Where to Find Railroad Performance Data?

NOT USED 2

Rail service in the US has been in utter turmoil over the last several years. The Surface Transportation Board (“Board”) has been carefully watching these problems and has expressed grave concerns about the Class I Railroads’ hiring and operating practices. Rail shippers have reached their wits’ end in trying to predict when their freight will arrive. It has been a difficult time, to say the least, for everyone involved. However, the Board does provide data on rail service and hiring that may be helpful to rail shippers as they try to navigate through these troubled rail lines.

Presently, by regulation, the Board collects certain railroad performance data metrics from Class I Railroads on a weekly and monthly basis. Also, the Board actively monitors, on an informal basis, the national rail network, including network fluidity and service issues, through, for example, the Railroad-Shipper Transportation Advisory Council, the Rail Customer and Public Assistance Program, and information requests to Class I Railroads.

This initial requirement for railroads to provide service data in 49 C.F.R. § 1250.2 stemmed from the massive rail service crisis in 2013-14. During this service crisis, the Board held two hearings in 2014 to give interested persons the opportunity to report on rail service problems, hear from rail industry executives on plans to address those problems, and discuss additional options to improve service.

After considerable review, the Board issued a Final Rule requiring all Class I Railroads and the Chicago Transportation Coordination Office to report certain service performance metrics in United States Rail Service Issues – Performance Data Reporting, EP 724 (Sub-No. 4) (STB served November 30, 2016). The Board issued various Railroad Performance Data Elements that the Class I Railroads must report, including train speed, dwell time, cars on line, trains holding, cars not moved in 48 hours, grain car information, coal unit train information, and carloads in interchange.  See 49 C.F.R. § 1250.2. The rules also required reporting on Chicago rail traffic and rail infrastructure projects. See 49 C.F.R. § 1250.3 and 4.   

While the existing metrics were helpful, some critics stated first mile / last mile (“FMLM”) metrics are a better source of data because they are a truer reflection of service than these required metrics which only reflect velocities from terminal to terminal. Many rail shippers argued that FMLM data better indicates the service they are actually receiving, as the metrics now required in 49 C.F.R. § 1250.2 are too general to allow the Board (and shippers) to assess local service.

Hearing these complaints, the Board sought comments in its August 31, 2021, order in EP 767 about FMLM service performance data reporting and other measures to improve rail service on the U.S. rail network. Later, the Board held a hearing on Urgent Issues in Freight Rail Service, due to the serious service problems across the country’s rail network. On May 6, 2022, the Board, in EP 770 (Sub-No. 1), required all Class I carriers to submit the following additional information on a weekly basis for six months:

  1. The weekly average terminal dwell times, measured in hours, for the carrier’s 11th through 20th largest terminals (to augment the system-wide data and the data currently reported for the ten largest terminals under 49 C.F.R. § 1250.2(a)(5)).
  2. The weekly average number of train starts per day (to augment the weekly average number of trains held per day data currently reported under 49 C.F.R. § 1250.2(a)(5)), sorted by train type (intermodal, grain unit, coal unit, automotive unit, crude oil unit, ethanol unit, other unit, and manifest).
  3. The following information, reported separately for privately-owned, TTX-owned, and railroad-owned cars: (i) the weekly average number of cars per day in storage; (ii) the weekly average number of cars per day in service with no mileage; (iii) the weekly average number of cars per day in service with mileage; (iv) the weekly average number of car miles per day; and (v) the aggregate number of car miles per week.
  4. With respect to recrews, for each operating division and for the system: (i) the weekly number of unplanned recrews due to compliance with federal hours of service regulations, and (ii) the recrew rate measured as a percentage of total crew starts.
  5. For each operating division and for the system, the percentage of scheduled spots and pulls that were fulfilled. (This is sometimes referred to in the industry as “Industry Spot and Pull.”)
  6. For each operating division and for the system, the weekly average number of local trains canceled per day, and the aggregate number of local trains canceled per week, broken down by cause (crew, locomotive power, or other).
  7. (i) For rail cars moving in manifest service, the percentage of cars constructively or actually placed at destination within 24 hours of the original estimated time of arrival. (ii) For the following types of unit trains (grain unit, coal unit, automotive unit, crude oil unit, and ethanol unit), the percentage of trains constructively or actually placed at destination within 24 hours of the original estimated time of arrival. (iii) For intermodal traffic, the percentage of trains that arrive at destination within 24 hours of the original estimated time of arrival. For movements involving more than one rail carrier in each of the specified categories, the destination for the upstream carrier shall be treated as the interchange location with the subsequent railroad. Finally, the Board directed Class I rail carriers to provide the following information on a monthly basis for a six-month period:
    1. For each category of employees covered in the Monthly Report of Number of Railroad Employees (Form C) submitted to the Board’s Office of Economics under 49 C.F.R. § 1246.1:
      1. total employee count;
      2. how many employees were added;
      3. how many employees were separated (with a breakout of those employees who separated by voluntary resignation);
      4. how many employees have been furloughed but are potentially available for recall;
      5. the number of “extra-board employees”; and
      6. for categories 300, 400, 500, and 600, how many employees are working in active service (as opposed to completing training courses).

Carriers are required to report these data for each railroad operating division to the maximum extent practicable, and should also report these data on a system-wide basis.

The Board in making this request was looking for more information regarding FMLM and on-time performance. This change in focus seemed to be a step in the right direction for rail shippers to assess railroad performance. However, some shippers still find the information to be too general and jumbled to help them with their service issues and are urging the Board to require more specific information, so they may assess their specific rail issues. The rulemaking in EP 767 regarding FMLM data remains open and is the best place for shippers to make suggestions of this nature and improve the usefulness of the data provided by railroads to the Board.

All of this data provided to date can be found at https://www.stb.gov/reports-data/rail-service-data/ (In addition, more employment data can be found at https://www.stb.gov/reports-data/economic-data/employment-data/ ) The Board has extended the order for the railroads to report the data in Urgent Issues in Rail Service. It will be interesting to see where the Board eventually ends up in EP 767.