The Board s competitive access guidelines state that it will impose competitive access when a railroad is offering inadequate service or using its control of its facilities to prevent a more efficient railroad from serving a captive shipper. This policy is somewhat different from the competitive access policy in telecommunications because it is selective. Until recently, this assumption made sense, because local telephone companies have historically enjoyed monopoly franchises that prevented competitors from entering their markets. Railroads, in contrast, face a great deal of competition for most of their traffic. Accordingly, current railroad regulation is tailored to address particular situations where monopoly power could be abused, and regulators require proof of abuse before they act.
Shippers have other regulatory options.
Proposals to expand competitive access in railroad also ignore another key difference between railroad and telecommunications regulation. This means that the Board regulates not just the rate charged over the portion of track where a railroad might have a monopoly, but also on any portions of the haul where alternative transportation is available. Long-distance rates are determined by competition, not regulation. In this sense, rail rate regulation for captive shippers is more extensive than in telecommunications. Shippers who cannot get competitive access thus already have another remedy.