Investigating Railroad Crossing Fees

If you are concerned about the rising costs of railroad crossing fees and want to do something about it, now is the time to come together as a group and formulate a clear path forward to stop this injustice.

Railroad crossing permit fees are a concern for the utility industry and the annual rental fees for these crossings installations continue to rise. Over the last six years, the fees charged by the railroad industry have skyrocketed to unbelievable levels. A utility company in Alabama has experienced increases for annual lease agreements from $900 to $18,000 in one year. Some potential utility customers are not able to obtain basic utility service due to the outrageous expense of crossing a railroad right of way. It is wrong for anyone to be denied basic utility services because of a railroad right of way.

The utility industry must develop a clear path forward to address these railroad crossing fees. If this was another type of expense, such as fuel, material, etc., every utility would be seeking alternate sources to compete with these rising costs. Plastic pipe was developed as an alternative to the high cost of steel pipe. Service vehicles have been downsized to reduce fuel costs. Increased technology has been installed to offset increased labor costs. Why is the railroad crossing fee expense not investigated and addressed by the utilities?

Very simply – TIME.

Most, if not all, utility installations are installed in very short time windows. The utility company normally does not have a large window of time to deal with the railroad crossing permits and the legal expense to question the permitting of the installation. The normal attitude by most utilities has been to pay the fee and pass it along to the customers. However, the U.S. economy at this time can no longer absorb this high cost of doing business as usual. Secondly, with customers searching for every way possible to save money, this additional expense could be a determining factor in customer retention or customer turnover.

In reviewing alternatives, some of the questions raised are why is there a charge for crossing a railroad at a street intersection? If the street is public property, should there be a charge for this use? If the railroad states that they own the land, have they completed a title search to document their ownership in order to validate their fee structure? What is the value of the land in question? Would it be better for the utility to condemn the land and provide the railroad with a right of way for their continued use? What do the federal government regulators of the railroad industry have to say about this type of condemnation option? Are all the utilities being charged the same amount for each individual crossing? Many questions need to be addressed.