C.F.R. » Title 49 » CHAPTER X—SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD › SUBCHAPTER B—RULES OF PRACTICE › PART 1105—PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS

49 C.F.R. § 1105.6

Classification of actions

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Environmental Impact Statements will normally be prepared for rail construction proposals other than those described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

(b) Environmental Assessments will normally be prepared for the following proposed actions:

(1) Construction of connecting track within existing rail rights-of-way, or on land owned by the connecting railroads;

(2) Abandonment of a rail line (unless proposed under the Northeast Rail Services Act or the Bankruptcy Act);

(3) Discontinuance of passenger train service or freight service (except for discontinuances of freight service under modified certificates issued under 49 CFR 1150.21 and discontinuances of trackage rights where the affected line will continue to be operated);

(4) An acquisition, lease or operation under 49 U.S.C. 10901, 10902, or 10907, or consolidation, merger or acquisition of control under 49 U.S.C. 11323 and 14303, if it will result in either

(i) Operational changes that would exceed any of the thresholds established in § 1105.7(e) (4) or (5); or

(ii) An action that would normally require environmental documentation (such as a construction or abandonment);

(5) A rulemaking, policy statement, or legislative proposal that has the potential for significant environmental impacts; and

(6) Any other proceeding not listed in paragraphs (a) or (c) of this section.

(c) No environmental documentation will normally be prepared (although a Historic Report may be required under section 1105.8) for the following actions:

(1) Any action that does not result in significant changes in carrier operations (i.e., changes that do not exceed the thresholds established in section 1105.7(e) (4) or (5)), including (but not limited to) all of the following actions that meet this criterion:

(i) An acquisition, lease, or operation under 49 U.S.C. 10901, 10902, or 10907, or consolidation, merger, or acquisition of control under 49 U.S.C. 11323 and 14303 that does not come within subsection (b)(4) of this section.

(ii) Transactions involving corporate changes (such as a change in the ownership or the operator, or the issuance of securities or reorganization) including grants of authority to hold position as an officer or director;

(iii) Declaratory orders, interpretation or clarification of operating authority, substitution of an applicant, name changes, and waiver of lease and interchange regulations;

(iv) Pooling authorizations, approval of rate bureau agreements, and approval of shipper antitrust immunity;

(v) Determinations of the fact of competition;

(2) Rate, fare, and tariff actions;

(3) Common use of rail terminals and trackage rights;

(4) Discontinuance of rail freight service under a modified certificate issued pursuant to 49 CFR 1150.21;

(5) Discontinuance of trackage rights where the affected line will continue to be operated; and

(6) A rulemaking, policy statement, or legislative proposal that has no potential for significant environmental impacts.

(d) The Board may reclassify or modify these requirements for individual proceedings. For actions that generally require no environmental documentation, the Board may decide that a particular action has the potential for significant environmental impacts and that, therefore, the applicant should provide an environmental report and either an EA or an EIS will be prepared. For actions generally requiring an EA, the Board may prepare a full EIS where the probability of significant impacts from the particular proposal is high enough to warrant an EIS. Alternatively, in a rail construction, an applicant can seek to demonstrate (with supporting information addressing the pertinent aspects of § 1105.7(e)) that an EA, rather than an EIS, will be sufficient because the particular proposal is not likely to have a significant environmental impact. Any request for reclassification must be in writing and, in a rail construction, should be presented with the prefiling notice required by § 1105.10(a)(1) (or a request to waive that prefiling notice period).

(e) The classifications in this section apply without regard to whether the action is proposed by application, petition, notice of exemption, or any other means that initiates a formal Board proceeding.

[56 FR 36105, July 31, 1991, as amended at 81 FR 8853, Feb. 23, 2016]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1983–2022 · leading case: Lee's Summit v. Surface Transp. Bd., 231 F.3d 39 (D.C. Cir. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lee's Summit v. Surface Transp. Bd., 231 F.3d 39 (D.C. Cir. 2000). · cites it 2× “If the Board had ordered an environmental evaluation, one might assume that it would have dealt only with the portion of the line to the east of the cities; hence the effect of the increased rail traffic in the cities’ vicinity would not have been evaluated in any event.”
City of New York v. Interstate Com. Comm'n & United States of Am., 4 F.3d 181 (2d Cir. 1993). · cites it 5× “49 C.F.R. § 1105.6 (c)(1). The regulation further provides, however, that: [t]he Commission may reclassify or modify these requirements for individual proceedings.”
Alaska Survival v. Surface Transp. Bd., 705 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir. 2013). “49 C.F.R. § 1105.6 (a) (2012). The STB invites public comment on the scope of the environmental review and on the DEIS.”
Jefferson Street Ventures, LLC v. City of Indio, 236 Cal. App. 4th 1175 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015). “; 49 C.F.R. §§ 1105.6 , 1105.7 (2014)), and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; Pub.”
United Transp. Union- Illinois Legislative Bd. v. Surface Transp. Bd. & United States of Am., 183 F.3d 606 (7th Cir. 1999). “All three Article III standing requirements are satisfied: (1) the risk of environmental injury to employees (2) caused by railroad construction and operation is both obvious and acknowledged by the Board’s own regulations, see 49 C.F.R. § 1105.6 (requiring Environmental Impact…”
Berkshire Scenic Ry. Museum, Inc. v. Interstate Com. Comm'n, 52 F.3d 378 (1st Cir. 1995). · cites it 2× “” 49 C.F.R. § 1105.6 (c)(2) (1990). The ICC reasoned that because no operational changes were involved in the Housatonic transaction, an assessment was not required.”
Padgett v. Surface Transp. Bd., 804 F.3d 103 (1st Cir. 2015). “” 49 C.F.R. § 1105.6 (c) (“No environmental documentation will normally be prepared .”
City of Yakima v. Surface Transp. Bd., 46 F. Supp. 2d 1092 (E.D. Wash. 1999). “49 C.F.R. § 1105.6 (b)(4). The STB requested comment on all aspects of the EA by all interested persons.”
Ryder Truck Lines, Inc. v. United States, 716 F.2d 1369 (11th Cir. 1983). “Petitioners in these consolidated actions include Ryder Truck Lines, Inc., American Trucking Associations, Inc.”
Starke Cnty. Farm Bureau Coop. Ass'n v. Interstate Com. Comm'n, 839 F. Supp. 1329 (N.D. Ind. 1993). “See 49 C.F.R. §§ 1105.6 (a), 1105.-10(b). After considering public comments and the recommendations of its environmental staff, the ICC will determine whether it needs to prepare an environmental impact statement.”
Goos v. Interstate Com. Comm'n, 911 F.2d 1283 (8th Cir. 1990). “See 49 C.F.R. § 1105.6 (b) (1989). In these assessments, the I.”
Missouri Mining, Inc. v. Interstate Com. Comm'n, 33 F.3d 980 (8th Cir. 1994). “NEPA requires federal agencies to prepare an EIS for “major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.” 42 U.S.C. § 4332 (2)(C); 40 C.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.