| SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD DECISION DOCUMENT | |||
| Decision Information | |||
Docket Number:   | FD_35557_0 | ||
Case Title:   | REASONABLENESS OF BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY COAL DUST MITIGATION TARIFF PROVISIONS | ||
Decision Type:   | Decision | ||
Deciding Body:   | Director Of Proceedings | ||
| Decision Summary | |||
Decision Notes:   | DECISION DETERMINED THAT A SEPARATE DECISION WILL ADDRESS DISCOVERY RELIEF SOUGHT BY BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY AFTER THE TIME FOR REPLIES HAVE PASSED AND MAKE A SINGLE DECISION ON THE ISSUES AT HAND. | ||
| Decision Attachments | |||
| 15 KB 31 KB | |||
| Approximate download time at 28.8 kb: 22 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 | |||
|
42208 SERVICE
DATE – LATE RELEASE FEBRUARY 16, 2012 DO SURFACE
TRANSPORTATION BOARD DECISION Docket No. FD 35557 REASONABLENESS OF
BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY COAL DUST MITIGATION TARIFF PROVISIONS Decided: February 16, 2012 In Docket No. FD 35305, the Board found a BNSF
Railway Company (BNSF) tariff intended to mitigate dispersion of coal dust from
rail cars, when considered as a whole, to be an unreasonable practice. Following BNSF’s issuance of a new tariff to
mitigate coal dust, which includes a safe harbor coal dust suppression
provision, the Board denied WCTL’s request to reopen Docket No. FD 35305,
but initiated this proceeding to consider the reasonableness of the new
tariff’s safe harbor provision. Ark.
Elec. Coop. Corp.—Petition for Declaratory Order, FD 35305, et al.
(STB served Nov. 22, 2011). On December 16, 2011, the Board granted a
motion to adopt a procedural schedule, which included a discovery period. On January 27, 2012, BNSF filed a motion
to compel discovery from WCTL. In the
motion, BNSF argues that the Board should compel WCTL to respond on behalf of
its members to certain interrogatories and requests for production. WCTL replied on February 6, 2012, to the
motion to compel. On January 27,
2012, BNSF also filed a petition for subpoenas in which it argues that, if the
Board denies BNSF’s motion to compel, the Board should instead issue subpoenas
to the individual members of WCTL. Replies
to the petition for subpoenas are due on February 16, 2012. Also, on February 6, 2012, BNSF filed a motion
to compel discovery from Union Electric Company D/B/A Ameren Missouri (Ameren),
which is a party to the proceeding.[1] Ameren’s reply is due on February 16,
2012. The parties agreed to incorporate the expedited
discovery dispute resolution procedures at 49 C.F.R. § 1114.31 in the
schedule for this proceeding. Under that
procedure, the Board would normally issue a decision on a motion to compel
within 10 days after the reply to the motion is filed, which here is
February 16, 2012. However, in
order to manage this docket efficiently, the Board will issue promptly a single
decision addressing BNSF’s three related filings after the periods for replies
have passed. This action will not
significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or the
conservation of energy resources. It is ordered: 1. The Board will issue a single decision on the
discovery relief sought by BNSF after the time for replies has passed. 2. This decision is effective on its service
date. By
the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, Director, Office of Proceedings. [1] On
February 13, 2012, Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation (AECC) filed
a motion to compel discovery from BNSF.
AECC’s motion will be addressed in a future decision. | |||