What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Intervenors who participated as parties at the courts of appeals should be counted as either appellants or respondents when it can be determined whose position they supported. For example, if there were two plaintiffs who lost in district court, appealed, and were joined by four intervenors who also asked the court of appeals to reverse the district court, the number of appellants should be coded as six.
When coding the detailed nature of participants, use your personal knowledge about the participants, if you are completely confident of the accuracy of your knowledge, even if the specific information is not in the opinion. For example, if "IBM" is listed as the appellant it could be classified as "clearly national or international in scope" even if the opinion did not indicate the scope of the business. 

Your task concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "private organization or association", specifically "other". Your task is to determine what subcategory of private association best describes this litigant.

Opinion:
RAILWAY LABOR EXECUTIVES ASSOCIATION, Petitioner, v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents, Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Co., et al., Intervenors.
No. 88-1391.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
April 11, 1991.
Before WALD and BUCKLEY, Circuit Judges, and ROBINSON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Senior Circuit Judge ROBINSON did not partic-ípate in this matter.
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
On consideration of intervenors’ petition for rehearing filed October 12,1989, and of the supplemental memorandum in support thereof filed March 27, 1991, it is
ORDERED by the court that inter-venors’ petition for rehearing be denied. Intervenors’ suggestion that the court’s opinion of August 29, 1989 (883 F.2d 1079) be modified in light of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Norfolk & Western Ry. v. American Train Dispatchers Ass’n, — U.S. —, 111 S.Ct. 1156, 113 L.Ed.2d 95 (1991), is granted as follows:
At 883 F.2d at 1082, delete the second full paragraph beginning “Our recent decision in Brotherhood of Railway Carmen....”, as well as the introductory phrase of the third paragraph, “Although that issue is squarely presented here, we find it inappropriate to consider the question because”. Insert the following introductory phrase at the beginning of the third paragraph: “We find, however, that”.

Question: This question concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "private organization or association", specifically "other". What subcategory of private association best describes this litigant?

Choices:
Civic, social, fraternal organization
Political organizations - Other than political parties Examples: Civil rights focus; Public Interest - broad, civil liberties focus (ACLU) or broad, multi-issue focus (Common Cause, Heritage Foundation, ADA) or single issue - Environmental ENV, Abortion, etc. (prolife, pro-abortion), elderly, consumer interests: Consumer Federation of America, Consumer's Union, National Railroad Passenger Association; PAC
Political party
Educational organization - Private, non-profit school
Educational organization - Association, not individual school - PTA or PTO
Religious or non-profit hospital or medical care facility (e.g., nursing home)
Other religious organization (includes religious foundations)
Charitable or philanthropic organization (including foundations, funds, private museums, private libraries)
Other
Unclear

Answer: 1