SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD DECISION DOCUMENT
    Decision Information

Docket Number:  
NOR_42135_0

Case Title:  
DENVER ROCK ISLAND RAILROAD COMPANY v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY

Decision Type:  
Notice

Deciding Body:  
Director Of Proceedings

    Decision Summary

Decision Notes:  
PROVIDED NOTICE THAT DENVER ROCK ISLAND RAILROAD COMPANY AND UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY SHOULD NOW PROCEED WITH THE SELECTION OF AN ARBITRATOR.

    Decision Attachments

23 KB
23 KB

Approximate download time at 28.8 kb: 22 Seconds

Note:
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

42295                                        SERVICE DATE – MAY 11, 2012

DO

 

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

 

NOTICE

 

Docket No. NOR 42135

 

DENVER ROCK ISLAND RAILROAD COMPANY v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY

 

Decided:  May 10, 2012

 

            On March 16, 2012, the Denver Rock Island Railroad Company (DRIR), a Class III rail carrier, filed a complaint to commence arbitration under 49 C.F.R. § 1108, pursuant to Section VI of the Rail Industry Agreement[1] (“RIA”).[2]  DRIR asserts that, pursuant to one of the principles agreed to by the parties in the RIA, which is illustrated under Exhibit C, Example 7, “New Routes,” Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) should grant trackage rights or haulage rights to DRIR over the East Denver Belt Line.[3]  According to DRIR, the rights would stretch over less than one mile of UP’s East Denver Belt Line in the Denver Terminal Area.  These rights would connect DRIR’s Silver Yard and DRIR’s Stockyards Lead Track and would allow new traffic to and from DRIR’s Silver Yard to access points on BNSF Railway Company’s system.  DRIR has asked for trackage rights, but UP refuses to grant them.  UP has offered, however, to perform the transportation itself at a stated switching charge per car. 

 

In its April 16, 2012 reply, UP states that it is willing to arbitrate this dispute, but that it does not consent to an arbitration that would result in an award of trackage rights to DRIR.[4]

 

            This matter, which has come to the Board under the terms of the RIA, will be sent to arbitration.  The RIA calls for granting trackage rights or haulage rights under certain circumstances, and, if disputes between the parties persist after discussion and negotiation, Section VI of the RIA provides for binding arbitration pursuant to the Board’s arbitration rules at 49 C.F.R. § 1108.  UP and DRIR have agreed to these terms by signing the RIA.  Accordingly, the Board will provide for arbitration in this matter. 

 

            DRIR and UP should now proceed with the selection of an arbitrator pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 1108.6.  A list of arbitrators is available from the Board’s Office of Public Assistance, Governmental Affairs, and Compliance at (202) 245-0238 or (866) 254-1792.

 

            By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, Director, Office of Proceedings.

 



[1]  See Assn. of American R.Rs.—Agreement—Application Under 49 U.S.C. § 10706, 3 S.T.B. 910 (1998).

              [2]  DRIR’s complaint invokes the RIA provision for resolving disputes that arise under RIA Section IV(3), Paper Barriers and New Routes.

              [3]  The RIA is an agreement between the Association of American Railroads and the American Short Line Regional Railroad Association that is intended to provide a framework for improving the ability of smaller railroads (Class II or III), on the one hand, and, on the other, Class I railroads to work together to serve the public in the most efficient possible manner.

              [4]  UP’s Reply 5.