Author Topic: MONON ABANDONMENT  (Read 36770 times)

indyspy

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 9908
  • Resident ATCS guru.
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #20 on: December 20, 2017, 02:21:45 AM »
As of 3/28/2016 all cars, derailed or not, are gone from Mitchell northward on the Monon.

The 251.7 thing is weird. That was the Bedford/Best DTC block point.

That would leave the remaining ex INRD and CSXT trackage in Bedford completely isolated. Really weird.

The thing about the storage cars, they stretched WELL south of the 251.7
« Last Edit: December 20, 2017, 02:00:06 PM by indyspy »
If in doubt, Notch it out!

Wema

  • Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 486
  • A Rail History Nut
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #21 on: December 20, 2017, 08:54:53 AM »
As of 3/28/2016 all cars, derailed or not, are gone from Mitchell northward on the Monon.

The 251.7 thing is weird. That was the Bedford/Best DTC block point.

That would leave the remaining INRD and CSXT trackage in Bedford completely isolated. Really weird.

The thing about the storage cars, they stretched WELL south of the 251.7

I thought INRD abandoned all their lines in Bedford back to Crane in 2009?

MSchwiebert

  • Chief Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #22 on: December 20, 2017, 09:06:48 AM »
Here's the link to the STB filing from yesterday.  Has a map on page 10.

https://www.stb.gov/filings/all.nsf/ba7f93537688b8e5852573210004b318/b3a39be7d45bc330852581fb0071675a/$FILE/244875.pdf

INDOT received official notification of abandonment application for the Monon from Bedford to New Albany this morning.   Should see it show up on STB site in next few days.  Have a client looking at OFA at least on North end, so it may not all be dead, but the fat lady is in the wings warming up.

crfan59

  • Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 375
  • CP freight to Lousiville on CSX' Hoosier sub.
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #23 on: December 20, 2017, 09:11:12 AM »
In May of 2010 when INRD ran their final special to Bedford, I snapped these photos - one of which looking north shows dual mileposts - presumably the one on the left was former MILW distance to Chicago and the one on the right being the former Monon distance to Chicago.  The Bedford street trackage headed south was right behind me in the second photo.  Former Monon trackage to the north was already gone and this was the last move

crfan
One way, Your way, My way, Our way, Right way, Wrong way, Conway, Conrail !

indyspy

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 9908
  • Resident ATCS guru.
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #24 on: December 20, 2017, 09:12:49 AM »
I thought INRD abandoned all their lines in Bedford back to Crane in 2009?

The INRD left some track in Bedford itself intact. Not much.

They left enough just west of the former diamond to back off the wye and pull forward.
They also left the industrial leads.

Not that it matters. The track in bedford itself is pretty weed eaten, and Bedford DPW has gone nuts paving over stuff.

Got to be some weird legal angle we are not seeing here.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2017, 02:00:38 PM by indyspy »
If in doubt, Notch it out!

indyspy

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 9908
  • Resident ATCS guru.
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #25 on: December 20, 2017, 09:35:26 AM »
Now here is a nasty thought.

What if this is a nasty two step process designed to thwart an OFA.

By excluding Bedford. It really makes it useless to try and put in an OFA to get the branch to Bedford. Because you would still have to deal with the CSXT, to try and serve a customer in Bedford.

So once the link INTO Bedford is severed, CSXT can then put in proceedings to abandon the rest. With the no way into Bedford no one in their right mind would submit an OFA for isolated track.

Someone has been playing a long game here. It's been going on here for a long time. All the way back to 2015 with the signal system stuff and the aborted salvage project, that would have left the line without any sidings. Then getting the INRD to put in to remove trackage rights.

Anyway you look at it, it's going to be a bit of a contentious abandonment. It is one of the longer Abandonment proceedings we have had in a while. The trail people and the rail-banking folks are going to pour out of the woodwork for this one.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2017, 01:59:25 PM by indyspy »
If in doubt, Notch it out!

Wema

  • Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 486
  • A Rail History Nut
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #26 on: December 20, 2017, 10:35:18 AM »
In May of 2010 when INRD ran their final special to Bedford, I snapped these photos - one of which looking north shows dual mileposts - presumably the one on the left was former MILW distance to Chicago and the one on the right being the former Monon distance to Chicago.  The Bedford street trackage headed south was right behind me in the second photo.  Former Monon trackage to the north was already gone and this was the last move

crfan

Nice Pics! Sad to see the line go but not surprising if there wasn't any customers in Bedford for the INRD. From reading the STB filings, seems like things got pretty heated with the town when INRD left.

Also, 246 looks to be the Monon milepost, funny how much the Monon mileposts look like the C&EI mileposts on the C&ED unless they were installed on both lines under L&N ownership?

