|SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD DECISION DOCUMENT|
|SUNBELT CHLOR ALKALI PARTNERSHIP V. NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY|
|Director Of Proceedings|
|DECISION ESTABLISHED A PROCEDURAL SCHEDULE FOR THIS PROCEEDING.|
| 14 KB|
|Approximate download time at 28.8 kb: 33 Seconds|
If you do not have Acrobat Reader, or if you have problems reading our files with your current version of Acrobat Reader, the latest version of Acrobat Reader is available free at www.adobe.com.
|Full Text of Decision|
42038 SERVICE DATE – LATE RELEASE NOVEMBER 21, 2011
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD
Docket No. NOR 42130
SUNBELT CHLOR ALKALI PARTNERSHIP
NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY AND
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
Decided: November 21, 2011
This decision establishes a procedural schedule for this proceeding.
Alkali Partnership (Sunbelt) challenges the reasonableness of rates and service
terms established by Norfolk Southern Railway Company (NSR) and Union Pacific
Railroad Company (UP) (collectively, defendants) for the transportation of
chlorine from McIntosh, Ala., to
On November 15, 2011, Sunbelt filed a motion in which it requests that the Board adopt the following procedural schedule:
Discovery Closes February 6, 2012
Joint Submission of Operating Characteristics April 9, 2012
Complainant’s Opening June 1, 2012
Defendants’ Replies October 1, 2012
Complainant’s Rebuttal February 6, 2013
Closing Briefs March 8, 2013
Sunbelt states that NSR and UP have authorized counsel for Sunbelt to represent that defendants do not oppose the motion. However, defendants’ authorization is predicated on Sunbelt’s acknowledgement that, if Sunbelt and UP are unable to reach a settlement, this procedural schedule will need to be extended to permit sufficient time for the Board to decide UP’s motion for partial dismissal, as well as to allow UP and Sunbelt to engage in discovery, which they have deferred during the mediation period. Sunbelt requests that the Board adopt this procedural schedule without prejudice to an extension if Sunbelt and UP are unable to reach a settlement prior to January 1, 2012.
Sunbelt’s unopposed motion to establish a procedural schedule will be granted, and the procedural schedule set forth above will be adopted for this proceeding, without prejudice to an extension if Sunbelt and UP are unable to reach a settlement prior to January 1, 2012. The parties are reminded that they may request a staff-supervised discovery conference, pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 1111.8(b) (2).
This decision will not significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or the conservation of energy resources.
It is ordered:
1. Sunbelt’s motion for a procedural schedule is granted, and the schedule described above is adopted for this proceeding, without prejudice to an extension if Sunbelt and UP are unable to reach a settlement prior to January 1, 2012.
2. This decision is effective on its service date.
By the Board, Joseph H. Dettmar, Acting Director, Office of Proceedings.