WASHINGTON — The Surface Transportation Board will wrap up the fact-finding portion of its investigation into the on-time performance of Amtrak’s Sunset Limited on Friday and has set a schedule for the remainder of the proceeding.
In a decision issued yesterday, the STB also ordered Amtrak to provide an opening statement that addresses several key points related to Amtrak’s right of preference over freight trains and how the board should award damages for violations.
Among the points Amtrak must address in its brief:
- Explain what would constitute a violation of Amtrak’s right of preference over freight trains.
- Whether the STB should rely on the Federal Railroad Administration’s definition of a host railroad and whether multiple railroads could be considered host railroads on a given portion of the Sunset Limited’s 1,997-mile route between Los Angeles and New Orleans.
- Address any other legal issues Amtrak believes are relevant to whether host railroads violated the Sunset Limited’s right of preference.
- Address the extent of the STB’s authority to award damages. Is this authority limited to damages for preference violations that cause a passenger train to fall below the 80% minimum on-time performance threshold for two consecutive calendar quarters? Or does the board have the authority to award damages for any failure to provide preference?
The other parties to the case — Union Pacific, BNSF Railway, Canadian National, New Orleans Public Belt Rail Commission, the Southern California Railroad Authority, and Canadian Pacific Kansas City — were ordered to submit replies to Amtrak’s opening statement.
The STB also ordered Amtrak and UP to address several questions.
First, how UP’s dispatching algorithm assigns Amtrak and UPS trains the highest priority ranking and whether this practice should be analyzed from a right of preference standpoint.
Second, there is disagreement over which railroad hosts the Sunset Limited between New Orleans Union Passenger Terminal and Live Oak, La. Amtrak should explain the nature of its relationship with the railroads that own the tracks or operate over them and to identify which railroad is considers to be the host carrier.
Third, the Federal Railroad Administration lists the UP-Amtrak schedule for the Sunset Limited as “disputed.” Under FRA regulations, a disputed schedule is one in which changes are sought that are or have been subject to non-binding dispute resolution. Amtrak and UP should explain what schedule changes were sought, what dispute resolution was used, and to produce documents related to schedule changes. If no schedule changes have been sought, or if no dispute resolution is under way, Amtrak and UP should explain why the schedule was reported as “disputed” rather than “uncertified.”
The decision also denied Amtrak’s request for the STB to issue a show-cause order regarding UP’s preservation of dispatching playback records. Finally, the STB ordered UP resubmit its narrative explanations for host railroad delays to the Sunset Limited that were 90 minutes or longer. At issue: UP labeled the entire narrative as “highly confidential” when the board wants the investigative process to be as transparent as possible. The board said it was unclear why UP’s entire narrative would be designated “highly confidential,” particularly when no other host railroad redacted its narrative explanations.
Amtrak’s opening statement is due by Oct. 7. Railroad party replies to the opening statement are due by Dec. 23. Replies from non-parties to the case are due by Jan. 22, 2025. Amtrak’s rebuttal to all replies is due by Feb. 21, 2025.
Amtrak brought the first-of-its-kind case to the STB in December 2022, seeking damages and other relief from UP over what it called the “abysmal” handling of the Sunset, and proposing how to handle the case.
The discovery process of the case was supposed to conclude by Dec. 20, 2023, but has dragged on due to eight requests for extensions after Amtrak filed a motion to compel UP to provide certain information.
