| SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD DECISION DOCUMENT | |||
| Decision Information | |||
Docket Number:   | FD_30186_0 | ||
Case Title:   | TONGUE RIVER RAILROAD COMPANY, INC.--RAIL CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION--IN CUSTER, POWDER RIVER AND ROSEBUD COUNTIES, MONT. | ||
Decision Type:   | Decision | ||
Deciding Body:   | Entire Board | ||
| Decision Summary | |||
Decision Notes:   | DECISION: (1) CLARIFIED WHAT THE BOARD WILL REVIEW IN THIS CASE; (2) DIRECTED TONGUE RIVER RAILROAD COMPANY, INC. (TRRC) TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION RELATED TO THE TRANSPORTATION MERITS OF THE REVISED LINE TRRC PROPOSES TO BUILD; (3) ESTABLISHED A NEW PROCEDURAL SCHEDULE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS PROCEEDING; AND (4) REQUIRED TRRC TO PUBLISH NEW NOTICES CONSISTENT WITH THIS DECISION. | ||
| Decision Attachments | |||
| 171 KB 30 KB | |||
| Approximate download time at 28.8 kb: 95 Seconds | |||
If you do not have Acrobat Reader, or if you have problems reading our files with your current version of Acrobat Reader, the latest version of Acrobat Reader is available free at www.adobe.com. | |||
| Full Text of Decision | |||
|
42741 SERVICE
DATE – NOVEMBER 1, 2012 EB SURFACE
TRANSPORTATION BOARD DECISION Docket No.
FD 30186 TONGUE
RIVER RAILROAD COMPANY, INC.—RAIL CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION—IN CUSTER, POWDER
RIVER AND ROSEBUD COUNTIES, MONT. Digest:[1]
This decision concerns a rail construction and operation project in
southeast Montana proposed by Tongue River Railroad Company, Inc. (TRRC). The decision clarifies what the Board will
review in the case and directs TRRC to supplement the application it
filed. The decision also establishes an
expanded procedural schedule from the one set forth in our rules and requires
TRRC to publish notice of that procedural schedule and the scope of this
proceeding, as discussed here. Decided: October 31, 2012 On
October 16, 2012, Tongue River Railroad Company, Inc. (TRRC) filed a revised
application pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 10901 in Docket No. FD
30186. TRRC intends to construct
and operate an approximately 83-mile line between Miles City, Mont., and two
ending points, one near the site of the previously planned Montco
mine near Ashland, Mont., and another at the proposed Otter Creek mine in the
Otter Creek area east of Ashland. We now
clarify what the Board will review in the case, direct TRRC to file
supplemental information related to the transportation merits of the revised
line TRRC now proposes to build, establish a new procedural schedule
appropriate for this proceeding, and require that TRRC publish new notices
consistent with this decision. BACKGROUND In 1986, the agency authorized TRRC to
construct an approximately 89-mile rail line between Miles City, Mont. and
Ashland and Otter Creek, Mont., a proceeding known as Tongue River I.[2] In 1996, the Board authorized TRRC to build a
contiguous 41-mile line from Ashland to Decker, Mont., in Tongue River II.[3] In 2007, the Board authorized TRRC to build
and operate the Western Alignment, a 17.3-mile alternative route for a portion
of the route already approved in Tongue River II, in a proceeding known
as Tongue River III.[4] Petitions
for review of Tongue River II and Tongue River III were filed in
the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and, in 2011, the
court affirmed in part, and reversed and remanded in part, those decisions for
additional environmental review. N.
Plains Res. Council v. STB, 668 F.3d 1067 (9th Cir. 2011). The court’s decision requires the Board to
revisit the environmental analysis for Tongue River I (as well as Tongue
River II and Tongue River III) because the Board had conducted a
cumulative impacts analysis for the entire line in Tongue River III and
made the resulting mitigation conditions applicable to the entire line in its Tongue
River III decision. On April 19,
2012, TRRC informed
the Board that it no longer intended to build the Tongue River II and Tongue
River III portions of the railroad. In a decision served on June 18, 2012,
the Board dismissed Tongue River II and Tongue River III and
reopened Tongue River I. As
explained in more detail in that decision, the Board required TRRC to file a
revised application that would present the railroad’s current plans to build a
rail line between Miles City and Ashland.
In addition, the Board announced that it would conduct a new
environmental review rather than a supplemental environmental review based on
the three prior environmental reviews conducted in Tongue River I, Tongue
River II, and Tongue River III.
In its revised application filed on October 16, 2012, TRRC proposes
to go forward with the Tongue River I project, although in modified
form.[5] DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS TRRC’s October 16, 2012 revised
application can be read as merely asking the Board to authorize certain refinements
to the line approved in 1986 in Tongue River I. Accordingly, we believe it necessary to
clarify at the outset that we intend to consider in this proceeding TRRC’s
current plans for the entire 83-mile line that TRRC presently intends to build.
