Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
You have 5 more viewings!
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
You have 4 more viewings!
You have 2 more viewings.
Unfortunately, you have no more viewings.
In March, ReMA petitioned the Surface Transportation Board (STB) to lift the ex parte restrictions on communications with the Surface Transportation Board regarding the 704 proceeding to revoke the long standing rail exemption for ferrous scrap. The rail exemption forbids shippers from using the STB’s investigative authority when conflicts between those covered commodities and the railroads occur. The STB granted ISRI’s petition to openly communicate with the STB including meetings with the Board and staff. And, as a result of ISRI’s petition, the American Association of Railroads (AAR) replied to the STB requesting that cost benefit analysis be part of all rule makings.
This week, ISRI, along with many other associations responded to the AAR petition arguing that while we support cost benefit analysis in rule makings, it should not be made a permanent and required component for all rulemaings. For example, ReMA argued that the STB should not be required to conduct a cost benefit analysis for each rule making when it would be impracticable for such an alsysi to be conducted. In most cases, it would be impossible to analyze the costs to the thousands of various commodities traveling over the rail system. Additionally, the STB does not have the financial or staff capability to conduct multiple cost benefit analysis at the same time. No other U.S. agency is required by regulation to conduct such analysis. Moreover, most cost benefit analysis are conducted for rules that concern environmental or health impacts rather than commercial and market impacts.
The AAR petition is a naked attempt to slow down the STB’s enforcement and rule making capabilities. ReMA also argued that even while we generally support the use of cost benefit analysis when appropriate, the proceedings such as 704 and 721 (reciprocal switching) should not be impacted since cost benefit analysis is not applicable and a thorough waybill analysis was conducted that demonstrated the need to revoke the rail exemption for ferrous scrap commodities.