CSX Acquisition of Pan Am Railways

jamoldover wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 10:53 am Potential, yes, but not for at least a few years. They're expecting it to take about 5 years to complete all of the infrastructure improvements that are needed (particularly in Maine).

Despite the track condition in D-1, I would think that CSX could still make a pretty strong economic case for Irving to at least shift traffic originating or terminating on CSX to the former PAR route. Even if you lose a day's transit with the 10 MPH track, it's still way less miles than going say CN-HUNT-CSX over the top and it's amazing what customers will put up with when it comes to $$.

I'm not so sure on that - I don't see CSX wanting to transport oil over 10 MPH track no matter how much customers are willing to pay for it - the last thing they need is a PR nightmare on a property they just purchased with loud claims of "we're going to make this a safe operation and improve everything".

Maybe not 100 car CBR trains, but there is already significant haz-mat traffic plying the rails East of Waterville so I don't see carload traffic being an issue at all. Until the line to Keag is upgraded this traffic will likely move via the existing NBSR haulage to Northern Maine Jct.

I couldn't figure out the Ayer MS Paint diagrams, I'm actually surprised they even submitted that but I guess more info the better. Regardless, while the diagrams may be notional the requirements to allow the movements that are noted above are not. I would trust the language and not the diagrams. B&E does not want to be blocked in while NS is dragging in 9,000 feet of Intermodal and likewise CSX wants to be able to reasonably get their train pairs through Ayer unimpeded.

Re: the Adams branch (Industrial) those restrictions are currently in place. PAS is only allowed to use it at certain times during the week, so they are stating nothing will change, even though they are trying to not manage B&E ops.

I find it altogether sad that the several public entities which are supposed to promote rail travel filed against a transaction that obviously will be for the better (for both freight and passenger). Folks need to sit down and talk more instead of litigating.

Once the NS Intermodal train is switched over to the B&A routing, it would seem like you could almost have 2 distinct yards with their own dedicated leads at the North end, with most everything going to or from the west over the B&E taking the west wye into the west side of the yard, with the East side being for intermodal, from both North and South as well as CSX's main line and set-off/pick-up tracks. There would obviously be the need to get CSX Ayer traffic into the B&E side of the yard for switching and local B&E traffic for points East of the yard would need to cross over to the East wye, but other than that, you could really have a dedicated track coming in off the West wye and a dedicated track coming in off the East wye which could really keep things segregated.

FatNoah wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 12:00 am Some interesting stuff:

• Track maps of yards start on page 92 (Selkirk is impressve!)

And Cedar Hill (p. 93), in to addition the Yard Office, has some building called the "Anastasia Circle of Life Pit." One wonders!

It's a construction/demolition waste recycling company. Nothing exciting - sorry to disappoint.

Based on some language in the section on single-line service opportunities, it sounds like CSX may be interested in expanding kaolin and slurry handling through Portland?

CP filed a notice of participation

Keith Creel had a few comments about CSX-PAR a while back. I can't find it but he said something along the lines of "We haven't looked into cooperation between CP and CSX in New England yet, but with two like-minded class I railroads operating in the region, great things could happen." I have to wonder if CSX would be interested in Searsport. They could easily get trackage rights from Northern Maine Junction. Perhaps having two class Is could attract more interest and investment in the underperforming port.

Looking through the application, other than the market analysis and a whole bunch of new maps, there is nothing really new in the application. The market analysis itself says that CSX expects the amount of traffic over PAR to remain relatively stable and that the main focus of the acquisition is to provide better service for those shippers using a CSX-PAR routing through single-line service and infrastructure upgrades (page 288-289). CSX says that mass conversion of truckloads to carloads can only happen once all infrastructure upgrades are done, which should take a few years (page 289-290).

As for the B&E, it is much the same story. The B&E will be able to operate PAS more efficiently and at a lower cost than currently; however, growth is expected over time and not immediately (page 290). Interestingly, the application refers to the Conn River Line as the "Knowledge Corridor." Anyone else heard this name used? As for the VTR dispute, CSX argues that there will be no loss of competition because B&E won't be operated with the rest of the G&W system (page 297). Yeah right...

Anyways here's the revised schedule:

July 1, 2021 Application due.
July 30, 2021 Board notice of acceptance of application to be published in the Federal
Register.
August 20, 2021 Notices of intent to participate in this proceeding due.
August 30, 2021 Descriptions of anticipated responsive, including inconsistent, applications
due. Petitions for waiver or clarification with respect to such applications
due.
Comments, protests, requests for conditions, and any other evidence and
argument in opposition to the Application or Related Transactions due.
This includes any comments from the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”)
and U.S. Department of Transportation (“USDOT”).
September 29, 2021 Responsive, including inconsistent, applications due.
October 19, 2021 Responses to comments, protests, requests for conditions, and other
opposition due, including to DOJ and USDOT filings. Responses to
responsive, including inconsistent, applications due. Rebuttal in support of
the Application and Related Transactions due.
November 9, 2021 Rebuttal in support of responsive, including inconsistent, applications due.
TBD Public hearing (if necessary).
December 9, 2021 Final briefs due. (Close of the record.)
March 9, 2022 Service date of final decision.
April 8, 2022 Effective date of final decision.

This post is already long enough. I'm going to read through some of the verified statements and make another one on them.

"Knowledge Corridor" is regional marketing name with web site calling attention to the Connecticut River valley's defining attributes re: all the colleges/universities in the region.

https://knowledgecorridor.org/about/his ... rtnership/

CN9634 wrote:Absolutely-- the 'Blue Nose' POSJ/SJPO traffic dented both MMA and CN volumes (mostly MMA) but now it'll surely move CSX to prominent northeast markets. I'm told CSX wants to run Keag to Rigby in one crew in the next 5 years.

That would seem to imply flawless Class 2 conditions with minimal enroute switching.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

So, PAR named a train after a sailing ship?

https://www.cbc.ca/kidscbc2/content/the ... ressor.jpg

Or even a Motor Vessel?

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/~CYAAOSw ... s-l300.jpg

Technically and OT, the Bluenose was a famous Nova Scotian racing and fishing schooner:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluenose

Welcome to nautical New England, Mr. Norman.

They named their newsletter after a flying boat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_314_Clipper) or was it a sailing ship (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper)? Don't know.
http://www.panamrailways.com/panam-clipper