[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 82 (Monday, April 28, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22994-23003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-9214]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Finance Docket No. 35087]


Canadian National Railway Company and Grand Trunk Corporation 
Control--EJ&E West Company

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board, Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of the Final Scope of Study for the 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On October 30, 2007, the Canadian National Railway Company 
(CN) and Grand Trunk Corporation (collectively CN or the Applicants) 
filed an application with the Surface Transportation Board (Board or 
STB) seeking the Board's approval to acquire control of EJ&E West 
(EJ&EW) Company, a wholly owned noncarrier subsidiary of the Elgin, 
Joliet and Eastern Railway Company\1\ (EJ&E). In their application, 
Applicants state that they plan to construct six new rail connections 
and approximately 19 miles of siding extensions and second mainline 
track (double track). EJ&E is a Class II railroad that currently 
operates approximately 200 miles of track in northeastern Illinois and 
northwestern Indiana.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants state in their application that EJ&E plans to 
transfer all of its land, rail, and related assets located west of 
the centerline of Buchanan Street in Gary (together with the real 
property and related fixtures associated with the hump and Dixie 
leads located east of Buchanan Street) to EJ&EW, which at that time 
would become a rail common carrier. EJ&E would retain its land, 
rail, and related assets east of the centerline (other than the real 
property and related fixtures associated with the hump and Dixie 
leads). It is expected that, if the proposed transaction is approved 
and Applicants acquire control of EJ&EW, EJ&E would change its name 
to Gary Railway Company, and EJ&EW would assume the Elgin, Joliet & 
Eastern Railway Company name. To eliminate confusion, and because 
EJ&EW would be a temporary entity, the remainder of this document 
will refer only to ``EJ&E.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 26, 2007, the Board issued Decision No. 2 announcing 
that its Section of Environmental Analysis (SEA) will prepare an 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to assess the potential 
environmental impacts that may result from the proposed acquisition. On 
December 21, 2007, SEA published a Notice of Intent (NOI) in the 
Federal Register announcing the start of the scoping process and the 
dates and times of public scoping meetings. This document, as well as a 
Draft Scope of Study, was served and distributed to approximately 350 
stakeholders and 41 federal, state, and local agencies on an 
environmental distribution list. A press release was issued to 21 
Chicago-area newspapers to announce the NOI to the public.
    Information about the STB's environmental review of the proposed 
acquisition was also made available through the Board's Web site, 
http://www.stb.dot.gov. The Board's Web site provides an overview of 
the proposed acquisition; public comment guidance; links to documents 
(including the NOI and Draft Scope of Study); links to CN's, and EJ&E's 
Web sites; and SEA contact information. Additionally, SEA established a 
toll-free information line (1-800-347-0689) for public comments with a 
Spanish-language option available. An electronic filing system is also 
available on the Board's Web site, http://www.stb.dot.gov, to receive 
comments.
    To promote participation in a series of 14 public scoping meetings 
scheduled for January 2008, SEA placed quarter-

[[Page 22995]]

page advertisements and published public notices in 21 Chicago-area 
newspapers announcing the meetings. SEA issued a follow-up press 
release to the same newspapers. Announcement posters were placed in 42 
public libraries in communities along the EJ&E rail line, and SEA 
emailed notices to 285 local elected officials.
    Approximately 2,600 individuals participated in the open-house 
scoping meetings held at seven locations throughout the Chicago region. 
Two meetings per location were held: One from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. and one 
from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. The dates and locations of the 14 open house 
meetings were:
     January 8, 2008: Mundelein, Illinois
     January 9, 2008: Barrington, Illinois
     January 10, 2008: Joliet, Illinois
     January 15, 2008: Matteson, Illinois
     January 16, 2008: Gary, Indiana
     January 17, 2008: West Chicago, Illinois
     January 22, 2008: Chicago, Illinois
    On January 30, 2008, SEA extended the deadline for Draft Scope of 
Study comments from February 1, 2008 to February 15, 2008. To publicize 
the extension, postcards were mailed to 3,038 persons on an updated 
environmental distribution list, and 43 letters were sent to agencies 
during the week of January 28, 2008. SEA issued a press release to the 
21 Chicago-area newspapers and emailed 310 elected officials to alert 
them to the comment period extension.
    In total, SEA received:
     1,347 comments from individuals attending the open house 
meetings;
     1,268 comment letters;
     219 oral comments on SEA's information line; and
     858 individual comments filed electronically on the 
Board's Web site.
    At the conclusion of the comment period, SEA mailed follow-up 
postcards acknowledging the receipt of comments and participation in 
the scoping process. SEA placed the names of all commenters on the 
environmental distribution list, thereby ensuring that they will 
receive notice of availability of the Draft and Final EIS, as well as 
the Final Scope of Study.
    Based on the comments received and further analysis, SEA has 
prepared the Final Scope of Study for the EIS, which is included in 
this Notice of Availability as Appendix A.

Addresses for Further Information

    Written requests for further information on the proposed 
acquisition should be directed to: Phillis Johnson-Ball, Surface 
Transportation Board, 395 E Street, SW.,Washington, DC 20423-0001.
    Telephone requests may be made by calling 1-800-347-0689 (SEA's 
information line), and emails may be sent via the Board's website at 
http://www.stb.dot.gov by clicking on the ``E--FILING'' link.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 30, 2007, Canadian National 
Railway Company (CN) and Grand Trunk Corporation (GTC), a noncarrier 
holding company through which CN controls its U.S. rail subsidiaries, 
filed an application with the Board under 49 U.S.C. 11323-25. The 
application seeks the Board's authorization for CN to acquire control 
of the EJ&E rail line, land, and related assets west of Buchanan Street 
in Gary, Indiana, along with the hump and Dixie lead tracks located 
east of Buchanan Street leading into Kirk Yard. Trackage east of 
Buchanan Street would be handled by the Gary Railway Company.
    Acquisition of the EJ&E rail line would provide CN with a 
continuous route around Chicago. The Applicants intend to connect the 
existing five CN rail lines that run into central Chicago and re-route 
CN trains now going through Chicago on their way to other destinations, 
to the EJ&E rail line. The proposed acquisition includes changes in 
rail line operations and changes in yard operations.
    The Applicants plan to make approximately $100 million in capital 
improvements, including constructing six new connections at Munger, 
Joliet, and Matteson (all in Illinois) and Griffith, Ivanhoe, and Kirk 
Yard located in Gary (all in Indiana). In addition, the proposed 
acquisition includes plans to install double track and extend sidings 
within the existing EJ&E railroad right-of-way (ROW) along 19 miles of 
the EJ&E arc at several locations:
     Leithton and Mundelein, Illinois
     East Siding to 95th Street (between Eola and Naperville, 
Illinois)
     Normantown to Walker, Illinois
     East Joliet to Frankfort, Illinois.

CN has stated that it intends to shift its trains to the EJ&E rail line 
from the existing CN routes as the proposed new rail line connections 
are completed and mainline capacity is added to the EJ&E rail line.
    The Applicants propose to upgrade and expand Kirk Yard, and to 
assess the capabilities of the East Joliet Yard and upgrade it to 
accommodate increased yard activity. The Applicants propose to relocate 
rail car sorting and train development activities to both Kirk Yard and 
East Joliet Yard to allow CN to reduce switching activity that now 
occurs at CN's Glenn, Hawthorne, Schiller Park, and Markham yards, and 
at the BRC Clearing Yard. The rail cars of local shippers would 
continue to be handled at all of those locations and intermodal rail 
cars would still be served at Markham Yard.
    Although the Applicants intend eventually to re-route all their 
trains currently operating over the St. Charles Air Line, a rail line 
in downtown Chicago owned jointly by CN, Union Pacific Railroad Company 
(UP), and BNSF Railway Company (BNSF), no abandonments are anticipated 
as a direct result of the proposed acquisition. Any abandonment of the 
St. Charles Air Line would require a separate request for authority to 
the Board under 49 U.S.C. 10903 or 10502, as well as coordination with 
BNSF and UP, and with other existing users such as Amtrak.
    Environmental Review Process: In reviewing the proposed 
acquisition, the Board will consider both the transportation merits of 
the proposed acquisition, and the potential environmental impacts. 
Based on the information provided in the application, concerns raised 
regarding possible impacts of the proposed acquisition on communities, 
and consultations with SEA (the office within the Board responsible for 
preparing the Board's environmental documentation under the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321-4335, and related 
environmental statutes) the Board decided in its decision accepting the 
application to prepare a full EIS. The EIS will include all of the 
environmental information necessary for the Board to take the hard look 
at environmental consequences required by NEPA.
    The NEPA environmental review process is intended to assist the 
Board and the public to identify and assess potential environmental 
consequences of the proposed acquisition before a decision is made 
whether to approve the proposed transaction, deny it, or approve it 
with mitigating conditions, including environmental conditions. On 
December 21, 2007, SEA issued a Notice of Intent (NOI) to individuals 
and agencies potentially interested in or affected by the proposed 
acquisition informing them of the Board's decision to prepare an EIS 
and to initiate the formal scoping process.
    SEA also developed and made available a Draft Scope of Study and 
requested comments. Public meetings were held and comments were 
received between December 21, 2007 and February 15, 2008. After 
carefully reviewing the public comments, SEA is issuing this Final 
Scope of Study for the Draft EIS.

[[Page 22996]]

    SEA is currently preparing a Draft EIS for the proposed 
acquisition. The Draft EIS will address those environmental issues and 
concerns identified during the scoping process and detailed in this 
Final Scope of Study. It will also include an appropriate discussion of 
alternatives and potential environmental mitigation.
    Upon its completion, the Draft EIS will be made available for 
public and agency review and comment. A Final EIS will then be issued 
reflecting the SEA's further analysis, the comments on the Draft EIS, 
and SEA's recommendations (if any) for environmental mitigation. In 
reaching its decision on this case, the Board will take into account 
the full environmental record, including the Draft and Final EIS, and 
all public and agency comments received.

Discussion

    Many issues that emerged through the scoping process are linked to 
concerns about potential impacts from increased freight rail traffic as 
a result of this proposed transaction. The issues raised by commenters 
are briefly outlined below, followed by a discussion of how the issue 
will be addressed in the Draft EIS. This preamble to the actual Final 
Scope of Study, included in Appendix A, provides SEA's rationale.

Proposed Acquisition and Definition of Alternatives

    Reasonable and feasible alternatives for the proposed acquisition 
that will be evaluated in the EIS include approval of the transaction 
as proposed, disapproval of the proposed transaction in whole (No-
Action alternative), or approval of the proposed transaction with 
conditions, including environmental mitigation conditions.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Board has broad authority to impose conditions in 
railroad control transactions under 49 U.S.C. 11324(c). However, the 
Board's power to impose conditions is not limitless: There must be a 
sufficient nexus between the condition imposed and the transaction 
before the agency, mitigation is not imposed to correct pre-existing 
conditions, and the condition imposed must be reasonable. See United 
States v. Chesapeake & O. Ry., 426 U.S. 500, 514-15 (1976); 
Consolidated Rail Corp. v. ICC, 29 F.3d 706, 714 (D.C. Cir. 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Many commenters recommended that the EIS include consideration of 
the Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency Program 
(CREATE Program) as an alternative to the proposed acquisition, or that 
it at least consider the effects on CREATE, and the use of non-EJ&E 
rail corridors and connections for CN to move its trains through the 
Chicago area.

CREATE and Other Non-EJ&E Rail Corridors as Alternatives

    NEPA and the Board's environmental rules require the EIS to include 
reasonable and feasible alternatives to the proposed acquisition (49 
CFR 1105.7(e)(1)). The EIS will evaluate proposed alternatives to 
determine which would meet ``the purpose and need'' of the proposed 
transaction, and warrant actual study or analysis, for the reasons that 
will be explained in the EIS. The purposes of the proposed transaction 
are described in a section of the CN application entitled ``Purpose of 
the Transaction'' (p. 22). These purposes are (1) connecting the five 
CN rail lines in the Chicago area to create operational improvements 
throughout the CN system, (2) obtaining access to the East Joliet and 
Kirk Yards, and (3) facilitating expanded business opportunities with 
EJ&E's shippers. Any reasonable and feasible alternative must meet the 
stated purpose and need for the proposed acquisition.
    Neither CREATE nor any other non-EJ&E rail corridors will be 
treated as alternatives for the proposed action because they plainly 
would not meet the three-fold purpose and need articulated in the 
application. Nevertheless, the transportation systems section of the 
EIS will address these issues as appropriate.

Alternative Connections

    Commenters also suggested that the EIS should examine alternative 
locations or configurations for the proposed new connections to reduce 
potential impacts related to this proposed transaction because there 
may be a variety of reasonable ways in which Applicants could 
accomplish construction of the proposed connections. The EIS will 
contain an appropriate examination of alternative configurations for 
the proposed connections to determine whether there is a way to meet 
the purpose and need of the proposed acquisition with less potential 
environmental impact.

Environmental Impact Categories

Safety

    Commenters raised concerns about rail safety and security, the 
Applicants' emergency management capability and planning, and the 
proximity of sensitive populations and land uses to the EJ&E rail line. 
The largest number of commenters on safety issues expressed concern 
about the potential impacts to local communities from accidents. As 
indicated in the Draft Scope of Study, the EIS will evaluate the 
effects of the proposed acquisition on the safety of the public at 
large (including such issues as increased probability of train 
accidents and derailments due to increased proposed acquisition-related 
train traffic on a system-wide basis), potential effects at grade 
crossings, and potential effects of increased proposed transaction-
related freight traffic on commuter and intercity passenger service 
operations. The EIS also will include an appropriate discussion of 
Applicants' Safety Integration Plan.

Hazardous Materials Transportation

    A number of commenters requested that the EIS address potential 
environmental impacts of the proposed acquisition on public health and 
safety with respect to the transportation of hazardous materials, 
including a discussion of possible accidental release, spill management 
capability, and the presence of contaminated sites. Many commenters 
suggested that this analysis should include CN's safety record in 
Canada, as well as the United States. Other commenters suggested that 
the EIS should assess accidents involving hazardous materials and 
alternative routes for hazardous material shipments.
    The EIS will assess CN's safety record in the United States. The 
rail safety statistics in Canada are collected and analyzed in a 
different manner than that used in the United States. The EIS will 
provide information on CN's U.S. safety record and that of the other 
U.S. Class I railroads, as compiled by the Association of American 
Railroads (AAR), to provide a valid basis for comparison. The EIS will 
use Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) standards as the basis for 
compliance for all hazardous material accidents and spills. The EIS 
also will address quantities and types of hazardous materials 
transported, response plans for potential spills or accidents, and 
locations of contaminated sites in the vicinity of planned construction 
activities.

Transportation Systems

    There are approximately 140 highway/rail at-grade crossings on the 
EJ&E line that may experience longer traffic delays due to increased 
freight rail traffic resulting from the proposed acquisition. Although 
existing CN crossings on lines into downtown Chicago would experience 
less train traffic and fewer delays as a result of the proposed 
acquisition, a number of commenters expressed concern about the 
potential impact of increased freight rail traffic on local 
transportation systems, including congestion and delays at highway/rail 
at-grade crossings, and potential impacts to

[[Page 22997]]

community emergency response capability.
    Consistent with the Draft Scope of Study, the EIS will evaluate the 
impact of the proposed transaction on local transportation systems and 
intercity Amtrak services, vehicular delays due to increases in rail-
related operation, and increased train traffic on movable railroad 
bridges as a result of the proposed transaction. Since no changes in 
intermodal activity or truck traffic have been identified, analysis of 
truck traffic as identified in the Draft Scope of Study does not appear 
warranted. Other issues of concern to be included in the transportation 
systems impact evaluation are described below.
    Planning Horizon: CN has used 2012, three years from the date of 
the Board's anticipated issuance of a final decision, as the year it 
expects to achieve the rail traffic projected in the application. Many 
commenters objected that this three-year forecasting period is too 
short. Commenters are concerned that using 2012 as the planning horizon 
would underestimate the potential effects of the proposed acquisition, 
and could result in less mitigation than the mitigation the Board would 
impose if the planning horizon were lengthened.
    Planning horizon threshold suggestions for both freight rail and 
highway traffic ranged from 2020 to as long as 2030 or 2035. The 
commenters believe that potential increases in freight rail traffic can 
be projected that far into the future, even though the forecasts are 
not as reliable as shorter projections. The commenters also allege that 
CN would not have decided to proceed with this proposed acquisition 
transaction based only on a short range forecast of potential freight 
rail traffic. On the other hand, CN contends that forecasts longer than 
three to five years are necessarily speculative due to uncertainties in 
the global economy and the effects of competition. CN also states that 
the proposed transaction would not lead to additional freight rail 
traffic beyond the projections in the application.
    After carefully considering the comments, SEA has determined that 
the time horizons suggested by the commenters are too long to produce 
reliable information. Those time horizons also exceed by far the time 
horizons that have been used in prior Board proceedings. At the same 
time, the three-year time horizon proposed in the Draft Scope of Study 
is too short for the proposed transaction. Thus, the EIS will use a 
five-year threshold from the date of the anticipated year of the 
issuance of a final decision (2015) for analysis of effects of 
increased rail traffic, such as vehicle delay. This year was selected 
because five years is not too long to produce reasonable and reliable 
freight rail forecasts. SEA has requested the necessary information 
from CN to permit the use of a five-year forecast in the EIS.
    Highway traffic will also be forecasted to 2020 for vehicle delay 
analysis. The year 2020 is reasonable based on available highway 
traffic data and will provide useful information for community planning 
purposes. Any year further in the future would diverge too much from 
the five-year freight rail forecast timeframe that will be used.
    ADT Threshold: The Draft Scope of Study stated that the EIS would 
assess impacts to safety and vehicle delays at highway/rail at-grade 
crossings where the average daily highway traffic (ADT) exceeds 2,500 
vehicles per day, but did not state which year should be used to 
measure the ADT. Some commenters suggested that the threshold for 
analysis should be lowered to 2,000 vehicles per day, to better help 
interested persons obtain information on all of the possible locations 
where drivers could be delayed or safety could be affected as a result 
of this proposed transaction.
    In the EIS, vehicle delay will be estimated for all public highway/
rail at-grade crossings and more detailed analysis will be done for 
crossings with an ADT of 2,500 vehicles per day. To clarify, SEA will 
apply the 2,500 vehicle per day threshold to traffic levels for the 
years 2015 and 2020. SEA also will conduct a more detailed analysis 
where the ADT at the crossing is less than 2,500 vehicles per day where 
appropriate as a result of specific circumstances. The ADT threshold of 
2,500 vehicles per day will provide a sufficient level of analysis to 
determine the location of significant effects of the proposed 
acquisition on safety or vehicle traffic delays.
    Gary Chicago International Airport (GCIA): Many commenters took the 
position that the EIS should analyze the effects of the proposed 
transaction on the Gary Chicago International Airport (GCIA). The GCIA 
has been engaged in an improvement program to increase the capacity of 
its existing principal east/west runway and to remedy a safety 
deficiency associated with this runway. Supporters of the airport 
expansion expect it to provide economic stimulus to the economy of 
Northwest Indiana. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) signed a 
Record of Decision (ROD) approving the extension in 2005.
    According to the comments, GCIA plans to extend the primary runway 
(designated as Runway 12/30) 1,900 feet to the northwest to solve 
capacity and safety problems. Based on the available information, GCIA 
evidently has obtained commitments for funding to carry out airport 
improvements. Currently the northwest end of the runway is only 270 
feet from the EJ&E tracks, which are on top of an embankment that 
places the tracks 22 feet above the end of the runway. Safety concerns 
have been raised because of the proximity of the EJ&E roadbed to the 
end of the runway, and the roadbed's elevation above the runway.
    To extend the runway and reduce the potential safety issues, GCIA 
has proposed to relocate and lower to ground level the EJ&E tracks. 
According to the FAA ROD, the proposed relocation of the EJ&E would 
increase the rail route by 5,263 feet and add two highway/rail at-grade 
crossings at Chicago Avenue and Industrial Drive. These two crossings 
would be eliminated at a later date by closing Chicago Avenue and 
raising the grade of Industrial Highway over the EJ&E tracks.
    Negotiations have been ongoing for many years between GCIA and 
EJ&E. CN has been sitting in on negotiations since the proposed 
acquisition was announced. To date, the parties have not reached an 
agreement on whether to relocate the EJ&E line or how the rail line 
relocation should be designed. During the parties' negotiations, 
concerns have been raised about increased fuel consumption and 
interference of the highway/rail at-grade crossings with train 
operations if the rail line is relocated. GCIA has contended that 
projected additional trains associated with the proposed transaction 
could make it more difficult to negotiate a solution to the runway 
problem. In response, CN asserts that the proposed transaction would 
have no effect on the relocation negotiations or GCIA because CN 
believes that the number of trains using the EJ&E rail line does not 
affect the issues that need to be addressed related to the relocation. 
CN has labeled the potential impacts of the proposed line relocation 
``a pre-existing condition,'' rather than one that would be a direct 
result of the proposed acquisition transaction.
    The Draft Scope of Study did not mention any analysis of potential 
effects on existing or proposed airports. Based on the comments, SEA 
will include in the EIS an appropriate analysis of the impacts of 
increased train traffic on the existing line near GCIA, as well as the 
proposed runway expansion and rail line relocation at GCIA.
    The Commuter Rail Division of the Regional Transportation Authority 
(Metra) and the Suburban Transit Access Route (STAR Line): Many

[[Page 22998]]

individuals and government agencies commented that the EIS should 
address the effects of the proposed transaction on future commuter rail 
service planned for a portion of the EJ&E ROW in Illinois. The Commuter 
Rail Division of the Regional Transportation Authority (a/k/a Metra) 
proposes to institute passenger service on certain segments of the EJ&E 
ROW and tracks. The service, to be known as the Suburban Transit Access 
Route, or the STAR Line, is part of the 2030 Regional Transportation 
Plan for Northeastern Illinois. The STAR Line plan calls for service 
over approximately 35 miles of EJ&E ROW from a point east of Interstate 
55 in Joliet, to Interstate 90 in Hoffman Estates, from which the 
service would then travel eastward on new track within the I-90 ROW 
corridor to O'Hare Airport. Metra's STAR Line would include seven new 
passenger rail stations along the existing EJ&E rail line in Cook, 
DuPage, and Will counties.
    Congress authorized funding for preliminary engineering of the STAR 
Line in Section 3043(c)(120) of SAFETEA-LU. Many of the municipalities 
along the STAR Line route have already obligated or spent funds to 
provide new passenger rail stations and are incorporating the STAR Line 
into their land use planning. Metra is also studying potential 
extensions to the STAR Line east of Joliet and north of Hoffman Estates 
on the EJ&E ROW, but that planning is preliminary and is not expected 
to be completed in the foreseeable future.
    The Draft Scope of Study states that the transportation systems 
analysis in the EIS will address the potential effects on reasonably 
foreseeable future commuter rail operations. SEA now clarifies that the 
EIS will encompass an appropriate discussion of the STAR Line from 
Joliet to Hoffman Estates, as part of the analysis.
    Metra and the EJ&E Interlockings: Many commenters urged that the 
EIS should include an analysis of the effects of the proposed 
acquisition on commuter rail operations where the Metra trains 
intersect with the EJ&E. Metra currently operates approximately 700 
trains each day throughout the Chicago region. The Metra trains pass 
over ``interlockings'' (rail to rail at-grade crossings) where freight 
traffic on the EJ&E corridor is projected to increase as a result of 
the proposed transaction. The interlockings are controlled by EJ&E. 
Metra and many other commenters are concerned that the projected 
freight increases resulting from this proposed transaction could impair 
Metra's on-time performance by causing commuter trains to wait for 
passing or stopped freight trains. Metra further states that it is 
planning to extend its service on the UP West Line that passes over the 
EJ&E interlocking at West Chicago, and on the UP Northwest Line that 
passes over the EJ&E interlocking at Barrington. Metra is also planning 
to institute new Southeast Service over the UP ROW, which would pass 
over the EJ&E interlocking at Chicago Heights. The success of these 
projects allegedly would be adversely affected due to the projected 
freight rail increases described in the application.
    The Metra extensions described above are part of the 2030 Regional 
Transportation Plan for Northeastern Illinois. Section 3043(a)(13) of 
SAFETEA-LU authorized over $26 million for final design and 
construction of Metra's UP West Extension. Section 3043(c)(119) of 
SAFETEA-LU authorized funding of preliminary engineering for Metra's 
Southeast Service.
    As the Draft Scope of Study stated, the EIS will evaluate the 
effects of the proposed transaction on existing and reasonably 
foreseeable commuter rail operations. As part of that analysis, the EIS 
will contain an appropriate examination of the transportation system 
impacts of the proposed acquisition on existing Metra service, Metra's 
UP West Extension, the UP Northwest Extension, and the Southeast 
Service.
    The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK): Many 
commenters noted that the EIS should consider the effects of the 
proposed transaction on AMTRAK service between downstate Illinois and 
Chicago. AMTRAK explained that it operates six trains each day over the 
CN Chicago Subdivision Line south from a point near 23rd Street on 
Chicago's Lakefront Line. These six trains connect from the Lakefront 
Line to Chicago's Union Station over the St. Charles Air Line, a rail 
line owned jointly by CN, UP, and BNSF. Under the proposed transaction, 
CN would no longer operate any freight trains over the St. Charles Air 
Line or along the Lakefront Line. AMTRAK is concerned that it could 
remain the only user of the St. Charles Air Line and CN's Lakefront 
Line and, as such, could be required to pay all maintenance expenses 
for the St. Charles Air Line. The Illinois Department of Transportation 
(IDOT) shares AMTRAK's concern, noting that it helps to finance 
AMTRAK's six daily trains. AMTRAK and IDOT say they would not be able 
to pay all of the maintenance expenses alone, which could jeopardize 
AMTRAK's current service. AMTRAK further indicates that, at present, it 
does not have an acceptable alternative access route into Chicago's 
Union Station.
    The commenters also asked that the EIS assess the impacts that 
could occur from loss of AMTRAK service to Illinois communities that 
rely on AMTRAK service to and from Chicago and the effects on the 
highway system and related energy consumption that would result from 
loss of this service.
    CN minimizes the potential impacts of this proposed transaction on 
AMTRAK, noting that AMTRAK has an existing agreement to use the St. 
Charles Air Line and the Lakefront Line tracks through 2010 and that 
AMTRAK can continue to use these lines indefinitely on the same terms 
with the same adjustments for inflation, as stated in the existing 
agreement. CN adds that there is no proposal pending before the Board 
to abandon the St. Charles Air Line or any of CN's tracks along the 
Chicago Lakefront Line.
    The Draft Scope of Study stated that the EIS would describe the 
effects of the proposed acquisition on existing AMTRAK service. SEA now 
clarifies that the EIS will examine the transportation system impacts 
on existing AMTRAK service on the St. Charles Air Line and the other CN 
lines used by AMTRAK in the Chicago area. Because there is no proposal 
in front of the Board for authority to abandon the St. Charles Air 
Line, the possible future discontinuance of AMTRAK service over the St. 
Charles Air Line will not be analyzed in detail in the EIS. Any attempt 
to do so at this point would be speculative.
    Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD): Many 
commenters urged that the EIS consider the effects of the proposed 
transaction on existing and proposed commuter rail service for 
Northwestern Indiana. The commenters explain that NICTD operates the 
South Shore commuter rail service between South Bend, Indiana and 
Chicago. The South Shore connects with the CN Illinois Central (Chicago 
Subdivision) tracks at 115th and Kensington in Chicago. Freight service 
on this CN line is expected to decrease as a result of the proposed 
transaction. NICTD is presently completing a switching improvement 
project where its tracks connect with CN at 115th and Kensington. NICTD 
evidently is considering two new West Lake Corridor commuter rail 
services between Chicago and communities in northwest Indiana. Both 
proposed services apparently would use existing Metra and NICTD 
trackage to Hammond, where the services would then use ROW controlled 
by NICTD south to Maynard, near Munster.

[[Page 22999]]

Service between Chicago and Valparaiso, Indiana would use the CN South 
Bend Subdivision between Munster and Valparaiso, Indiana; this service 
would cross the EJ&E at Griffith. Service between Chicago and Lowell, 
Indiana would use CSXT trackage between Munster and Lowell, Indiana. 
This service would cross the CN South Bend Subdivision at Maynard and 
the EJ&E at Dyer.
    The available information indicates that NICTD has prepared two 
planning documents related to these proposed services, which identify 
the purpose and need for the proposed services and describe rail and 
bus alternatives. However, a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) has 
not been determined for these services. No funding sources have been 
secured to date for continued planning and implementation for the 
proposed services. NICTD also does not have an agreement with CN to use 
its South Bend Subdivision ROW for the proposed passenger service. 
NICTD and others have commented that the outstanding issues related to 
use of the CN South Bend Subdivision ROW should be resolved in the 
instant acquisition proceeding and that the EIS should assess the 
impacts related to loss of the opportunity to institute new commuter 
service on the CN South Bend Subdivision ROW.
    An appropriate discussion of the NICTD operations will be included 
in the EIS.

Land Use

    Some commenters expressed concerns regarding potential impacts to 
parks and other community facilities and amenities, as well as impacts 
to neighborhoods including visual impacts. Consistent with the Draft 
Scope of Study, the EIS will evaluate consistency of the proposed 
transaction with existing land use plans and zoning requirements, and 
potential impacts to prime farmland. Because trains already operate on 
the EJ&E rail line, and additional trains resulting from the proposed 
transaction are not expected to change the physical character of the 
line or adjoining lands, SEA does not believe that a detailed visual 
impact analysis is warranted.

Socioeconomics

    A number of commenters expressed concern over the potential impacts 
that the proposed acquisition would have on community quality of life, 
on local property values and the local economy, and how the proposed 
transaction would affect community growth and social cohesion. 
Consistent with the Draft Scope of Study, the EIS will evaluate 
socioeconomic issues related to changes in the physical environment as 
a result of the proposed transaction.

Energy

    Some commenters expressed concern about fuel consumption related to 
congestion and potential effects of the proposed transaction on climate 
change. As indicated in the Draft Scope of Study, the EIS will evaluate 
the potential environmental impact of the proposed transaction on the 
transportation of energy resources and recyclable commodities to the 
extent that such information is available, and evaluate potential 
changes in fuel use arising from the proposed transaction. The EIS will 
also include an appropriate discussion of fuel use changes related to 
this proposed transaction and climate change.

Air Quality

    Commenters expressed concern regarding the potential impacts of the 
proposed transaction to public health and regional air quality 
resulting from proposed transaction-related changes in train emissions. 
The commenters noted that longer and more frequent trains and 
additional rail activity in the rail yards are expected to increase air 
emissions in the EJ&E corridor. In addition, commenters were concerned 
about an increase of emissions at highway/rail at-grade crossings from 
vehicles subject to delays as a result of the proposed acquisition. The 
Chicago Metropolitan Area has been designated as a nonattainment area 
under the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, the EIS will evaluate air 
emissions increases where the post-proposed acquisition activity would 
exceed the Board's thresholds for environmental review in nonattainment 
areas in 49 CFR 1105.7(e)(5)(i) (generally, an increase of three trains 
per day on any segment of rail line affected by the proposal).
    The EIS will also evaluate the net increase in emissions from 
increased railroad operations, as well as potential air emissions 
increases from vehicle delays at rail crossings associated with the 
proposed transaction. Emissions changes arising from the proposed 
transaction will be estimated, including expected increases or 
decreases in diesel particulate emissions and related air toxics.

Noise and Vibration

    Many commenters expressed concern about potential increases in horn 
and other noise, as well as train-induced vibration throughout the EJ&E 
corridor as a result of the proposed acquisition. As the commenters 
note, the proposed transaction would place more and longer trains on 
EJ&E tracks and increase activity at key points such as Kirk Yard in 
Gary, Indiana. Accordingly, consistent with the Draft Scope of Study, 
the EIS will evaluate potential proposed transaction-related increases 
in noise and associated impacts and will assess potential vibration 
effects based on Federal Transit Administration (FTA) vibration 
methodology in areas where it appears there may be vibration sensitive 
receptors within or adjacent to the EJ&E rail line ROW.

Biological Resources

    Commenters expressed concern regarding potential impacts of the 
proposed transaction on wildlife, as well as nature preserves and 
designated natural areas. The Draft Scope of Study stated that the EIS 
would assess the effects of acquisition-related construction (double 
tracking, proposed new connections) on threatened and endangered 
species, wildlife sanctuaries or refuges, and national or state parks 
or forests. Many commenters suggested that the EIS should also assess 
the effects of increased rail operations, maintenance (herbicide 
spraying), and the risk of accidents on wildlife areas along the EJ&E 
ROW.
    Based on the comments, the EIS will assess the operational impacts 
of additional freight rail traffic on areas where federal or state 
threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitats are 
located. The EIS will examine the effects of the proposed acquisition 
in areas along the EJ&E rail line ROW that have been designated as 
natural areas by federal, state, and local natural resource agencies. 
The EIS will also assess the potential effects on designated natural 
areas from construction of the alternative configurations for the 
proposed new connections and double tracking.

Water Resources

    Some commenters expressed concern about the potential effects of 
the proposed transaction on surface and groundwater quality, as well as 
flood plains and local drainage systems. As indicated in the Draft 
Scope of Study, the EIS will evaluate consistency with applicable 
federal or state water quality standards; determine if permits may be 
required under Sections 404 or 402 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 
1344) for any proposed construction; and assess whether any planned 
construction has the potential to encroach upon any designated wetlands 
or 100-year floodplains.

[[Page 23000]]

Environmental Justice

    Some commenters expressed concern about potential disproportionate 
adverse effects of the proposed acquisition on minority or low income 
populations. Consistent with the Draft Scope of Study, the localized 
adverse impacts of the proposed transaction (for example, noise, air 
quality, residential or business relocations, and community impacts) 
will be analyzed in relation to the presence of minority and low income 
populations. The EIS will assess demographics in the immediate vicinity 
of areas where major planned activities (such as construction of 
improved rail connections, siding extensions, and installation of 
double track) would take place, and where increases in train traffic 
would be above the Board's threshold for environmental review. The EIS 
will evaluate whether such activities potentially could have a 
disproportionately high and adverse effect on minority or low income 
groups.

Cultural and Historic Resources

    The Draft Scope of Study stated that the EIS would address 
potential effects from construction of the proposed connections and 
double tracking on cultural and historic resources that are in or 
immediately adjacent to the railroad ROW. Commenters suggested that the 
EIS should assess impacts on cultural resources that are near but not 
necessarily adjacent to the EJ&E ROW or near the area where new 
connections are proposed. These cultural resources range from historic 
and prehistoric sites to historic districts.
    The Final Scope of Study clarifies that the EIS will establish an 
area of potential effect (APE) in coordination with the State Historic 
Preservation offices (SHPO) in Illinois and Indiana. SEA will assess 
potential effects within the APE. The APE will most likely be inside 
the EJ&E ROW and the immediate area where construction activities 
(double tracking, new connections) may cause ground disturbance. In 
addition, the EIS will evaluate Native American sites to the extent 
they are suggested for evaluation by a SHPO or a Native American tribe.

Indirect and Cumulative Effects

    Commenters expressed concern about the potential indirect and 
cumulative effects that could be caused by the proposed acquisition, 
including effects of other reasonably foreseeable activities on 
communities and natural resources. Consistent with the Draft Scope of 
Study, the EIS will address indirect and cumulative effects that may 
occur later in time, or at other locations, or which, in combination 
with other actions, could affect the same resources. This analysis will 
be done for reasonably foreseeable related actions that warrant such 
analysis, given the context and scope of the proposed acquisition.
    In addition, some commenters suggested that the EIS should examine 
the effects of increased freight rail traffic on CN lines in Wisconsin. 
They suggested that the proposed acquisition of the EJ&E by CN would 
result in increased traffic on the CN lines in Wisconsin going to and 
from the Chicago area. This, the commenters state, would result in 
increased impacts to safety and air quality in Wisconsin.
    In preparing the EIS, SEA will determine the geographic boundaries 
for the analysis of indirect and cumulative effects by examining an 
area within reasonable proximity to the area or areas where direct 
effects to environmental resources are observed. SEA will also take 
into account the nature of each affected resource that is analyzed. The 
Applicants have not identified proposed transaction-related train 
traffic changes on any of the CN rail line segments outside of the 
EJ&E's arc. Although SEA's own review analysis has not been completed 
yet, the available information does not suggest that an analysis of 
indirect and cumulative effects outside of the Chicago metropolitan 
area will be warranted.
    As indicated in the Draft Scope of Study, the EIS will evaluate 
indirect and cumulative effects, as appropriate, for other projects or 
activities that relate to the proposed transaction where SEA determines 
that there is the likelihood of significant environmental impacts and 
where information is provided to the Board that describes (1) those 
other projects or activities, (2) their interrelationship with the 
proposed acquisition, and (3) the type and severity of the potential 
environmental impacts. This information must be provided to the Board 
within sufficient time to allow for review and analysis in the EIS.
    Some commenters suggested that the EIS should examine the effects 
of the proposed acquisition of the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad 
Corporation (DM&E) and the Iowa, Chicago & Eastern Railroad Corporation 
(IC&E) by Canadian Pacific Railway Corporation (CP).\3\ Prior to CP's 
application to acquire DM&E and IC&E, the Board approved an extension 
of the DM&E into the Powder River Basin in Northeastern Wyoming to 
permit rail access to coal resources.\4\ The commenters believe that 
the likely route for any new coal shipments that could result from the 
CP's proposed acquisition of the DM&E would be over the CN rail lines 
in Wisconsin, including the EJ&E rail lines, if CN's proposed 
acquisition of EJ&E is authorized and implemented. They contend that 
this would result in more and longer freight trains than the numbers 
projected in the application, which, the commenters claim, would result 
in more severe impacts on their communities than would otherwise be the 
case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This acquisition is pending before the Board in STB Finance 
Docket No. 35081, CP Railway Company et al.--Control--Dakota 
Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corp., et. al.
    \4\ See Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corp., Construction 
into the Powder River Basin, STB Finance Docket No. 33407 (STB 
served Feb. 15, 2006), affirmed Mayo Foundation v. STB, 472 F.3d 545 
(8th Cir. 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As previously noted, the EIS will include an appropriate evaluation 
of indirect and cumulative effects of reasonably foreseeable projects 
that relate to the proposed acquisition. The commenters' suggestion 
that the impacts of the proposed acquisition of the DM&E and IC&E by CP 
need to be considered as part of the cumulative impact analyses, 
however, is premature. In a decision in Finance Docket No. 35081, 
issued on April 4, 2008, the Board determined that it would be 
appropriate to defer preparation of an EIS addressing the possible 
future movement of DM&E PRB coal traffic over the IC&E and/or CP lines 
because sufficient information is not available to conduct a meaningful 
review now. In that decision, the Board made clear that should it 
ultimately authorize the transaction proposed in Finance Docket No. 
35081, it would impose conditions on the authorization precluding such 
movements pending completion of an EIS and the issuance of a final 
Board decision addressing the impact of such coal operations and 
allowing such operations to begin, if appropriate. In short, no 
movements of the sort commenters are concerned about are reasonably 
foreseeable at this time.

Mitigation

    Many commenters suggested that the Board should require CN to 
install highway/rail grade separations or change rail operations 
wherever vehicle delays or safety risk would exceed the existing 
conditions. Other commenters stated that the Board should base its 
mitigation conditions on the accomplishment of regional goals and not 
on local problem sites. Some commenters believed that the Board should 
retain jurisdiction over the

[[Page 23001]]

proposed transaction for an extensive period after the proposed 
transaction is implemented (assuming the Board authorizes it), to 
review additional increases in freight rail and vehicle traffic to 
determine appropriate mitigation. Other commenters suggested that the 
Board should not approve the proposed transaction unless CN agrees to 
make accommodations for improvements, such as the runway extension at 
GCIA and the NICTD West Lake Corridor service on the South Bend 
Subdivision ROW.
    It would be inappropriate to present any specific mitigation in the 
Final Scope of Study for the Draft EIS. Mitigation depends on the 
results of the environmental analysis, and the environmental analysis 
related to the proposed transaction is not yet completed. The Draft EIS 
will contain recommendations for environmental mitigation based on the 
results of the analysis of potential effects. After the Draft EIS is 
issued, commenters will have the opportunity to comment on the 
mitigation recommendations in the Draft EIS. The comments will be 
reflected in the Final EIS. The Board then will consider SEA's final 
recommended mitigation in deciding whether to grant or deny the 
proposed acquisition or grant it with environmental conditions. 
Finally, it is worth noting here that the Board only has authority to 
require mitigation for effects arising from the proposed acquisition, 
not pre-existing conditions. At the same time, however, voluntary 
mitigation (i.e., mitigation proposed by the railroad often after 
consultations with potentially affected communities and others) can 
sometimes achieve more far reaching results than the Board could 
unilaterally impose. Voluntary mitigation and mutually acceptable 
negotiated agreements can result in cost sharing to allow completion of 
very costly measures, such as grade-separated crossings, which 
primarily benefit the community rather than the railroad, and thus are 
typically funded primarily by entities other than the railroad.
    The Final Scope of Study for the Draft EIS of the proposed 
transaction is attached as Appendix A.

    By the Board, Victoria J. Rutson, Chief, Section of 
Environmental Analysis.
Anne K. Quinlan,
Acting Secretary.

Appendix A: Final Scope of Study for the EIS

Proposed Action and Definition of Alternatives

    Applicants' proposed acquisition of the EJ&E railroad would result 
in shifting of rail traffic from rail lines in Chicago to rail lines on 
the EJ&E line, which forms an arc around Chicago. Rail traffic on CN 
lines inside the EJ&E arc would generally decrease. These decreases in 
rail traffic would be offset by substantial increases in the number of 
trains operated on the EJ&E line outside Chicago. The increase in train 
traffic on the EJ&E line would vary from approximately 15 to 24 
additional trains per day. Applicants state that the proposed 
transaction would not impair CN's ability to handle commuter trains, 
passenger trains, or trackage/haulage trains currently operating on the 
EJ&E line. Finally, on the integrated CN/EJ&E system, four train pairs 
would be added to EJ&E terminals: three inbound and three outbound 
switch trains at Kirk Yard, and one inbound and one outbound switch 
train at East Joliet Yard. Applicants' projections for the changes in 
rail operations as a result of the proposed acquisition are set forth 
in the application, available on the Board's Web site. The proposed 
transaction also includes construction of six rail connections, siding 
extensions, and installation of double track. The EIS will discuss the 
purpose and need for the proposed transaction.
    Reasonable and feasible alternatives for the proposed acquisition 
that will be evaluated in the EIS are (1) approval of the proposed 
transaction, (2) disapproval of the proposed transaction in whole (No-
Action alternative), or (3) approval of the proposed transaction with 
conditions, including environmental mitigation conditions.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Board has broad authority to impose conditions in 
railroad acquisition transactions under 49 U.S.C. 11324 (c). 
However, the Board's power to impose conditions is not limitless: 
there must be a sufficient nexus between the condition imposed and 
the transaction before the agency, mitigation is not imposed to 
remedy pre-existing conditions, and the condition imposed must be 
reasonable. See United States v. Chesapeake & O. Ry., 426 U.S. 500, 
514-15 (1976); Consolidated Rail Corp. v. ICC, 29 F.3d 706, 714 
(D.C. Cir. 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the EIS will consider as appropriate, reasonable and 
feasible alignment alternatives for the six proposed connections.

Environmental Impact Analysis

    Analysis in the EIS will address proposed activities and their 
potential environmental impacts, as appropriate. Existing rail 
operations are the baseline from which the potential environmental 
impacts of the proposed transaction will be evaluated. SEA will 
evaluate only the potential environmental impacts of operational and 
physical changes that are directly related to the proposed transaction. 
SEA will not consider environmental impacts solely arising from 
existing rail operations and existing railroad facilities.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 6 In proceedings similar to this proposed acquisition, the 
Board's practice consistently has been to mitigate only those 
environmental impacts that result directly from the proposed 
transaction. The Board, like its predecessor, the Interstate 
Commerce Commission, has not imposed mitigation to remedy pre-
existing conditions such as those that might make the quality of 
life in a particular community better, but are not a direct result 
of the proposed acquisition (i.e., congestion associated with the 
existing rail line traffic, or the traffic of other railroads).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The scope of the analysis will include the following types of 
activities:
    1. Anticipated changes in level of operations on rail lines (for 
instance, an increase in average length of trains, or a proposed change 
in average train speed) for those rail line segments that meet or 
exceed the Board's thresholds for environmental review in 49 CFR 
1105.7.
    2. Proposed changes in activity at rail yards to the extent such 
changes may exceed the Board's thresholds for environmental analysis in 
49 CFR 1105.7
    3. Proposed physical construction of improved rail connections, 
siding extensions, and installation of double track.

Environmental Impact Categories

    The EIS will address potential impacts on the environment that will 
include the areas of safety, rail operations, transportation systems, 
hazardous waste sites, hazardous materials transportation, land use, 
energy, air quality, noise, natural resources, water resources, 
socioeconomic effects related to physical changes in the environment, 
environmental justice, cultural or historic resources, and indirect and 
cumulative effects, as described below.

1. Safety

    The EIS will:
    A. Consider at-grade rail crossing accident probability and safety 
factors related to increased freight traffic as a result of the 
proposed transaction. This will generally include all public highway/
rail at-grade crossings.

[[Page 23002]]

Accident probability analysis will address the potential for rail and 
vehicle accidents.
    B. Consider increased probability of train accidents and 
derailments due to increased proposed transaction-related traffic on a 
system-wide basis.
    C. Address potential effects of proposed transaction-related 
increased freight traffic on commuter and intercity passenger service 
operations.
    D. Discuss CN's emergency management or emergency response plans.
    E. Address safety issues associated with the integration of 
differing rail operating systems and procedures, including an 
appropriate discussion of Applicants' Safety Integration Plan.

2. Hazardous Materials Transportation

    The EIS will discuss the potential environmental impacts of the 
proposed transaction on public health and safety with respect to the 
transportation of hazardous materials, including:
    A. Changes in the types of hazardous materials and quantities 
transported or re-routed.
    B. Nature of the hazardous materials that are currently being 
transported or are proposed to be transported.
    C. Applicants' safety practices and protocols.
    D. Applicants' U.S. safety data on derailments, accidents and 
hazardous materials spills.
    E. Contingency plans to address accidental spills.
    F. Probability of increased spills given railroad safety statistics 
and applicable Federal Railroad Administration requirements.

3. Transportation Systems

    The EIS will:
    A. Describe system-wide and localized effects of the proposed 
transaction-related operational changes, construction of proposed 
connections, siding extensions, and installation of double track.
    B. Evaluate those commuter rail line segments or crossings that 
would experience increased freight traffic as a result of the proposed 
transaction.
    C. Discuss proposed transaction-related effects on existing or 
proposed commuter or passenger rail service (Metra, NICTD, AMTRAK) as 
appropriate (i.e., where capital improvements have been approved). 
Evaluate the capability of the EJ&E rail line segments or crossings to 
accommodate the reasonably foreseeable addition of commuter trains.
    D. Discuss proposed transaction-related potential diversions of 
freight traffic from trucks to rail and from rail to trucks, as 
appropriate.
    E. Address vehicular delays at rail crossings and intermodal 
facilities due to increases in rail traffic operations as a result of 
the proposed transaction. Estimates of typical delays will be made for 
highway/rail at-grade crossings, more detailed analysis will be done at 
highway/rail at-grade crossings that have an ADT of 2,500 vehicles per 
day or are within 800 feet of another crossing. Vehicle delay analysis 
will be done for traffic levels in years 2015 and 2020. Detailed 
analysis also will be conducted at highway/rail at-grade crossings that 
have an ADT of less than 2,500 vehicles per day, but have unique 
circumstances that make such evaluations appropriate.
    F. Evaluate potential effects of proposed transaction-related 
highway/rail at-grade crossing blockage due to stopped trains.
    G. Discuss potential effects of proposed transaction-related 
increased train traffic on emergency response facilities in proximity 
to the EJ&E rail line.
    H. Discuss potential effects of proposed transaction-related 
increased train traffic on railroad bridges that cross navigation 
channels to the extent that such bridges allow only one mode of 
transportation to pass at a time (movable-span railroad bridges).
    I. Discuss potential effects of proposed transaction-related 
increased train traffic on the Gary Chicago International Airport and 
its planned expansion.

4. Land Use

    The EIS will:
    A. Describe whether the construction of the proposed rail 
connections, siding extensions, and installation of double track are 
consistent with existing land use plans.
    B. Describe environmental impacts associated with the construction 
of the proposed rail connections, siding extensions, and installation 
of double track on existing land use plans and potential effects on 
prime farmland.
    C. Discuss potential effects of proposed transaction-related 
changes in rail operations on parks, forest preserves, and schools in 
the vicinity of the EJ&E rail line.
    D. Discuss consistency of the construction of the proposed rail 
connections, siding extensions, and installation of double track with 
applicable zoning requirements.

5. Socioeconomics

    The EIS will:
    A. Address socioeconomic issues related to changes in the physical 
environment as a result of the proposed transaction.
    B. Describe demographic characteristics of the transaction area and 
potential effects of the proposed transaction.
    C. Evaluate economic effects of proposed acquisition-related 
construction and improvements to the EJ&E.
    D. Discuss potential effects of proposed transaction-related 
increased train traffic on the potentially affected communities.

6. Hazardous Materials--Contaminated Sites

    The EIS will:
    A. Describe any recorded sites of contamination within or adjacent 
to areas potentially disturbed by proposed transaction-related 
construction activities.
    B. Discuss known areas where spills of hazardous materials have 
occurred in the past and which may be affected by proposed transaction-
related activities.
    C. Discuss emergency response and clean up plans.

7. Energy

    The EIS will:
    A. Describe the potential environmental impact of the proposed 
transaction on transportation of energy resources and recyclable 
commodities.
    B. Evaluate potential changes in fuel use arising from the proposed 
transaction.

8. Air Quality

    The EIS will:
    A. Evaluate air emissions increases where the proposed post-
acquisition activity would exceed the Board's environmental thresholds 
in 49 CFR 1105.7(e)(5)(i), for air quality nonattainment areas as 
designated under the Clean Air Act. The applicable thresholds are as 
follows for the Chicago Metropolitan area, which is a nonattainment 
area: \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Nonattainment areas are areas that do not comply with one or 
more ambient air quality standards. Ozone non-attainment areas are 
further classified as Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe, or 
Extreme Areas. These classifications are based on the level, in 
parts per million (ppm), of ozone measured for each area. Moderate 
areas are defined as .092 to .107 ppm, Serious Areas are defined as 
containing 0.107 ppm to 0.120 ppm, and Severe Areas are defined as 
containing 0.120 to 0.187 ppm. The Chicago area is currently 
classified as moderate non-attainment for ozone and non-attainment 
for PM 2.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. A 50 percent increase in rail traffic (measured in gross-ton 
miles annually) or an increase of three trains a day on any segment of 
rail line affected by the proposal; or

[[Page 23003]]

    2. An increase in rail yard activity of at least 20 percent or more 
in carload activity (rail car switching and block swapping).
    3. Increase in truck traffic greater than 10 percent of average 
daily traffic (ADT) or 50 trucks per day.
    B. Discuss the net change in emissions from changes in railroad 
operations associated with the proposed transaction. Net emissions 
changes will be calculated for counties with projected proposed 
transaction-related changes in train traffic.
    C. Discuss the following information regarding the anticipated 
transportation of ozone depleting materials (such as nitrogen oxide and 
Freon):
    1. Materials and quantity;
    2. Applicants' safety practices;
    3. Applicants' safety record (within the United States) on 
derailments, accidents, and spills;
    4. Contingency plans to address accidental spills; and
    5. Likelihood of an accidental release of ozone depleting materials 
in the event of a collision or derailment.
    D. Discuss potential air emissions increases from vehicle delays at 
highway/rail at-grade crossings where the crossing is projected to 
experience a change in rail traffic arising from the proposed 
transaction over the thresholds described above. Such increases will be 
factored into the net emissions estimates for the affected area.
    E. Estimate potential increases or decreases in diesel particulate 
emissions arising from the proposed transaction.
    F. Discuss potential for changes in greenhouse gas emissions 
arising from the proposed transaction and how such changes may relate 
to climate change.

9. Noise and Vibration

    The EIS will:
    A. Describe potential noise and vibration impacts of the proposed 
transaction for those areas that exceed the Board's environmental 
thresholds identified in the Air Quality section.
    B. Identify whether the proposed transaction-related increases in 
rail traffic will cause an increase to a noise level of 65 dBA 
Ldn and 3 dBA Ldn or greater. If so, an estimate 
of the number of sensitive receptors (e.g., schools and residences) 
within such areas will be made.
    C. Assess potential proposed transaction-related vibration effects 
based on Federal Transit Administration (FTA) vibration methodology in 
areas where it appears there may be vibration sensitive receptors 
within or immediately adjacent to the railroad right of way.
    D. Discuss existing or planned Quiet Zones.

10. Biological Resources

    The EIS will:
    A. Discuss the potential environmental impacts of construction of 
proposed connections, siding extensions, and installation of double 
track on federal or state endangered or threatened species or 
designated critical habitats.
    B. Discuss the effects of construction of proposed rail 
connections, siding extensions, and installation of double track on 
wildlife sanctuaries or refuges, and national or state parks or 
forests.
    C. Discuss potential effects of proposed transaction-related 
increased train traffic on federal or state designated protected 
species or areas of special biological significance.

11. Water Resources

    The EIS will:
    A. Describe existing surface and groundwater resources in the 
vicinity of the EJ & E, particularly in areas of planned construction 
activity.
    B. Discuss whether potential impacts from the construction of 
proposed rail connections, siding extensions, and installation of 
double track may be inconsistent with applicable federal or state water 
quality standards.
    C. Discuss whether permits may be required under Sections 404 or 
402 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) for any construction of 
proposed rail connections, siding extensions, and installation of 
double track, and whether any such projects have the potential to 
encroach upon any designated wetlands or 100-year floodplains.
    D. Discuss hydrogeology in the study area and presence of any 
designated sensitive groundwater areas.

12. Environmental Justice

    The EIS will:
    A. Report on the demographics in the immediate vicinity of any area 
where major activity such as construction of rail connections, siding 
extensions, and/or installation double track is proposed.
    B. Report on the demographics in the vicinity of rail lines with 
projected proposed transaction-related rail traffic increases above the 
Board's thresholds for environmental review.
    C. Evaluate whether such activities potentially have a 
disproportionately high and adverse effect on any minority or low-
income group.

13. Cultural and Historic Resources

    The EIS will address potential impacts from the proposed 
construction of rail connections, siding extensions, and installation 
of double track on cultural and historic resources that are within 
areas potentially disturbed by construction activities.

14. Indirect and Cumulative Effects

    The EIS will:
    A. Address indirect and cumulative effects of environmental impacts 
that have regional or system-wide ramifications. This analysis will be 
done for environmental impacts that warrant such analysis given the 
context and scope of the proposed transaction.
    B. Discuss as part of the indirect and cumulative impact analysis 
the potential environmental impacts of yard modification activities on 
railroad-owned property that would potentially be affected by the 
proposed transaction.
    C. Evaluate indirect and cumulative effects, as appropriate, for 
other projects or activities that relate to the proposed transaction 
where SEA determines that there is the likelihood of significant 
environmental impacts and where information is provided to the Board 
that describes (1) those other projects or activities, (2) their 
interrelationship with the proposed acquisition, and (3) the type and 
severity of the potential environmental impacts. This information must 
be provided to the Board within sufficient time to allow for review and 
analysis in the EIS.

15. Mitigation

    Where SEA determines there is potential for significant adverse 
impacts arising from the proposed transaction, SEA will consider 
reasonable mitigation measures that could reduce or eliminate such 
adverse impacts. SEA may consider a range of mitigation measures based 
on the nature and severity of the potential impact and consistent with 
the Board's jurisdiction and authority.

[FR Doc. E8-9214 Filed 4-25-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P