Hillsboro Branch

Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.

Moderator: MEC407

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Sat Mar 25, 2017 7:01 am

eustis22 wrote:so the adverse thing filing.....does this mean that PAR is going to reactivate service?


They're trying to take the conveyor belt biz from Milford & Bennington. The adverse discontinuance filing is limited to only the 5 miles between Law Stone and Granite State, and not the unused outer 15 miles to Monadnock Paper Mill at end-of-track. So if they succeed MBRX would lose all current business, but technically still have rights to serve Monadnock. But Monadnock immediately becomes moot because their revenues would be zeroed out and they (1) would immediately fold before ever being able to make a phone call to the mill, (2) can't recover costs on that 15-mile run to serve very small carloads on the mill to ever live by that alone. So any which way MBRX goes immediately out of business.

Double-whammy to Billerica's spite game. A fallen flag, and NHDOT is left with little choice but to (not immediately, but inevitably) abandon all track beyond the quarry when it's unable to RFP for a new carrier, because PAR won't touch anything beyond the quarry.


As for the conveyor belt...nutty if they plan to run it as-is because it's 2 trips per day between quarry and plant. As if Billerica didn't already waste enough on taxi fare from slop ops they're now going to have to burn fares 5 days a week on a Nashua crew to handle this. And power rotation will be iffy since they can barely complete their own NA-1 job to Wilton without canning on the return trip to Nashua. I suppose if Law & GS invested in more siding storage and better loading machinery so their carloads could be more efficiently crammed into a single round trip that would do away with the need for the twice-a-day conveyor belt and allow for a vanilla NA-1 daily job to tack it on at the end. It's the only scenario that would make PAR appropriate enough profit margins for this spite move against MBRX to make a lick of business sense. But that assumes somebody's going to pay for the customer storage expansion, and that somebody is going to staff-up NA-1 well enough to run it on-time without need to outlaw most days on the trip back to Nashua.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7083
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby mbrxnh1 » Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:20 pm

As president of the MBRX, I have been asked to comment on the number of recent posts concerning the MBRX and a PAR filing which seeks an adverse discontinuance. First, PAR has not filed an application for an adverse discontinuance against the MBRX. PAR has filed a "petition for waiver" with the STB and in their filing indicated they intend to file an application to seek an adverse discontinuance on or about April 20, 2017 against the MBRX. The MBRX will be responding to the petition for waiver shortly. Should PAR file an application for an adverse discontinuance, the MBRX, Granite State Concrete and others will vehemently oppose such a PAR filing. The petition for waiver only includes the PAR trackage from MP 16.36 in Wilton to MP 11.00 in Milford. The MBRX operates from MP 13.4 (Granite State Concrete in Milford - PAR section) to MP 18.68 (Granite State Concrete's Wilton quarry - MBRX section). Although rarely used, the trackage from MP 18.68 to MP 30.10 is maintained to FRA Class 1. The trackage beyond MP 30.10 is presently out of service. The active trackage between MP 16.36 to MP 18.86 (state owned) is maintained to an FRA Class 3 condition.

The MBRX will continue to meet our obligations and has NO interest in curtailing our service to Granite State Concrete or the State of New Hampshire.
mbrxnh1
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:35 am

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby Jeff Smith » Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:54 pm

Thank you for the official clarification; please keep us posted as the matter progresses.

-Jeff Smith, Site Admin
Next stop, Willoughby
~Jeff Smith (fka "Sarge") :: RAILROAD.NET Site Administrator
Jeff Smith
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7404
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:28 am
Location: MP 67.2 Georgia Southern Railway

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby BostonUrbEx » Sat Mar 25, 2017 4:04 pm

mbrxnh1 wrote:The active trackage between MP 16.36 to MP 18.86 (state owned) is maintained to an FRA Class 3 condition.


