Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 116 / Friday, June 14, 1996 / Notices 30279

Transportation Investment program

jump-started innovative financing

suggested by ISTEA. The establishment

of transportation infrastructure banks

builds upon this progress. ISTEA’s

successor should continue these efforts

to create new ways of paying for the

transportation systems America needs.

7. Encourage New Technologies

Cleaner, safer, and more efficient

transportation has often come because

of new technologies—some entirely

new, such as the automobile, and some

that have made previous advances safer

or more efficient, such as seat belts.

Continued development and use of

advanced technology is vital if such

progress is to continue. Under ISTEA,

the Federal Government renewed its

emphasis on applying technology to

improve safety, system capacity, and

travel times. Investment in research and

development has been expanded, both

through increased funding and through

new partnerships with the private

sector. The successful Intelligent

Transportation Systems and Global

Positioning Satellite systems

deployments are products of such

initiatives. Post-ISTEA transportation

legislation should continue this

commitment.

8. Encourage Better Infrastructure

Investment and Management

Continually improving the

performance of infrastructure

investment programs is always

essential, but especially so in an era of

limited public funding. ISTEA’s

successor should encourage state and

local officials to base investment

decisions on systematic cost-benefit

analysis, and to adopt operational,

maintenance, and pricing practices, that

maximize the efficiency of, and return

on, investment, as described in the

Executive Order, Principles for Federal

Infrastructure Investments.

Meeting the Challenge

ISTEA is visionary legislation. Its

central elements—strategic

infrastructure investments,

intermodalism, flexibility,

intergovernmental partnership, a strong

commitment to safety, enhanced

planning and strategic investment—

should be preserved.

The forces shaping the debate over the

role of government in our society will

influence the reauthorization debate.

What is the Federal role in surface

transportation infrastructure? What has

worked under ISTEA—what has not?

What can we do to improve our safety

record? How can we increase our

resources? How can we benefit more

from the fiscal resources we have?

Should we expand eligibility for Federal

funds, for example to rail and

intermodal projects?

Most of these questions require

further study and discussion. But in one

case—the Federal role—the answer is

clear. We need strong Federal

leadership. Efficient national cargo

movement is key to our ability to benefit

from expanding trade opportunities.

Truckers and other freight operators

need national uniformity in facilities

and regulatory standards. We also need

national consistency if we are going to

move forward with deployment of new

technology. We cannot achieve other

key national priorities—linking

Americans to jobs, health care and

education—without efficient and

accessible transportation. And the

challenges we face in the areas of safety

and the environment do not stop at state

borders.

As we tackle these difficult questions,

the policy principles and building

blocks outlined in this statement should

guide us. Our goal for reauthorization is

to develop a proposal for the next

century that allows our Nation to

preserve our competitive advantage

throughout the world and maintain the

well being of our citizens.

Issued this 10th day of June 1996, in

Washington, DC.

Frank Kruesi,

Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy.

[FR Doc. 96–15163 Filed 6–13–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–62–P

Federal Highway Administration

Environmental Impact Statement:

Westchester County, NY

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this

notice to advise the public that an

environmental impact statement will be

prepared for a proposed highway project

in the Town of North Castle,

Westchester County, New York. A

portion of the project is situated within

the Town of Greenwich, Connecticut.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Harold J. Brown, Division

Administrator, Federal Highway

Administration, New York Division, Leo

W. O’Brien Federal Building, 9th Floor,

Clinton Avenue and North Pearl Street,

Albany, New York, 12207, Telephone

(518) 472–3616, or A.J. Bauman,

Regional Director, New York State

Department of Transportation, Region 8,

4 Burnett Boulevard, Poughkeepsie,

New York 12601, Telephone (914) 431–

5750.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

FHWA and the New York State

Department of Transportation

(NYSDOT), in cooperation with the

Town of North Castle will prepare an

environmental impact (EIS) on a

proposal to improve New York State

Route 120 and interchanges 2 and 3 on

I–684. The proposed improvements will

include the widening of existing State

Route 120 from the intersection with

County Route 135, northwest to the

intersection with State Route 22, a

distance of approximately 2.6 miles.

The project also includes improvements

to Exits 2 and 3 on I–684.

Improvements to Route 120 are

necessary to provide for the existing and

projected traffic demand. Alternatives

under consideration include: (1) Taking

no action; (2) widening existing State

Route 120 from two to four lanes for a

length of approximately 2.6 miles and

ramp relocations and/or additions at

Interchanges 2 and 3 on I–684.

Incorporated into and studied with the

build alternative will be design

variations of grade and alignment.

Letters describing the proposed action

and soliciting comments will be sent to

appropriate Federal, State, and local

agencies. A scoping meeting for Federal,

State, local agencies and the general

public will be held in early summer

1996 in Armonk, New York. This

meeting will be conducted in two

sessions, an afternoon session for

Federal, State, and local agencies, and

an evening session for the general

public. A public meeting will be held in

Armonk, New York in the fall of 1996.

In addition, a public hearing will be

held in early 1997. Public notice will be

given of the time and place of the

meetings and hearing. The draft EIS will

be available for public and agency

review and comment prior to the public

hearing.

To ensure that the full range of issues

related to this proposed action are

addressed and all significant issues

identified, comments, and suggestions

are invited from all interested parties.

Comments or questions concerning this

proposed action and the EIS should be

directed to the FHWA at the address

provided above.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning

and Construction. The regulations

implementing Executive Order 12372

regarding intergovernmental consultation on

Federal programs and activities apply to this

program.)
30280 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 116 / Friday, June 14, 1996 / Notices

Issued on: June 6, 1996.

Robert Arnold,

District Engineer, Albany.

