[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14858-14859]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5991]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[Docket No. FD 35582]


Rail-Term Corp.--Petition for Declaratory Order

    On December 14, 2011, Rail-Term Corp. (RTC) filed a petition for an 
order declaring that it is not a ``rail carrier'' within the definition 
at 49 U.S.C. 10102(5), and therefore not subject to the Board's 
jurisdiction. The Railroad Retirement Board (Retirement Board) 
determines coverage of employers and employees under the Railroad 
Retirement Act, 45 U.S.C. 231 et seq. (Retirement Act) and the Railroad 
Unemployment Insurance Act, 45 U.S.C. 351 et seq. (Insurance Act). The 
Retirement Act and Insurance Act both define an ``employer'' as a 
carrier by rail subject to the jurisdiction of the Surface 
Transportation Board (STB or Board). See 45 U.S.C. 231(a)(1)(i); 45 
U.S.C. 351(b). The Retirement Board held that RTC was a ``covered 
employer'' in its initial decision and on reconsideration.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On January 28, 2011, the Retirement Board issued Board 
Coverage Decision 11-14, finding again that RTC is a ``covered 
employer.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    RTC appealed the reconsideration decision of the Retirement Board 
to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.\2\ The D.C. Circuit held the 
petition for review in abeyance to allow RTC to petition the STB for a 
declaratory order on the question of whether RTC is a rail carrier 
under 49 U.S.C. 10102(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Rail-Term Corp. v. R.R. Ret. Bd., No. 11-1093 (D.C. Cir., 
filed Nov. 14, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 20, 2012, RTC filed a request for a procedural schedule.

[[Page 14859]]

Under the schedule, RTC requests that after a declaratory order 
proceeding has been instituted, opening comments be due on day 30; 
reply comments be due on day 60; RTC's rebuttal comments be due on day 
75; and a decision by the Board be served on day 135. On January 23, 
2012, the American Train Dispatchers Association (ATDA) filed an 
opposition to the request for a procedural schedule. ATDA states that 
there is no reason to prolong the case by requesting additional 
comments and briefings.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ After RTC filed its petition for a declaratory order, the 
Retirement Board and ATDA filed comments in response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petition for a declaratory order raises issues that require 
consideration by the Board. By this decision, the Board is instituting 
a proceeding under 49 U.S.C. 721(a). An accurate and complete record is 
required for the Board to determine whether it has jurisdiction over 
RTC. Therefore, RTC and ATDA are directed to supplement the record in 
this proceeding by March 28, 2012, with copies of their respective 
filings submitted to the Retirement Board and D.C. Circuit in the 
course of those proceedings. If parties other than RTC and ATDA 
submitted filings before the Retirement Board and D.C. Circuit, RTC 
must submit copies of those filings, as well as any transcripts of 
proceedings before those bodies. Because this additional information 
will assist the Board in making a jurisdictional determination, no 
further briefings from the parties are necessary, and the request for a 
procedural schedule is denied.
    This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the 
human environment or the conservation of energy resources.
    Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at 
``www.stb.dot.gov.''

It Is Ordered

    1. The request for institution of a declaratory order proceeding is 
granted.
    2. RTC and ATDA are directed to supplement the record by March 28, 
2012.
    3. The request for a procedural schedule is denied.
    4. This decision is effective on its service date.


    By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.

    Decided: March 7, 2012.
Jeffrey Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2012-5991 Filed 3-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P