96-5515. Disclosure, Publication, and Notice of Change of Rates and Other Service Terms for Rail Common Carriage  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 47 (Friday, March 8, 1996)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 9413-9415]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-5515]
    
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
    
    Surface Transportation Board
    
    49 CFR Chapter X
    
    [STB Ex Parte No. 528]
    
    
    Disclosure, Publication, and Notice of Change of Rates and Other 
    Service Terms for Rail Common Carriage
    
    AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board, DOT.
    
    ACTION: Advance Notice Of Proposed Rulemaking.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The ICC Termination Act of 1995 (ICCTA) eliminated the tariff 
    and tariff filing requirements formerly applicable to rail carriers, 
    but imposed in lieu thereof certain obligations to disclose common 
    carriage rates and service terms as well as a requirement 
    
    [[Page 9414]]
    for advance notice of an increase in such rates or change in service 
    terms. The ICCTA requires the Board to promulgate regulations to 
    administer these new obligations by June 29, 1996. The Board seeks 
    public comment on appropriate regulations for that purpose, and 
    encourages the affected interest groups to discuss and seek mutually 
    agreeable regulations to propose.
    
    DATES: Comments are due on April 8, 1996.
    
    ADDRESSES: Send comments (an original and 10 copies) referring to STB 
    Ex Parte No. 528 to: Surface Transportation Board, Office of the 
    Secretary, Case Control Branch, 1201 Constitution Avenue NW., 
    Washington, DC 20423.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beryl Gordon, (202) 927-5610. [TDD for 
    the hearing impaired: (202) 927-5721.]
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The ICC Termination Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 
    104-88, 109 Stat. 803 (ICCTA), enacted on December 29, 1995, abolished 
    the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) and transferred responsibility 
    for the economic regulation of rail transportation to a new Surface 
    Transportation Board (the Board). See ICCTA Section 101 (abolition of 
    the ICC). See also new 49 U.S.C. 701(a) (establishment of the Board), 
    as enacted by ICCTA Section 201(a). The transfer took effect on January 
    1, 1996. See ICCTA Section 2 (effective date).1
    
        \1\ The ICCTA also made several changes to the rail regulatory 
    authority that had been administered by the ICC. In this notice, 
    when referring to the provisions of the United States Code affected 
    by ICCTA we use the word former to refer to the law in effect prior 
    to January 1, 1996, and the word new to refer to the law in effect 
    on and after January 1, 1996.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        The substantive provisions of the new law differ in several 
    important respects from the former law. As pertinent here, the former 
    law required that rail carriers file with the ICC tariffs containing 
    the specific rates and charges (or the basis for calculating them) for 
    their common carriage transportation services. Rail carriers had to 
    adhere to the rates and terms contained in their tariffs. See former 49 
    U.S.C. 10761 and 10762. See also 49 CFR part 1314 (1995).
        The ICCTA eliminated the rail tariff requirements, effective 
    January 1, 1996. Accordingly, no new rail carrier tariffs are to be 
    filed with the Board, and the rail carrier tariffs that were previously 
    filed with the ICC are no longer effective tariffs as of January 1, 
    1996. The ICC regulations at 49 CFR part 1314, governing rail carrier 
    tariffs, are likewise not effective as of that date and are being 
    formally repealed in another proceeding recently initiated by the 
    Board.
        Nevertheless, new 49 U.S.C. 11101(b) and (d) require disclosure of 
    rail common carriage rates and service terms. New 49 U.S.C. 11101(c) 
    further requires that rail carriers, when providing common carriage, 
    not increase their rates or change their service terms without advance 
    notice. Finally, new 49 U.S.C. 11101(e) requires rail carriers to 
    adhere to the rates and service terms published or otherwise made 
    available under new 49 U.S.C. 11101(b)-(d).2
    
