[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 207 (Monday, October 27, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64009-64013]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25464]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Docket No. FD 35852]
Canaveral Port Authority--Petition for Exemption To Construct and
Operate a Rail Line Extension to Port Canaveral, Florida
AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board, DOT.
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 Meetings; and Request
for Comments on Draft Scope.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Canaveral Port Authority (CPA) plans to file a request
with the
[[Page 64010]]
Surface Transportation Board (Board) pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502 for
authority to construct and operate approximately 11 miles of new rail
line to Port Canaveral (Port) in Brevard County, Florida. The proposed
Port Canaveral Rail Extension (PCRE) would also utilize approximately
17 miles of existing rail line at the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration's (NASA) John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) to make a
connection with a main line of the Florida East Coast Railway (FEC).
The proposed PCRE would provide the Port with direct access to freight
rail service. The new rail line would begin near the Port's North Cargo
Area, extend west across the Banana River, enter KSC on Merritt Island
south of Kars Park, and then turn north through KSC grounds where it
would connect with KSC's existing rail line.
The construction and operation of the proposed PCRE has the
potential to result in significant environmental impacts; therefore,
the Board's Office of Environmental Analysis (OEA) has determined that
the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is
appropriate to satisfy the Board's obligations under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.). The purpose of this Notice of Intent is to inform stakeholders--
including members of the public; Tribes; federal, state, and local
agencies; environmental groups; potential shippers and other parties--
interested in or potentially affected by the proposed project of the
decision to prepare an EIS and to issue a Draft Scope of Study for the
EIS for review and comment. OEA will hold public scoping meetings as
part of the NEPA process. Written comments submitted during scoping
will assist OEA in issuing a Final Scope of Study that defines the
range of actions, alternatives, and impacts to be considered in the
EIS. Public meeting dates and locations, along with the Draft Scope of
Study, are provided below. This Notice of Intent initiates the EIS
process and scoping.
Dates and Locations: The public scoping meetings will be held at
the following locations on the dates listed:
November 18, 2014; 5:00-8:00 p.m.; John Henry Jones
Gymnatorium, Titusville Campus of Eastern Florida State College, 1311
North U.S. Route 1, Titusville, Florida; and
November 19, 2014; 5:00-8:00 p.m.; Convention Center,
Radisson Resort at the Port, 8701 Astronaut Boulevard, Cape Canaveral,
Florida.
The scoping meetings will be held in an open house format for the
first hour followed by a brief presentation by OEA. After the
presentation, interested parties will be provided an opportunity for
public comment at an open microphone for the balance of the three-hour
scoping meeting, as needed. A court reporter will transcribe the public
comments.
The meeting locations comply with the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.). Persons that need special
accommodations should contact OEA's project manager listed below.
Interested parties are invited to submit written comments on the
Draft Scope of Study, potential alternative routes for the proposed
rail line, and other environmental issues and concerns by December 19,
2014 to assure full consideration during the scoping process. OEA will
issue a Final Scope of Study after the close of the scoping comment
period.
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. OEA 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 range of actions,
alternatives and potential scope of environmental impacts or issues to
be addressed in the EIS. As part of its scoping process, OEA has
developed, and has made available for public comment in this notice, a
Draft Scope of Study for the EIS. Scoping meetings will be held in the
project area to provide further opportunities for public involvement
and input during the scoping process. In addition to comments on the
Draft Scope of Study, interested parties are encouraged to comment on
potential alternative routes for the proposed rail line. At the
conclusion of the scoping and comment period, OEA will issue a Final
Scope of Study for the EIS. The Final Scope of Study will identify the
alternative rail line routes to be carried forward for detailed
analysis in the EIS.
After issuing the Final Scope of Study, OEA will prepare a Draft
EIS for the project. The Draft EIS will address the environmental
issues and concerns identified during the scoping process and assess
and compare alternatives, including the no-action alternative. The
Draft EIS will also contain OEA's preliminary recommendations for
environmental mitigation measures. Upon its completion, the Draft EIS
will be made available for review and comment by the public, government
agencies, and other interested parties. OEA will prepare a Final EIS
that considers comments on the Draft EIS. In reaching its decision on
this case, the Board will consider the Draft EIS, the Final EIS, all
environmental comments, and OEA's recommendations regarding the
environmental preferred alternative and environmental mitigation
measures.
OEA has invited several agencies to participate in this EIS process
as cooperating agencies on the basis of their special expertise or
jurisdiction by law. These agencies include but may not be limited to:
NASA; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
OEA is also initiating government-to-government consultation with
potentially affected tribes, including but not limited to: Seminole
Tribe of Florida, Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, and Miccosukee Tribe of
Indians of Florida.
Filing Environmental Comments: Scoping comments submitted by mail
should be addressed to: Dave Navecky, Surface Transportation Board, 395
E Street SW., Washington, DC 20423-0001, Attention: Environmental
Filing, Docket No. FD 35852.
Scoping comments may also be submitted electronically on the
Board's Web site, www.stb.dot.gov, by clicking on the ``E-FILING'' link
on the home page and then selecting ``Environmental Comments.'' Log-in
accounts are not needed to file environmental comments electronically,
and comments may be typed into the text box provided or attached as a
file. If you have difficulties with the e-filing process, please call
202-245-0350.
Please refer to Docket No. FD 35852 in all correspondence,
including e-filings, addressed to the Board.
Scoping Comments are due by December 19, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Navecky by mail at Office of
Environmental Analysis, Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20423-0001 or by phone at 202-245-0294. 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
www.stb.dot.gov. Project specific information on the Board's Web site
may be found by placing your cursor on the ``Environmental Matters''
button, then clicking on the ``Key Cases'' button in the drop down menu
and then selecting ``Port Canaveral Rail Extension.'' For further
information about the Board's environmental review
[[Page 64011]]
process and this EIS, you may also visit a Board-sponsored project Web
site at www.portcanaveralraileis.com. The project Web site includes a
map of the project area including CPA's proposed alignment. However,
the final list of alternatives to be carried forward in the EIS for
detailed study will be determined by the Board, in consultation with
the cooperating agencies, following the scoping period and
consideration of scoping comments.
Draft Scope of Study for the EIS
Purpose and Need
According to CPA, the principal purpose of the proposed rail
extension is to provide it with the capability to transport primarily
bulk, break bulk (i.e., packaged, non-containerized cargo), and
containerized goods to and from Port Canaveral by rail.
The Port currently has no on-dock or near-dock freight rail
service, and the only access to rail service is by truck. The Port's
current access to the Interstate Highway System (I-95) requires
traveling two miles on State Road 401 and a 14-mile stretch of heavily
traveled State Road 528. The construction of a rail line would satisfy
the need for an additional mode of transportation for the movement of
bulk and break-bulk materials and containerized freight to and from the
Port. Additionally, the PCRE would facilitate future cargo growth at
the Port.
The proposed PCRE involves a request by CPA for Board approval to
operate KSC's existing 17 miles of rail line and to construct and
operate an approximately 11-mile rail line extension to the Port. The
CPA-proposed alignment would also maintain rail support to NASA KSC
government and commercial space operations. The proposed project is not
a federal government-proposed or sponsored project. Thus, the project's
purpose and need should be informed by both the applicant's goals and
the agency's enabling statute, here, 49 U.S.C. 10901. Section 10901
provides that the Board must approve a construction request unless it
finds that the construction is ``inconsistent with the public
convenience and necessity.'' Thus, the statute creates a presumption
that rail construction is in the public interest and will be approved.
Proposed Action and Alternatives
The proposed new rail line would extend from the Port's North Cargo
Area, cross over the Banana River, enter KSC on Merritt Island south of
Kars Park, continue north up the east side of KSC, connect with the
KSC's existing rail facilities, continue on KSC's existing rail line,
which crosses the Indian River via the Jay-Jay Bridge, and then connect
with the FEC mainline near Titusville, Florida.
