[Federal Register: February 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 35)]
[Notices]
[Page 9189-9192]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22fe06-170]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Finance Docket No. 34421]
HolRail LLC--Construction and Operation Exemption--In Orangeburg
and Dorchester Counties, SC
AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board, Transportation.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of Final Scope of Study for the
Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On November 13, 2003, HolRail LLC (HolRail) filed a petition
with the Surface Transportation Board (the Board or STB) pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 10502 for authority to construct and operate a rail line in
Orangeburg and Dorchester counties, South Carolina (SC). The proposed
project would involve the construction and operation of approximately
two miles of new rail line from the existing cement production factory
owned by HolRail's parent company, Holcim (US) Inc. (Holcim), located
near Holly Hill in Orangeburg County, to the terminus of an existing
rail line of the Norfolk Southern Railway Company (NSR), located to the
south near Giant in Dorchester County.
Based on consultations conducted to date, the Board's Section of
Environmental Analysis (SEA) determined that the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is appropriate. To help determine
the scope of the EIS, and as required by the Board's regulations at 49
CFR 1105.10(a)(2), SEA published in the Federal Register on July 29,
2005, the Notice of Intent to Prepare an EIS; Notice of Initiation of
the Scoping Process; Notice of Availability of Draft Scope of Study for
the EIS and Request for Comments. The scoping comment period originally
concluded on August 31, 2005, but due to an inadvertent omission in the
scoping notice mailed to Federal, state and local agencies, SEA
accepted comments from any interested agency through October 28, 2005.
After review and consideration of all comments received, this notice
sets forth the Final Scope of Study for the EIS. The Final Scope of
Study reflects changes to the Draft Scope of Study as a result of the
comments, and summarizes and addresses the principal environmental
concerns raised by the comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Navecky, Section of
Environmental Analysis, Surface Transportation Board, 1925 K Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001, or 202-565-1593, or
naveckyd@stb.dot.gov. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available
through the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: By petition filed on November 13, 2003, HolRail seeks
an exemption from the Board under 49 U.S.C. 10502 from the prior
approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 10901 for authority to construct and
operate a rail line in Orangeburg and Dorchester counties, SC,
approximately 40 miles northwest of Charleston and 60 miles southeast
of Columbia.
The new rail line would establish alternative rail service at the
Holly Hill facility which is presently served only by CSX
Transportation, Inc. (CSX). Holcim recently completed an expansion of
the Holly Hill plant and has determined that alternative rail access is
necessary to achieve the full benefits of the expanded production
capacity. HolRail would arrange for a third-party operator to provide
rail service, and would employ a contractor to provide maintenance
service for the line, or engage the third-party operator to perform
this service.
[[Page 9190]]
Pursuant to the Board's responsibilities under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), SEA has begun the environmental review
of HolRail's proposal by consulting with appropriate Federal, state,
and local agencies, as well as HolRail, and conducting technical
surveys and analyses. SEA has also consulted with the South Carolina
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in accordance with the
regulations implementing section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA) at 36 CFR part 800 and identified appropriate
consulting parties to the section 106 process.
Based on the nature and content of the public and agency comments
received, SEA determined that the effects of the proposed project on
the quality of the natural environment may be significant, and thus,
preparation of an EIS is appropriate. For the environmental review
process, SEA intends to analyze the potential environmental impacts of
the proposed route, the no-action or no-build alternative (i.e.,
continuing use of the CSX line), and one alternative route that SEA has
preliminarily determined as a reasonable and feasible build
alternative.
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. For this scoping process, SEA developed a Draft
Scope of Study for the EIS and issued the document for public review
and written comment. In response to the Draft Scope of Study, SEA
received written comments from four agencies and one interested party.
After review and consideration of all comments received, this notice
sets forth the Final Scope of Study for the EIS. The Final Scope of
Study reflects changes to the Draft Scope of Study as a result of the
comments.
With the issuance of this Final Scope of Study, SEA will now
prepare a Draft EIS (DEIS) for the project. The DEIS will address those
environmental issues and concerns identified during the scoping
process. It will also contain SEA's preliminary recommendations for
environmental mitigation measures. Upon its completion, the DEIS will
be made available for public and agency review and comment for at least
45 days. SEA will then prepare a Final EIS (FEIS) that addresses the
comments on the DEIS from the public and agencies. Then, in reaching
its decision in this case, the Board will take into account the DEIS,
the FEIS, and all environmental comments that are received.
