Supporting Statement - 2140-0022 merging 2140-0017 (to ROCIS)

2140-0022
June 2018
SUPPORTING STATEMENT
FOR REQUEST OF OMB APPROVAL
UNDER THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT AND 5 C.F.R. § 1320
The Surface Transportation Board (STB or Board) requests a three-year extension of
approval for the Board’s collections from those seeking statutory authority to preserve rail
service (OMB Control Number: 2140-0022). The Board also seeks to merge into this collection
the collection of information about specific notifications under the Trails Act (OMB Control
Number: 2140-0017).
A. Justification.
1. Why the collection is necessary. The Surface Transportation Board is, by statute,
responsible for the economic regulation of common carrier freight railroads and certain other
carriers operating in the United States. Under the Interstate Commerce Act, amended by the ICC
Termination Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 104-88, 109 Stat. 803 (1995), amended by the Surface
Transportation Board Reauthorization Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114-110 (2015), and Section 8(d)
of the National Trails System Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1247(d) and 49 C.F.R. § 1152.29 (Trails Act),
persons seeking to preserve rail service may file pleadings before the Board to acquire or
subsidize a rail line for continued service, or to impose a trail use or public use condition.
When a line is proposed for abandonment, affected shippers, communities, or other
interested persons may seek to preserve rail service by filing with the Board: an offer of financial
assistance (OFA) to subsidize or purchase a rail line for which a railroad is seeking abandonment
(49 U.S.C. § 10904), including a request for the Board to set terms and conditions of the
financial assistance; a request for a public use condition (§ 10905); or a trail use request
(16 U.S.C. § 1247(d)). Similarly, when a line is placed on a system diagram map identifying it as
an anticipated or potential candidate for abandonment, affected shippers, communities, or other
interested persons may seek to preserve rail service by filing with the Board a feeder line
application to purchase the identified rail line (§ 10907). Additionally, the railroad owning the
rail line subject to abandonment must, in some circumstances, provide information to the
applicant or offeror.
The collection by the Board of these filings and submissions allows the Board to meet its
statutory duty to regulate or facilitate the referenced rail transactions. The table below shows the
statutory and associated regulatory provisions under which the Board requires this collection of
information.

Table – Statutory and Regulatory Provisions
Information Required

Statutory Provision

Regulations

Offer of Financial
Assistance

49 U.S.C. § 10904

49 C.F.R. § 1152.27

Request for Public Use
Condition

49 U.S.C. § 10905

49 C.F.R. § 1152.28

Trail Use Request

16 U.S.C. § 1247(d)

49 C.F.R. § 1152.29

Feeder Line Application

49 U.S.C. § 10907

49 C.F.R. pt. 1151

2. How the collection will be used. When a person seeks to preserve rail service through
one of the provisions outlined above, the applicable statute or regulation requires that certain
information be filed or submitted to the Board or to another party. Under 49 U.S.C. § 10904, the
filing of an OFA starts a process of negotiations to quantify the financial assistance needed to
purchase or subsidize the rail line sought for abandonment. Once the OFA is filed, the offeror
may request additional information from the railroad, which the railroad must provide. If the
parties cannot agree to the sale or subsidy, either party also may file a request for the Board to set
the terms and conditions of the financial assistance. Under § 10905, a public use request allows
the Board to impose a 180-day public use condition on the abandonment of a rail line, permitting
the parties to negotiate a public use (other than a trail) for the rail line.
Under 16 U.S.C. § 1247(d), a trail use request, if agreed upon by the abandoning carrier,
requires the Board to condition the abandonment by issuing a Notice of Interim Trail Use (NITU)
or Certificate of Interim Trail Use (CITU), permitting the parties to negotiate an interim trail
use/rail banking agreement for the rail line. Additionally, under 49 C.F.R. § 1152.29 (and as
previously approved under the merging collection OMB Control Number 2140-0017), parties are
required to jointly notify the Board when a trail use agreement has been reached and must
identify the exact location of the right-of-way subject to the agreement, including a map and
milepost marker information. The rules also require parties to file a petition to modify or vacate
the CITU/NITU if the trail use agreement applies to less of the right-of-way than covered by the
CITU/NITU. Finally, the rules require that a substitute trail sponsor must acknowledge that
interim trail use is subject to restoration and reactivation at any time. The submissions ensure
that the affected public and the agency will have notice whenever a trail use agreement is reached
or modified. They also ensure that any trail sponsor, including any substitute trail sponsor,
acknowledges that interim trail use is subject to restoration and reactivation at any time. (These
notifications properly come under the auspices of the Trails Act and OMB Control Number
2140-0022.)
Finally, under § 10907, a feeder line application provides the basis for authorizing an
involuntary sale of a rail line for the purpose of continuing freight rail transportation.
2

