[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 72 (Friday, April 12, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16281-16284]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9129]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 16282]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 10)]
Responsive Application--Capital Metropolitan Transportation
Authority
[Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 11)]
Responsive Application--Montana Rail Link, Inc.
[Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 12)]
Responsive Application--Entergy Services, Inc., Arkansas Power & Light
Company, and Gulf States Utility Company
[Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 13)]
Responsive Application--The Texas Mexican Railway Company
[Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 14)]
Application for Terminal Trackage Rights Over Lines of the Houston Belt
& Terminal Railway Company--The Texas Mexican Railway Company
[Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 15)]
Responsive Application--Cen-Tex Rail Link, Ltd./South Orient Railroad
Company, Ltd.
[Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 16)]
Responsive Application--Wisconsin Electric Power Company
[Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 17)]
Responsive Application--Magma Copper Company, The Magma Arizona
Railroad Company, and the San Manuel Arizona Railroad Company
AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.
ACTION: Decision No. 29; notice of acceptance of responsive
applications.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Board is accepting for consideration the responsive
applications filed by Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority
(CMTA) in Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 10); Montana Rail Link,
Inc. (MRL) in Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 11); Entergy Services,
Inc. (ESI), Arkansas Power & Light Co. (AP&L), and Gulf States
Utilities Co. (GSU) (collectively, Entergy) in Finance Docket No. 32760
(Sub-No. 12); The Texas Mexican Railway Company (Tex Mex) in Finance
Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 13), including Tex Mex's application for
terminal trackage rights over lines of the Houston Belt & Terminal
Railway Co. in Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 14); Wisconsin
Electric Power Company (WEPCO) in Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No.
16); and Magma Copper Company, The Magma Arizona Railroad Company
(MAA), and the San Manuel Arizona Railroad Company (SMA) (collectively,
Magma) in Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 17). The Board is not
accepting for consideration the responsive application filed by Cen-Tex
Rail Link, Ltd./South Orient Railroad Company, Ltd. (Cen-Tex/South
Orient) in Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 15).1 These
responsive applications are responsive to the primary application filed
November 30, 1995, by Union Pacific Corporation (UPC), Union Pacific
Railroad Company (UPRR), Missouri Pacific Railroad Company (MPRR),
Southern Pacific Rail Corporation (SPR), Southern Pacific
Transportation Company (SPT), St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company
(SSW), SPCSL Corp. (SPCSL), and The Denver and Rio Grande Western
Railroad Company (DRGW).2
\1\ The Alameda Historic Complex (Alameda) filed a pleading on
March 29, 1996, titled as a responsive application for trackage
rights and other specified conditions. Because Alameda did not file
a description of an anticipated responsive application by the
January 29, 1996 deadline, and because it has not complied with the
procedures for filing applications found at 49 CFR 1180, we will
treat Alameda's pleading as comments on the primary application.
LSBC Holdings, Inc. (LSBC), which filed a timely notice and
description of inconsistent/responsive application, filed its LSBC-3
pleading on March 29, 1996, titled as a proposed inconsistent and
responsive application. LSBC explains that, at this time, it is
``unable to file a Responsive Application worthy of review by the
STB.'' We will treat LSBC's pleading as comments on the primary
application.
\2\ UPRR and MPRR are referred to collectively as UP. SPT, SSW,
SPCSL, and DRGW are referred to collectively as SP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: The effective date of this decision is April 12, 1996. Comments
regarding any responsive application must be filed with the Board by
April 29, 1996. Rebuttal in support of these responsive applications
must be filed with the Board by May 14, 1996. Briefs (not to exceed 50
pages) must be filed with the Board by June 3, 1996.
ADDRESSES: An original and 20 copies of all comments referring to
Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 10), Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-
No. 11), Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 12), Finance Docket No.
32760 (Sub-No. 13), Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 14), Finance
Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 16), and/or Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No.
17), as appropriate, must be filed with the Office of the Secretary,
Case Control Branch (Attn: Finance Docket No. 32760), Surface
Transportation Board, 1201 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, D.C.
20423. Parties are encouraged also to submit all comments on a 3.5-inch
diskette in WordPerfect 5.1 format.
In addition, one copy of all comments filed in these proceedings
must be served, by first class mail, on: the Secretary of
Transportation; the Attorney General of the United States;
Administrative Law Judge Jerome Nelson, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 825 North Capitol Street NE., Washington, D.C. 20426; Arvid
E. Roach II, Esq., Covington & Burling, 1201 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
P.O. Box 7566, Washington, D.C. 20044-7566 (representing primary
applicants UPC, UPRR, and MPRR); and Paul A. Cunningham, Esq., Harkins
Cunningham, 1300 Nineteenth Street NW., Washington, D.C. 20036
(representing primary applicants SPR, SPT, SSW, SPCSL, and DRGW).
Also, one copy of all comments filed in these proceedings must be
served, by first class mail on the appropriate responsive applicant's
representative: Albert B. Krachman, Esq., Bracewell & Patterson,
L.L.P., 2000 K Street NW., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 20006
(representing CMTA); Mark H. Sidman, Esq., Weiner, Brodsky, Sidman &
Kider, P.C., 1350 New York Avenue NW., Suite 800, Washington, D.C.
20005 (representing MRL); Christopher A. Mills, Esq., Slover & Loftus,
1224 Seventeenth Street, NW., Washington, D.C. 20036 (representing
Entergy); Richard A. Allen, Esq., Zuckert, Scoutt & Rasenberger, 888
17th Street, NW., Suite 600, Washington, D.C. 20006-3939 (representing
Tex Mex); Thomas F. McFarland, Jr., Esq., McFarland & Herman, 20 North
Wacker Drive, Suite 1330, Chicago, IL 60606-2902 (representing WEPCO);
and Fritz R. Kahn, Esq., Fritz R. Kahn, P.C., Suite 750 West, 1100 New
York Avenue, NW., Washington, D.C. 20005-3934 (representing Magma).
Furthermore, one copy of all documents in these proceedings must be
served, by first class mail, on all other persons designated parties of
record [POR] on the Board's service list in Finance Docket No. 32760.
See Finance Docket No. 32760, Decision No. 15 (served February 16,
1996), as modified by Finance Docket No. 32760, Decision No. 17 (served
March 7, 1996), and Decision No. 26 (served March 25, 1996).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia Farr, (202) 927-5352. [TDD for
the hearing impaired: (202) 927-5721.]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the primary application filed with the
Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) on November 30, 1995, primary
applicants UPC, UPRR, MPRR, SPR,
[[Page 16283]]
SPT, SSW, SPCSL, and DRGW seek approval and authorization under 49
U.S.C. 11343-45 (as effective prior to January 1, 1996) for: (1) the
acquisition of control of SPR by UP Acquisition Corporation
(Acquisition), an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of UPC; (2) the
merger of SPR into UPRR; and (3) the resulting common control of UP and
SP by UPC. In Decision No. 9 (served December 27, 1995, and published
that same day in the Federal Register at 60 FR 66988), the ICC accepted
the primary application for consideration, and directed that all
responsive applications be filed by March 29, 1996.
The ICC Termination Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 104-88, 109 Stat. 803
(ICCTA), which was enacted on December 29, 1995, and took effect on
January 1, 1996, abolished the ICC but transferred certain of its
functions and certain proceedings then pending before it to the Board.
We issue this decision in accordance with the ICCTA section 204(b)(1)
transition rule, which provides that proceedings pending before the ICC
at the time of its termination that involve functions transferred to
the Board shall be decided by the Board under the law in effect prior
to January 1, 1996. The Finance Docket No. 32760 proceeding, which was
pending with the ICC at the time of its termination, involves functions
transferred to the Board under 49 U.S.C. 11323-26 (as effective on and
after January 1, 1996).
In Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 10), CMTA seeks, on behalf of
an unnamed rail carrier unaffiliated with applicants, trackage rights
over what will be, if the Board approves the proposed merger, the UP/SP
track between McNeil and Kerr, TX, with interchange rights with the
Burlington Northern Railroad Company and The Atchison, Topeka, and
Santa Fe Railway Company (collectively, BN/Santa Fe) at either McNeil
or Kerr. CMTA further requests that we direct applicants to cooperate
with CMTA to arrive at a mutually acceptable accommodation of CMTA's
planned passenger rail service through the McNeil interchange, and that
we retain jurisdiction over this issue in the event CMTA and the merged
railroad are unable to reach agreement.
In Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 11), MRL seeks authority to
acquire rail lines, incidental trackage rights, interchange access, and
proportional ratemaking authority to SP stations in California and
Oregon to mitigate alleged loss of competition in the central route
from Northern California to Kansas City, MO, resulting from the
proposed merger.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ MRL seeks to have a to-be-formed entity (the ``Acquisition
Company'') purchase the following lines: (1) the UP lines in
California from Stockton, through Sacramento to Marysville, along
with the contiguous branch lines to Read and Sutter, north through
Keddie to Flanigan, NV, including the UP branch line from Reno
Junction south to Reno, NV, and the branch south from Hawley to
Loyalton, CA; (2) the SP line running north from Flanigan to
Alturas, CA, then northwest to Klamath Falls, OR (the ``Modoc
Line''); (3) the line from Flanigan east via the UP route to
Winnemucca, NV, then east to Wells, NV, and Ogden, UT, via the SP
route; (4) from Ogden, all of the DRGW lines, and their contiguous
branches to Salt Lake City, UT, and down to Provo, UT, and east on
the DRGW to Denver, CO, including the branches to Potash, Sunnyside,
Clear Creek, Copperton, and Garfield, UT; (5) all of the DRGW lines
in Colorado, from the Utah border east to Dotsero, including the
branches to Montrose, Oliver, and Woody Creek, and at Dotsero, the
lines northeast to Denver and southeast to Pueblo (the ``Tennessee
Pass''), including branches to Craig and Energy Fuels via Steamboat
Springs; (6) the DRGW line between Denver and Pueblo, extending
south of Pueblo to Antonito, CO, including the branch line to
Creede, CO, and the DRGW's rights, if any, to Trinidad, CO; (7) east
of Pueblo, the rights and ownership of the former MPRR line between
Pueblo and Herington, KS; (8) SP's ownership in and access to the
Kansas City Terminal; and (9) the UP line from Silver Bow, MT, to
Pocatello, ID, and the contiguous branches to Arco, Aberdeen, and
Gay, ID.
MRL seeks approval for the Acquisition Company to acquire all
the railroad rolling stock and equipment owned and leased by UP/SP,
including locomotives, cars, cabooses and equipment, roadway
maintenance equipment and other vehicles currently used to perform
service on the subject lines.
MRL seeks approval for the Acquisition Company to acquire
trackage rights over the following lines: (1) overhead rights on the
UP line from Pocatello to Ogden; (2) overhead rights on the UP from
Lindsborg, KS, to Salina, KS, and from Salina to Solomon, KS, with
access to a direct interchange with Kyle Railways at Solomon; (3)
local trackage rights on the SSW between Herington, KS, and Topeka,
KS; (4) overhead trackage rights on UP between Topeka and Kansas
City; (5) SP's rights on BN/Santa Fe between Topeka and Kansas City.
MRL seeks, on behalf of the Acquisition Company, full access to
interchange with connecting carriers, including shortlines, at all
common points. Finally, MRL seeks for Acquisition Company the right
to quote rates to and from SP stations in California and Oregon for
traffic moving, respectively, via Stockton, CA, and Klamath Falls,
OR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 12), Entergy seeks the
following trackage rights: (1) Overhead trackage rights on behalf of
BN/Santa Fe or some other rail carrier unaffiliated with applicants
over SSW's lines between Pine Bluff, AR, and Memphis, TN, with the
right to transport loaded and empty trains of coal to and from AP&L's
coal-fired, electric generating facilities known as the White Bluff
Steam Electric Station near Redfield, AR (White Bluff) upon
construction of a spur build-out from the White Bluff power plant to a
connection with SP at Pine Bluff; and (2) overhead trackage rights on
behalf of BN/Santa Fe or some other rail carrier unaffiliated with
applicants over SP's line between Beaumont, TX, and a point of
connection with the Southern Gulf Railway Company (SGR) near Lake
Charles, LA, with the right to transport loaded and empty trains of
coal to and from GSU's coal-fired, electric generating facilities known
as the Roy S. Nelson Generating Station near Mossville, LA, upon
completion of construction of SGR's rail line between the connection
with SP and the Nelson power plant.
In Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 13), Tex Mex seeks trackage
rights over lines from Robstown and Corpus Christi, TX, to Houston, TX,
to a connection with the Kansas City Southern Railway Company (KCS) at
Beaumont, TX. Tex Mex seeks rights over those lines to permit it to
carry overhead traffic and to serve all local shippers currently
capable of receiving service from both UP and SP, directly or through
reciprocal switching, with full rights to interchange traffic with UP,
SP, and any other railroad at any interchange point on such
lines.4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Tex Mex requests trackage rights over the following main
lines: (1) the UP line between Robstown and Placedo, TX; (2) the UP
line between Corpus Christi and Odem, TX, via Savage Lane to Viola
Yard on the UP; (3) the SP line from Placedo to Victoria, TX; (4)
the SP line between Victoria and Flatonia, TX; (5) the SP line
between Flatonia and West Junction, TX; (6) in the alternative, the
UP line from Gulf Coast Junction, TX, through Settegast Junction,
TX, to Amelia, TX (UP main line option), or the SP line from Tower
87 to Amelia, TX (SP main line option); and (7) the joint UP/SP line
from Amelia to Beaumont, TX, and the connection with KCS at the
Neches River Draw Bridge in Beaumont.
Tex Mex requests trackage rights in Houston over the following
SP lines: (1) the line from West Junction through Bellaire Junction
to Eureka at milepost 5.37 (Chaney Junction, TX); (2) the SP line
from milepost 5.37 to milepost 360.7 near Tower 26 via the Houston
Passenger station; (3) the SP line from milepost 5.37 to milepost
360.7 near Tower 26 via the Hardy Street yard; (4) if the UP main
line option is used, the SP line from milepost 360.7 near Tower 26
to the connection with the Houston Belt & Terminal Railway Company
(HB&T) at Quitman Street near milepost 1.5; (5) if the SP main line
option is used, the SP line from Tower 26 through Tower 87 to the SP
main line to Amelia; and (6) the SP line from West Junction to the
connection with the Port Terminal Railway Association (PTRA) at Katy
Neck, TX, by way of Pierce Junction.
Tex Mex requests the right to use the following yard and other
terminal facilities of SP, UP, and HB&T: (1) SP's Glidden (TX) Yard;
(2) interchanges with PTRA at the North Yard, Manchester Yard, and
Pasadena Yard in Houston, TX; and (3) interchanges with HB&T at
HB&T's New South Yard.
Tex Mex will seek the right to construct two improved
connections, at Robstown and Flatonia.
Tex Mex requests the Board to condition any approval of the
merger on granting Tex Mex the trackage rights at the same
compensation provided for in the settlement agreement applicants
reached with BN/Santa Fe, except that Tex Mex requests that the
compensation level for its trackage rights operations be subject to
quarterly adjustments for changes in railroad productivity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 16284]]
In Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 14), Tex Mex seeks certain
terminal trackage rights, contingent upon the grant of the conditions
sought in Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 13). It requests an order
pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 11103 permitting Tex Mex to use the following
segments of HB&T terminal trackage in Houston, TX: (1) the HB&T line
from the Quitman Street connection with SP to the HB&T's connection
with UP at Gulf Coast Junction; and (2) the HB&T line from its
connection with the SP at T. & N.O. Junction (Tower 81) to HB&T's
connection with UP at Settegast Junction.
In Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 15), Cen-Tex/South Orient
seeks trackage rights in Texas, and the elimination of minimum payments
and passenger restrictions on trackage rights over SP track from Alpine
Junction, TX, to Paisano Junction, TX.5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Specifically, Cen-Tex/South Orient seeks trackage rights
over: (1) UPRR's Fort Worth line from Tower 55 to the UP Fort Worth
connection with Railtran's line; (2) the UPRR Dallas connection with
Railtran's line to the C.J. Yard in Dallas; (3) the SP line from
Sulphur Springs, TX, to the KCS connection in Texarkana, TX/AR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 16), WEPCO seeks a grant of
overhead trackage rights on behalf of Wisconsin Central (WC) or
Canadian Pacific-Soo Line (CP/Soo) over the following UP rail lines:
(1) between Chicago, IL, Milwaukee, WI, and Cleveland, WI, on the one
hand, and on the other, WEPCO's Oak Creek Power Plant at Oak Creek, WI;
(2) between the Oak Creek Power Plant and Cudahy Shop, Inc., a railcar
repair facility located at Cudahy, WI; and (3) in the terminal areas of
Chicago, IL, and Milwaukee, WI, as may be necessary or desirable to
implement the operations described above.
In Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No. 17), Magma, and its wholly
owned subsidiaries, MAA and SMA, seek overhead trackage rights over the
lines operated by SP between Magma, AZ, and Phoenix and Nogales, AZ,
for the MAA, and between Hayden, AZ (via the Copper Basin Railway
Company (CBRY), a switching carrier for the SP operating between Hayden
and Magma), and Phoenix and Nogales for the SMA.
The responsive applications filed by CMTA, MRL, Entergy, Tex Mex,
WEPCO, and Magma substantially comply with the applicable regulations,
and therefore are being accepted for consideration by the Board.
The responsive application filed by Cen-Tex/South Orient does not
comply with the applicable regulations. The application contains
virtually none of the information required by 49 CFR 1180 for
responsive applications, such as supporting information (49 CFR
1180.6), market analyses (49 CFR 1180.7), operational data (49 CFR
1180.8), and financial information (49 CFR 1180.9).6 Because Cen-
Tex/South Orient's responsive application is incomplete, it is being
rejected by the Board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Cen-Tex/South Orient did not, on or before the January 29,
1996 deadline, file a petition for waiver or clarification to have
its responsive application designated a minor transaction. However,
even if it had successfully done so, it has not filed the
information necessary to support even a responsive application for a
minor transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The responsive applications are available for inspection in the
Public Docket Room at the offices of the Board in Washington, DC. The
responsive application filed by any particular responsive applicant may
also be obtained upon request from that applicant's representative
named above.
The responsive applications in Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-Nos.
10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 17) are consolidated for disposition with
the primary application in Finance Docket No. 32760 (and all embraced
proceedings). Service of an initial decision will be waived, and
determination of the merits of these responsive applications will be
made in the first instance by the Board itself. See 49 U.S.C. 11345(f)
(as effective prior to January 1, 1996).
Interested persons may participate formally by submitting written
comments regarding any or all of these responsive applications, subject
to the filing and service requirements specified above. Such comments
(referred to as ``response[s]'' in the procedural schedule, see 60 FR
at 66994) should be filed with the Board by April 29, 1996. Comments
should include the following: the commenter's position in support of or
in opposition to the transaction proposed in the responsive
application; any and all evidence, including verified statements, in
support of or in opposition to such proposed transaction; and specific
reasons why approval of such proposed transaction would or would not be
in the public interest.
Because the responsive applications accepted for consideration in
this decision contain proposed conditions to approval of the primary
application in Finance Docket No. 32760, the Board will entertain no
requests for affirmative relief with respect to these responsive
applications. Parties may only participate in direct support of or in
direct opposition to these responsive applications as filed.
This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the
human environment or the conservation of energy resources.
It is ordered:
1. The responsive applications in Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-
Nos. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16 and 17) are accepted for consideration, and
are consolidated for disposition with the primary application in
Finance Docket No. 32760 (and all embraced proceedings).
2. The responsive application in Finance Docket No. 32760 (Sub-No.
15) is rejected.
3. The parties shall comply with all provisions as stated above.
Decided: April 5, 1996.
By the Board, Chairman Morgan, Vice Chairman Simmons, and
Commissioner Owen.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-9129 Filed 4-11-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-00-P
