|
<br />
<br />RAIL Ch. 109
<br />
<br />ceniorari denied 102 S.CL 388, 454 U.S.
<br />892, 70 L-Ed..2d 206.
<br />!';. _ Freiiht ~, locomotives, and
<br />other equipment
<br />RegulatioJ')$ of Commission [no:-v
<br />Boardl ,overning ab~dol1Jt1cnt of. 1'aI~
<br />road lines and discontinuance of ral\ ser.
<br />vice were inv8.lid to ex:e,:,t they estab-
<br />lished that, in de.ten'l'lliUIlg avoidable
<br />cost$, depreciation COSts fo: locomot:v~.
<br />freight C3~, and other equipment attrib-
<br />utable to branch line of $emce should be ,
<br />based cr. uri",ia...I Look I;O:lt. of Iud! '
<br />equ.ipmer.t rather, than costs wl;ich woukl
<br />~t stay consum- be aveided if semte were lermtn.a.ted a.od
<br />c: by ""I camCt equipmcl\t uced .Isewb.ere on ~ilr",.d. :
<br />ninue operation i.e., cost of purchasing new equlJ:me!1..
<br />1 Chicago and NeM Western Transp. Co.,
<br />!$ent emp oyeud v. U.S,. C.A.7 CIlI.) 1978, 582 F.2d .1043,7.
<br />IIqe'" I":lfflp.r an d:1
<br />,live bargaining supplemented 582 F.2 1066, ceT11,?I'&:',
<br />ch relief would denied 99 S.Ct. 641, 439 U.S. 103-1, S8;
<br />or modification LEd.2ti 698. ;'
<br />nmerce COl'lUJlb- 6. _ Income taX effects . 'f'
<br />portatien Board) On remand of proceeding fo.r ~eV1C:w ~
<br />as authorized to I"egu!ati"M At4nf'>rp.d by ComrnlS$lon [n~,
<br />,t carrier's appli- Board) in cool1i!Ction wi~ StatU~cS I!~'
<br />:!.e would be dis- erning abandonment ?f rall~d hn~ .'
<br />,ummation of the discontir.uanCi: of roul service, C~
<br />.1:\.".l..iv~' Ass'n v. s~on would be .required to. reconsldeorr '"
<br />:.A.2 (N.Y.) t 986. failure to provide for conslderatlon .
<br />deDled 107 S.Ct. fects of income laxe$ uFon return of
<br />..:Ed..2d ~78. ty and 10 explain why. It bl:lu::V~ :;U
<br />, or consolidation rtgulations were cons15tcnt With
<br />j-"~~ed Chicago and Nonh Western Transp.
<br />UIij-' . ".!":., C.A.7 (Ill.) 11)78,582 F.2.1 .t().t
<br />;tjon of lmersune ." - 66 rfJ
<br />Ig offers or [lLan. supplemented 5B2 F.ld 10 ,ce039
<br />off abandonment denied 99 S.Ct. 641. 439 U.S. 1 .
<br />t~ctiel1 under LEd.1d (,QII
<br />.ng iicquisition of 7. - Labor tO$l$ "
<br />or consolidiiUOn. Certain labor COSts incu rred oy ~
<br />7 1 QI!; ?frO 1='.20. WI:I ~ ,,""p~rly found by Com~ ,
<br />06 S.CL 791. 474 (now Beard) to be avoidable upon;,
<br />69. donment of rail line, bcca,!-sc even ,
<br />road wen! t?'1' I;rP.'; to m3.lItUUI1 c;J'f:
<br />~y ab--~oned section. work would.
<br />;"1"... "avoidable III1(1 Id P
<br />......e> on rest of line which crew (:au .
<br />that would not be and because retcntioc. of tra1J"._
<br />I were Ah=<ionqd. would further reduce its labCr I;(!S~:
<br />purely economic cawe reusignmem of employed '1/
<br />I meUt1Te of mar. reduce its training and hiting of nd I
<br />se Ulr~ redUC' ployees, "cople uf S",,1c of m. v .
<br />>UtpU\ and \\Te reo C.A.7 1983.698 F.2d 868. ~'
<br />o.a1 occur thT'Qugb "
<br />b. aow statements With respeet to proposed ~ ~'
<br />7e5' attributable to er nil liu"', L..w. .:..-ew w~eo; wb
<br />Particular serlice. costs that were avoidiible \I~a. a
<br />:. C.. C.A.8. 1981. mento when: collective barga~
<br />or.ui del11ea 10:2 menl r~Q\.'ir~t4 tr.:u wages 0 aed.
<br />Z. 10 LEd.2d 206. paid even if line wcre IlbanCO
<br />124
<br />
<br />IJUuvI
<br />Id.onrocnt con-
<br />lder Minnesota
<br />pr~cmpted oy
<br />:rely ~ il
<br />nClmically opti-
<br />.y6eld Nl)rth"'..n
<br />I1d North West-
<br />.fiJm.19a4, 104
<br />81 L.Ed.:zd 527.
<br />
<br />elL 109 LICENSING
<br />
<br />of Cherokee v. 1. C. C" CA8, 1981. 64 1
<br />FJd 1220, ccnioral'i denied 102 S.Ct,
<br />387.454 U.S. 892. 70 _L,Ed.lel 206. cer-
<br />tioran denied 102 S.\:.t. jlllS, 454 U,5.
<br />89Z. 70 L.Ed.2d 206.
<br />
<br />.. ~ Opportumt)' CMU
<br />"Opportunity coses" ~ factor in deter-
<br />ll\inillg burcen on intersuuc commerce
<br />from continued operation of rail linp.
<br />sought to be abandoned nre defined a.$
<br />ru1 economic loss whic:h an entity expe-
<br />rien~cs when it must forego some other.
<br />!Dore prol'ita;,le use ot' its resources, ar.d
<br />they are comput~ by multiplying net liq.
<br />iddation value of Hne by ndequate ra~ of
<br />IQIoIIII, C<:II ""'11>villt: E.levator. lnc, v,
<br />LC.C., CA.S, 1984. 724 F.ld 666. on re-
<br />hearing 735 F.2d 1059.
<br />
<br />,. - Rehabilitation costs
<br />~ (;(Jmmission (now Board] acted pro~r-
<br />It in adopting regulation imp!ementinE
<br />It.tllIes concer~ abandoJ1mcrJt of raiI-
<br />Nld lines aM discontinuance of rail ser.
<br />me which included T\\habilitation cost in
<br />'OU\;Cpt of "avoidable CO$t" only if track
<br />~ol'fed were not ~fe for operating
<br />Speeds of ten miles per hcur or lower.
<br />c:bIeaso !IDe!. N,W. T'IIoIIo:>V. Ce. v. u.s..
<br />C-A.7 (111.) 1978, 582 F,2d 1043, supple-
<br />IIIented 582 f.2d 1066. certiorari denied
<br />, -~ S.Q. 641. ~Q U.S. 1039, SB LSd.~d
<br />", .69'.
<br />'/ ,:,.
<br />, .1" P'-"""nement of 4Ibandonmenl
<br />I ' -......
<br />~ c:oun ContraCt $1,Iit brought by
<br />"I;~road which had proposed to buy ma-
<br />y SegInents of abandoned t.-ack did not
<br />! "hoe po3tpel1CJulIlJl ot abandonment
<br />, by selling railroad, particu-
<br />.J wbere railroad which had proposed
<br />
<br />
<br />49 ~ 10905
<br />
<br />to buy traCk was party which had default.
<br />ed On purchase agreement. Sirnme~ v,
<br />l.C.c.. C.A 7. 1985, 784 F.2d 242.
<br />
<br />II. Purehase price esubli$be.d by Board
<br />Proper ~"tat\ltory arId constitutional
<br />3tOJ'ld..rd for detcuui"ALivlI \)y Cumm!s-
<br />sion (oow Board) of purchase price of
<br />railroad line 50ughl to be abandoned is
<br />f;:lir fJ1arut ulv:agGl v:a1ue that line WQuld
<br />have had to railroad had it been permit-
<br />ted to abandon line. Chicago and North
<br />Western Transp. Co..... u. S.. C.A.7. 191\?
<br />678 F.2d 66S.
<br />
<br />12. Subsidy compensatlon established
<br />by DQ~....J
<br />Interstale Commerce Commission [now
<br />Surface Tral1Sportation Board) had not
<br />euItic;.,ntly indicated to ship~1 .....uuul
<br />of subsidy which shipp~r would be re-
<br />quired to make [0 compel carrier to con.
<br />tinue opP.r:lTil'le line wh,ch it wished tQ
<br />abandon; labor ~sts waich carrier
<br />weuld incur by not abandoning line were
<br />not sufficient:y set forth. Crand Prairie
<br />Coop. Inc. v. I.C.C" CA.7. 1994, 16 F.3d
<br />789.
<br />
<br />13. Binding natUn, urlltHIcl1 dcclstons
<br />, Revised Interstate Commerce Act, gov.
<br />erning offers of financial assistam;:e 10 rail
<br />=rnen; to :h'oid abllndotlmonc And JQ-
<br />co:Jtinuan~e of raillincs, does nOl permit
<br />selling carrier to back Out of Sale of rail
<br />litle QI;Ce transaction ha:<: .........n IIUthQl"i2ed
<br />by Interstatt: COmmerte Commistion
<br />[110W Surface Transportiition Board).
<br />. Railway Labor Executivu' A$s'n v. Staten
<br />Wand R. Corp., C.A.2 (N.Y.) 1986. 792
<br />F.2d 7, certiorari denied 107 S.Ct. 97.7,
<br />479 U.S. 1054, 93 LEd.2d 918.
<br />
<br />
<br />Offering abandoned ra1l properties Cor sale for public
<br />purposes
<br />
<br />en the Board approves an application to abandon Or di$contin-
<br />,;. undf.'r section 10903. the BViinl shall find whether the rail
<br />nics that are involved in the proposed abandonment or discon-
<br />.. ce are appropriate for use for public purpo!;e~, inr.1uding
<br />,ways, other forms of mass transportation, conservation, energy
<br />, uction or transmission, or recr~tion. If the Board finds that
<br />'~ail pf"opc:nics pt"oposetJ Lv be:! abandoned are appropriate for
<br />; C PUrposes and not required for continued rail operations, the
<br />t1ies may be sold, leased, exchanged, Or othp.l"'\.Visp. r!isposed of
<br />. under conditions provided in the order of the Board. The
<br />125
<br />
<br />/'
<br />
|