It is currently Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:05 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Nickel Plate Trail
PostPosted: Fri Dec 22, 2017 1:39 pm 

Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:17 pm
Posts: 160
I do not know who "Alco guy" is, it is not me.

As for the line having more business then in the N&W days that is not true.
Back when N&W ran the line, they were taking many large capacity 86 foot box cars south to Indianapolis for the GM stamping plant. The loss of this traffic was one of the reasons for N&W, then NS leaving this line and filing for abandonment.

At one time, Indiana Railroad was pulling grain cars from the elevator in downtown Noblesville and adding them to grain car from the Tipton Co-0p elevator. The breakup of the Co-0p seemed to put a stop to this, as most county Co-0ps went their own way.

In my files, I still have a copy of the filing by NS for the abandonment of this line. It was filed under the Interstate Commerce Commission on August 27, 1991.

According to the filing, the last year of N&W service saw a total of 1,955 cars move over this line. The Indianapolis traffic accounted for 1,369 of those cars leaving 586 reported as other than Indy.

For comparison of NS base year of 1987 carloads vs. INRD April 1990 through March 1991:
Atlanta NS 1 carload INRD 2 carloads
Castleton NS 311`carloads INRD 409 carloads
Indianapolis NS 1,533 carloads INRD 750 carloads
Noblesville NS 174 carloads INRD 122 carloads
Tipton NS 362 carloads INRD 852 carloads { see Note }

note: Handled in switching service, 823 for Tipton County Farm Bureau.

These were cars just switched out of the Co-0p and handed to NS at Tipton.
Just switching service.

So there was NO big increase in carloads with INRD service, other than the coal trains, which really came later, after the NS sale to the current owners.

586 carloads for other than Indy, is hardly worth serving a 35 mile railroad.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nickel Plate Trail
PostPosted: Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:10 pm 

Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:17 pm
Posts: 160
"So, if our interpretation is correct, in the INRD on NKP example, they could only be contracted to serve Duke. They could take Duke coal, transformer, pole - doesn't matter. HOWEVER, they would settle freight charges from origin to NKP property line as normal common carrier, and invoice the NKP's pwners for services rendered from interchange point to Duke. So if Duke is only customer to use line and INRD billed correctly, then there is no common carrier obligation - it died when ICC approved abandonment. Even if INRD billed Duke rather than NKP owner, that's probably a minor enough detail that the STB would excuse. But if you can PROVE that INRD ever served any other customers, IN MY OPINION (I am not a lawyer but am involved in this kind of stuff), that very well could/should open the door to allow STB jurisdiction over this line."

That is what I am basing my opinion upon.[/quote]

I could see the service provided to Duke Energy as non-common carrier service if Duke Energy owned the rail line, but they do not.

Since the owners purchased this rail line and never consumated the abandonment, I see service to Duke Energy as common carrier service.

The owners, were indeed operating a railroad and being paid for services preformed over their railroad. Duke Energy was not the owner, jsut paying for service as they would have any way, by the carload or unit train.

I guess someone needs to look at the corporation papers that were filed or should have been filed with the state of Indiana when the port authority was formed. This would tell what the stated purpose of the corporation was. Was their purpose as a port authority just to sit on the property or to promote it as a railroad. If it was to promote it as a railroad, then the port was providing or offering common carrier service. It just so happened that the INRD pulled out after the end of the coal trains as it was not profitable.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nickel Plate Trail
PostPosted: Fri Dec 22, 2017 7:01 pm 

Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm
Posts: 400
None of the evaluative issues you bring up matters to OFA, the only thing that matters is that the line is considered a common carrier. If more than one customer was being served then the line is considered a common carrier, meaning an entity can make an OFA to take over the line. Period. And there is evidence that multiple customers, in addition to Duke, were being served by INRR. In this sense the IMC line is fortunate compared to say the ASRR or the CMRR, which were closed for so long that there are no freight customers left.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nickel Plate Trail
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 12:46 am 

Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:17 pm
Posts: 160
[quote="PMC"]None of the evaluative issues you bring up matters to OFA, the only thing that matters is that the line is considered a common carrier. If more than one customer was being served then the line is considered a common carrier, meaning an entity can make an OFA to take over the line. Period."