Ralph

  • Global Moderator
  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 977
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #27 on: December 20, 2017, 11:01:45 AM »
IndyKing & Wema, thanks for the information.

21st Century Limited

  • Fireman
  • **
  • Posts: 58
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #28 on: December 20, 2017, 12:17:56 PM »
Indyspy, you may be on to something. My conductor just the other morning said basically the same thing! Very interesting filing.

indyspy

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 9908
  • Resident ATCS guru.
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #29 on: December 20, 2017, 01:39:59 PM »
Well that and I looked back in the INRD abandonment proceedings.

It turns out that while left in place. The INRD has formally abandoned any trackage left in Bedford. The remaining INRD rails were sold to Bedford. They actually went back and reopened abandonment proceedings and abandoned the rest.

So there is no longer any INRD track left in Bedford. There is a city owned OOS spur with no common carrier connected to CSX

https://www.stb.gov/Filings/all.nsf/d6ef3e0bc7fe3c6085256fe1004f61cb/2be492dc77339931852578dc004e62d8/$FILE/230726.PDF
https://www.stb.gov/Filings/all.nsf/d6ef3e0bc7fe3c6085256fe1004f61cb/44def4aeb41f18068525792c00617248/$FILE/231115.PDF

Making things more sticky. There were two customers actively shipping north on the INRD until the line to Crane was abandoned.
I think the plan was to set up a port authority and have the stuff move via CSX, well then the bridge burnt in late 2010. AFTER, the INRD abandonment was approved.

http://indianarailroads.org/board/index.php?topic=5182.0
« Last Edit: December 20, 2017, 02:10:33 PM by indyspy »
If in doubt, Notch it out!

Wema

  • Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 486
  • A Rail History Nut
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #30 on: December 20, 2017, 02:28:41 PM »
Hard to get around the paywalls to read the articles about the fire.  :-\

Was the bridge considered OOS after the fire?

indyspy

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 9908
  • Resident ATCS guru.
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #31 on: December 20, 2017, 02:31:26 PM »
Hard to get around the paywalls to read the articles about the fire.  :-\

Was the bridge considered OOS after the fire?

WAAAAY OOS, It got messed up pretty bad.

You can see it on Google earth, as well as the derailed cars from the later derailment if you look at historical google images.
If in doubt, Notch it out!

IN1312

  • Chief Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 616
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #32 on: December 20, 2017, 05:04:32 PM »
I haven't been sharing what  have been told, because I am usually not one to repeat pure hearsay, especially when it sounds weird and slightly illogical, but with all the weirdness surrounding this line, I am beginning to wonder, so I am sharing what I was told. Maybe it's total BS, but at this point I think anything is possible in regards to this line.

According to a person I reasonably believe could have known this information, when INRD pulled up their line, the US Navy hadn't been paying attention to the filings. When the personnel on the base saw the line East/South being pulled, it drew the military's full attention. Since the line had technically been railbanked with a clause that would allow tracks to be relaid if needed, they let that situation sit at that point. However, despite the previous filings, until this year, the line from Mitchell south has been fully maintained despite no trains. When CSX attempted to remove the sidings and the diamond, they suddenly stopped for some unknown reason never made public. According to the source, it was because the military said no, due to wanting the option open of reopening a second connection for CRANE.

If this is the case, could this abandonment paperwork being phrased oddly be an new attempt to slide the abandonment past an new and somewhat distracted administration?

IndyKing

  • Mogul
  • *****
  • Posts: 2549
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #33 on: December 21, 2017, 12:29:37 AM »
Also, 246 looks to be the Monon milepost, funny how much the Monon mileposts look like the C&EI mileposts on the C&ED unless they were installed on both lines under L&N ownership?
Yes, 246 is the Monon milepost.  I believe the style is indeed of L&N origin, so it would fit that other L&N-owned lines had similar mileposts.

There were two customers actively shipping north on the INRD until the line to Crane was abandoned.
Who were they?  I imagine Bedford Recycling was one, but the other...?
Cheers, Al

indyspy

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 9908
  • Resident ATCS guru.
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #34 on: December 21, 2017, 08:29:58 AM »
Yes, 246 is the Monon milepost.  I believe the style is indeed of L&N origin, so it would fit that other L&N-owned lines had similar mileposts.
Who were they?  I imagine Bedford Recycling was one, but the other...?

I don't know. The INRD filing refereed to them as Customer A and B

The filing said there actually was a Customer C. But the filing stated it was a one time flatcar load of some sort of Vehicle.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2017, 09:47:23 AM by indyspy »
If in doubt, Notch it out!

IndyKing

  • Mogul
  • *****
  • Posts: 2549
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #35 on: December 21, 2017, 10:12:58 PM »
I don't know. The INRD filing refereed to them as Customer A and B

The filing said there actually was a Customer C. But the filing stated it was a one time flatcar load of some sort of Vehicle.

I think Customer C must have been the GM plant, as I recall somebody telling me that they had a flat car brought in to remove a large piece of equipment, not too long before the line was abandoned from Crane to Bedford.  The only other customers that could have been active in recent years would have been Bedford Recycling, which I am pretty sure would be one of the two, as well as Indiana Steel & Engineering and possibly also IMCO Recycling.
Cheers, Al

spuwho

  • Brakeman
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #36 on: December 31, 2017, 09:07:24 PM »
I am late to the party, but I do remember that INRD (Hoback) said they tried "very hard" to drum up business online on the Monon to Bedford, but they made a vague comment to the fact that "the fees CSX wanted to move traffic over the bridges were more than we could afford".  It seemed an odd response if INRD actually owned the ROW that CSX was collecting on bridge use.  It made me assume that in the CSX to INRD sale, CSX had some sort of ongoing liability with Monon bridges and wanted to collect fees from traffic to use them so they could be maintained.  I couldn't get any other information on it.

While INRD appears to operate separately, I never really saw them as anything but at the whim of CSX who owns what? 80-90% that Mr. Hoback didn't?

I have discussed CSX behavior in Indiana with retired dispatchers from Mitchell, Evansville, Jacksonville, etc.  If the route isn't key to a Chicago, New York, or Jacksonville routing, it just doesn't register on managements radar.  I even spoke with a Conrail retiree who used to manage service in Indianapolis and they said the same things. If it wasn't bulk and routing to New York, then it was surplus.

If ever we go to war and DoD requires a bulk retrieval out of Crane, some stupid finger pointing will probably result and an appropriation to restore additional service from somewhere will result.

The day will come when (but don't desire) some massive derail/collision/hazmat or sudden bridge failure (like in Vandalia) on CSX that will result in a massive re-route crisis.  I have seen some of the restorative bridge work CSX does between Avon and Terre Haute, all I can say is not impressed. Would love to see the permits they pulled for some of those.

Kim_Heusel

  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 798
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #37 on: December 31, 2017, 10:29:19 PM »
If ever we go to war and DoD requires a bulk retrieval out of Crane, some stupid finger pointing will probably result and an appropriation to restore additional service from somewhere will result.

INRD still provides service to Crane.

Kim Heusel

IndyKing

  • Mogul
  • *****
  • Posts: 2549
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #38 on: January 01, 2018, 09:16:40 AM »
... but they made a vague comment to the fact that "the fees CSX wanted to move traffic over the bridges were more than we could afford".  It seemed an odd response if INRD actually owned the ROW that CSX was collecting on bridge use.  It made me assume that in the CSX to INRD sale, CSX had some sort of ongoing liability with Monon bridges and wanted to collect fees from traffic to use them so they could be maintained.  I couldn't get any other information on it.

It was my understanding was that INRD never owned the section from Bedford to New Albany, but simply had trackage rights as a result of the former Milwaukee rights to access Louisville that were granted in 1973 (I think), and had been passed down to the SOO, then CP Rail, and finally INRD.  AFAIK, the sticking point with CSX was that they wanted INRD to pay for the upkeep of (at the very least) the bridge over the White River, between Bedford and Mitchell, which was in such a bad state of disrepair that absorbing those the costs was impractical.
Cheers, Al

Broadway

  • Chief Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 653
Re: MONON ABANDONMENT
« Reply #39 on: January 01, 2018, 08:31:19 PM »
It was my understanding was that INRD never owned the section from Bedford to New Albany, but simply had trackage rights as a result of the former Milwaukee rights to access Louisville that were granted in 1973 (I think), and had been passed down to the SOO, then CP Rail, and finally INRD. 

That is correct -- not sure how anyone would be under the impression INRD ever owned the Hoosier Sub. Not the case. And Crane still gets service three days/week from INRD, so closing the Crane-Bedford segment has had no impact on the military whatsoever.

INRD quit operating on the Monon because CSX quit operating on the Monon, and once that happened, INRD would've been required to pay for 100 percent of the maintenance. Not just bridges - everything. CSX made patchwork repairs to reopen the Monon around late 1992/early 1993 for Louisville-St. Louis traffic (recall that Monon through-traffic died with the opening of the Greencastle connection on June 1, 1992). All CSX did was replace ties and do a little surfacing. It was falling apart again by 2010; lots of 10 mph slow orders. INRD didn't have enough Louisville business to justify the cost of maintenance. Folks on this board can throw around the "INRD does what CSX says" conspiracies all they want, but the truth is INRD is an investment for CSX, not a puppet. INRD does what's best for INRD, and CSX usually stays out of the way b/c INRD management runs a profitable company, which has a direct effect on CSX's bottom line. Believe me, some CSX managers have thrown goofy ideas at INRD management before, and the response from INRD was, "thanks, but no thanks."