Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 15, 2010 / Notices 56159 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Kenneth Petty, (202) 366–6654, Office of 

Planning, Environment, and Realty, 

Federal Highway Administration, 

Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. 

ET, Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Planning and Research Program 

Administration. 

OMB Control #: 2125–0039. 

Background: Under the provisions of 

Title 23, United States Code, Section 

505, 2 percent of Federal-aid highway 

funds in certain categories that are 

apportioned to the States are set aside 

to be used only for State Planning and 

Research (SPR). At least 25 percent of 

the SPR funds apportioned annually 

must be used for research, development, 

and technology transfer activities. In 

accordance with government-wide grant 

management procedures, a grant 

application must be submitted for these 

funds. In addition, recipients must 

submit periodic progress and financial 

reports. In lieu of Standard Form 424, 

Application for Federal Assistance, the 

FHWA uses a work program as the grant 

application. The information contained 

in the work program includes task 

descriptions, assignments of 

responsibility for conducting the work 

effort, and estimated costs for the tasks. 

This information is necessary to 

determine how FHWA planning and 

research funds will be utilized by the 

State Transportation Departments and if 

the proposed work is eligible for Federal 

participation. The content and 

frequency of submission of progress and 

financial reports specified in 23 CFR 

Part 420 are specified in OMB Circular 

A–102 and the companion common 

grant management regulations. 

Respondents: 52 State Transportation 

Departments, including the District of 

Columbia and Puerto Rico. 

Frequency: Annual. 

Estimated Average Annual Burden 

per Response: 560 hours per 

respondent. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 29,120 hours. 

Public Comments Invited: You are 

asked to comment on any aspect of this 

information collection, including: (1) 

Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the U.S. 

DOT’s performance, including whether 

the information will have practical 

utility; (2) the accuracy of the U.S. 

DOT’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed information collection; (3) 

ways to enhance the quality, usefulness, 

and clarity of the collected information; 

and (4) ways that the burden could be 

minimized, including the use of 

electronic technology, without reducing 

the quality of the collected information. 

The agency will summarize and/or 

include your comments in the request 

for OMB’s clearance of this information 

collection. 

Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; 

and 49 CFR 1.48. 

Issued on: September 8, 2010. 

Judi Kane, 

Acting Chief, Management, Programs and 

Analysis Division. 

[FR Doc. 2010–22952 Filed 9–14–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Maritime Administration 

[Docket No. MARAD 2010 0082] 

Information Collection Available for 

Public Comments and 

Recommendations 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 

notice announces the Maritime 

Administration’s (MARAD’s) intention 

to request extension of approval for 

three years of a currently approved 

information collection. 

DATES: Comments should be submitted 

on or before November 15, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jerome Davis, Maritime Administration, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: 

202–366–0688 or E-Mail: 

Jerome.davis@dot.gov. Copies of this 

collection also can be obtained from that 

office. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title of Collection: Voluntary 

Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA). 

Type of Request: Extension of 

currently approved information 

collection. 

OMB Control Number: 2133–0532. 

Form Numbers: MA–1020. 

Expiration Date of Approval: Three 

years after date of approval by the Office 

of Management and Budget. 

Summary of Collection of 

Information: This information collection 

is in accordance with Section 708, 

Defense Production Act, 1950, as 

amended, under which participants 

agree to provide commercial sealift 

capacity and intermodal shipping 

services and systems necessary to meet 

national defense requirements. In order 

to meet national defense requirements, 

the government must assure the 

continued availability of commercial 

sealift resources. 

Need and Use of the Information: The 

information collection is needed by 

MARAD and the Department of Defense 

(DOD), including representatives from 

the U.S. Transportation Command and 

its components, to evaluate and assess 

the applicants’ eligibility for 

participation in the VISA program. The 

information will be used by MARAD 

and the U.S. Transportation Command, 

and its components, to assure the 

continued availability of commercial 

sealift resources to meet the DOD’s 

military requirements. 

Description of Respondents: 

Operators of qualified dry cargo vessels. 

Annual Responses: 40. 

Annual Burden: 200 hours. 

Comments: Comments should refer to 

the docket number that appears at the 

top of this document. Written comments 

may be submitted to the Docket Clerk, 

U.S. DOT Dockets, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. Comments may 

also be submitted by electronic means 

via the Internet at http://regulations.

gov/search/index.jsp. Specifically 

address whether this information 

collection is necessary for proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency and will have practical utility, 

accuracy of the burden estimates, ways 

to minimize this burden, and ways to 

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity 

of the information to be collected. All 

comments received will be available for 

examination at the above address 

between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. EDT (or 

EST), Monday through Friday, except 

Federal Holidays. An electronic version 

of this document is available on the 

World Wide Web, http://regulations.

gov/search/index.jsp. 

Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search 

the electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://www.regulations.gov/ 

search/index.jsp. 

Authority: 49 CFR 1.66. 

Dated: September 9, 2010. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
56160 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 15, 2010 / Notices 

1See Union Pac. R.R.—Aban. Exemption—in 

Lancaster County, Neb., AB 33 (Sub-No. 207X) (STB 

served Sept. 30, 2003). 

By order of the Maritime Administrator. 

Christine Gurland, 

Secretary, Maritime Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23010 Filed 9–14–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Surface Transportation Board 

[Docket No. FD 35415] 

BNSF Railway Company and Union 

Pacific Railroad Company—Joint 

Relocation Project Exemption—in 

Lincoln, Neb. 

On August 30, 2010, BNSF Railway 

Company (BNSF) and Union Pacific 

Railroad Company (UP) jointly filed a 

verified notice of exemption under 49 

CFR 1180.2(d)(5) to participate in a joint 

project involving the relocation of 

certain tracks over which they currently 

both operate, or have authority to 

operate, in the City of Lincoln, 

Lancaster County, Neb. (the City). 

The purpose of the joint relocation 

project is to facilitate the redevelopment 

of the West Haymarket District and 

Downtown Lincoln (referred to as the 

West Haymarket Project). To allow for 

the redevelopment to proceed, BNSF 

must remove certain existing tracks and 

relocate its operations over tracks that 

will run parallel to the existing lines. 

UP will allow a portion of a previously 

abandoned line to be utilized in the 

project. 

BNSF and UP will jointly relocate 

tracks over which they both currently 

operate, or have authority to operate, as 

follows: 

BNSF owns a rail line beginning 

south of Sun Valley Boulevard (near UP 

milepost 56.50) that crosses Salt Creek 

and continues into a wye a short 

distance east of Salt Creek. The east leg 

of the wye (Track 460) extends in an 

easterly direction to a connection with 

a BNSF main line, which, in turn, 

connects with the Omaha, Lincoln, & 

Beatrice Railway and extends beyond to 

Omaha, Neb. The west leg of the wye 

(Track 324) extends in an easterly and 

then southerly direction to BNSF’s 

Hobson Yard in the City. 

UP has overhead trackage rights over 

the east leg of the wye between BNSF 

milepost 0.65 and BNSF milepost 56.92. 

See Union Pac. R.R.—Trackage Rights 

Exemption—The Burlington N. & Santa 

Fe Ry., FD 33403 (STB served June 3, 

1997); Union Pac. R.R.—Amendment of 

Trackage Rights Exemption—BNSF Ry., 

FD 30868 (Sub-No. 1) (STB served July 

20, 2006). UP also leases: (1) The BNSF 

line near Sun Valley Boulevard 

(beginning near UP milepost 56.50) to 

the beginning point of the wye at BNSF 

milepost 0.62 (referred to as the Sun 

Valley Segment); and (2) the west leg of 

the BNSF wye from BNSF milepost 0.62 

to BNSF milepost 59.4. 

The joint relocation project that is the 

subject of this notice involves 

abandoning the Sun Valley Segment and 

relocating the existing wye tracks a 

short distance to the south. The 

underlying real estate will be conveyed 

to the City. BNSF will remove the tracks 

on the Sun Valley Segment and UP will 

reconstruct its parallel line which it had 

previously abandoned.1 The new UP 

line will be located between UP 

milepost 56.50 and UP milepost 56.68, 

a short distance east of Salt Creek and 

crossing over Salt Creek using an 

existing UP bridge (UP track). The UP 

track will be owned and maintained by 

UP. BNSF will be granted trackage 

rights over the UP track. 