Wow, meanwhile the entire Hillsboro Branch (PAR) is excepted track.
User avatar
BostonUrbEx
 
Posts: 3577
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Winn to MPT 8, Boston to MPN 38, and Hat to Bank

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby BM6569 » Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:01 am

Besides the freight main the DE runs on, best track in the state!
User avatar
BM6569
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 12:19 pm
Location: Hebron, Maine

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby NHV 669 » Mon Mar 27, 2017 7:57 pm

Doubt it, the SLR can fly in some spots in the woods up here.....
Casey
Living near right-of-ways since 1989. Old haunts include: childhood sightings of 669 being the last to "de-rust" the Berlin branch, late 90's summers trackside at the Wagon Wheel of Biddeford, ME, White River Junction, VT, Oneonta, NY, Colorado Springs, CO, and Santa Barbara, CA.
User avatar
NHV 669
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:07 pm
Location: Just east of Scott Jct. on the Mountain Division

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby newpylong » Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:39 pm

The Portland Division is better track than anything the SLR has.
newpylong
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:32 pm
Location: NH

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby b&m 1566 » Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:58 am

Isn't the SLR Class 3 and the Portland Division Class 4?
b&m 1566
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 2:09 am
Location: Hudson, NH

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby NHV 669 » Sun Apr 09, 2017 6:46 pm

Not sure, but I believe most if not all of the VT section is CWR now.
Casey
Living near right-of-ways since 1989. Old haunts include: childhood sightings of 669 being the last to "de-rust" the Berlin branch, late 90's summers trackside at the Wagon Wheel of Biddeford, ME, White River Junction, VT, Oneonta, NY, Colorado Springs, CO, and Santa Barbara, CA.
User avatar
NHV 669
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:07 pm
Location: Just east of Scott Jct. on the Mountain Division

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby newpylong » Sun Apr 09, 2017 7:47 pm

That doesn't mean anything. Most of PAS is CWR and it's only class 2.

So.e of the SLR is Class 3 and always has been, but no Class 4 like most of the Portland Division.
newpylong
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:32 pm
Location: NH

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby b&m 1566 » Mon Apr 24, 2017 3:58 pm

Is 503 still sitting in Milford today?
b&m 1566
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 2:09 am
Location: Hudson, NH

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby johnpbarlow » Wed May 24, 2017 3:41 am

Monadnock Paper has submitted a letter to the STB in opposition to Pan Am Railways' Petition for Waiver seeking adverse discontinuance of the Milford-Bennington Railroad's operations. Interesting excerpt:
Over the years, we have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars maintaining the track to our Mill. That did not prevent Pan Am from discontinuing service many years ago. If we are ever to have
any chance of regaining service, it will only be if the Milford-Bennington Railroad is operating the line.


https://www.stb.gov/filings/all.nsf/ba7f93537688b8e5852573210004b318/e117b8d98e4339a48525812800664866/$FILE/243313.pdf

Also, the Town of Wilton has weighed in at the STB indicating it doesn't favor the waiver:
https://www.stb.gov/filings/all.nsf/ba7f93537688b8e5852573210004b318/8835850840df2ac485258129005b7860/$FILE/243381.pdf

I'm guessing the track condition between Wilton and Bennington isn't very good having not been used for several years?
johnpbarlow
 
Posts: 1615
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:50 pm

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby newpylong » Wed May 24, 2017 8:38 am

Not that I support giving the M&B the boot, but it's a odd filing by the Mill. If they were interested in using rail they would have done so by now.
newpylong
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:32 pm
Location: NH

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby b&m 1566 » Wed May 24, 2017 2:19 pm

I'm confused: I wasn't aware the B&M abandoned operations first, I though the abandonment came after the mill stopped using rail service.
b&m 1566
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 2:09 am
Location: Hudson, NH

Re: Hillsboro Branch

Postby Dick H » Wed May 24, 2017 5:27 pm

If NS takes over PAR, they would probably attempt to sell the PAR portion of the line
to the state or a short line operator. The PAR portion needs considerable track work.
The state would work get some TIGER grant money for repairs, that is, until
yesterday. The anti-rail and everything else Sheriff in DC has proposed ending all
TIGER grants.
Dick H
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 8:55 pm
Location: Dover, NH

PreviousNext

Return to Pan Am Railways (formerly Guilford Rail System)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests