[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 3 (Tuesday, January 6, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 473-480]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30940]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
49 CFR Part 1250
[Docket No. EP 724 (Sub-No. 4)]
United States Rail Service Issues--Performance Data Reporting
AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board (the Board or STB), Department of
Transportation.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Through this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Board is
proposing to establish new regulations requiring all Class I railroads
and the Chicago Transportation Coordination Office (CTCO), through its
Class I members, to report certain service performance metrics on a
weekly basis.
DATES: Comments are due by March 2, 2015. Reply comments are due by
April 29, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Comments and replies may be submitted either via the Board's
e-filing format or in the traditional paper
[[Page 474]]
format. Any person using e-filing should attach a document and
otherwise comply with the instructions at the E-FILING link on the
Board's Web site, at http://www.stb.dot.gov. Any person submitting a
filing in the traditional paper format should send an original and 10
copies to: Surface Transportation Board, Attn: Docket No. EP 724 (Sub-
No. 4), 395 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20423-0001.
Copies of written comments and replies will be available for
viewing and self-copying at the Board's Public Docket Room, Room 131,
and will be posted to the Board's Web site. Copies will also be
available (for a fee) by contacting the Board's Chief Records Officer
at (202) 245-0238 or 395 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20423-0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Valerie Quinn at (202) 245-0382.
Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at (800) 877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Surface Transportation Board has been
closely monitoring the rail industry's performance since service
problems began to emerge in late 2013. Service challenges have impacted
a wide range of commodities, including grain, fertilizer, ethanol,
coal, automobiles, chemicals, propane, consumer goods, crude oil, and
industrial commodities.
In response to the service challenges affecting this broad cross-
section of rail shippers, the Board held two public hearings this year,
in April in Washington, DC, and in September in Fargo, N.D., to provide
the opportunity for interested persons to report on service problems,
to hear from rail industry executives on plans to address rail service
problems, and to explore additional options to improve service. During
and after these hearings, shippers expressed concerns about the lack of
publicly available information related to rail service and requested
access to performance data from the railroads to better understand the
scope, magnitude, and impact of the service issues,\1\ as well as the
underlying causes and the prospects for recovery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See generally National Grain and Feed Association Letter,
U.S. Rail Serv. Issues, EP 724 (filed May 6, 2014); Western Coal
Traffic League Letter, U.S. Rail Serv. Issues, EP 724 (filed Apr.
17, 2014); Apr. Hr'g Tr. 154-155, U.S. Rail Serv. Issues, EP 724
(Apr. 10, 2014); Western Coal Traffic League Statement 5-6, U.S.
Rail Serv. Issues, EP 724 (filed Sept. 5, 2014); Sept. Hr'g Tr. 48,
290, U.S. Rail Serv. Issues, EP 724 (Sept. 4, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on these concerns and our own need to better understand
railroad operating conditions, on October 8, 2014, the Board ordered
all Class I railroads and the Class I railroad members of the CTCO to
file weekly reports on an interim basis, containing specific
performance data. See U.S. Rail Serv. Issues--Data Collection (Interim
Data Order), EP 724 (Sub-No. 3) (STB served Oct. 8, 2014).
Specifically, railroads were asked to report weekly average train
speeds, weekly average terminal dwell times, weekly average cars
online, number of trains held short of destination or scheduled
interchange, and loading metrics for grain and coal service, among
other items. The data were intended to give both the Board and its
stakeholders access to near real-time information about the operations
and performance of the Class I railroads, and the fluidity of the
Chicago gateway. In addition, the data were expected to assist rail
shippers in making logistics decisions, planning operations and
production, and mitigating losses amid the challenging railroad
operating environment.
On October 22, 2014, the Class I railroads and the Association of
American Railroads (AAR) (on behalf of the CTCO) filed the first set of
weekly reports in response to the Interim Data Order. As requested by
the Board, each carrier also provided an explanation of its methodology
for deriving performance data in response to each request. Generally,
the responses corresponded to the elements of the Interim Data Order;
however, some railroads approached individual requests differently,
leading to variations in the reported data. The different approaches
primarily were due to the railroads' disparate data-keeping systems,
different railroad operating practices, and/or unintended ambiguities
in certain requests. Certain railroads also departed from the Board's
prescribed reporting in order to maintain consistency with their own
weekly data runs and analysis. For the most part, however, railroads
made reasonable efforts to respond to each request, substituting
analogous data when precise information could not readily be derived.
In addition to the weekly data reports, AAR, on behalf of its Class
I freight railroad members (except Canadian Pacific Railway Company
(CP)), submitted a letter to the Board indicating that it believes the
public, the Board, and the railroads would have benefited from ``[a]
constructive public discourse regarding service data [which] could have
led to a more productive and less burdensome collection of information
that would have satisfied the Board's regulatory objectives.'' \2\ With
the first several weeks of filings in response to the Interim Data
Order complete, we invite public comment to determine whether to
establish new regulations for permanent reporting and to receive
constructive input to revise, as necessary, and improve the existing
data reporting structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ AAR Letter 1, U.S. Rail Serv. Issues--Data Collection, EP
724 (Sub-No. 3) (filed Oct. 22, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The weekly filings have allowed the Board and rail stakeholders to
monitor the industry's performance in near real-time, and allowed the
Board to begin to develop baseline performance data. Based on the
Board's experience with the reporting to date, and as expressly
contemplated in the Interim Data Order, the Board is now moving forward
with a rulemaking to determine whether to establish new regulations for
permanent reporting by the members of the Class I railroad industry,
the Class I carriers operating in the Chicago gateway, and the CTCO
through its Class I members. The permanent collection of performance
data on a weekly basis would allow continuity of the current reporting
and improve the Board's ability to identify and help resolve future
regional or national service disruptions more quickly, should they
occur. Transparency would also benefit rail shippers and other
stakeholders, by helping them to better plan operations and make
informed decisions based on publicly available, near real-time data,
and their own analysis of performance trends over time.
The proposed data requirements have been designed to impose as
small a burden as possible on the carriers that would be subject to the
rule, while achieving the Board's goal of continued rail service
performance transparency. The Board believes that the benefit to the
Board, rail shippers, and other stakeholders would outweigh the burden
of reporting under the proposed rule. The data collected pursuant to
the rule would continue to provide for service performance transparency
in the industry and allow the Board to more rapidly identify and
respond to service performance issues.
Accordingly, the Board seeks public comments on proposed new
regulations to be codified at 49 CFR 1250.1-1250.3 to require Class I
rail carriers, Class I carriers operating in the Chicago gateway, and
the CTCO, through its Class I members, to submit to the Board weekly
reports on railroad performance. The proposed reporting requirements
are based on and include those contained in the Interim Data Order, but
include the following modifications:
[[Page 475]]
In subsection (a), instructions have been added to
Requests nos. 1-3 to align the requests with performance data being
published by AAR;
In subsection (a), Request no. 4 has been modified to
capture average dwell time for ``loaded'' unit trains at origin ``or
interchange receipt,'' and to clarify that the data is to be reported
by the railroad receiving the loaded train at a shipper facility or
interchange location;
In subsection (a), Requests nos. 5 and 6 have been revised
to cure ambiguities that emerged during the initial reporting periods
and to clarify the data intended to be reported. Request no. 5 is
intended to capture every instance during the reporting week in which
specific types of loaded or empty trains are held at a location on the
reporting railroad's system short of destination or scheduled
interchange for longer than six consecutive hours. Request no. 6 is
intended to capture an average of daily snap shots of cars in specific
services that have not moved for the specified durations (48-120 hours;
greater than 120 hours);
In subsection (a), Request no. 9 has been deleted from the
proposed requirements because it appears to have limited application to
the carriers' disparate grain unit train operations; however, we ask
that commenters propose an appropriate measure to capture performance
data for grain unit train operations;
In subsection (a), Request no. 10 has been renumbered as
Request no. 9 and revised to allow carriers to report weekly total coal
unit train loadings or weekly total coal car loadings by coal
production region;
In subsection (b), Request no. 1 has been modified to
clarify that the request is for the average daily car ``volume'' at the
key Chicago yards, meaning cars on hand, rather than cars processed;
In subsection (b), Request no. 2 has been modified to
clarify the method for deriving trains held outside the Chicago
gateway;
A new item has been added in subsection (d) to request a
quarterly listing of all work-in-progress, major rail infrastructure
projects, including project location by state, planned completion date
for the project, percentage complete at the time of reporting, and
project description and purpose. For purposes of this request, ``work-
in-progress'' refers to projects for which ground breaking has taken
place, ``major'' refers to any rail infrastructure project budgeted at
$25 million or more over the life of the project, and ``rail
infrastructure'' refers to capacity expansion or enhancement projects,
excluding maintenance-of-way.
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
[[Page 476]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06JA15.055
[[Page 477]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06JA15.056
As the Board noted in the Interim Data Order, at both hearings,
carriers cited congestion in Chicago as one significant cause of the
service problems.\3\ While congestion in the area was particularly
acute last winter, it has been a recurring problem at this crucial
network hub. The Board continues to recognize the longstanding
importance of Chicago as a hub in national rail operations and the
impact that recent extreme congestion in Chicago has had on rail
service in the Upper Midwest and nationwide. CP asserts, in its
response to the Interim Data Order, that if either the Belt Railway of
Chicago (BRC) or the Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad (IHB) becomes
congested, the Chicago Terminal then becomes congested and that
congestion then ``reverberates throughout the system.'' \4\ CP urges
the Board to require BRC and IHB to report appropriate metrics on a
weekly basis.\5\ Under the Interim Data Order, AAR has been reporting
average daily car counts in key Chicago area yards, including Clearing
and Blue Island, which are BRC and IHB yards, respectively. Commenters
are invited to propose the reporting of additional metrics, from the
BRC and IHB or others, that could improve oversight and support a
better understanding of service issues in the Chicago area. Finally,
the Board in the Interim Data Order directed the Class I members of the
CTCO to file a general summary of the CTCO's service contingency
protocols. However, given that the Chicago gateway remains a concern,
we believe that having more information about how the Class I carriers
are managing operations in Chicago would be beneficial. Accordingly,
the Class I members of the CTCO are directed to file a detailed
explanation of the CTCO's service contingency protocols, including the
protocol triggers and countermeasures. Should the members need to
provide proprietary information to sufficiently explain the CTCO
protocols (such as car counts and specific locations that trigger the
protocols), they may request a protective order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Apr. Hr'g Tr. 186-87, 208, U.S. Rail Serv. Issues, EP 724
(Apr. 10, 2014); North Dakota Public Service Commission Comments 3,
U.S. Rail Serv. Issues, EP 724 (filed Sept. 4, 2014).
\4\ CP Comment 1, U.S. Rail Serv. Issues--Data Collection, EP
724 (Sub-No. 3) (filed Oct. 22, 2014).
\5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board also asks that Class I railroads comment on the
capabilities of their respective internal data-keeping systems for
capturing and generating data and the appropriate timeframe (i.e.,
starting day and ending day) for the reporting week and for filing
reports. Commenters are also asked to address whether and how
geographical parameters could be practically incorporated into the
requests in order to identify parts of the freight rail network
experiencing acute congestion or service issues. The proposed rules
address the same specific commodities covered under the Interim Data
Order. If commenters believe it would advance the Board's goals, they
may include metrics focused on other commodities along with an
explanation of why it would be beneficial to collect that
information.\6\ Additionally, commenters may propose revised
definitions for terms used in the data requests, such as ``unit
train,'' if they believe such revised definitions would be necessary or
helpful to the uniform collection of data, and methodologies for
deriving data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ On October 24, 2014, The Fertilizer Institute submitted a
letter asking the Board to require separate reporting with regard to
fertilizer shipments. The Fertilizer Institute Letter 1-2, U.S. Rail
Serv. Issues--Data Collection, EP 724 (Sub-No. 3) (filed Oct. 24,
2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, on October 22, 2014, Kansas City Southern Railway
Company (KCS) filed a petition for a waiver from certain requirements
due to the nature of its grain business and its very limited number of
customers in a discrete number of states in its service territory.\7\
In response to the petition, the Board proposes to exempt KCS from
filing state-specific information in response to Request nos. 7 and 8.
Commenters may address whether this exemption is appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See KCS Petition for Waiver, U.S. Rail Serv. Issues--Data
Collection, EP 724 (Sub-No. 3) (filed Oct. 22, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the Board is considering whether to implement a
standardized set of weekly reporting requirements, proposals for new
reporting items should take into account whether they may be obtained
from data likely maintained by railroads in the ordinary course of
business. Proposed items should not call for narrative responses or
impose requirements that vary from week to week. Also, the Class I
railroads are asked to comment on which requests can be reported
through AAR or Railinc Corporation \8\ on behalf of the industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Railinc Corporation provides information technology,
applications, and electronic data services to the North American
freight railway industry. It is a wholly-owned subsidiary of AAR.
See Railinc, Company Overview, https://www.railinc.com/rportal/company-overview (last visited Dec. 19, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In seeking public comments, the Board requests that interested
stakeholders evaluate the utility of each
[[Page 478]]
data request, offer proposed modifications, and/or propose other
requests that would assist the Board and the public in gaining complete
and accurate near real-time assessment of the performance of Class I
railroads.
Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, generally requires a description and analysis
of new rules that would have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. In drafting a rule, an agency is
required to: (1) Assess the effect that its regulation will have on
small entities; (2) analyze effective alternatives that may minimize a
regulation's impact; and (3) make the analysis available for public
comment. Sec. Sec. 601-604. In its notice of proposed rulemaking, the
agency must either include an initial regulatory flexibility analysis,
Sec. 603(a), or certify that the proposed rule would not have a
``significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' Sec.
605(b). The impact must be a direct impact on small entities ``whose
conduct is circumscribed or mandated'' by the proposed rule. White
Eagle Coop. v. Conner, 553 F.3d 467, 480 (7th Cir. 2009).
The rules proposed here would not have a significant economic
impact upon a substantial number of small entities, within the meaning
of the RFA. The reporting requirements would apply only to Class I rail
carriers, which, under the Board's regulations, have annual carrier
operating revenues of $250 million or more in 1991 dollars (adjusted
for inflation using 2013 data, the revenue threshold for a Class I rail
carrier is $467,063,129). Class I carriers generally do not fall within
the Small Business Administration's definition of a small business for
the rail transportation industry.\9\ Therefore, the Board certifies
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the
meaning of the RFA. A copy of this decision will be served upon the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy, Office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business
Administration, Washington, DC 20416.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The Small Business Administration's Office of Size Standards
has established a size standard for rail transportation, pursuant to
which a line-haul railroad is considered small if its number of
employees is 1,500 or less, and a short line railroad is considered
small if its number of employees is 500 or less. 13 CFR 121.201
(industry subsector 482).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paperwork Reduction Act. Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501-3549, and Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
regulations at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(3), the Board seeks comments regarding:
(1) Whether the collection of information in the proposed rule, and
further described in the Appendix, is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Board, including whether the
collection has practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the Board's
burden estimates; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, when appropriate. Information pertinent to these issues is
included in the Appendix. The collection in this proposed rule will be
submitted to OMB for review as required under 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) and 5
CFR 1320.11.
This proposal would not significantly affect either the quality of
the human environment or the conservation of energy resources.
It is ordered:
1. Comments are due by March 2, 2015. Reply comments are due by
April 29, 2015.
2. A copy of this decision will be served upon the Chief Counsel
for Advocacy, Office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration.
3. Notice of this decision will be published in the Federal
Register.
4. The Class I members of the CTCO shall file a detailed
explanation of the CTCO's service contingency protocols, including the
protocol triggers and countermeasures, by January 14, 2015.
5. This decision is effective on its service date.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 1250
Administrative practice and procedure, Railroads, Reporting and
record keeping requirements.
Decided: December 30, 2014.
By the Board, Chairman Elliott, Vice Chairman Miller, and
Commissioner Begeman.
Jeffrey Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Surface
Transportation Board proposes to amend title 49, chapter X, subchapter
D, of the Code of Federal Regulations by adding Part 1250 as follows:
PART 1250--RAILROAD PERFORMANCE DATA REPORTING
Sec.
1250.1 Reporting Requirements
1250.2 Definitions
1250.3 Data Elements
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 721 and 11145.
Sec. 1250.1 Reporting Requirements.
Each Class I railroad is required to report to the Board on a
weekly basis, the performance data set forth in Sec. 1250.3(a)(1)-(9).
The Class I railroads operating at the Chicago gateway are required to
jointly report on a weekly basis the performance data set forth in
Sec. 1250.3(b)(1)-(2). The reports required under Sec. 1250.3(b)(1)-
(2) may be submitted by the Association of American Railroads (AAR).
The data must be reported to the Board between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
Eastern Time on Tuesday of each week, covering the previous reporting
week (12:01 a.m. Sunday-11:59 p.m. Saturday). In the event that a
particular Tuesday is a Federal holiday or falls on a day when STB
offices are closed for any other reason, then the data should be
reported on the next business day when the offices are open. The data
must be filed in Excel format, using an electronic spreadsheet made
available by the Board's Office of Public Assistance, Governmental
Affairs, and Compliance (OPAGAC), and should be emailed to
[email protected]. Each week's report must include data only
for that week, and should not include data for previous weeks. Unless
otherwise provided, the data will be publicly available and posted on
the Board's Web site.
Sec. 1250.2 Definitions.
(a) Unit train. Unit train refers to a train comprising 50 or more
railcars of the same or similar type, carrying a single commodity in
bulk.
Sec. 1250.3 Railroad Performance Data Elements.
(a) Each Class I railroad must report the following performance
data elements for the reporting week. However, with regard to elements
7 and 8, Kansas City Southern Railway Company is not required to report
information by State, but instead shall report system-wide data.
(1) System-average train speed by the following train types for the
reporting week. (Train speed should be measured for line-haul movements
between terminals. The average speed for each train type should be
calculated by dividing total train-miles by total hours operated.)
(i) Intermodal
(ii) Grain unit
(iii) Coal unit
(iv) Automotive unit
(v) Crude oil unit
[[Page 479]]
(vi) Ethanol unit
(vii) Manifest
(viii) All other
(2) Weekly average terminal dwell time, measured in hours,
excluding cars on run-through trains (i.e., cars that arrive at, and
depart from, a terminal on the same through train) for the carrier's
system and its 10 largest terminals in terms of railcars processed.
(Terminal dwell is the average time a car resides at a specified
terminal location expressed in hours.)
(3) Weekly average cars on line by the following car types for the
reporting week. (Each railroad is requested to average its daily on-
line inventory of freight cars. Articulated cars should be counted as a
single unit. Cars on private tracks (e.g., at a customer's facility)
should be counted on the last railroad on which they were located.
Maintenance-of-way cars and other cars in railroad service are to be
excluded.)
(i) Box
(ii) Covered hopper
(iii) Gondola
(iv) Intermodal
(v) Multilevel (Automotive)
(vi) Open hopper
(vii) Tank
(viii) Other
(ix) Total
(4) Weekly average dwell time at origin or interchange location for
loaded unit train shipments sorted by grain, coal, automotive, crude
oil, ethanol, and all other unit trains. (For the purposes of this data
element, dwell time refers to the time period from release of a unit
train at origin or interchange location until actual movement by the
receiving carrier. The data is to be reported by the receiving
carrier.)
(5) The weekly total number of loaded and empty trains held short
of destination or scheduled interchange for longer than six consecutive
hours sorted by train type (intermodal, grain unit, coal unit,
automotive unit, crude oil unit, ethanol unit, other unit, and all
other) and by cause (crew, locomotive power, track maintenance,
mechanical issue, or other (explain)). (This request is intended to
capture every instance during the reporting week in which a loaded or
empty train is held at a location on the reporting railroad's system
short of its destination or scheduled interchange for longer than six
consecutive hours. For example, if, during a reporting week, a coal
unit train originating from the Powder River Basin, and scheduled to be
interchanged in St. Louis were held for six consecutive hours in
Nebraska due to crew unavailability and held again for nine consecutive
hours in Iowa due to track maintenance, during the same reporting week,
then this train would be reported twice in the weekly report to the STB
(once for ``crew'' and once for ``track maintenance'').)
(6) The daily average number of loaded and empty cars, operating in
normal movement and billed to an origin or destination, which have not
moved in (a) more than 120 hours; and (b) more than 48 hours, but less
than or equal to 120 hours, sorted by service type (intermodal, grain,
coal, crude oil, automotive, ethanol, or all other). In order to derive
the daily averages for the reporting week, carriers are requested to
run a same-time snapshot each day of the reporting week, capturing cars
within each category. The number of cars captured on the daily snapshot
for each category should be added, and then divided by the number of
days in the reporting week (typically seven days). In deriving this
data, carriers should include cars in normal service anywhere on their
system, but should not include cars placed at a customer facility; in
constructive placement; placed for interchange to another carrier; in
bad order status; in storage; or operating in railroad service (e.g.,
ballast).
(7) The weekly total number of grain cars loaded and billed,
reported by State, aggregated for the following Standard Transportation
Commodity Codes (STCCs): 01131 (barley), 01132 (corn), 01133 (oats),
01135 (rye), 01136 (sorghum grains), 01137 (wheat), 01139 (grain, not
elsewhere classified), 01144 (soybeans), 01341 (beans, dry), 01342
(peas, dry), and 01343 (cowpeas, lentils, or lupines). ``Total grain
cars loaded and billed'' includes cars in shuttle service; dedicated
train service; reservation, lottery, open and other ordering systems;
and, private cars. Additionally, separately report the total cars
loaded and billed in shuttle service (or dedicated train service)
versus total cars loaded and billed in all other ordering systems,
including private cars.
(8) For the aggregated STCCs in Item 7, report by State the
following:
(i) The total number of overdue car orders (a car order equals one
car; overdue means not delivered within the delivery window);
(ii) Average number of days late for all overdue grain car orders;
(iii) The total number of new orders received during the past week;
(iv) The total number of orders filled during the past week; and
(v) The number of orders cancelled, respectively, by shipper and
railroad during the past week.
(9) Weekly total coal unit train loadings or car loadings for the
reporting week by coal production region.
(b) The Class I railroads operating at the Chicago gateway (or AAR
on behalf of the Class I railroads operating at the Chicago gateway)
must jointly report the following performance data elements for the
reporting week:
(1) Average daily car volume in the following Chicago area yards:
Barr, Bensenville, Blue Island, Calumet, Cicero, Clearing, Corwith,
Gibson, Kirk, Markham, and Proviso for the reporting week; and
(2) Average daily number of trains held for delivery to Chicago
sorted by receiving carrier for the reporting week. The average daily
number should be derived by taking a same time snapshot each day of the
reporting week, capturing the trains held for each railroad at that
time, and then adding those snapshots together and dividing by the days
in the reporting week. (For purposes of this request, ``held for
delivery'' refers to a train staged by the delivering railroad short of
its scheduled arrival at the Chicago gateway at the request of the
receiving railroad, and that has missed its scheduled window for
arrival.)
(Note: If Chicago terminal yards not identified in Sec. (b)(1),
are included in the Chicago Transportation Coordination Office's (CTCO)
assessment of the fluidity of the gateway for purposes of implementing
service contingency measures, then the data requested in Sec. (b)(1)
shall also be reported for those yards.)
(c) The Class I railroad members of the CTCO (or one Class I
railroad member of the CTCO designated to file on behalf of all Class I
railroad members, or AAR) must:
(1) File a written notice with the Board when the CTCO changes its
operating Alert Level status, within one business day of that change in
status.
(2) If the CTCO revises its protocol of service contingency
measures, file with the Board a detailed explanation of the new
protocol, including both triggers and countermeasures, within seven
days of its adoption.
(d) On a quarterly basis, each Class I railroad must report all
work-in-progress, major rail infrastructure projects, including
location by State, planned completion date for each project, percentage
complete for each project at the time of reporting, and project
description and purpose. For purposes of this request, ``work-in-
progress'' refers to projects for which ground-breaking has taken
place; ``major'' refers to projects whose budget equals or exceeds $25
million over the life of the project; and ``rail
[[Page 480]]
infrastructure'' refers to network capacity expansion or enhancement,
excluding maintenance-of-way. The data must be reported to the Board
between 9AM and 5PM Eastern Time on the first Tuesday of each quarter.
In the event that the first Tuesday of a quarter is a Federal holiday
or falls on a day when STB offices are closed for any other reason,
then the data should be reported on the next business day when the
offices are open.
The following will not appear in the CFR:
Appendix
The additional information below is included to assist those who
may wish to submit comments pertinent to review under the Paperwork
Reduction Act:
Description of Collection
Title: Rail Service Data Collection.
OMB Control Number: 2140-XXXX.
STB Form Number: None.
Type of Review: New collection.
Respondents: Class I railroads (on behalf of themselves and the
Chicago Transportation Coordination Office (``CTCO'')).
Number of Respondents: Seven.
Estimated Time per Response: The proposed rules seek three
related responses, as indicated in the table below.
Table--Estimated Time per Response
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated
time per
Type of responses response
(hours)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weekly..................................................... 3
Quarterly.................................................. 3
On occasion................................................ 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frequency: The frequencies of the three related collections
sought under the proposed rules are set forth in the table below.
Table--Frequency of Responses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frequency
of
Type of responses responses
(per year)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weekly..................................................... 52
Quarterly.................................................. 4
On occasion................................................ 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Burden Hours (annually including all respondents): The
recurring burden hours are estimated to be no more than 1,182 hours
per year, as derived in the table below. In addition, there are some
one-time, start-up costs of approximately 2 hours for each
respondent filing a quarterly report that must be added to the first
year's total burden hours. To avoid inflating the estimated total
annual hourly burden, the two-hour start-up burden has been divided
by three and spread over the three-year approval period. Thus, the
total annual burden hours for each of the three years are estimated
at no more than 1,186.67 hours per year.
Table--Total Burden Hours
[Per year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated time Frequency of
Type of responses Number of per response responses (per Total yearly
respondents (hours) year) burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weekly.......................................... 7 3 52 1,092
Quarterly....................................... 7 3 4 84
On occasion..................................... 1 3 2 6
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... .............. .............. .............. 1,182
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total ``Non-hour Burden'' Cost: None identified. Reports will be
submitted electronically to the Board.
Needs and Uses: The new information collections would allow the
Board to better understand current service issues and potentially to
identify and resolve possible future regional and national service
disruptions more quickly. Transparency would also benefit rail
shippers and stakeholders, by allowing them to better plan
operations and make informed business decisions based on publicly-
available real-time data, and their own analysis of performance
trends over time.
Retention Period: Information in this report will be maintained
in the Board's files for 10 years, after which it is transferred to
the National Archives.
[FR Doc. 2014-30940 Filed 1-5-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P