DOT REPORT #7 - March, 1996 ============================================================= A compilation of rail notices published by the US Department of Transportation between March 1 - 15, 1996. Includes abandonment and control notices, FRA orders and related petitions. Condensed from original. ============================================================= CONTENTS: Illinois & Midland Railroad, Inc.; Acquisition and Operation Exemption; Chicago & Illinois Midland Railway Company Genesee & Wyoming, Inc.--Continuance in Control Exemption-- Illinois & Midland Railroad, Inc. Illinois Central Corporation and Illinois Central Railroad Company; Control; CCP Holdings, Inc., Chicago, Central & Pacific Railroad Company and Cedar River Railroad Company Cimarron Valley Railroad, L.C.; Acquisition and Operation Exemption; Cimarron Valley and Manter Branches of The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company David L. Durbano--Continuance in Control Exemption--Cimarron Valley Railroad, L.C. Commuter and Intercity Passenger Railroads, Including Public Authorities Providing Passenger Service, and Affected Freight Railroads; Clarification of Emergency Order Requiring Enhanced Operating Rules and Plans for Ensuring the Safety of Passengers Occupying the Leading Car of a Train With Appropriate Amendments Central New England Railroad, Inc., Modified Certificate Arkansas-Oklahoma Railroad Company--Lease and Trackage Rights Exemption--Missouri Pacific Railroad Company and the State of Oklahoma Minnesota Commercial Railway Company--Trackage Rights Exemption-- Soo Line Railroad Company Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Salt Lake County, Utah Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corporation--Acquisition and Operation--Colony Segment of the Union Pacific Railroad Company, Inc. Huron and Eastern Railway Company, Inc.--Acquisition--CSX Transportation, Inc. Rail Link, Incorporated--Continuance in Control Exemption-- Talleyrand Terminal Railroad Company, Inc. Talleyrand Terminal Railroad Company, Inc.--Operation Exemption-- Lines of Municipal Docks Railway Consolidated Rail Corporation--Abandonment--in Berrien County, MI Ellis & Eastern Company--Acquisition, Operation, Joint Relocation Project, and Trackage Rights Exemptions--Brandon-Ellis, SD Livonia, Avon & Lakeville Railroad Corporation--Acquisition and Operation Exemption--Line of Consolidated Rail Corporation Central Kansas Railway, Limited Liability Company--Abandonment Exemption--in Clark and Comanche Counties, KS Central Railroad Company of Indiana--Abandonment Exemption--in Dearborn County, IN Notification of Funds Availability for Next Generation High-Speed Rail Corridor Studies Central Kansas Railway, Limited Liability Company--Abandonment Exemption--in Marion and McPherson Counties, KS ===================================================================== == DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [STB Finance Docket No. 32862] Illinois & Midland Railroad, Inc.; Acquisition and Operation Exemption; Chicago & Illinois Midland Railway Company Illinois & Midland Railroad, Inc. (IMR), a noncarrier, has filed a notice of exemption to acquire and operate 98 miles of rail lines of Chicago & Illinois Midland Railway Company (CIMR) extending from milepost 10 at Pekin to milepost 87 at Springfield, and extending from milepost 100 at Cimic to milepost 121 at Taylorville, in the State of Illinois. IMR will also acquire the interest of CIMR in 25.4 miles of overhead trackage rights over: (1) The line of railroad of Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Company extending from milepost 0.0 at Peoria to milepost 10 at Pekin; and (2) the line of railroad of Illinois Central Railroad Company extending from milepost 191.9 at Springfield to milepost 207.3 at Cimic, in the State of Illinois. The transaction was to have been consummated on or about February 8, 1996. Decided: February 22, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Finance Docket No. 32863] Genesee & Wyoming, Inc.--Continuance in Control Exemption-- Illinois & Midland Railroad, Inc. Genesee & Wyoming, Inc. (GWI), a noncarrier, has filed a verified notice under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(2) to continue in control of Illinois & Midland Railroad, Inc. (IMR), upon IMR's becoming a class III rail carrier. GWI also controls through stock ownership 9 other nonconnecting class III rail carriers: Genesee & Wyoming Railroad Company; Dansville and Mount Morris Railroad Company; Rochester & Southern Railroad, Inc.; Louisiana & Delta Railroad, Inc.; Buffalo & Pittsburgh Railroad, Inc.; Bradford Industrial Rail, Inc.; Allegheny & Eastern Railroad, Inc.; Willamette & Pacific Railroad, Inc.; and GWI Switching Services. Also, GWI has a pending petition for exemption to continue in control of a connecting Class III railroad. (Portland & Western Railroad) The transaction is exempt from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 11323 because: (1) The railroads will not connect with each other or with any railroad in their corporate family; (2) the continuance in control is not part of a series of anticipated transactions that would connect the railroads with each other or with any railroad in their corporate family; and (3) the transaction does not involve a class I carrier. Decided: February 22, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Finance Docket No. 32858] Illinois Central Corporation and Illinois Central Railroad Company; Control; CCP Holdings, Inc., Chicago, Central & Pacific Railroad Company and Cedar River Railroad Company ACTION: Notice of acceptance of application. SUMMARY: The Board accepts for consideration the application filed January 31, 1996, by Illinois Central Corporation (IC Corp.), Illinois Central Railroad Company (ICR), CCP Holdings, Inc. (Holdings), Chicago, Central and Pacific Railroad Company (CCPR), and Cedar River Railroad Company (CRRC) (collectively referred to as applicants) for approval and authorization of IC Corp.'s acquisition of control of CCPR and CRRC through ownership of the stock of Holdings, CCPR/CRRC's parent. IC Corp. already controls ICR through ownership of all of ICR's stock. In accordance with 49 CFR 1180.4(b)(2)(iv), the Board finds that this is a minor transaction as described in 49 CFR 1180.2(c). (Where appropriate, IC Corp. and ICR are collectively referred to as IC, and CCPR and CRRC are collectively referred to as CC&P.) DATES: This decision is effective on March 1, 1996. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By application filed January 31, 1996, Board approval is being sought under 49 U.S.C. 11323-25 (formerly 49 U.S.C. 11343-45) for IC Corp.'s acquisition of control of CCPR and CRRC through ownership of the stock of Holdings. Applicant ICR is a Class I railroad operating approximately 2,624 route miles of rail lines in six Midwestern and South Central States. ICR is a wholly owned subsidiary of IC Corp., a noncarrier holding company. ICR controls and operates the Kensington & Eastern Railroad Company and Waterloo Railway Company, applicant carriers that own rail property in the States of Illinois and Mississippi. ICR also owns non- controlling stock interests in several switching and terminal railroads. IC owns non-controlling stock interests in The Belt Railway Company of Chicago, the Mississippi Export Railroad Company, the Paducah & Illinois Railroad Company, the Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Company and the Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis. Applicant CCPR is a Class II rail carrier that owns and operates approximately 724 miles of rail line between Chicago, IL, on the east and Sioux City, IA, and Council Bluffs, IA/Omaha, NE, on the west. The Chicago-Sioux City/Omaha line was formerly the Iowa Division of IC; CCPR purchased the line from IC and began operations in 1985. Applicant CRRC is a Class III rail carrier that owns or operates approximately 102 miles of rail lines between Waterloo, IA, and Glenville, MN. CRRC was formed in 1991 as a wholly owned subsidiary of CCPR to acquire the Waterloo-Albert Lea, MN line from the defunct Cedar Valley Railroad Company. CRRC is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Holdings and a sister company to CCPR. Applicant Holdings is a noncarrier holding company which directly controls CCPR and CRRC. Holdings also controls Iron Horse Properties, Inc. and the Missouri River Bridge Company, both noncarriers. Holdings is controlled by Donald R. Wood, Jr. IC Corp. proposes to acquire control of CCPR and CRRC through purchase of all of the issued and outstanding common stock of Holdings. Although CCPR and CRRC will be marketed as part of the IC rail system and CCPR's operations will be coordinated with those of ICR, they will remain separate legal entities. IC Corp. has no present plans to merge CCPR or CRRC into IC. IC proposes to consummate control of CC&P (through IC Corp.'s acquisition of Holdings' stock) as soon as a Board decision approving this application and authorizing the proposed control transaction has become effective. Applicants state that common control of IC and CC&P will position both rail systems to more effectively serve their customers and compete in the increasingly concentrated rail marketplace which surrounds them. The proposed transaction assertedly will provide shippers and receivers on IC and CC&P with new routing options and more efficient and competitive single-line service. For example, according to applicants, CC&P grain shippers will gain direct, single-line access to long-haul destination markets in the South-Central United States and to export markets through the Gulf ports of New Orleans and Mobile, AL. At the same time, grain receivers on IC will be assured reliable, independent and long-term access to grain from Iowa origins. Coal shippers and receivers on IC's lines will likewise gain access to additional markets via CC&P's lines. Applicants state that all customers will benefit from the improved transit times, better equipment utilization and other operating efficiencies made possible by common control. Applicants maintain that, in addition to generating benefits for the shipping public, the proposed transaction will strengthen the combined IC/CC&P system and improve both its operating and financial performance. Applicants estimate that common control will attract approximately 11,500 new carloads of traffic annually to the IC/CC&P system and will present significant opportunities to reduce expenses and rationalize operations. Applicants maintain that the proposed transaction will help position IC to remain a competitive, independent and viable carrier amid consolidation and market aggregation in the rail industry. Applicants submit that the proposed end-to-end combination of IC and CC&P under common control will have no adverse impact on competition. To the contrary, they state that common control of IC and CC&P will enhance competition and provide improved service and routing options for shippers on ICR and CC&P lines. According to applicants, grain shippers on CC&P in particular will benefit from new single-line routes to major grain processing plants on ICR and from competitive single-line rail access to export grain markets via ICR's lines to the ports of New Orleans and Mobile. These shippers will also benefit by having access to ICR's fleet of over 4,000 covered hopper cars. Applicants also state that grain receivers on ICR, including grain processors in Illinois, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama will benefit from reliable, long-term, independent access to Iowa grain. In addition to grain shippers and receivers, applicants submit that the combination of CC&P and IC into a single system will open new single-line routes for shippers of Illinois Basin coal from ICR origins in Illinois to destinations on CC&P's lines and new marketing opportunities for intermodal shippers. Applicants maintain that shippers on both railroads will benefit from improved car supply from access to the larger car fleet of the combined system, and from faster transit times and improved operating efficiency. They state that no customer will lose rail service as a result of the transaction. Indeed, they claim that a combined IC/CC&P system will be stronger, financially and operationally, than either carrier could be separately, and thus will be better able to compete with other railroads, motor carriers and barges in providing effective and efficient service to the shipping public. According to applicants, common control will have no adverse impact on the continuation of essential transportation services by IC, CC&P or any other carrier. Diversions of traffic from other rail carriers will be minimal. Furthermore, they state that the transaction will assure the preservation and continued viability of CC&P's lines. Applicants do not anticipate that any existing ICR employees will be adversely affected by the proposed control transaction. All of CCPR's non-management employees and CRRC's maintenance-of-way employees are represented by national unions and covered under existing collective bargaining agreements. According to applicants, these agreements will remain in force, modified as necessary to achieve the efficiency benefits of the proposed transaction, after consummation of control. Some work currently performed by CC&P employees will be transferred to IC locations. As a result of the proposed transaction, applicants anticipate that a total of 57 positions subject to collective bargaining will be eliminated in the first year of common control. No labor impacts are anticipated in the second and third years after consummation. In addition, five CC&P dispatchers currently located in Waterloo will be transferred to IC's dispatching center in Homewood, IL, as a result of the consolidation of dispatching functions at the latter facility. Some CC&P maintenance-of-way positions will be eliminated by introduction of modern mechanized track maintenance procedures on CC&P's lines. However, all maintenance work on CC&P lines will continue to be performed by CC&P employees. The applicable level of labor protection for the control transaction proposed herein is that set forth in New York Dock Ry.