NO they can not!
In order to acquire a line through the "OFA" process a formal abandonment application must be filed. Once the abandonment application has been filed, then someone that is qualified can make an offer through the "OFA" procedures. If no one files an "OFA" and there are no objection of merit, then the abandonment will be approved, then the line will become available for railbanking or rails to trails.

Just why do you think that the attorney for the owners has file for a "Petition for Partial Revocation of Exemption"?

It is an attempt to by-pass the abandonment process to avoid someone filing an "OFA". Just plain and simple.


Quote: " And there is evidence that multiple customers, in addition to Duke, were being served by INRR".


I am well aware that the INRD served more than one customer before the NS filed to abandon this line in 1991, I have already posted figures for that.

Where is your evidence that more than one customer was served by INRD after the abandonment was approved by the ICC, after the purchase by the current owners and during the time they ran coal trains?

In the filing for the owners, they state that INRD continued to serve Duke Energy on the southern 17 miles of the railroad, but nothing more. This was to around 2004, almost 14 years ago and has nothing to do with it.

I can tell you right now, that the STB could care less about any claims that you make in regards to evidence without facts to back them up. So, if you think, that there were more than one customer being served on this line, then come up with the proof, such as car billing, way bills, service logs, anything. Just someone saying they saw them go by their house is not proof in the eyes of the STB.

And in all the filing on this case, NO ONE has provided any proof to that claim.

That is simply, because it has nothing to do with it.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nickel Plate Trail
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:44 am 

Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm
Posts: 400
AlcoC420 wrote:
I can tell you right now, that the STB could care less about any claims that you make in regards to evidence without facts to back them up. So, if you think, that there were more than one customer being served on this line, then come up with the proof, such as car billing, way bills, service logs, anything. Just someone saying they saw them go by their house is not proof in the eyes of the STB.


This is tiresome, I won't be making any cases to the STB, I don't have a dog in this fight but you apparently do. The issue of whether the track was operated as a common carrier will come up if the HHPA claims it is too late for an OFA, and there are entities opposing the removal who will likely point that out and whose opinion the STB will definitely "care less" about. For example, this formal request by Kokomo Grain, the major grain shipper in Indiana, two months ago:

https://www.stb.gov/filings/all.nsf/ba7 ... 600458b4e/

Here is a section of the letter to the acting STB office of proceedings chair:

"Dear Ms. Begeman,

Our company, Kokomo Grain is one of the largest independent grain companies headquartered in Indiana. It has a total of 10 facilities located in state and in Tennessee with a federally licensed capacity of 50 million bushels. Customers include both domestic and export markets. Successful grain marketing is highly sensitive to price. Cost effective rail service is one of the cornerstones of our business. ...The Hoosier Heritage Port Authority was established to preserve the rail line and benefit Hamilton Tipton and Marion counties. To our knowledge it has shown little or no interest in fulfilling this aspect of its charter. (Nor, did it protest when CSX and NS removed their connections to the line). We believe the evidence shows the line is a substantial asset for north central Indiana with significant commercial potential that could benefit our company and hundreds of area farms. Our estimates based on knowledge of the market suggest that the line could generate as many as 1900 carloads per year of whole grains (Corn STCC 1132, Wheat 1137, Soybeans 1144). We are opposed to effort's to sever or otherwise impair the value of the line to serve its original purpose. We urge the STB to decline the railroad Owners' petition in order to protect and preserve future rail service along this line."

There is another group with their own plan: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vx2uheot90tt0 ... l.pdf?dl=0 Again, not me.

Now, I wonder what someone apparently advocating that a section of track be torn out is doing on a rail preservation board.