We make clear here that we reopened the Tongue
River I proceeding to review in full what is now the entire Tongue River
I line construction project. The
Board’s review will include not only the new environmental review of the entire
construction project that will be prepared, but also an examination of the
transportation merits supporting the entire Tongue River I line.[6] In
light of this clarification, TRRC is directed to supplement its application to
provide a sufficient record for the Board’s review. TRRC appears to seek to incorporate
information from the original 1983 application to construct the Tongue River
I line in its current application.
However, in order to make this material readily accessible to the
public, TRRC must include in its supplement any and all information from its
1983 application that is still relevant and that it wants considered in the
record. TRRC also must include in the
supplement a description of its complete ownership structure. Finally, TRRC must submit any additional evidence
and argument in its supplemental filing in support of the transportation merits
for the line that it now intends to build. Under our regulations, comments on TRRC’s application would
be due 35 days after its October 16, 2012 filing date, and TRRC’s reply would
be due 5 days after the comments are due.
See 49 C.F.R. §§ 1150.10(g) and (h). Given the need for TRRC to file supplemental
information and the nature of this proceeding, we are adopting a revised
procedural schedule[7]
that provides additional time for the parties’ submissions to ensure a complete
record.[8] This schedule is set forth in the Appendix to
this decision. TRRC
might have already published notices stating that comments on the application
are due on or before November 20, 2012, as ordinarily required by our
rules. Therefore, we clarify that
interested parties may file comments at any time until the expiration of the
deadlines in the procedural schedule we establish here. To alert the parties to what we intend to
consider in this proceeding and the new schedule, we will require TRRC to
publish new notices consistent with this decision within 15 days of the service
date of this decision in the same places as any prior notices might have been
published and to certify to the Board that it has done so. This
decision will not significantly affect either the quality of the human
environment or the conservation of energy resources. It is ordered: 1.
TRRC shall file a supplement to its application, as discussed above by
December 17, 2012. 2. TRRC shall publish notices of the scope of
the proceeding and the new procedural schedule within 15 days of the service
date of this decision, as discussed above. 3. The Board adopts the procedural schedule set
forth in the Appendix to this decision. By the Board,
Chairman Elliott, Vice Chairman Mulvey, and
Commissioner Begeman. APPENDIX November 1, 2012 Service
Date of this Decision. November 16, 2012 Due date for certification by
TRRC that it has published newspaper notices pursuant to this decision. December 17,
2012 Due
date for TRRC’s supplement. January 9, 2013 Publication of Federal
Register notice accepting or rejecting the application. March 1, 2013 Due
date for comments in support of or opposition to the application. April 15, 2013 Due
date for TRRC’s reply. [1] The digest constitutes no part of the decision
of the Board but has been prepared for the convenience of the reader. It may not be cited to or relied upon as
precedent. Policy Statement on Plain
Language Digests in Decisions, EP 696 (STB served Sept. 2, 2010). [2]
Tongue River R.R.—Rail Constr. and
Operation—In Custer, Powder River and Rosebud Cntys.,
Mont. (Tongue River I), FD 30186 (ICC served Sept. 4, 1985), modified
(ICC served May 9, 1986), pet. for judicial review
dismissed, N. Plains Res. Council v. ICC, 817 F.2d 758
(9th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 976 (1987). [3] Tongue River R.R.—Rail Constr. and Operation—Ashland to Decker, Mont., 1 S.T.B. 809 (1996), pet. for reconsid. denied (STB served Dec. 31, 1996). [4] Tongue River R.R.—Rail Constr. and Operation—Ashland to Decker, Mont., FD 30186 (Sub-No. 3) (STB served Oct. 9, 2007), pet. for reconsid. denied (STB served March 13, 2008). [5] Although the decision granting Tongue River I authorized the construction of an 89-mile line, TRRC now describes the line as being approximately 83 miles in length based on refinements that would straighten and shorten the alignment. [6] The Board’s review of construction applications is governed by 49 U.S.C. § 10901 and its regulations at 49 C.F.R. §§ 1150.1-1150.10 and by the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4370d (NEPA), and related environmental laws. Section 10901 requires the Board to grant a construction application unless the Board finds that the proposal is inconsistent with the public convenience and necessity (PC&N). [7] The environmental review process for this rail construction project will proceed separately. On October 22, 2012, the Board’s Office of Environmental Analysis issued a notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), a notice of scoping meetings to be held in Montana the week of November 12, 2012, and a request for comments on a draft scope of study for the EIS. | |||