-- Control--Brooklyn Eastern Term. Dist., 360 I.C.C. 60 (1979). No employee protection agreements have been reached as of the date of the application. IC anticipates offering transfer or a severance package to employees whose positions are eliminated as a result of IC's acquisition of control of CC&P. Under 49 CFR 1180, we must determine whether a proposed transaction is a major, significant, or minor transaction. The proposed transaction, which does not involve the merger or control of two or more Class I railroads and which will reunite under common control rail lines that were previously operated by IC as a single system, has no regional or national significance and will not have any anticompetitive effects. Accordingly, we find the proposal to be a minor transaction under 49 CFR 1180.2(c), consistent with the categories of transactions now defined at 49 U.S.C. 11325(a). Because the application substantially complies with the regulations governing minor transactions, we are accepting it for consideration. Decided: February 23, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Finance Docket No. 32869] Cimarron Valley Railroad, L.C.; Acquisition and Operation Exemption; Cimarron Valley and Manter Branches of The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company Cimarron Valley Railroad, L.C. (CVR), a noncarrier, has filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.31 to acquire and operate the Cimarron Valley and the Manter Branches, including overhead trackage rights, from The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company (``Santa Fe'') as follows: (1) 151.04 miles of the Cimarron Valley Branch extending from East Ensign, KS, at milepost 3.76, to east of Boise City, OK, at milepost 154.80; (2) incidental overhead trackage rights to permit interchange on Santa Fe's C.V. Subdivision between milepost 154.80 and milepost 158.33, on Track No. 2 of Santa Fe's Boise City Subdivision between milepost 158.33 and milepost 159.74, and on Track Nos. 11, 12, 13 and 14 of Santa Fe's Boise City Yard near Boise City, OK; (3) 103.83 miles of the Manter Branch from Satanta, KS, at milepost 0.06 to east of Springfield, CO, at milepost 91.03 together with the Pritchett Industrial Spur from North Junction, north of Springfield, CO, at milepost 96.84, to near Pirtchett, CO, at milepost 109.70; and (4) incidental overhead trackage rights to permit interchange on Santa Fe's Manter Subdivision between milepost 91.03 and the west end of Santa Fe's Manter Subdivision at South Junction, CO, near milepost 95.00, and on Santa Fe's Boise City Subdivision between milepost 172.60 and milepost 174.40, and on the siding of Santa Fe's Boise City Subdivision at Springfield, CO. Consummation was expected to occur on or shortly after February 23, 1996. Decided: February 27, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [STB Finance Docket No. 32870] David L. Durbano--Continuance in Control Exemption--Cimarron Valley Railroad, L.C. David L. Durbano (Applicant), a noncarrier, has filed a verified notice under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(2) to continue in control of Cimarron Valley Railroad, L.C. (CVR), upon CVR's becoming a Class III rail carrier. Consummation was expected to occur on or shortly after February 23, 1996. Applicant controls four other Class III rail carriers: Wyoming and Colorado Railroad Company, Inc. (WYCO); Oregon Eastern Railroad Company, Inc. (OER); Arizona Central Railroad, Inc. (AZCR); and Southwestern Railroad Company, Inc. (SWR). The transaction is exempt from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 11323 because Applicant states that: (1) CVR, WYCO, OER, AZCR, and SWR will not connect with each other; (2) the continuance in control is not part of a series of anticipated transactions that would connect the railroads with each other; and (3) the transaction does not involve a Class I carrier. Decided: February 27, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration [FRA Emergency Order No. 20, Notice No. 2] Commuter and Intercity Passenger Railroads, Including Public Authorities Providing Passenger Service, and Affected Freight Railroads; Clarification of Emergency Order Requiring Enhanced Operating Rules and Plans for Ensuring the Safety of Passengers Occupying the Leading Car of a Train With Appropriate Amendments Introduction On February 20, 1996, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) issued Emergency Order No. 20 (Notice No. 1). The order required prompt action to immediately enhance passenger train operating rules and emergency egress and to develop a more comprehensive interim system safety plan addressing cab car forward and multiple unit (MU) operations that do not have either cab signal, automatic train stop, or automatic train control systems. Subsequent to issuance of the order, FRA and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) recognized that the original order's safety measures, while establishing requirements to abate the safety risks at issue, would benefit from refinements increasing their effectiveness. Three aspects of the original order are being refined in this notice. FRA is: (1) More sharply focusing and strengthening the provisions relating to the delay in block rule; (2) tailoring the signal calling provisions to reflect more diverse operating situations; and (3) providing more detailed guidance on the emergency egress sampling provision. FRA is also clarifying measures that apply to defective cab signal, automatic train stop (ATS) and automatic train control (ATC). (1) Delayed in Block The original order required application of the delay-in-block provisions regardless of the train's location on the railroad although, in the relevant accidents that formed the basis for the order, the trains involved were operating in a block immediately preceding an interlocking or controlled point. Additionally, the original order provided no maximum speed for delayed-in-block movements other than that provided in relevant railroad rules. The FRA's refined approach will limit the order's applicability to blocks immediately preceding interlockings and controlled points and require that the train reduce speed in accordance with applicable operating rules, but in no case may speed exceed 40 miles per hour. FRA established the maximum speed of 40 miles per hour in accordance with the reduced speed imposed under its regulations addressing failure of cab signal, ATS, or ATC devices (see 49 CFR 236.567, 236.811). This will more clearly focus the rule on the situations intended to be addressed by the original order and ensure that the maximum reduced speed permitted where the rule applies is standardized and is based on a known standard. In other words, the maximum speed where the rule applies will be 40 miles per hour or less, depending upon the railroad's rules. FRA is also strengthening the delay-in-block rule by adding a measure requiring that appropriate signs be installed at each affected signal and at the departure end of stations. This will prevent confusion as to where the rule applies. (2) Signal Calling The modification to the signal calling provision reflects the reality that designated crew members will be positioned in varying locations when receiving the verbal communication identifying the signal indication. Although the initial version of the order specified a particular location on the train (i.e. in a trailing unit or car), the underlying safety concern can be satisfied by having the crew member receive and acknowledge the communication regardless of the responder's physical location on the train. (3) Emergency Egress The original order required but did not set parameters for testing a representative sample of emergency exits. The alteration to the emergency egress provisions requires that sampling of emergency window exits be conducted in conformity with either of two alternate methods commonly recognized for such efforts. This modification provides a degree of uniformity industry wide. In addition, FRA has modified the emergency egress portion of the order to clarify that the exterior marking requirement applies to those windows that may be employed for access by emergency responders, which may be windows other than, or in addition to, those designed for emergency egress for passengers. In addition, FRA has modified the interim system safety plan portion of the order to require discussion of the railroad's programs and plans for liaison with and training of emergency responders with respect to emergency access to passengers. The original order required discussion only of methods used to inform passengers of the location and method of emergency exits. Finding and Order Note: Rules (1) and (2) apply to all push-pull and MU operations unless cab signal, automatic train stop, or automatic train control is in operation, speeds do not exceed 30 m.p.h., or within yard or terminal limits as specified for this purpose by the railroad. (1) Delayed-in-Block Rule (A) On March 4, 1996, at 12:01 a.m., have in effect, publish in its code of operating rules, and comply with a rule that requires: If a passenger train operating in the block immediately preceding an interlocking or controlled point stops for any reason, or its speed is reduced below 10 m.p.h., the train shall proceed under the reduced speed set forth in applicable operating rules governing such circumstances and be prepared to stop before passing the next signal. In no event shall this reduced speed exceed 40 m.p.h., although lower speeds are permissible. The train must maintain the prescribed reduced speed until the next wayside signal is clearly visible and that signal displays a proceed indication. (B) Within 30 days of issuance of the railroad's rule, a railroad operating supervisor shall personally contact each engineer and conductor in passenger service and inform them in a face-to-face meeting of the requirements of that rule. Such briefing shall be documented and such documentation shall be available for FRA review upon request. (C) Within 60 days of issuance of the railroad's rule, each engineer/conductor in such passenger service shall receive an unannounced operational (``efficiency'') test on the rule which requires a full stop at the signal ahead; and, within 90 days of rule publication, an on-board operational monitoring ride shall be conducted by an operating supervisor of the railroad to ensure a complete understanding of rule provisions. Such tests and operational monitoring checks shall be documented and such documentation shall be available for FRA review upon request. (D) The railroad's program of operational tests and inspections under 49 CFR Part 217 shall be revised as necessary to include this rule, and shall specifically include a minimum of two such tests per year for each passenger engineer. (E) Within 30 days of issuance of the railroad's rule, an appropriate qualifying appurtenance shall be affixed to each signal governing the approach to an interlocking or controlled point signal to serve as a visual reminder to the engineer. Appropriate signage shall be displayed at the departure end of passenger stations located in the block immediately preceding interlockings or controlled points. (2) Crew Communications Rule (A) On March 4, 1996, at 12:01 a.m., have in effect, publish in its operating rules, and comply with a rule that requires: A crew member located in the operating cab of a controlling locomotive, cab car, or MU car, shall have means to communicate orally and shall communicate the indication and location of each wayside signal affecting the movement of the train as soon as the signal becomes visible, for all signals which require either (1) that the train be prepared to stop at the next wayside signal, or (2) that the train be prepared to pass the next wayside signal at restricted speed. In multiple track territory, the crew member shall include the affected track number. (B) A designated crew member shall immediately acknowledge the transmission, and confirm the information to the crew member(s) on the controlling locomotive by repeating the message. If the designated crew member fails to acknowledge the communication, the engineer must ascertain at the next scheduled stop why the message is not being confirmed. If necessary due to radio equipment failure, alternative means shall be established by the operating crew (e.g., via intercom, cellular telephone, etc.) to accomplish the procedure. (C) If the engineer fails to control the train movement in accordance with either a wayside signal indication or other restrictions imposed upon the train, the designated crew member shall at once communicate with and caution the engineer regarding the restriction, and, if necessary, take appropriate action to ensure the safety of the train, including stopping the movement if appropriate. (D) Within 30 days of the issuance of the railroad's rule, a railroad operating supervisor shall personally contact each engineer and conductor in passenger service and inform them in a face-to-face meeting of the requirements of this rule. Such briefing shall be documented and such documentation shall be available for FRA review upon request. (E) Within 60 days of the issuance of the railroad's rule, each engineer/conductor in such passenger service shall receive an unannounced operational ``efficiency'' test on the rule; and, within 90 days of rule publication, an on-board operational monitoring ride shall be conducted by an operating supervisor of the railroad to ensure a complete understanding of rule provisions. Such tests and operational monitoring checks shall be documented and such documentation shall be available for FRA review upon request. (F) The railroad's program of operational tests and inspections under 49 CFR Part 217 shall be revised as necessary to include this rule, and shall specifically include a minimum of two such tests per year for each passenger engineer. (3) Emergency Egress: Marking and Inspecting Exits (A) No later than April 20, 1996, ensure that each emergency exit location is marked inside the car for passenger and crew information. Markings for egress from inside the car shall be accompanied by clear and legible instructions for operation of the exit. Also, clear markings shall also be provided on the exterior of each car indicating which windows may be employed for access by emergency responders. All such markings must be clearly visible and legible at egress locations. (B) Immediately begin, and by April 20 complete, a program to test a representative sample of emergency window exits on cars in its fleets to verify proper operation. (C) Records of the date, car number, and verification of proper exit operation shall be maintained and available for FRA review upon request. Each railroad shall also verify emergency exit operation as part of routine vehicle maintenance cycles. (4) Interim System Safety Plans Each authority operating or contracting for the operation of push- pull, EMU or DMU service (including Amtrak) shall, not later than April 5, 1996, submit to FRA an interim system safety plan for the purpose of enhancing the safety of such operations. In developing such plans, the authority shall provide opportunity for the riding public and designated representatives of railroad employees to comment on proposed actions that may affect the quality of service, including passenger safety. The plan shall address the following hazards associated with passenger occupancy of lead units: Train-to-train collisions. Derailments giving rise to the hazard of impact with fixed structures. Collisions with heavy vehicles at highway-rail crossings. The plan shall take into consideration the overall safety of all passengers and crew members and shall, at a minimum, address the following opportunities for risk reduction: (A) Use of cab car/MU car. The authority shall specify the circumstances under which occupancy of a cab or MU car in the lead position is permitted, by route and train assignment. The authority shall propose or report appropriate modifications in such practices, taking into consideration service needs (e.g., equipment capacity, passenger loadings) and safety issues (e.g., train densities, method of operation, availability of cab signals and automatic control, issues related to standing passengers, grade crossing exposure, and other relevant factors). (B) Operating rules. The authority shall review railroad operating rules and practices pertinent to the hazards listed above to determine if further enhancements in safety are warranted and advise FRA as to what action is necessary to enhance the level of safety. (C) Adverse conditions. In conducting the review of railroad operating rules and practices, consideration shall be given to adverse or unusual operating conditions such as weather (e.g., fog, heavy rain or snow, flooding, etc.). (D) Short-term technology enhancements. The authority shall consider short-term enhancements in technology that may improve the safety of train operations, such as use of alerting devices, equipping of additional locomotives with cab signal/ATC apparatus (where in effect on the territory), or other available enhancements to enhance engineer performance or provide warning of operation in excess of authority provided by the wayside signal system. In addition, the authority shall consider whether the installation of additional signals on any particular line would appreciably reduce the risk of train collisions. (E) Crew management. The authority shall review crew management practices in light of contemporary literature regarding shift work and cumulative fatigue to determine if the alertness and performance of employees can be promoted by changes in those practices. Special attention shall be given to the issue of night split shifts. (F) Highway-rail grade crossings. The authority shall review risks to passengers associated with occupancy of cab or MU cars in the lead while passing over highway-rail crossings, particularly crossings utilized by heavy vehicles and vehicles transporting hazardous materials, and shall address measures that can reduce these risks. (G) Emergency exit notification. The authority shall review methods it uses, in addition to marking emergency exits, to inform passengers of the location and operation of those exits, such as flyers dropped on seats, announcements to passengers, explanations on the face of passenger tickets, etc. The authority shall specify any plans it has to increase passenger awareness of the location and operation of emergency exits. The authority shall also discuss its plans for liaison with and training of emergency responders with respect to emergency access to passenger cars. Upon receipt of plans responsive to the above-reference requirements, the Administrator, in consultation with the FTA Administrator, will determine whether other mandatory action appears necessary to address hazards associated with the subject rail passenger service. Effective Date and Notice to Affected Persons The amendments to this order shall take effect at 12:01 a.m. on March 4, 1996. The original order would have required the railroad to have its revised operating rules on delay in block and crew communications to be in place by March 2. The additional two days granted here is intended to ensure that it is feasible to revise, issue, and implement the revised rules by Monday, March 4. Other deadlines (i.e., for compliance with the emergency egress and interim system safety plan requirements) are not changed, but actual dates have been inserted to avoid confusion about how to count the days allotted for certain tasks. Issued in Washington, D.C. on February 29, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [Finance Docket No. 32769] Central New England Railroad, Inc., Modified Certificate On October 11, 1995, Central New England Railroad, Inc. filed a notice under 49 CFR Part 1150, Subpart C--Modified Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to operate approximately 13.5-miles of an abandoned rail line between milepost 8.8 at Enfield, CT (on the Connecticut-Massachusetts State line) and milepost 23.3 at East Windsor Hill, CT, owned by the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT). The 5.5-mile portion of the line between milepost 12.5 (Hazardville, CT) and milepost 18.0 (East Windsor, CT), was formerly owned by the Trustee of Penn Central Transportation Company, one of the eastern railroads reorganized under the Regional Rail Reorganization Act, and was never designated in the United States Railway Associations's Final System Plan for transfer to Consolidated Rail Corporation (CR). The line was abandoned by the Trustee in 1976 pursuant to section 308 of the Regional Rail Reorganization Act of 1973, 45 U.S.C. 744(b) and acquired by the State of Connecticut's Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) for continued rail service. The 3.7-mile portion of the line between milepost 12.5 (Hazardville, CT) and milepost 8.8 (Enfield, CT) was abandoned by the Boston and Maine Corporation in 1993. The 4.3-mile portion of the line between milepost 18.0 and milepost 22.3 (East Windsor Hill, CT/CR milepost 6.77--Troy Road Connection) was abandoned by CR in 1987. ConnDOT subsequently acquired this portion of the line on May 11, 1995, for continued rail service. The Commission will serve a copy of this notice on the Association of American Railroads (Car Service Division), as agent of all railroads subscribing to the car-service and car-hire agreement, and on the American Short Line Railroad Association. Decided: February 28, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Finance Docket No. 32873] Arkansas-Oklahoma Railroad Company--Lease and Trackage Rights Exemption--Missouri Pacific Railroad Company and the State of Oklahoma Arkansas-Oklahoma Railroad Company (AOK), a noncarrier, has filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.31 to assume the Missouri Pacific Railroad's (MP) lease of a rail line which is owned by the State of Oklahoma between Howe, OK, at milepost 295.36 and McAlester, OK, at milepost 364.96, a distance of 69.60 miles. The transaction also includes incidental AOK trackage rights for interchange purposes over MP's Shawnee Branch rail line between milepost 364.96 and milepost 370.5 and between milepost 566.00 and milepost 563.00, a distance of 8.54 miles. Consummation is scheduled to occur on or after the March 1, 1996 effective date of the exemption. Decided: February 29, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [STB Finance Docket No. 32872] Minnesota Commercial Railway Company--Trackage Rights Exemption-- Soo Line Railroad Company Minnesota Commercial Railway Company (MNCR) has filed a verified notice under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(7) to acquire overhead trackage rights from the Soo Line Railroad Company (Soo) over approximately 7.60 miles between milepost 416.14+/- near Merriam Park and milepost 408.54+/- near East Hoffman Avenues in St. Paul, Ramsey County, MN. The trackage rights were scheduled to become effective on February 29, 1996. The notice states that the MNCR's use of the Soo track will enable MNCR to operate trains it handles in interchange with other carriers. Decided: February 29, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Transit Administration Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Salt Lake County, Utah ACTION: Notice of intent. SUMMARY: The FTA is issuing this notice to advise the public that a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) will be prepared for a proposed transportation project in Salt Lake County, Utah. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FTA, in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), the Utah Transit Authority (UTA), and the Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) will prepare a major investment study/draft environmental impact statement for transportation improvements in the corridor from the University of Utah through Salt Lake City to the Salt Lake City International Airport in Salt Lake County, Utah. The Salt Lake Area Long Range Transportation Plan adopted on October 26, 1995, identifies the corridor from the University of Utah to the Salt Lake City International Airport as having the potential need for major transit investment(s). A University Corridor Transit Study completed in 1993 found that light rail transit or other major transit investments would be feasible in the corridor from the University to downtown Salt Lake City. In addition, a Long Range Transit Plan currently being developed for the Wasatch Front Region identifies the University to Airport corridor as one of the future anchor corridors for major transit investment in the region. This study will consider no-build, transportation system management, and build alternatives. A multimodal evaluation of transportation improvements in the corridor will be focus of the study, with both transit and highway improvements such as traffic management strategies being considered. Among the transit alternatives to be studied are light rail transit and express bus service on high- occupancy vehicle lanes. Issued on: March 1, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [Finance Docket No. 32864] Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corporation--Acquisition and Operation--Colony Segment of the Union Pacific Railroad Company, Inc. ACTION: Notice of filing of application and request for comments. SUMMARY: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10902 and section 327 of Public Law No. 104-88, the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Company (DME) has filed an application to acquire and operate an approximately 203-mile rail line currently owned by Union Pacific Railroad Company, Inc. (UP) located in Wyoming, South Dakota, and Nebraska, commonly referred to as the Colony Line. The Colony Line runs in a north-south direction from Colony, WY, to Crawford, NE, the majority of which is located in South Dakota. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the application, filed February 22, 1996, DME claims that there will be no material adverse impact on competition from this transaction since DME is merely replacing UP as the originating carrier on the Colony Line. Also, because DME is merely taking over an existing operation with no impact on environmental resources, the applicant is exempt from environmental reporting requirements pursuant to 49 CFR 1105.6(c)(2). DME states that the number of full-time UP employees on the Colony Line is 41 and anticipates that, following this transaction, the number of full-time employees on the Colony Line will rise to 50. DME claims that no labor protection conditions should be imposed. DME seeks expedited review of this application due to various financial obligations it has entered into which take effect on May 1, 1996. DME has served copies of this application on State officials, officials of communities located on the Colony Line, the shippers and receivers that use the Colony Line, connecting railroads, representatives of affected employees, and newspapers serving the Colony Line area. In light of the extensive service on the parties likely to have an interest in this proceeding, and in light of DME's justification for expedited action, the Board is requesting that comments be filed by March 18, 1996. Decided: March 5, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [Finance Docket No. 32826] Huron and Eastern Railway Company, Inc.--Acquisition--CSX Transportation, Inc. ACTION: Notice of exemption. SUMMARY: The Board, under 49 U.S.C. 10505, exempts the Huron and Eastern Railway Company, Inc. from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 11343-45, subject to standard labor protection, to acquire from CSX Transportation, Inc., 2.09 miles of rail line between milepost 2.0 and milepost 4.09 near Saginaw, MI. DATES: This exemption is effective on April 7, 1996. Decided: February 26, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [Finance Docket No. 32866] Rail Link, Incorporated--Continuance in Control Exemption-- Talleyrand Terminal Railroad Company, Inc. Rail Link, Incorporated (Rail Link), has filed a verified notice under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(2) to continue in control of the Talleyrand Terminal Railroad Company, Inc. (TTRC) upon TTRC becoming a Class III rail carrier. The transaction was to have been consummated on or after February 14, 1996. Rail Link also controls two nonconnecting Class III rail carriers: (1) the Commonwealth Railway, Incorporated and the Carolina Coastal Railway, Inc. (CCR). The transaction is exempt from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 11323 because Rail Link states that: (1) the railroads will not connect with each other or with any railroad in their corporate family; (2) the continuance in control is not part of a series of anticipated transactions that would connect the railroads with each other or with any railroad in their corporate family; and (3) the transaction does not involve a Class I carrier. Decided: March 1, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [STB Finance Docket No. 32865] Talleyrand Terminal Railroad Company, Inc.--Operation Exemption-- Lines of Municipal Docks Railway Talleyrand Terminal Railroad Company, Inc. (TTRC) has filed a notice of exemption to operate approximately 10-miles of rail line owned by Municipal Docks Railway (MDR) from F&J Junction (between Norfolk Southern Railway milepost 5-C and CSX Transportation milepost 632.08) in an easterly direction to MDR milepost 10.33, within the Talleyrand Marine Terminal in Duval County, FL. The transaction was to have been consummated on or after February 14, 1996. TTRC entered into an agreement with Jacksonville Port Authority (JPA) for the operation of certain rail lines located in and near the Port of Jacksonville, FL. JPA owns the subject trackage through the MDR, a common carrier division of JPA. Decided: March 1, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [Docket No. AB-167 (Sub-No. 1154)] Consolidated Rail Corporation--Abandonment--in Berrien County, MI The Board has issued a decision authorizing Consolidated Rail Corporation to abandon two connecting sections of rail line--the 2.1- mile Niles Industrial Track and the 0.9-mile French Paper Lead Track, a total distance of approximately 3.0 miles, in Niles, Berrien County, MI, subject to environmental and labor protective conditions. The Board will issue an abandonment certificate within 15 days after this publication, to become effective no later than 45 days after this publication, unless the Board finds that: (1) a financially responsible person has offered financial assistance (through subsidy or purchase) to enable rail service to continue; and (2) it is likely that the assistance would fully compensate the railroad. Decided: March 4, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [Finance Docket No. 32506] Ellis & Eastern Company--Acquisition, Operation, Joint Relocation Project, and Trackage Rights Exemptions--Brandon-Ellis, SD ACTION: Notice of exemption. SUMMARY: Under 49 U.S.C. 10505, the Board exempts from the prior approval requirements of (a) 49 U.S.C. 10901 the acquisition and operation by Ellis & Eastern Company of a 16.5-mile rail line between milepost 49.0, at or near Brandon, and milepost 65.5, at or near Ellis, in Minnehaha County, SD, and (b) 49 U.S.C. 11343-45, (i) the sale by Ellis & Eastern Company to Burlington Northern Railroad Company of a switching yard and the adjacent 2.0-mile line between mileposts 56.6 and 58.6, all in Sioux Falls, SD, and the grant back of trackage rights over that line, (ii) the grant of additional trackage rights by Burlington Northern Railroad Company to Ellis & Eastern Company over a 2.0-mile line between mileposts 54.6 and 56.6, also in Sioux Falls, and (iii) a joint relocation project involving the respective lines of Ellis & Eastern Company and Burlington Northern Railroad Company between mileposts 55.6 and 56.6, also in Sioux Falls. The exemptions for those transactions requiring prior approval under 49 U.S.C. 11343- 45 are subject to appropriate labor protective conditions. DATES: The exemption will be effective April 10, 1996. Decided: February 26, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Finance Docket No. 32754] Livonia, Avon & Lakeville Railroad Corporation--Acquisition and Operation Exemption--Line of Consolidated Rail Corporation ACTION: Notice of exemption. SUMMARY: The Board, under 49 U.S.C. 10502, exempts from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 10902 the acquisition and operation of an 18.49-mile line of railroad near Rochester, NY, by the Livonia, Avon & Lakeville Railroad Corporation, a Class III railroad. DATES: The exemption will be effective March 31, 1996. Decided: March 5, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [STB Docket No. AB-406 (Sub-No. 5X)] Central Kansas Railway, Limited Liability Company--Abandonment Exemption--in Clark and Comanche Counties, KS Central Kansas Railway, Limited Liability Company (CKR) has filed a notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1152 Subpart F--Exempt Abandonments to abandon a 30.3-mile portion of its line of railroad known as the Englewood Subdivision from milepost 136 at or near Protection to milepost 166 plus 1846 feet at or near Englewood, in Clark and Comanche Counties, KS. CKR is a subsidiary of OmniTRAX, Inc., a noncarrier holding company. OmniTRAX was authorized to control CKR, pursuant to a notice of exemption in 1994. Provided no formal expression of intent to file an offer of financial assistance (OFA) has been received, this exemption will be effective on April 10, 1996, unless stayed pending reconsideration. Decided: February 29, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [STB Docket No. AB-459 (Sub-No. 1X)] Central Railroad Company of Indiana--Abandonment Exemption--in Dearborn County, IN Central Railroad Company of Indiana (CIND) filed a notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1152 Subpart F--Exempt Abandonments to abandon approximately 2.3-miles of its rail line from milepost 22.4 near Lawrenceburg Junction to milepost 24.7 near Dearborn Junction, in Dearborn County, IN. Provided no formal expression of intent to file an offer of financial assistance (OFA) has been received, this exemption will be effective on April 10, 1996, unless stayed pending reconsideration. Decided: February 29, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration Notification of Funds Availability for Next Generation High-Speed Rail Corridor Studies SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1996, (Public Law 104-50 (November 15, 1995)), the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has $1 million in next generation high speed rail funds available for grants to eligible participants for high speed rail corridor planning assistance, including preliminary engineering and operational analysis, and other planning activities. This notice sets forth the criteria by which FRA will make its selection of grant recipients. The FRA strongly supports the advancement of high-speed rail in congested corridors where it can be an important component of a balanced transportation system. Further, FRA believes the development or continuation of high- speed rail in specific corridors should be undertaken as a partnership of states, localities, and the private sector, with support from the Federal government. Pursuant to the Swift Rail Development Act of 1994, (Public Law 103-440 ( November 2, 1994)), the Secretary may provide financial assistance to a public agency or group of public agencies for corridor planning for up to 50 percent of the publicly financed costs associated with eligible activities. Not less than 20 percent of the publicly financed costs associated with eligible activities shall come from State and local sources, which State and local sources may not include funds from any Federal programs. CRITERIA FOR FUNDING: Eligible participants are encouraged to submit a request for this funding which addresses the following criteria: 1. The level of interest in the chosen corridor demonstrated by State, regional, and local governments and elected officials or other interested groups. Interest can be shown by the past and proposed financial commitments and in-kind resources of State and local governments and the private sector. 2. The extent to which the proposed planning focuses on systems which will achieve sustained speeds of 125 mph or greater. 3. The degree of integration of the corridor into metropolitan area and statewide transportation planning. 4. The potential interconnection of the corridor with other parts of the Nation's transportation system, including the interconnection with other countries. 5. The anticipated effect of the corridor on the congestion of other modes of transportation. 6. Whether the work to be funded will aid the efforts of State and local governments to enhance compliance with Federal environmental laws and regulations. 7. The estimated level of ridership and the estimated capital cost of corridor improvements, including the cost of closing, improving, or separating highway-rail grade crossings. 8. Whether a specific route has been selected, specific improvements identified, and capacity studies completed, and whether the corridor has been designated as a high-speed rail corridor under Section 1010 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Public Law 102-240 December 18, 1991). ELIGIBLE PARTICIPANTS: Any state government, local government, organization of state and/or local governments, or any combination of such entities is eligible to apply for funding. DEADLINE FOR REQUESTS FOR GRANT APPLICATIONS: Eligible participants desiring to apply for this funding, should notify FRA by letter, and FRA will respond initially by providing a standard grant application package. For priority consideration, FRA requests that the completed grant application packages be returned by June 30, 1996. Issued in Washington, D.C. on March 5, 1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [SBT Docket No. AB-406 (Sub-No. 6X)] Central Kansas Railway, Limited Liability Company--Abandonment Exemption--in Marion and McPherson Counties, KS Central Kansas Railway, Limited Liability Company (CKR) has filed a notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1152 Subpart F--Exempt Abandonments to abandon a 33.4-mile portion of its line of railroad known as the McPherson Subdivision from milepost 10 plus 2,418 feet at or near Marion to milepost 43 plus 4,505 feet at or near McPherson, in Marion and McPherson Counties, KS.< CKR is a subsidiary of OmniTRAX, Inc., a noncarrier holding company. OmniTRAX was authorized to control CKR, pursuant to a notice of exemption in 1994. Provided no formal expression of intent to file an offer of financial assistance (OFA) has been received, this exemption will be effective on April 12, 1996, unless stayed pending reconsideration. Decided: February 29, 1996.