        \2\ A central feature of both the old and new law is the 
    requirement that a rail carrier adhere to its established rates. 
    Therefore, as a transition matter, a question that arises is whether 
    a rail carrier must continue to adhere to its established rates and 
    service terms--those that were in effect (in tariffs on file with 
    the ICC) on December 31, 1995--unless and until changed in a manner 
    consistent with the requirements of new section 11101. Otherwise, it 
    could be argued that there could be a break in the continuity of 
    rates that Congress did not intend.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        New 49 U.S.C. 11101(f) directs the Board to establish rules to 
    implement the requirements of new 49 U.S.C. 11101. In accordance with 
    this directive, we intend to promulgate new regulations to implement 
    the requirements of new 49 U.S.C. 11101(b), (c), and (d). We do not 
    believe that implementing rules are required for new 49 U.S.C. 
    11101(a), which simply reenacts the longstanding common carrier 
    obligation that the carrier provide transportation or service on 
    reasonable request. We believe that this obligation, which has been 
    well developed through case law, is best addressed on a case-by-case 
    basis.
        Similarly, our preliminary view is that implementing rules are not 
    required for new 49 U.S.C. 11101(e), which requires a rail carrier to 
    provide transportation or service in accordance with the rates and 
    service terms, and any changes thereto, as published or otherwise made 
    available under new 49 U.S.C. 11101(b), (c), or (d). This requirement 
    appears to be clear on its face.
        The regulations implementing new section 11101 would appear to 
    apply to any transportation or service provided by a rail carrier 
    subject to our jurisdiction under new 49 U.S.C. 10501, with two 
    exceptions. They would not apply, it would seem, to transportation or 
    service provided by a rail carrier (1) under a contract pursuant to 
    former 49 U.S.C. 10713 or new 49 U.S.C. 10709, or (2) covered by an 
    exemption issued under former 49 U.S.C. 10505 or new 49 U.S.C. 10502, 
    to the extent that such exemption remains in effect and applies to rate 
    notice and disclosure requirements.
        The new regulations would first need to address the requirement of 
    new 49 U.S.C. 11101(b) that a rail carrier promptly provide to any 
    person, on request, its rates and other service terms. It would appear 
    that this requirement applies both to the disclosure of an existing 
    rate (and related service terms) and to the establishment of a new rate 
    (and related service terms) where none exists.
        In the situation where the carrier has existing rates covered by 
    the rate information request, the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 11101(b) and 
    (f) require the carrier ``immediate[ly]'' to disclose its ``rates and 
    service terms, including classifications, rules, and practices'' to any 
    person requesting such information. We seek suggestions for a rule that 
    would implement these provisions in a way that would provide the rate 
    requester with complete information about all relevant terms and 
    conditions. We also seek input on whether we should attempt to define 
    the word immediately, or instead should simply establish general 
    guidelines to be applied on a case-by-case basis, setting up broad 
    parameters governing disclosure.
        There may be instances in which a shipper or prospective shipper 
    requests the carrier to establish a rate for a type of traffic for 
    which no existing rate is in place. Again, the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 
    11101(b) appear to require that the rail carrier provide a rate, as 
    well as any related charges and service terms, promptly. We seek input 
    on whether we ought to define the word promptly, or instead should 
    simply adopt broadly applicable guidelines.
        The new regulations also need to address the requirement of new 49 
    U.S.C. 11101(c) that a rail carrier may not increase a common carriage 
    rate or change a common carriage service term without first giving 20 
    days' notice to any person who, within the previous 12 months, (1) has 
    requested that rate or term under new subsection (b), or (2) has made 
    arrangements with the carrier for a shipment that would be subject to 
    the increased rate or changed term. It seems to us that the advance 
    notice requirement would apply to known users of the transportation or 
    service to which the increase or change is applicable (i.e., a person 
    who has made a shipment within the past year or has already made 
    arrangements for a future shipment) and also to known prospective users 
    of such transportation or service (i.e., a person who has requested 
    that rate to be established). Our preliminary view is that it would not 
    be necessary or appropriate to require a carrier to keep a record of 
    and notify all persons who have requested rate information but are not 
    users of the 
    
    [[Page 9415]]
    affected transportation service. We request comment on what guidance, 
    if any, should be given for determining which members of the shipping 
    public are covered by the 20-day notice period.
        We note that the notice requirement does not apply to a rate 
    decrease, which a carrier may apply without notice. Similarly, it would 
    not seem that the notice requirement should apply to, and hence delay, 
    a change in service terms that is clearly beneficial to shippers. Our 
    initial view is that it is not necessary to establish rules addressing 
    how to determine whether a service change is clearly beneficial to 
    shippers. Commenters may wish to address this issue.
        The new regulations also need to address the publication 
    requirement of new 49 U.S.C. 11101(d), which requires railroads to 
    ``publish, make available, and retain for public inspection [their] 
    common carrier rates, schedule of rates, and other service terms,'' and 
    any changes thereto, for the transportation of agricultural products 
    (including grain, as defined in 7 U.S.C. 75, and all products thereof) 
    and fertilizer. It should be noted that the publication requirement for 
    these commodities is in addition to the disclosure and notification 
    requirements of new subsections (b) and (c). This additional 
    requirement reflects Congress' concern that broad dissemination of 
    market information on a timely basis is particularly critical to the 
    agricultural sector of the economy, given the seasonal nature of its 
    transportation needs and the short time frame within which such needs 
    must be met.
        It would seem that the required publication could be provided by 
    the rail carrier itself or by an agent (e.g., a publishing service or 
    another rail carrier) acting at the rail carrier's direction. It would 
    also seem that these publications would need to be made available to 
    all interested persons, but that the rail carrier or its agent should 
    be able to impose reasonable charges for such publications.3 We 
    seek comment on how best to implement this provision. Again, we request 
    input on how to interpret the requirement that publication of any 
    proposed or actual changes be made promptly.
    
        \3\  Of course, to accommodate particular segments of the 
    agricultural sector, it would seem that carriers could, at their 
    discretion, continue to issue more narrowly focused publications as 
    well.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Finally, the new regulations should provide for the required 
    information to be supplied either in writing or in electronic form. It 
    would appear that the form chosen would depend upon the technical 
    capacities of the carrier to transmit, and of the requester to receive, 
    the information.
    
    Request for Comments
    
        We invite all interested persons to comment and to offer 
    suggestions for the new regulations. We encourage affected interest 
    groups to discuss these new requirements with each other and to seek a 
    mutually agreeable set of regulations that would meet the needs of all 
    affected interests--both shipper and carrier, and both large and small.
        Comments (an original and 10 copies) must be in writing, and are 
    due on April 8, 1996.
        We encourage any commenter that has the necessary technical 
    wherewithal to submit its comments as computer data on a 3.5-inch 
    floppy diskette formatted for WordPerfect 5.1, or formatted so that it 
    can be readily converted into WordPerfect 5.1. Any such diskette 
    submission (one diskette will be sufficient) should be in addition to 
    the written submission (an original and 10 copies).
    
    Small Entities
    
        Because this is not a notice of proposed rulemaking within the 
    meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), we 
    need not conduct at this point an examination of impacts on small 
    entities. We will certainly welcome, of course, any comments respecting 
    whether regulations that commenters may suggest would have significant 
    economic effects on any substantial number of small entities.
    
    Environment
    
        The issuance of this advance notice of proposed rulemaking will not 
    significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or the 
    conservation of energy resources. Furthermore, we would not expect that 
    regulations suggested for implementing new 49 U.S.C. 11101 would 
    significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or the 
    conservation of energy resources. We certainly welcome, of course, any 
    comments respecting whether suggested revisions would have any such 
    effects.
    
        Authority: 49 U.S.C. 721(a) and 11101.
    
        Decided: February 29, 1996.
    
        By the Board, Chairman Morgan, Vice Chairman Simmons, and 
    Commissioner Owen.
    Vernon A. Williams,
    Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 96-5515 Filed 3-7-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4915-00-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
03/08/1996
Department:
Surface Transportation Board
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Advance Notice Of Proposed Rulemaking.
Document Number:
96-5515
Dates:
Comments are due on April 8, 1996.
Pages:
9413-9415 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
STB Ex Parte No. 528
PDF File:
96-5515.pdf
CFR: (1)
49 CFR None