The new rail line would consist of a single track constructed of
continuous welded rail and concrete ties. Other major elements of the
proposed project would include a right-of-way of up to 100 feet in
width and crossings of local roads and utility corridors.
CPA would operate its trains on both the new rail line and on KSC's
existing rail line to the FEC connection. Initially, the trains would
move approximately 170 roundtrip hopper and box cars per week. Within
2.5 years after the proposed rail operations begin, CPA estimates that
an additional 50 roundtrip double-stacked container cars could also
move on the proposed PCRE. CPA estimates that it would operate
approximately three to four trains per week with the trains moving at
approximately 10 miles per hour.
The EIS will analyze and compare the potential impacts of (1)
construction and operation of a range of reasonable and feasible
alternative routes for the proposed PCRE and (2) the no-action
alternative (i.e., denial of the request).
Environmental Impact Analysis
Proposed New Construction and Operation
Analyses in the EIS will address the proposed activities associated
with the construction and operation of the PCRE and their potential
environmental impacts, as appropriate.
Impact Categories
The EIS will analyze potential direct, indirect, and cumulative
impacts \1\ of CPA's proposed construction and operation and a range of
reasonable and feasible alternatives, or in the case of the no-action
alternative, the lack of these activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NEPA requires the Board to consider direct, indirect, and
cumulative impacts. Direct and indirect impacts are both caused by
the action. 40 CFR 1508.8(a)-(b). A cumulative impact is 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 other
actions.'' 40 CFR 1508.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact areas addressed will include the analysis of transportation
systems, safety, land use, recreation, biological resources, water
resources, including wetlands and other waters of the U.S., navigation,
geology and soils, air quality and climate, noise and vibration, energy
resources, socioeconomics as they relate to physical changes in the
environment, cultural and historic resources, aesthetics and
environmental justice. Other categories of potential impacts may also
be included as a result of comments received during the scoping process
or on 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 direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of each
alternative being studied in detail on each category, as described
below:
1. Transportation Systems
The EIS will:
a. Evaluate the potential impacts resulting from construction and
operation of each alternative on the existing transportation network in
the project area.
b. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential project impacts to transportation systems, as appropriate.
2. Safety
The EIS will:
a. Describe existing road/rail grade crossing safety and analyze
the potential for an increase in accidents related to the proposed new
rail operations, as appropriate.
b. Describe existing rail operations and analyze the potential for
increased probability of train accidents, as appropriate.
c. Evaluate the potential for disruption and delays to the movement
of emergency vehicles.
d. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential project impacts to safety, as appropriate.
3. Land Use
The EIS will:
a. Evaluate the potential impacts of each alternative on 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.
b. Analyze the potential impacts associated with each alternative
to land uses identified within the project area. Such potential impacts
could include incompatibility with existing land use and conversion of
land to railroad use.
c. Evaluate consistency with Florida Coastal Management Program in
compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act.
d. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential impacts to land use, as appropriate.
4. Recreation
The EIS will:
a. Evaluate existing conditions and the potential impacts of each
[[Page 64012]]
alternative, and their operation, on recreational areas and
opportunities for recreational activities provided in the project area.
b. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential project impacts on recreational areas and opportunities for
recreational activities, as appropriate.
5. Biological Resources
The EIS will:
a. Evaluate the existing biological resources within the project
area including vegetative communities (including seagrasses), wildlife,
fisheries, marine mammals, and federal and state threatened or
endangered species, and analyze the potential impacts to these
resources resulting from each alternative. Several protected species
will be addressed, including, but not limited to, the bald eagle,
Florida scrub jay, gopher tortoise, manatee, eastern indigo snake, wood
stork, and southeastern beach mouse.
b. Describe the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge and any
other relevant wildlife sanctuaries, refuges, national or state parks,
forests, or grasslands, and evaluate the potential impacts to these
resources resulting from each alternative.
c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize, eliminate, or
compensate for potential impacts to biological resources, as
appropriate.