The new east wye track will be 

located between new BNSF milepost 0.0 

and BNSF milepost 59.24 where it will 

connect with BNSF’s number 1 main 

line (new east wye). The new east wye 

will be owned and maintained by BNSF. 

UP will be granted trackage rights over 

the new east wye. The new west wye 

will be located between new milepost 

BNSF 0.0 and BNSF milepost 59.55 

where it will connect with BNSF’s 

number 1 main line (new west wye). 

The new west wye will be owned and 

maintained by BNSF. UP’s lease of the 

existing west wye and the Sun Valley 

Segment will be terminated. UP will 

retain existing operating rights 

incidental to interchange to Hobson 

Yard which includes the new west wye. 

Applicants state that the proposed 

joint relocation project will not disrupt 

service to shippers. There are no 

shippers on the Sun Valley Segment, the 

existing east wye or the existing west 

wye lines. Applicants also state that the 

construction of the UP track, the new 

east wye and the new west wye will not 

involve an expansion of service by 

either carrier into new territory, or alter 

the existing competitive situation, but 

will simply preserve BNSF’s and UP’s 

ability to continue to serve the existing 

customers in the area. 

The Board will exercise jurisdiction 

over the abandonment, construction, or 

sale components of a relocation project, 

and require separate approval or 

exemption, only where the removal of 

track affects service to shippers or the 

construction of new track or transfer of 

existing track involves expansion into 

new territory. See City of Detroit v. 

Canadian Nat’l Ry., 9 I.C.C.2d 1208 

(1993), aff’d sub nom. Detroit/Wayne 

Cnty. Port Authority v. ICC, 59 F.3d 

1314 (DC Cir. 1995); Flats Indus. R.R. & 

Norfolk S. Ry.—Joint Relocation Project 

Exemption—in Cleveland, Ohio, FD 

34108 (STB served Nov. 15, 2001). Line 

relocation projects may embrace 

trackage rights transactions such as 

those involved here. See Detroit, Toledo 

& Ironton R.R.—Trackage Rights— 

Between Washington Court House & 

Greggs, Ohio—Exemption, 363 I.C.C. 

878 (1981). Under these standards, the 

incidental abandonment, construction, 

lease and trackage rights components of 

this relocation project require no 

separate approval or exemption because 

the relocation project will not disrupt 

service to shippers, expand BNSF’s or 

UP’s service into a new territory, or alter 

the existing competitive situation, and 

thus, this joint relocation project 

qualifies for the class exemption at 49 

CFR 1180.2(d)(5). 

As a condition to this exemption, any 

employees affected by the trackage 

rights will be protected by the 

conditions imposed in Norfolk and 

Western Railway—Trackage Rights— 

Burlington Northern, Inc., 354 I.C.C. 605 

(1978), as modified in Mendocino Coast 

Railway—Lease and Operate-California 

Western Railroad, 360 I.C.C. 653 (1980). 

The transaction may be consummated 

on or after September 29, 2010, the 

effective date of the exemption (30 days 

after the exemption was filed). 

If the verified notice contains false or 

misleading information, the exemption 

is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the 

exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) 

may be filed at any time. The filing of 

a petition to revoke will not 

automatically stay the effectiveness of 

the exemption. Petitions for stay must 

be filed no later than September 22, 

2010 (at least 7 days before the 

exemption becomes effective). 

An original and 10 copies of all 

pleadings, referring to Docket No. FD 

35415, must be filed with the Surface 

Transportation Board, 395 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20423–0001. In 

addition, a copy of each pleading must 

be served on applicants’ representatives: 

Karl Morell, Of Counsel, Ball Janik LLP, 

Suite 225, 1455 F Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20005; and Mack H. 

Shummate, Jr., Senior General Attorney, 

101 North Wacker Drive, #1920, 

Chicago, IL 60606. 

Board decisions and notices are 

available on our Web site at http:// 

www.stb.dot.gov. 

Decided: September 3, 2010. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES