[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 5 (Thursday, January 8, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 850-853]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-106]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Finance Docket No. 35116]


R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc.--
Construction and Operation Exemption--in Clearfield County, PA

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement; 
Notice of Availability of the Draft Scope of Study for the 
Environmental Impact Statement; Notice of Scoping Meeting; and Request 
for Comments on Draft Scope.

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

SUMMARY: On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania 
Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition with the Surface Transportation 
Board (Board) pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502 for authority to construct 
and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton 
Junction and Winburne in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania (the Western 
Segment) and to rebuild the track on a connecting 9.3-mile line between 
Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties, Pennsylvania 
(the Eastern Segment) that is currently being used for interim trail 
use, subject to the possible restoration of rail service (rail banking) 
pursuant to the Trails Act, 16 U.S.C. 1247(d). In total, the proposed 
project would involve the construction or rebuilding, and operation, of 
approximately 20 miles of the former Beech Creek Railroad to serve a 
new quarry, landfill, and industrial park being developed by Resource 
Recovery, LLC, near Gorton, Pennsylvania.
    Because this project has the potential to result in significant 
environmental impacts, the Board's Section of Environmental Analysis 
(SEA) has determined that the preparation of an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) is appropriate pursuant to the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The 
purpose of this Notice of

[[Page 851]]

Intent is to notify individuals and agencies interested in or affected 
by the proposed project of the decision to prepare an EIS. SEA will 
hold a public scoping meeting as part of the NEPA process associated 
with the development of the EIS. Additionally, as part of the scoping 
process, SEA has developed a draft Scope of Study for the EIS for 
review and comment. The public meeting date and location, along with 
the draft Scope of Study, are provided below:
    Date and Location: The public scoping meeting will be held: 
Tuesday, February 10, 2009, 6-8 p.m., Philipsburg-Osceola Area Senior 
High School, 502 Philips Street, Philipsburg, PA 16866-1899.
    The public scoping meeting will be held in an informal open-house 
format during which interested persons may ask questions about the 
proposed project and the Board's environmental review process, and 
advise SEA staff about potential environmental effects of the project. 
No formal presentations will be made by agency representatives. SEA 
staff will be available to answer questions and receive comments 
individually.
    Interested parties are invited to submit written comments on the 
draft Scope of Study, alternatives to the proposed rail line, and other 
environmental issues and concerns by February 24, 2009, to assure full 
consideration during the scoping process. SEA will issue a final Scope 
of Study after the close of the scoping comment period.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background: Simultaneously with the filing of its petition for 
exemption (which seeks Board authority for both the rail banked Eastern 
Segment as well as the Western Segment of the proposed rail line), RJCP 
also filed a motion to dismiss the part of this proceeding that relates 
to the reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment. RJCP argues 
that reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment does not require 
Board approval under 49 U.S.C. 10901 (or an exemption under 49 U.S.C. 
10502) and that therefore, the Board should not perform an 
environmental review of that segment of the proposed rail line. At this 
time, the Board has not decided whether reactivation of the Eastern 
Segment requires Board authority. Although the Board has not yet 
decided this issue, environmental review of the Eastern Segment is 
necessary to satisfy the NEPA requirements of one of the Board's 
cooperating agencies discussed below, and therefore SEA is now issuing 
this Notice of Intent.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 1501.5 and 1501.6, SEA may request agencies that 
have jurisdiction under other laws, or agencies that have ``special 
expertise with respect to any environmental issue,'' to participate as 
``cooperating agencies'' in the Board's environmental review process. 
Cooperating agencies typically make their own decisions regarding a 
particular project and tend to adopt the environmental analysis 
prepared by another agency (known as the ``lead'' agency) as the basis 
for their decision. Where environmental review takes place with 
cooperating agencies, one environmental document therefore includes 
information necessary to fulfill the requirements of NEPA and related 
environmental laws for both the lead and cooperating agencies.
    Based on preliminary agency consultations and field reconnaissance 
of the project area conducted by SEA and its third-party contractor 
(Skelly and Loy, Inc.), SEA believes that the proposed project could 
impact resources (i.e., wetlands and watercourses) that fall under the 
jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Therefore, 
SEA has invited the Corps, and the Corps has agreed, to participate as 
a cooperating agency in the preparation of the EIS for this project. To 
assure that the Corps has the information it needs to meet all of its 
responsibilities under NEPA and the Clean Water Act, SEA will conduct 
an appropriate environmental review of the entire 20 miles of proposed 
rail line (i.e., both the Eastern and Western Segments), regardless of 
the Board's decision on RJCP's pending motion to dismiss.
    Summary of the Board's Environmental Review Process: The NEPA 
process is intended to assist the Board and the public in identifying 
and assessing the potential environmental consequences of a proposed 
action before a decision on the proposed action is made. SEA is 
responsible for ensuring that the Board complies with NEPA and related 
environmental statutes. The first stage of the EIS process is scoping. 
Scoping is an open process for determining the scope of environmental 
issues to be addressed in the EIS. As part of the scoping process, SEA 
has developed, and has made available for public review and comment in 
this notice, a draft Scope of Study for the EIS. SEA will host a 
scoping meeting to provide further opportunities for public involvement 
and input during the scoping process. Interested parties are also 
encouraged to comment on any potential alternatives for the proposed 
project. SEA is currently considering four alternatives for the 
proposed project (construction and operation of the 20 miles of rail 
line along the former Beech Creek line, two non-rail transportation 
options for the no-build alternative, and the no-action alternative). 
At the conclusion of the scoping and comment period, SEA will issue a 
final Scope of Study for the EIS.
    After issuing the final Scope of Study, SEA will prepare a Draft 
EIS for the project. The Draft EIS will address the environmental 
issues and concerns identified during the scoping process. It will also 
contain SEA's preliminary recommendations for environmental mitigation 
measures. The Draft EIS will be made available upon its completion for 
review and comment by the public, government agencies, and other 
interested parties. SEA will then prepare a Final EIS that considers 
comments on the Draft EIS, sets forth any additional analyses, and 
makes final recommendations to the Board on appropriate mitigation 
measures. In reaching its decision in this case, the Board will take 
into account the Draft EIS, the Final EIS, and all environmental 
comments that are received.
    Filing Environmental Comments: Comments submitted by mail should be 
addressed to: Danielle Gosselin, Surface Transportation Board, 395 E 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20423, Attention: Environmental Filing, STB 
Finance Docket No. 35116.
    Comments may also be filed electronically on the Board's Web site, 
http://www.stb.dot.gov, by clicking on the ``E-FILING'' link.
    Please refer to STB Finance Docket No. 35116 in all correspondence, 
including e-filings, addressed to the Board.
    All comments must be post marked by February 24, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Danielle Gosselin, Section of 
Environmental Analysis, Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20423. Assistance for the hearing impaired is 
available through the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-
800-877-8339. The Web site for the Board is http://www.stb.dot.gov.

Draft Scope of Study for the EIS

Proposed Action and Alternatives

    The Proposed Action is the construction and operation of an 
abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton Junction and Winburne 
and the reactivation of track on a connecting 9.3-miles of currently 
rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton. The approximately 20 
miles of track would

[[Page 852]]

allow RJCP to provide rail service to a proposed new quarry, landfill, 
and industrial park being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC, near 
Gorton in Rush Township, Centre County, Pennsylvania. The anticipated 
train traffic would be two trains daily, with one train per day 
traveling in each direction. The EIS will also analyze the potential 
impacts of two non-rail transportation options for the no-build 
alternative and a no-action alternative set forth below.
    The reasonable and feasible alternatives that will be evaluated in 
the EIS are: (1) Construction and operation of the proposed rail line 
along the former Beech Creek line, (2) no-build alternative option 1 
involving the construction of a new interchange on Interstate 80, (3) 
no-build alternative option 2 involving improving the existing local 
road system (i.e., road paving, bridge replacement etc.), and (4) the 
no-action alternative.

Environmental Impact Analysis

Proposed New Construction or Rebuilding and Operation
    Analysis in the EIS will address the proposed activities associated 
with the construction or rebuilding, and operation, of the proposed 20 
miles of rail line and potential environmental impacts, as appropriate.
Impact Categories
    The EIS will analyze the potential impacts associated with the 
proposed project on both the human and natural environment, or in the 
case of the no-action alternative, the lack of these impacts. Impact 
areas addressed will include the categories of transportation and 
safety, land use, energy resources, air quality, noise, biological 
resources including threatened and endangered species, water resources 
including wetlands and other jurisdictional waters of the U.S., 
socioeconomics as they relate to physical changes in the environment, 
recreation, environmental justice, geology and soils, and cultural/
historic resources. Other categories of impacts may also be included as 
a result of comments received during the scoping process or the Draft 
EIS. The EIS will include a discussion of each of these categories as 
they currently exist in the project area and will address the potential 
impacts of each alternative on each category as described below.
1. Transportation and Safety
    The EIS will:
    a. Evaluate potential pedestrian and motor vehicle safety concerns 
at each public and private at-grade road crossing.
    b. Include a level of service analysis focusing on average vehicle 
delay time for all grade crossings having an average daily traffic 
volume greater than 5,000 vehicles.
    c. Include an assessment of the appropriate safety appurtenances to 
be erected at each crossing.
    d. Assess the project's operational safety with respect to its 
close proximity to residential structures.
    e. Evaluate the project's consistency with local and regional 
transportation planning goals.
    f. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential 
impacts to safety, as appropriate.
2. Land Use
    The EIS will:
    a. Identify existing land uses that would be potentially impacted 
by the project.
    b. Evaluate the project's consistency with local and regional land 
use planning goals.
    c. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential 
impacts to land use, as appropriate.
3. Energy Resources
    The EIS will:
    a. Describe the effect of the project on energy resources, 
recyclable commodities, and overall changes in energy efficiency.
    b. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential 
impacts to energy resources, as appropriate.
4. Air Quality
    The EIS will:
    a. Quantitatively evaluate rail operation air emissions, if the 
project would affect a Class I or non-attainment or maintenance area as 
designated under the Clean Air Act.
    b. Qualitatively evaluate the temporary air quality impact 
resulting from rail line construction activities.
    c. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential 
project impacts to air quality, as appropriate.
5. Noise
    The EIS will:
    a. Quantitatively evaluate rail operation noise impacts, including 
the use of any auditory warning devices at public road crossings.
    b. Qualitatively evaluate the temporary noise impact resulting from 
rail line construction activities.
    c. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential 
project impacts to sensitive noise receptors, as appropriate.
6. Biological Resources
    The EIS will:
    a. Evaluate the existing biological resources within the project 
area, including vegetative communities, terrestrial and aquatic 
habitats, and known wildlife species.
    b. Evaluate project impacts to any Federal or state threatened and 
endangered plant or animal species.
    c. Describe the proposed project's impact on any wildlife 
sanctuaries, refuges, national and state parks/forests, or state game 
lands.
    d. Document all coordination conducted with those Federal and state 
agencies having jurisdiction over biological resources.
    e. Propose mitigative measures to avoid, minimize or compensate for 
potential impacts to biological resources, as appropriate.
7. Water Resources
    The EIS will:
    a. Describe the existing surface water resources identified within 
the project area, including all jurisdictional wetlands and 
watercourses and their regulatory floodplains.
    b. Evaluate project impacts to all jurisdictional surface water 
resources.
    c. Document the necessary Federal and state water resource/
encroachment permitting requirements that the proposed project will be 
subject to.
    d. Propose mitigative measures to avoid, minimize or compensate for 
potential impacts to water resources, as appropriate.
8. Socioeconomics
    The EIS will:
    a. Summarize the existing local and regional socioeconomic 
conditions, including long-term population, housing and employment 
metrics.
    b. Document the locations of existing community facilities and 
services identified within the regional project area.
    c. Evaluate the proposed project's impact to socioeconomic 
conditions within the regional project area, including employment gains 
and losses.
    d. Propose mitigative measures to avoid, minimize or compensate for 
potential impacts to regional socioeconomic factors, as appropriate.
9. Recreation
    The EIS will:
    a. Identify existing public and private recreational facilities 
within the project area, and evaluate the proposed project's impact to 
these recreational facilities.
    b. Propose mitigative measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate 
for potential impacts to recreational facilities, as appropriate.

[[Page 853]]

10. Environmental Justice
    The EIS will:
    a. Evaluate the potential project impacts on local and regional 
minority and low-income populations.
    b. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential 
project impacts on environmental justice populations, as appropriate.
11. Geology and Soils
    The EIS will:
    a. Describe the geologic and soil conditions within the project 
area, including the status of past and present coal mining operations.
    b. Evaluate potential measures to avoid or construct through active 
surface mined areas.
    c. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential 
project impacts to geology and soils, as appropriate.
12. Cultural/Historic Resources
    The EIS will:
    a. Document all historic resource eligibility and effect studies 
conducted pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation 
Act.
    b. Document all project coordination with the state historic 
preservation officer.
    c. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential 
project impacts to cultural/historic resources, as appropriate.
13. Cumulative and Indirect Impacts
    The EIS will:
    a. Address any identified potential cumulative impacts of the 
project, as appropriate. Cumulative impacts are the impacts on the 
environment which result from the incremental impact of the action when 
added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions 
regardless of what agency (Federal or non-federal) or person undertakes 
such actions (for example, Resource Recovery, LLC's proposed new 
quarry, landfill and industrial park).
    b. Address any identified potential indirect impacts of the 
project, as appropriate. Indirect impacts are impacts that are caused 
by the action and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but 
are still reasonably foreseeable.

    Decided: January 2, 2009.

    By the Board, Victoria Rutson, Chief, Section of Environmental 
Analysis.
Kulunie L. Cannon,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. E9-106 Filed 1-7-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P