Summary of and Response to Scoping Comments
Written comments on the Draft Scope of Study were received from the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), SC Department of Transportation (SCDOT), SC Office of
Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM) and CSX Transportation,
Inc. (CSX).
The USFWS, NMFS and SCDOT offered no specific comments on the Draft
Scope of Study. In its comment letter, OCRM certified that the proposed
project would be consistent with the SC Coastal Zone Management Program
provided that (1) no freshwater wetlands are disturbed or altered and
that (2) all necessary erosion and sediment control practices are
maintained until the entire site is stabilized. If the proposed action
would include disturbing two acres or more of land, or if less than two
acres but within one-half mile of a receiving water body, a stormwater
permit application must be submitted and approved by OCRM prior to any
land disturbing activity. If land disturbing activities will be two
acres or less and not within one-half mile of a receiving water body
then a ``Disturbing Less Than Two Acres Form'' must be submitted to
OCRM. Because the Draft Scope of Study already addressed wetland and
surface water impacts and related permitting requirements, changes to
the Scope of Study in response to OCRM's comments were not needed.
CSX's comments addressed the level of detail to be provided in the
description of the alternatives and the nature of environmental impacts
to be provided in the EIS. CSX also expressed conclusions on
environmental impacts to be expected. Regarding the description of the
alternatives, CSX listed the project design specifications and types of
construction and operation activities it believes should be provided in
the EIS. SEA will incorporate those details that SEA deems relevant and
applicable to this EIS. SEA has clarified in the Final Scope of Study
that the reasonable and feasible alternatives to be addressed in the
EIS are construction and operation over Alignments A and B, and the no-
action or no-build alternative.
In comments on environmental impacts, CSX addressed impact
categories in general, and provided specific comments on the nature and
types of impacts that should be addressed in the EIS in the areas of
transportation and traffic safety; public health and worker health and
safety; water resources; biological resources; geology and soils; and
noise and vibration. SEA will address those impacts as appropriate
based on the alternative descriptions and affected environment
discussions yet to be prepared.
Final Scope of Study for the EIS
Proposed Action and Alternatives
The proposed project would provide alternative rail access to the
Holcim facility, which is currently served only by CSX. The existing
CSX line begins at the terminus of an NSR rail line at Giant, SC,
passes to the immediate west of the Holcim facility, and continues to
Creston, SC. The proposed action would involve the construction and
operation of an approximately 2-mile rail line that would also begin at
the terminus of the NSR line at Giant, SC, and end at the Holcim
facility.
HolRail proposes two potential alignments, both of which are on the
east side of and parallel to the existing CSX line across Four Hole
swamp, a world class heritage swamp according to comments submitted by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, SC Department of Natural Resources,
and National Audubon Society during preliminary consultations.
Alignment A would involve constructing the new rail line largely within
the existing ROW of the CSX rail line. Alignment B would be constructed
approximately 50 yards east of the CSX ROW, on property almost entirely
owned by Holcim. Either alignment would connect with NSR to the south
on land owned by a neighboring cement facility, over which HolRail
intends to obtain access by easement or other arrangement.
HolRail intends to construct and own the track, which would be a
part of the common carrier rail network. HolRail would arrange for a
third-party operator to provide rail service. HolRail would also employ
a contractor to provide maintenance service for the line, or engage the
third-party operator to perform this service.
Environmental Impact Analysis
The reasonable and feasible alternatives that will be evaluated in
the EIS are (1) a new rail line utilizing
[[Page 9191]]
Alignment A, (2) a new rail line using Alignment B, and (3) the no-
action or no-build alternative. Any other alternatives that were
considered but not carried forward in the EIS and the reasons they were
discarded will also be briefly described in the EIS.
Proposed New Construction
The EIS will document the activities associated with the
construction and operation of the proposed new rail line.
Impact Categories
Impact areas addressed in the EIS will include the effects of the
proposed construction and operation of the new rail line on
transportation and traffic safety, public health and worker health and
safety, water resources, biological resources, air quality, geology and
soils, land use, environmental justice, noise, vibration, recreation
and visual resources, cultural resources, and socioeconomics. 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 from
the proposed project on each category, as described below:
1. Transportation and Traffic Safety
The EIS will:
a. Describe the potential impacts of the proposed new rail line
construction and operation on the existing transportation network in
the project area.
b. Describe the potential for train derailments or accidents from
proposed rail operations.
c. Describe potential pipeline safety issues at rail/pipeline
crossings, as appropriate.
d. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project impacts to transportation and traffic safety, as appropriate.
2. Public Health and Worker Health and Safety
The EIS will:
a. Describe potential public health impacts from the proposed new
rail line construction and operation.
b. Describe potential impacts to worker health and safety from the
proposed new rail line construction and operation.
c. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project impacts to public health and worker health and safety, as
appropriate.
3. Water Resources
The EIS will:
a. Describe the existing groundwater resources within the project
area, such as aquifers and springs, and the potential impacts on these
resources resulting from construction and operation of the proposed new
rail line.
b. Describe the existing surface water resources within the project
area, including watersheds, streams, rivers, and creeks, and the
potential impacts on these resources resulting from construction and
operation of the proposed new rail line.
c. Describe existing wetland systems in the project area, including
Four Hole Swamp, and the potential impacts on these resources resulting
from construction and operation of the proposed new rail line.
d. Describe the permitting requirements that are appropriate for
the proposed new rail line construction and operation regarding
wetlands, stream crossings (including floodplains), water quality, and
erosion control.
e. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project impacts to water resources, as appropriate.
4. Biological Resources
The EIS will:
a. Describe the existing biological resources within the project
area, including vegetative communities, wildlife and fisheries, and
Federal and state threatened or endangered species and the potential
impacts to these resources resulting from the proposed new rail line
construction and operation.
b. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project impacts to biological resources, as appropriate.
5. Air Quality Impacts
The EIS will:
a. Describe the potential air quality impacts resulting from the
proposed new rail line construction and operation.
b. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project impacts to air quality, as appropriate.
6. Geology and Soils
The EIS will:
a. Describe the native soils and geology of the proposed project
area.
b. Describe the potential impacts to soils and geologic features
from the proposed new rail line construction and operation.
c. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project impacts on soils and geologic features, as appropriate.
7. Land Use
The EIS will:
a. Describe existing land use patterns within the project area and
identify those land uses that would be potentially impacted by the
proposed new rail line construction and operation.
b. Describe the potential impacts associated with the proposed new
rail line construction and operation to land uses identified within the
project area.
c. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project impacts to land use, as appropriate.
8. Environmental Justice
The EIS will:
a. Describe the demographics of the communities potentially
impacted by the construction and operation of the proposed new rail
line.
b. Evaluate whether new rail line construction or operation would
have a disproportionately high adverse impact on any minority or low-
income group.
c. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project impacts on environmental justice communities of concern, as
appropriate.
9. Noise
The EIS will:
a. Describe the existing noise environment of the project area and
potential noise impacts from the proposed new rail line construction
and operation.
b. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project impacts to noise receptors, as appropriate.
10. Vibration
The EIS will:
a. Describe the potential vibration impacts from the proposed new
rail line construction and operation.
b. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project impacts from vibration, as appropriate.
11. Recreation and Visual Resources
The EIS will:
a. Describe existing recreation and visual resources in the
proposed project area and potential impacts to recreation and visual
resources from construction and operation of the proposed new rail
line.
b. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project impacts to recreation and visual resources, as appropriate.
12. Cultural Resources
The EIS will:
a. Describe the cultural resources in the area of the proposed
project and potential impacts to cultural resources from the proposed
new rail line construction and operation.
b. Describe the NHPA section 106 process for the proposed project,
and
[[Page 9192]]
propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential project
impacts to cultural resources, as appropriate.
13. Socioeconomics
The EIS will:
a. Describe the demographic characteristics of the project area.
b. Describe the potential environmental impacts to employment and
the local economy as a result of the proposed new rail line
construction and operation.
c. Propose mitigative measures to minimize or eliminate potential
project adverse impacts to socioeconomic resources, as appropriate.
14. Cumulative and Indirect Impacts
The EIS will:
a. Address any identified potential cumulative impacts of the
proposed new rail line construction and operation, 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.
b. Address any identified potential in direct impacts of the
proposed new rail line construction and operation, 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: February 16, 2006.
By the Board, Victoria Rutson, Chief, Section of Environmental
Analysis.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-2456 Filed 2-21-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-00-P