[FR Doc. 96–15086 Filed 6–13–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–M

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number H–95–1]

Addendum to a Test Program for a

Conditional Waiver; National Railroad

Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

In accordance with 49 CFR Part 211,

notice is hereby given that Amtrak has

requested an addendum to the

previously granted temporary waiver of

compliance with specific requirements

of certain parts of Title 49 of the Code

of Federal Regulations in order to

conduct a limited demonstration of a

passenger trainset, the IC3 ‘‘Flexiliner’’.

Amtrak was granted conditional

waivers from sections of Railroad Safety

Appliance Standards (49 CFR Part 231),

Railroad Safety Glazing Standards (49

CFR Part 223) and Railroad Track Safety

Standards (49 CFR Part 213) (see FR

28011, May 26, 1995, for complete

description). The waivers permit

Amtrak, and a number of potential

sponsors, including state departments of

transportation and commuter agencies,

to demonstrate and operate in revenue

service the Flexiliner trainset, a threecar, articulated, diesel hydraulic,

multiple unit trainset built by ABA

Scandia A/S for the Danish State

Railway (DSB).

The conditional waiver pertained to

one 3-unit IC3 Flexiliner trainset, and

since that time a second trainset has

been added. Amtrak says this is

necessary because of the limited amount

of seating available on one trainset, and

the expected passenger loads on the

proposed routes require more seating.

Amtrak requested relief from the

Railroad Locomotive Safety Standard,

49 CFR 229.131, Sanders, which

requires that each locomotive shall be

equipped with operable sanders that

deposit sand on each rail in front of the

first powered operated wheel set in the

direction of movement. The IC3

Flexiliner trainsets are not equipped

with sanders. They are equipped with

magnetic track brakes which are

activated when the train brakes are

applied in emergency. Air pressure

forces the brakes to the rail and battery

voltage causes a strong magnetic field to

develop a significant retardation force.

Magnetic track brakes are common in

Europe and were used in this country

on the X2000 and ICE trainsets during

their recent demonstration trials.

Due to the impending arrival of the

IC3 Flexiliner trainsets at the Port of

Baltimore, Maryland, FRA has, on a

temporary basis, conditionally waived

compliance with the relevant portions

of the rail safety regulations. FRA has,

however, reserved the right to withdraw

such approval upon receipt by FRA of

public comment raising substantial

issues of safety.

Interested parties are invited to

participate in this proceeding by

submitting written views, data, or

comments. FRA does not anticipate

scheduling a public hearing in

connection with this proceeding since

the facts do not appear to warrant a

hearing. If any interested party desires

an opportunity for oral comment, they

should notify FRA, in writing, before

the end of the comment period and

specify the basis for their request.

All communications concerning these

proceedings should identify the

appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver

Petition Docket Number H–95–1) and

must be submitted in triplicate to the

Docket Clerk, Office of Chief Counsel,

Federal Railroad Administration, Nassif

Building, 400 Seventh Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20590.

Communications received within 30

days of the date of publication of this

notice will be considered before final

action is taken. Comments received after

that date will be considered as far as

practicable. All written communications

concerning these proceedings are

available for examination during regular

business hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) in Room

8201, Nassif Building, 400 Seventh

Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590.

Issued in Washington, D.C. on June 10,

1996.

Phil Olekszyk,

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety

Compliance and Program Implementation.

[FR Doc. 96–15116 Filed 6–13–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

Notice of Application for Approval of

Discontinuance or Modification of a

Railroad Signal System or Relief from

the Requirements of Title 49 CFR Part

236

Pursuant to Title 49 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 Title 49

CFR Part 236 as detailed below.

Block Signal Application (BS–AP)–No.

3396

Applicant: Soo Line Railroad

Company, Mr. J. C. Thomas, S&C

District Manager, 105 South 5th Street,

Box 530, Minneapolis, Minnesota

55440.

The Soo Line Railroad Company seeks

approval of the proposed

discontinuance and removal of the

Conley frog locks, on the two main track

Kinnickinnic River movable bridge, at

Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Gateway

Division, C&M Subdivision.

The reason given for the proposed

changes is to reduce maintenance costs

associated with maintaining the frog

locks, which are not required to be in

compliance with applicable rule Part

236.312.

BS–AP–No. 3397

Applicant: Soo Line Railroad

Company, Mr. J. C. Thomas, S&C

District Manager, 105 South 5th Street,

Box 530, Minneapolis, Minnesota

55440.

The Soo Line Railroad Company seeks

approval of the proposed

discontinuance and removal of the

Conley frog locks, on the two main track

Menomonee River movable bridge, at

Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Gateway

Division, C&M Subdivision.

The reason given for the proposed

changes is to reduce maintenance costs

associated with maintaining the frog

locks, which are not required to be in

compliance with applicable rule Part

236.312.

BS–AP–No. 3398

Applicant: Wisconsin Central

Limited, Mr. Glenn J. Kerbs, Vice

President Engineering, P.O. Box 5062,

Rosemont, Illinois 60017–5062.

The Wisconsin Central Limited (WC)

seeks approval of the proposed

discontinuance and removal of the

interlocking plant, at Menasha,

Wisconsin, milepost MA 1.20,

Manitowoc Subdivision, where a single

main track of the WC crosses at grade

a single yard track of the WC. The

proposal includes installation of a swing

gate with a stop sign, in the southwest

quadrant, normally lined to foul the

yard track.

The reason given for the proposed

changes is that both tracks are owned by

the WC, and the only through train

movements are on the single main track

at timetable speed of 10 mph.

BS–AP–No. 3399

Applicants:

National Railroad Passenger

Corporation, Ms. Alison Conway-