| SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD DECISION DOCUMENT | |||
| Decision Information | |||
Docket Number:   | NOR_42119_0 | ||
Case Title:   | NORTH AMERICA FREIGHT CAR ASSOCIATION V. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY | ||
Decision Type:   | Decision | ||
Deciding Body:   | Director Of Proceedings | ||
| Decision Summary | |||
Decision Notes:   | DECISION ADOPTED THE PROPOSED PROCEDURAL SCHEDULE IN THIS PROCEEDING. | ||
| Decision Attachments | |||
| 15 KB 18 KB 35 KB | |||
| Approximate download time at 28.8 kb: 32 Seconds | |||
If you do not have Acrobat Reader, or if you have problems reading our files with your current version of Acrobat Reader, the latest version of Acrobat Reader is available free at www.adobe.com. | |||
| Full Text of Decision | |||
|
41903 SERVICE DATE –
SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 DO SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD DECISION Docket No. NOR 42119 Decided: September
26, 2011 This decision grants an unopposed motion filed by the
North America Freight Car Association (NAFCA) to alter the procedural schedule
in this proceeding. On April 15, 2010, NAFCA filed a complaint against Union
Pacific Railroad Company (UP), alleging that provisions of Item 200-A of UP’s
Freight Tariff 6004 Series constitute unreasonable practices and violations of
UP’s common carrier obligation. On
May 5, 2010, UP filed an answer to the complaint, generally denying
NAFCA’s allegations. By a series of
decisions, the most recent served on May 13, 2011, the proceeding
was held in abeyance until July 8, 2011, so that the parties could engage
in informal discovery and consider mediation to resolve this dispute or
narrow the issues.[1] On
July 7, 2011, NAFCA: (1) filed
its first amended complaint; (2) notified the Board that the parties had
failed to reach a negotiated agreement and advised the Board that no further
negotiations appear warranted; and (3) submitted for the Board’s
consideration a procedural schedule negotiated by the parties with a request
for a Board order embracing the proposed procedural schedule. On July 27, 2011, UP filed an answer to
NAFCA’s first amended complaint. By a decision
served on August 2, 2011, the Board adopted the procedural schedule
jointly proposed by the parties. On
September 14, 2011, NAFCA filed a motion to alter the procedural schedule. NAFCA states that the alteration is necessary
to accommodate the completion of the discovery process. NAFCA states that UP concurs with the
modified procedural schedule. NAFCA requests that the Board adopt the
following procedural schedule: October 3,
2011 UP completes
discovery responses November 4,
2011 NAFCA
completes discovery responses December 5,
2011 NAFCA Opening Statement due February 3,
2012 UP Reply Statement due March 5,
2012 NAFCA
Rebuttal due The
request is reasonable. The proposed alteration
to the procedural schedule, agreed to by the parties, will be adopted. This action will not
significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or the
conservation of energy resources. It is ordered: 1. The request to adopt the proposed procedural
schedule is granted. 2. The procedural
schedule set forth above is adopted. 3.
This decision is effective on its date of service. By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, Director, Office of
Proceedings. [1] On
June 25, 2010, NAFCA filed a motion for a protective order to facilitate
informal discovery, to which UP concurred.
By decision served on July 12, 2010, the motion for a protective order
was granted, and a protective order was adopted. | |||