

service) provide an appropriate way to

upgrade current corridor services to

higher speeds?

(c) What should be the role of Amtrak

in HSGT? Should State HSGT sponsors

have the option of choosing another

provider of the service and, if so, should

the other provider have the same rights

vis-a-vis the owning railroad that

Amtrak now has?

(d) Are special arrangements needed

with the private railroads to insure the

future availability of excess rights-ofway and capacity for HSGT in this

region?

(e) What sorts of labor issues are

raised by HSGT projects, and do Federal

laws related to rail labor need to be

changed for HSGT service?

(f) What types of new technologies are

important to the development of HSGT

in this region?

(g) What should be the nature of

Federal HSGT technology development

and demonstration activities? What

should be the State role in this region?

(h) What other actions should be

taken to promote a U.S. HSGT industry?

The possibilities include defense

conversion projects, Buy American

requirements, and tax policies.

(i) How should policies to promote a

U.S. HSGT industry be gauged against

the efficiency of using currently

available foreign technologies?
15816 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 58 / Monday, March 27, 1995 / Notices

(j) What specific constitutional or

other legal provisions in your state

currently adversely affect

implementation of HSGT? What changes

would you suggest to overcome these

barriers?

FRA invites respondents who plan to

attend outreach sessions to send

preliminary comments in advance of the

session, identifying which session they

plan to attend. Additional comments

from participants following the sessions

will also be welcome.

For further information contact: John

F. Cikota, (202) 366–9332

Issued in Washington, D.C. on March 21,

1995

Jolene M. Molitoris,

Administrator, Federal Railroad

Administration.

[FR Doc. 95–7509 Filed 3–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Public Information Collection

Requirements Submitted to OMB for

Review

March 17, 1995.

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 1980,

Public Law 96–511. 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.

Special Request: In order to conduct

the satisfaction survey described below

between April–June 1995, the

Department of Treasury is requesting

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) review and approval this

information collection by March 31,

1995. To obtain a copy of this survey,

please contact the IRS Clearance Officer

at the address listed below. All

comments must be received by close of

business March 27, 1995.

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

OMB Number: 1545–1349

Form Number: None

Type of Review: Revision

Title: 1995 Telephone Routing

Interactive System Voice Balance Due

Telephone Application Customer

Satisfaction Survey

Description: The Internal Revenue

Service has developed the Voice

Balance Due automated telephone

application which allows IRS callers

to request a payment extension or

establish a monthly payment plan to

satisfy an outstanding balance due

interactively, without assistor

involvement

Respondents: Individuals or households

Estimated Number of Respondents: 700

Estimated Burden Hours Per

Respondent:

Automated Customer Satisfaction

Survey—2 minutes

Manual Customer Satisfaction

Survey—5 minutes

Frequency of Response: Other

Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 83

hours

Clearance Officer: Garrick Shear, (202)

622–3869, Internal Revenue Service,

Room 5571, 1111 Constitution

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224

OMB Reviewer: Milo Sunderhauf, (202)

395–7340, Office of Management and

Budget, Room 10226, New Executive

Office Building, Washington, DC

20503

Lois K. Holland,

Departmental Reports Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–7390 Filed 3–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–M

Public Information Collection

Requirements Submitted to OMB for

Review

March 17, 1995.

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 1980,

Public Law 96–511. 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.

Special Request: In order to conduct

the satisfaction survey described below

between April–May 1995, the

Department of Treasury is requesting

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) review and approval this

information collection by March 31,

1995. To obtain a copy of this survey,

please contact the IRS Clearance Officer

at the address listed below. All

comments must be received by close of

business March 27, 1995.

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

OMB Number: 1545–1349

Form Number: None

Type of Review: Revision

Title: 1995 Telephone Routing

Interactive System Location

Telephone Application Pilot Test

Description: The Internal Revenue

Service has developed the automated

Location Telephone Application

which provides IRS callers with the

addresses and hours of operation of

the IRS offices offering taxpayer

assistance interactively, without

assistor involvement

Respondents: Individuals or households

Estimated Number of Respondents:

2,250

Estimated Burden Hours Per

Respondent: 2 minutes

Frequency of Response: Other

Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 113

hours

Clearance Officer: Garrick Shear, (202)

622–3869, Internal Revenue Service,

Room 5571, 1111 Constitution

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224

OMB Reviewer: Milo Sunderhauf, (202)

395–7340, Office of Management and

Budget, Room 10226, New Executive

Office Building, Washington, DC

20503

Lois K. Holland,

Departmental Reports, Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–7391 Filed 3–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–M

Federal Law Enforcement Training

Center

Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Advisory Committee to the

National Center for State and Local Law

Enforcement Training.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The agenda for this meeting

includes the introduction of new

members and special guests; opening

remarks by the Director of the Federal

Law Enforcement Training Center and

Committee Co-chairs; and reports on the

following initiatives, Community

Policing Concept, STAR series and

Crime Bill, Georgia Air National Guard

activities, Department of Defense

Counter Drug Activities, International

Training, and the Fellowship Program.

DATES: March 29, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Law Enforcement

Training Center, Building 94, Board

Room, Glynco, GA 31524.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Hobart M. Henson, Director, National

Center for State and Local Law

Enforcement Training, Federal Law