We have had several threads going about the bottle trains, so this naturally
falls right into that topic.

Tuch

----- Original Message -----
From: John Krattinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: AAA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 1999 22:58
Subject: CRTS Update #11-98


> CRTS Update #11-98
> Wednesday, November 24th, 1999 at 20:05 EST
>
> Surface Transportation Board (Board) Chairman Linda J. Morgan announced
> today that the Board has issued a decision finding no basis for granting
> the request of Acme Steel Company (Acme) for an emergency service order
> under 49 U.S.C. 11123.  Acme had asked for a declaration of an emergency
> and an order directing the Norfolk Southern Railway Company (NS), CSX
> Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), and the Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad
> Company
> (IHB) to cooperate with each other and to coordinate in providing rail
> transportation to Acme's facilities in the Chicago, Illinois, area.
>
> Acme stated that it filed the petition for emergency service relief to
> address service problems that have arisen during the transitional period
> since the operations of the Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail) were
> taken over by CSXT and NS on June 1, 1999.  Indicating that its rail
> service has deteriorated, Acme asked the Board to issue an emergency
> service order directing the three carriers to cooperate so that service
> to
> Acme will be provided no less quickly than it was historically provided
> by
> Conrail.
>
> The Board denied the petition, concluding that the relief sought was
> inappropriate and unnecessary.  While recognizing that shippers have
> faced
> service issues since the transfer of Conrail's operations to CSXT and
> NS,
> the Board found--and Acme conceded--that the current situation is not
> similar to that which compelled the Board in 1997 to declare an
> emergency
> in the West.  The Board also noted that Acme has never asked the Board
> to
> work with the carriers on Acme's behalf, and in fact, in its formal
> petition for emergency relief, Acme did not ask the Board to take any
> specific action to address specific operational problems, or to provide
> the
> type of relief (related to the routing or movement of traffic)
> identified
> in the emergency service provisions of the law.  And the Board saw no
> need
> to grant the relief that Acme did seek--an order "direct[ing] NS, CSXT
> and
> IHB . . . to immediately begin cooperating in coordinating their
> facilities
> to allow the prompt movement of hot metal"--because it was clear from
> the
> record, including Acme's own submission, that the carriers are already
> cooperating and coordinating their operations to provide improved
> service
> to Acme and to other shippers.
>
> The Board noted that it continues to actively monitor the operational
> aspects of the Conrail transaction through CSXT's and NS's regular
> service
> data reporting, and through daily contacts with railroads, shippers, and
> railroad employees, and has developed an informal process to address
> specific service complaints.  The Board's Office of Compliance and
> Enforcement (OCE) has established an open line of communication with
> senior
> railroad officials, and OCE immediately forwards service complaints
> brought
> to it informally by shippers seeking assistance.  OCE follows up on each
> complaint to ensure that it is being addressed appropriately.  In some
> cases, OCE staff may review the steps that the carrier is taking, and
> may
> recommend alternatives.  Handling shippers' individual service issues
> informally in this manner, the Board pointed out, provides an effective
> way
> for the Board to facilitate real solutions to shippers' service concerns
> without overreaching governmental action.  Declaring an emergency simply
> so
> that it could issue an order on Acme's behalf directing the carriers to
> do
> what they are already doing, however, would be inappropriate.
>


 ------------------------------------------------------
 This is the Illiana Railroad Discussion List.
 For more info visit http://www.railcenter.com/illiana
 ------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to