Dear friends,
Last week, the Surface Transportation Board, the federal level interstate rail regulatory agency, issued a decision regarding Texas Central’s request for oral argument related to their petition to reopen. Texas Rail Advocates has already touted this as a positive development for Texas Central, so we wanted to provide some context and clarification to shed light on this interim decision. Much like our last update, this detailed update demonstrates our continued efforts in this fight and stresses the importance for you to remain involved and engaged.
As a refresher, in 2016 Texas Central asked the STB for an exemption so that it could immediately begin construction of its HSR project. The STB declined jurisdiction after finding that the project would be operated entirely in Texas and would not be part of the “interstate rail network.” Texas Central acted like the decision – the first of many setbacks the project has suffered over the years – was a victory, boasting that “STB approval will not be required before construction can start.” Of course, this statement was false: Texas Central knew full well that STB approval is required.
In 2018, Texas Central filed a petition to “reopen” the STB proceeding. Texas Central claimed that it had entered into a “through-ticket” arrangement with Amtrak, which meant that the project would now be part of the interstate rail network. And, Texas Central requested – for a second time – that the STB take jurisdiction over the project. Nearly a year later, Texas Central requested an “oral argument” on its petition to reopen.
At every stage in the STB proceeding, Texans Against High Speed Rail has voiced its opposition to the project loud and clear. TAHSR – through Blake Beckham and Patrick McShan of The Beckham Group, STB specialist Richard Streeter, and Andrew Nehring of Fourth Street Advocacy – has explained to the STB why it should not take jurisdiction over the project, which is certain to be a financial disaster. Most recently, TAHSR filed an opposition to Texas Central’s request for oral argument. In that document, TAHSR told the STB that regardless of any alleged agreement with Amtrak, Texas Central has done nothing to address the “glaring jurisdictional dilemma – the lack of any connection between TCR and Amtrak service in Dallas or Houston. Likewise, nothing that TCR might say during oral argument will change these undisputed facts.”
Last Thursday, the STB issued an interim decision denying Texas Central’s request for oral argument. In addition, the STB asked Texas Central to produce five categories of additional information related to its alleged agreement with Amtrak:
1) Annual projections relating to passenger transfers (passengers transferring from Amtrak to Texas Central’s high-speed train, and vice versa), supported by a full description of the underlying methodologies, assumptions, date, and data sources for the projections, along with Amtrak’s “written concurrence” of them;
2) Details of any physical connection for transferring passengers in Dallas who may choose to walk between the Amtrak station and Texas Central’s proposed station location, including what arrangements have been made, if any, for passengers’ luggage;
3) Details pertaining to any proposed “transfer service” between the Amtrak stations and Texas Central’s proposed station locations (in Dallas and Houston), such as frequency of the transfer service and projected wait times;
4) Legal support for the notion that the STB can assert jurisdiction over the project even though there is “a complete break or gap in physical rail assets”; and
5) Discussion of whether Texas Central’s proposed passenger transfer service is similar to transfer service and related activities in the freight context.
In short, the STB is making Texas Central show its work. Unless an extension is granted, Texas Central must produce this information by July 22. TAHSR, and any other parties, may file replies to Texas Central’s submission by August 9.
Finally, the STB suggested in its recent decision that if it chooses to take jurisdiction over the project, it may require Texas Central to file a full construction approval application, in light of the questions raised by TAHSR and others regarding the project’s rising costs, financial feasibility, and lack of funding. Such an application would require Texas Central to provide full and complete information pertaining to these critical issues to assist the STB in analyzing “the transportation merits of the project.” In its discussion, the STB also noted that concerns “with the scope, costs, and funding” of the California HSR have arisen since the STB’s finding of jurisdiction over that project in 2013.
We believe this latest STB decision is a positive development in our fight against Texas Central. We are pleased that the STB is requiring Texas Central to support its claims with actual evidence and data. The more information Texas Central must fork over, the better. We are confident that once all the facts come to light, the STB will see that Texas Central’s project – a closed, intrastate system – will not be part of the national rail network.
Below is a copy of the STB decision: https://www.texansagainsthsr.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/STB-Order-6-20-19.pdf
As always, thank you for your support of our organized efforts to protect your private property rights and tax dollars. We are proud to represent the very best of Texas.
Truly for Texas,
Kyle Workman
Chair and President
Texans Against HSR
Download / Print