3. Extent of automated information collection. These documents may be e-filed on the
Board’s website, located at www.stb.gov. The public may also access these filings on the
Board’s website. Additionally, records provided to others may be transmitted via email.
4. Identification of duplication. The information requested does not duplicate any other
information available to the Board or the public.
5. Effects on small business. The information collection for filings and submissions by
persons seeking to preserve rail service does not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. While a majority of the estimated 40 respondents may be
small businesses, any submission that would be applicable to such businesses requires a
relatively limited amount of time and expense for drafting and transmission. Furthermore, filers
may seek a waiver of filing fees due to hardship.
6. Impact of less frequent collections. Under the statutes referenced above, the Board is
required to regulate, or provide for, various transactions to preserve rail service. This collection
is only required when a respondent is seeking the benefit of the use of a rail line that might
otherwise be abandoned. A less frequent collection would deprive the Board of its ability to
determine whether the respondent meets the eligibility standards to obtain the benefit that the
respondent is seeking. Therefore, without this collection, the Board could not fulfill its statutory
responsibilities.
7. Special circumstances. No special circumstances apply to this collection.
8. Compliance with 5 C.F.R. § 1320.8. As required, the Board published a notice
providing a 60-day comment period regarding this collection. See 83 Fed. Reg. 17210 (Apr. 18,
2018). No comments were received. A 30-day notice was published concurrently with this
submission to Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 83 Fed. Reg. 29864 (June 26, 2018).
9. Payments or gifts to respondents. The Board does not provide any payment or gift to
respondents.
10. Assurance of confidentiality. Although most of the information collected, as
described above, is available to the public, some of the information collected may be protected
and treated as confidential. At times, persons requesting to preserve rail service under 49 U.S.C.
§§ 10904-05, 10907 and 16 U.S.C. § 1247(d) may wish to file commercially sensitive
information. To protect such information, parties may mark documents or portions of documents
as “confidential” or “highly confidential” and simultaneously file a motion for a protective order.
See 49 C.F.R. § 1104.14. Generally, the Board will issue a protective order (sometimes with
modifications), limiting access to confidential pleadings to parties who demonstrate a need for
the information and adequately ensure that the documents will be kept confidential. See
49 C.F.R. §§ 1121.3(d), 1150.33 (h), 1150.43(h), 1180.4(g)(4).
3

11. Justification for collection of sensitive information. No sensitive information of a
personal nature is requested.
12. Estimation of burden hours for respondents. The number of annual responses is
shown in Table – Number of Yearly Responses below. When multiplied by the number of hours
for each type of filing, as provided in Table – Number of Hours per Response below, the
estimated annual burden hours for 40 respondents making 116 responses is 826 hours (sum of
estimated hours per response X number of responses for each type of filing (including 40 hours
for notifications of Trails Act agreement and substitute sponsorship)).
Table – Number of Yearly Responses.
Type of Filing
Number of
filings
Offer of Financial
1
Assistance
OFA—Railroad Reply to
1
Request for Information
OFA—Request to Set
1
Terms and Conditions
Request for Public Use
1
Condition
Feeder Line Application
5
Trail Use Request
23
Trail Use Request
84
Extension

Table – Estimated Hours per Response.
Type of Filing
Number of Hours per Response
Offer of Financial
32 hours
Assistance
OFA—Railroad Reply to
10 hours
Request for Information
OFA—Request to Set
4 hours
Terms and Conditions
Request for Public Use
2 hours
Condition
Feeder Line Application
70 hours
Trail Use Request
4 hours
Trail Use Request
4 hours
Extension
4

Of course, the actual hourly burden to respondents will depend on the facts and complexity of
each situation in which they seek rail authority.
13. Other costs to respondents. Because Board collections are submitted electronically to
the Board, there is no cost for filing with the Board. However, respondents are sometimes
required to send consultation letters to various other governmental agencies. Copies of these
letters are part of an environmental and historic report that must be filed with this collection
(unless waived by the Board). Because some of these other agencies may require hard copy
letters, there may be some limited mailing costs, which staff estimates in total to be
approximately $1,200.00.
14. Estimate of Cost to the Federal Government. Under 31 U.S.C. § 9701 and 49 C.F.R.
§ 1002, the Board establishes user fees (also called filing fees) that, for most services, recoup the
cost to the Board for the specific services that the Board provides to persons seeking a benefit,
including requests to preserve rail service. These fees, and the corresponding costs to the
government, are based on a cost study using the formula set forth at 49 C.F.R. § 1002.3(d) and
other factors relevant to Board fee policy. These costs are updated each year, based on a new
cost study. 1 Here, the Board’s user fees, which typically track the cost to the government for the
respondents’ filings, amount to $226,570 (filing fees applicable to each type of filing X number
of responses for each type of filing + cost to agency due to capped fees and public use – see
Table – Estimated Total Cost to the Federal Government).
Table –Filing Fees.
Type of Filing
Offer of Financial Assistance
OFA—Railroad Reply to
Request for Information 2
OFA—Request to Set Terms
and Conditions
Request for Public Use
Condition 3

Filing
Fees
$1,800
$0
$26,000
$0

1

The Board’s last annual user-fee update was issued in Regulations Governing Fees for
Services Performed in Connection with Licensing and Related Services–2017 Update, EP 542
(Sub-No. 25) (STB served July 28, 2017), and became effective on September 1, 2017.
2

There is no filing with the Board for railroad replies to requests for information by the
filing party in an OFA. The railroad’s reply is provided directly to the requesting party.
Therefore, there is no cost to the agency associated with this requirement.
3

There is no fee associated with a request for a public use condition because it is in the
public interest (i.e., use of right-of-way for state or local public projects).
5

Feeder Line Application
Trail Use Request
Trail Use Request Extension

$2,600
$ 300
$ 500

However, the Board’s user fees do not always include all of the costs to the government. The
Board caps certain fees either out of a concern that higher fees could have a chilling effect on the
ability of some parties to bring a matter to our attention or because certain types of actions are deemed
to benefit the public. As relevant here, the Board has capped the fees for filings of feeder line
applications and trail use condition requests. The additional costs to the government due to capped
fees are calculated in the tables below.

Table – Additional Cost Per Response Due to Capped Fees.
Type of Filing
Actual Cost Capped Fee Cost to Agency
Feeder Line Application $26,510
($2,600)
$23,910
Trail Use Request
$ 1,350
($ 300)
$ 1,050
Trail Use Request
$ 530
($ 500)
$
30
Extension
Table – Total Additional Cost to Agency Due to Capped Fees.
Type of Filing
Additional Cost Number of
Per Response
Responses
Feeder Line Application $23,910
5
Trail Use Request
$ 1,050
23
Trail Use Request Extn
$
30
84
Total Additional cost

Additional Cost
Due to Caps
$119,550
$ 24,150
$ 2,520
$146,220

Finally, the Board has not assessed a user fee for the filing of requests for a public use
condition because such requests are for the good of the public. There are, however, costs to the
government associated with this filing. Because the Board’s treatment of a request for a public
use condition is similar to its treatment of a trail use request, we conclude that the costs to the
government for both types of requests are similar. Therefore, we estimate that the cost to the
government for requests for a public use condition is $1,050 (estimated $1,050 cost of a public
use condition request X number of public use condition requests (1)).
Totaling the Board’s user fees and the additional costs not reflected in its user fees (due to
capped fees and filings in the public interest), the estimated total annualized cost to the Federal
government of this collection is summarized in the table below.

6

Table – Estimated Total Cost to the Federal Government.
Type of Cost
Cost
Cost Study for Filing Fees
$ 79,300
Additional Cost of Capped
$146,220
Fees
Lack of Fees for Public Use $ 1,050
Estimated Total Cost
$226,570
15. Changes in burden hours. This is an existing collection, which is being adjusted to
update the burdens and costs based on the actual number of recent filings. The burdens
associated with the merged collection have also been incorporated.
16. Plans for tabulation and publication. The information in this collection that is not
confidential will be posted on the Board’s website, located at www.stb.gov. However, as
discussed above, when these filings contain confidential information, only a public, redacted
version is published on the Board’s website.
17. Display of expiration date for OMB approval. The new expiration date for this
collection will be published in the Federal Register when the collection is approved by OMB.
18. Exceptions to Certification Statement. Not applicable.

B. Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods.
Not applicable.

7