6. Water Resources
The EIS will:
a. Describe the existing surface water and groundwater resources
within the project area, including the Atlantic Ocean, lakes, rivers,
streams, ponds, wetlands, and floodplains and analyze the potential
impacts on these resources resulting from each alternative.
b. Describe the permitting requirements for the various
alternatives with regard to wetlands, river crossings, water quality,
floodplains, and erosion control.
c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize, eliminate, or
compensate for potential project impacts to water resources, as
appropriate.
7. Navigation
The EIS will:
a. Identify existing navigable waterways within the project area
and analyze the potential impacts on navigability resulting from each
alternative.
b. Describe the permitting requirements for the various
alternatives with regard to navigation.
c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential impacts to navigation, as appropriate.
8. Geology and Soils
The EIS will:
a. Describe the geology, soils, and seismic conditions found within
the project area, including unique or problematic geologic formations
or soils, prime farmland, and hydric soils, and analyze the potential
impacts on these resources resulting from each alternative.
b. Evaluate any potential measures to avoid or construct through
unique or problematic geologic formations or soils.
c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential project impacts to geology and soils, as appropriate.
9. Air Quality and Climate
The EIS will:
a. Evaluate the air emissions from the potential operation of
trains on the proposed rail line, including potential greenhouse gas
emissions, as appropriate.
b. Evaluate the potential air quality impacts resulting from the
proposed new rail line construction activities.
c. Evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed project on global
climate change and the potential impacts of global climate change on
the proposed project.
d. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential project impacts, as appropriate.
10. Noise and Vibration
The EIS will:
a. Describe the potential noise and vibration impacts during the
proposed new rail line construction resulting from each alternative.
b. Describe the potential noise and vibration impacts of the
proposed new rail line operation resulting from each alternative.
c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential project impacts to sensitive noise receptors, as appropriate.
11. Energy Resources
The EIS will:
a. Describe and evaluate the potential impact of the proposed
project on the distribution of energy resources in the project area
resulting from each alternative.
b. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential project impacts to energy resources, as appropriate.
12. Socioeconomics
The EIS will:
a. Analyze the effects of a potential influx of construction
workers to the project area and the potential increase in demand for
local services interrelated with natural or physical environmental
effects.
b. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential project-related adverse impacts to social and economic
resources, as appropriate.
13. Cultural and Historic Resources
The EIS will:
a. Identify historic buildings, structures, sites, objects, or
districts eligible for listing on or listed on the National Register of
Historic Places (historic properties) within the area of potential
effects for each alternative. The cultural resources identified will be
categorized into three major groups: tribal resources, archaeological
resources, and built resources.
b. Consult with federally recognized Native American tribes to
identify properties with religious and cultural significance to the
tribes within the area of potential effects for each alternative
(tribal resources), and analyze potential project impacts to them.
c. Identify prehistoric-era and historic-era archaeological
resources by using professionals who meet the Secretary of the Interior
Professional Qualifications Standards (SOIPQS) in the discipline of
archaeology, and analyze potential project impacts to them.
d. Identify built resources by using professionals who meet the
SOIPQS in the disciplines of history or architectural history, and
analyze potential project impacts to them.
e. Propose measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate potentially
adverse project impacts to tribal resources, built resources, and
archaeological resources that are historic properties, as appropriate.
14. Aesthetics
The EIS will:
a. Describe the potential impacts of the proposed new rail line
construction on any areas within the project area identified or
determined to be of high visual quality.
b. Describe the potential impacts of the proposed new rail line
construction on any waterways considered for or designated as wild and
scenic.
c. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential project impacts on aesthetics, as appropriate.
15. Environmental Justice
The EIS will:
a. Evaluate the potential impacts resulting from each alternative
on local
[[Page 64013]]
and regional minority and low-income populations.
b. Propose mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or eliminate
potential project impacts on environmental justice populations, as
appropriate.
16. Cumulative Impacts
The EIS will evaluate the cumulative and incremental impacts of the
proposed project when added to other past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable future actions in the project area, as appropriate.
By the Board.
Victoria Rutson,
Director, Office of Environmental Analysis.
Brendetta S. Jones,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2014-25464 Filed 10-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P