STB and Passenger Rail

[McLeansvilleAppFan]

I was in a discussion about the Asheville-Salisbury route and the other person seems to think anything not going directly to Charlotte is a waste of money and they don't mean heading on to Charlotte after Salisbury but using the CSX line through Shelby or the L and O through Mooresville or some other route.

They are convinced the federal government through the STB can just dictate to a freight railroad to carry passenger rail. I don't think that is this case, and even if possible it is not how to go about this. But I just want the pure legal and statutory authority explanation of the powers of the STB.
So my question to this knowledgeable body does the STB have the authority to go to a freight railroad and insist that passenger rail will run over their tracks regardless of the freight companies feelings on the matter. I assume there is some difference in the legacy routes taken over by Amtrak in 19712 or even later and starting a new route now, but maybe now.

Educate me please.

 

[Metra Electric Rider]

This, "They are convinced the federal government through the STB can just dictate to a freight railroad to carry passenger rail", sounds like YIMBY arguments, complaints really, I read in development message boards and blogs where people are upset that projects aren't built on vacant lots despite not owning them or the lots not even being for sale.

I think you are generally right in your assumptions, but I don't know the nuance to it. If were that easy, we'd have better rail service (possibly, with funding).

 

[jis]

Maybe this article will be found of some use in explaining the situation about passenger rail access to freight routes and right of ways

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R42512.html

 

[AmtrakMaineiac]

Maybe this article will be found of some use in explaining the situation about passenger rail access to freight routes and right of ways

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R42512.html

I thought that the right of Amtrak to be able to run passenger trains over freight railroads only applied to those railroads that joined Amtrak in return for being allowed to drop their own passenger trains. For example Amtrak could not demand to run trains over the FEC since in 1971 it had no remaining passenger service and did not join Amtrak.

 

[jis]

I thought that the right of Amtrak to be able to run passenger trains over freight railroads only applied to those railroads that joined Amtrak in return for being allowed to drop their own passenger trains. For example Amtrak could not demand to run trains over the FEC since in 1971 it had no remaining passenger service and did not join Amtrak.

That is my understanding too.

Here is a Wikipedia article on the subject:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_railroads_eligible_to_participate_in_the_formation_of_Amtrak

 

[McLeansvilleAppFan]

That is my understanding too.

Here is a Wikipedia article on the subject:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_railroads_eligible_to_participate_in_the_formation_of_Amtrak

Which raises the question: CSX or its predecessor keep some of the routes (Silver Service) but how would that be handled on a route that was not carrying passengers in 1971 or 1979 for Southern or the other routes that were not part of Amtrak on 1 May 1971. I was under the impression that the legacy routes continued but Amtrak establishing new routes by force was not part of the statutory powers they or any branch of government had to force on the freight companies.

 

[jis]

Which raises the question: CSX or its predecessor keep some of the routes (Silver Service) but how would that be handled on a route that was not carrying passengers in 1971 or 1979 for Southern or the other routes that were not part of Amtrak on 1 May 1971. I was under the impression that the legacy routes continued but Amtrak establishing new routes by force was not part of the statutory powers they or any branch of government had to force on the freight companies.

My understanding is that companies joined the agreement, not individual routes. Eventually mergers and acquisitions brought more routes into the compact. But I could be wrong.

Southern joined Amtrak eventually, and in that act made any of its routes available for Amtrak service. However, all that it does is that NS has to sit down and talk about it and negotiate. They cannot outright refuse. At the end of the day the prices and other conditions have to be agreed upon anyway. Same with Denver and Rio Grande Western, now part of UP.

Nothing prohibits any railroad from entering into and agreement with Amtrak or any other outfit to run trains for an agreed upon price. It is not like passenger trains do not run on segments that were not part of the original Amtrak deal. Heck Western Pacific refused to join the compact and refused to talk to Amtrak. Eventually they were acquired by companies that did and then Amtrak has run on their trackage.

For example SEPTA struck a deal with Reading for running Commuter Service even though Reading by itself did not join anything, but eventually joined Conrail. And of course FECR which never joined anything eventually decided to run passenger service for All Aboard Florida which does business as Brightline and even though eventually the two companies involved are owned by very different owners they continue to work together. So almost anything can happen. 1971 was a long time back now.

 

[west point]

About SOU RR. One of its owned RRs (Cof GA) did run until 1971. Nancy Hanks actually ran on last day before Amtrak with a short stub using a steam loco 750 then diesel rest of way to Savannah. Was never litigated in court but several informal challenges of that relationship could have prevented SOU from avoiding Amtrak. The question now is moot.

 

[McLeansvilleAppFan]

About SOU RR. One of its owned RRs (Cof GA) did run until 1971. Nancy Hanks actually ran on last day before Amtrak with a short stub using a steam loco 750 then diesel rest of way to Savannah. Was never litigated in court but several informal challenges of that relationship could have prevented SOU from avoiding Amtrak. The question now is moot.

Am I correct is assuming that SOU RR kept the Southern Crescent and Asheville-Salisbury Carolina Special/Asheville Special/Piedmont running more so in the hopes of Amtrak dying before those (and maybe other SOU RR passenger lines I am not aware of) were turned over to Amtrak and then they could be done with it all finally as it relates to passenger rail or was the SOU RR really trying to make a go of it with passenger rail out of historical pride or some thought of making money on it. SOU RR ran an excursion for a bit even after Asheville-Salisbury route stopped in 1975.

 

[Bostontoallpoints]

My understanding is that companies joined the agreement, not individual routes. Eventually mergers and acquisitions brought more routes into the compact. But I could be wrong.

Southern joined Amtrak eventually, and in that act made any of its routes available for Amtrak service. However, all that it does is that NS has to sit down and talk about it and negotiate. They cannot outright refuse. At the end of the day the prices and other conditions have to be agreed upon anyway. Same with Denver and Rio Grande Western, now part of UP.

Nothing prohibits any railroad from entering into and agreement with Amtrak or any other outfit to run trains for an agreed upon price. It is not like passenger trains do not run on segments that were not part of the original Amtrak deal. Heck Western Pacific refused to join the compact and refused to talk to Amtrak. Eventually they were acquired by companies that did and then Amtrak has run on their trackage.

For example SEPTA struck a deal with Reading for running Commuter Service even though Reading by itself did not join anything, but eventually joined Conrail. And of course FECR which never joined anything eventually decided to run passenger service for All Aboard Florida which does business as Brightline and even though eventually the two companies involved are owned by very different owners they continue to work together. So almost anything can happen. 1971 was a long time back now.

Also, one of the biggest reasons that the railroads agreed to Amtrak running passenger rail was because Amtrak took over financing the pensions of the employees of the passenger trains.

 

[railiner]

Also, one of the biggest reasons that the railroads agreed to Amtrak running passenger rail was because Amtrak took over financing the pensions of the employees of the passenger trains.

And that continues to this day...Amtrak employees are all in the Railroad Retirement system, and their contributions helps a lot in financing same especially considering the ever shrinking number of freight railroad active employees.