| SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD DECISION DOCUMENT | |||
| Decision Information |  | | |
| | | |
Docket Number: | FD_35475_0 | | |
| | | |
Case Title: | PORT OF IVORY, LLC--OPERATION EXEMPTION--LINE OF RAILROAD IN TULARE COUNTY, CAL. | ||
| | | |
Decision Type: | Decision | ||
| | | |
Deciding Body: | Director Of Proceedings | ||
| | | |
| Decision Summary | | | |
| | | |
Decision Notes: | DECISION: (1) HELD THIS PROCEEDING IN ABEYANCE UNTIL APRIL 15, 2011; AND (2) DIRECTED THE PARTIES TO NOTIFY THE BOARD ON THE STATUS OF NEGOTIATIONS ON OR BEFORE APRIL 15, 2011. | ||
| | | |
| Decision Attachments | |||
| |||
| | ||
| 8 KB 18 KB | |||
| Approximate download time at 28.8 kb: 12 Seconds | ||
 Note: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 | | | |
| | | |
|
41548 SERVICE DATE – LATE RELEASE APRIL 5, 2011 DO SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD DECISION Docket No. FD 35475 PORT OF IVORY, LLC—OPERATION EXEMPTION—LINE OF RAILROAD IN TULARE COUNTY, CAL. Decided: April 5, 2011 Port of Ivory, LLC (Port), a limited liability company and noncarrier, filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 C.F.R. § 1150.31 to operate about 1,500 track feet of existing railroad trackage inside an existing industrial facility it owns in Tulare County, Cal. Notice of the exemption was served and published in the Federal Register on March 18, 2011 (76 Fed. Reg. 15,047).[1] On March 29, 2011, the San Joaquin Valley Railroad Company (SJVR) filed a petition to reject the notice of exemption, alleging that the notice contains significant false and misleading information rendering it void ab initio. By letter filed on April 4, 2011, Port requests that the Board hold this proceeding in abeyance for 10 days starting April 5, 2011 (or until April 15, 2011). Port states that it and SJVR have commenced discussions to resolve their differences and asks to hold the proceeding in abeyance to facilitate a resolution. Port indicates that SJVR’s counsel has authorized Port to state that SJVR concurs in the request. The request to hold this proceeding in abeyance is reasonable and will be granted. Accordingly, this proceeding will be held in abeyance until April 15, 2011. The parties are directed to notify the Board on the status of the negotiations on or before April 15, 2011. This decision will not significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or the conservation of energy resources. It is ordered: 1. This proceeding will be held in abeyance until April 15, 2011. 2. The parties are directed to notify the Board on the status of the negotiations on or before April 15, 2011. By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, Director, Office of Proceedings. | |||