Edit: fixed STB link.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nickel Plate Trail
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:14 am 

Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:23 am
Posts: 17
AlcoC420,you need to reread my post. I said it was more ACTIVE when INRD ran it compared to when NS LAST RAN THE LINE (NOT NW).I did not say anything about car count or actual business. When NS LAST RAN they were down to three days a week, then at the very end, down to once a week. When INRD started they ran EVERY DAY FIVE DAYS A WEEK.As for my many photos showing both coal drags and general freight, as you know, several groups are working towards saving the line. If photos could be of any help to any of these groups, they can be made available. Whether or not that is considered PROOF in the eyes of the STB i really can't say. My guess is they would not.My experience was always with the old ICC so things have probably changed.....Your passion towards saving this line and your well authored submission to the surf is appreciated.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nickel Plate Trail
PostPosted: Sun Dec 24, 2017 8:18 am 

Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:17 pm
Posts: 160
[quote="PMC"][quote="AlcoC420"]

"Now, I wonder what someone apparently advocating that a section of track be torn out is doing on a rail preservation board."

If you think that I am advocating that a section of this line be removed for a trail, then you need to re-read my posts.

I was simply explaining other options that the owners could use, if they loose their current filing with the STB.

I am not trying to step on anyone here with my post and if you feel that way I am sorry.
I do not want any of this line removed, there are way too many good options for it and the powers to be { our elected officals } could care less. The line has never been properly operated to it's potential under the present ownership.

A properly operated "Port Authority" could have served everyones needs; freight, tourist and commuter.


One of the leasons that everyone needs to take from what is happening here, is get involved in your community.

Get out and vote!

The largest problem with Noblesville and Fishers, Indiana, is they are part of Hamilton County, one of the richest counties in Indiana and are all most entirely under Republican control. I am very conservative and vote mostly Republican, but here in Hamilton County, we have very few, if any, to vote for, other then Republicans. We all need to vote in the primary elections, which determine who runs in the general elections.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nickel Plate Trail
PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:04 pm 

Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:41 am
Posts: 3091
Location: Inwood, W.Va.
I just saw this recently.

Facebook link from "Save the Nickel Plate" (pro-rail site):

https://www.facebook.com/SavetheNickelP ... 207056805/

And the text for those who can't get or detest Facebook.

Quote:
BREAKING NEWS! The STB is listening to the public!

January 5, 2018 - The Surface Transportation Board issued its second decision concerning the proceeding initiated by Fishers, Noblesville, and Hamilton County to railbank the Nickel Plate line.

Decision:
https://goo.gl/WfXZQU

YOUR EFFORTS ARE PAYING OFF! The STB is accepting all 112 filings submitted so far - against the wishes of the Fishers, Noblesville, and Hamilton County - into the record of the proceeding. The cities and county may submit one final reply and then the case is closed for a final decision to be rendered.

Of those filings:

94 OPPOSED railbanking
8 were from Fishers, Noblesville, and Hamilton County
4 SUPPORTED railbanking
6 were NEUTRAL or supplemental motions to a filing.

"Because of the significant public interest in this proceeding and in the interest of a complete record that embodies the full spectrum of interests involved, the service requirements of 49 C.F.R. § 1104.12(a) will be waived for all pleadings and letters received by the Board as of the date of issuance of this decision, and all of those pleadings and letters will therefore be accepted into the record."

While they did deny STNKP's motion to suspend and investigate the proceeding as well as an additional request for an extension of time; their decision specifically highlights the importance they've placed on "[the] public's interest...and...a complete record that embodies the full spectrum of interests involved"

This is a HUGE milestone and we have YOU to thank! So THANK YOU to all of our supporters who have been so active in this issue! Keep it up and PLEASE continue to INVITE others to "LIKE" and follow our page.


The actual decision, which in my opinion isn't quite as rosy as the announcement, but which does say, as does the announcement, that all letters and opinions will be considered, something that may have been a point of contention in the past.

https://www.stb.gov/Decisions/readingro ... /46165.pdf


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], John Risley, rjenkins, Yahoo [Bot] and 35 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: