Official New England Southern Thread (NEGS)

b&m 1566 wrote:Is Pan Am still trying to take back Concord or is that a dead issue now?

They are still working on it.

NEGS GP39-2 2370 light into Manchester Yard yesterday around 4:45PM. It was odd, this is the first time I've ever seen them go light into Manchester to get anything. They retrieved 3 Grey Covered Hopper Type Cars, it was said probably for Concord Crop

I was reading an old Railpace(January '86), when NEGS got their 2 Geeps from Rock Island (302/503). In the article it stated how Peter wanted to also take over the Worcester & Nashua between Worcester and Clinton. To Quote from Railpace:

Increased traffic from the takeover of the ex-B&M Concord to Manchester NH line has prompted the New England Southern to acquire two used diesels. The ex-ROCK units were rebuilt by Chrome Locomotive at Silvis, IL. No. 503 is a GP18, while 302 is a GP9, both in bright green and yellow livery. Engines will start their new lives in New Hampshire, but NES plans to take over operation of the Ex-B&M Worcester-Ayer line betwee Worcester and Clinton, MA in January, and may move one unit there. NES units are seen LEFT passing under the Starrucca in D&H Train RYRP on November 24, 1985, photo by J. J. Young, Jr.

Why did this fall through???

Guilford Guy wrote: Why did this fall through???

Most likely because of the increased demand for service from Manchester to Concord, and money and crews at the time did not allow it. I'll ask Pete though.

I don't know about the Clinton, MA thing but Peter told me the original plan was for him to interchange with the B&M in Nashua but the B&M would keep the customers up to Manchester and he would service everything north minus the Coal train. In the very beginning though I though the B&M service up to Concord and NEGS provided service for all the customers north of Concord?
I know Peter did have another railroad but I forget where. The line is long gone and tracks removed. If my memory service me correct his first railroad closed before he started NEGS or shortly after. He's got pictures of it in his office (the Tower).

I believe Pete ran a branch line at Chicopee Falls or Chicopee, Massachusetts that is no longer there.

Pete was also one of the founders of MassCentral.

Just read today that the guy DKRANE who has been tagging all the cars in Manchester yard has been arrested on graffiti charges. Oddly enough Pete and I were talking about it today while making some switches...and sure enough as I get home, I see the kids tag in the Union Leader, and his arrest report.

I live close enough to 89 to hear vehicles distinctly, 93 to hear a roar, and Bow Jct to hear train horns blown for the level crossing clearly. Very early this morning (12:40 AM) I heard a rumbling noise I couldn't identify, so I opened the front door just in time to hear a horn blowing for the Bow Jct crossing. Who was going where that late/early and what were they moving?

Oliva77 wrote:I live close enough to 89 to hear vehicles distinctly, 93 to hear a roar, and Bow Jct to hear train horns blown for the level crossing clearly. Very early this morning (12:40 AM) I heard a rumbling noise I couldn't identify, so I opened the front door just in time to hear a horn blowing for the Bow Jct crossing. Who was going where that late/early and what were they moving?

Are you sure it was a train horn? The southbound did not run until mid morning Thursday, and I dont think a northbound was run Wednesday that I know of.

I know that some jokers put train horns on their trucks, but I heard two longs and a (short) short, almost like a grunt. I half wondered if a Bow coal (the rumble being a long train) or a line of Ciment cars were brought up here out of the way of...? I figured one of the more serious train watchers would have noticed anything unusual.

Had to have been something else. NEGS did not run that night, and GRS is not authorized to move NEGS cars. May have been Bow power coming up..they can come as far north as 50' south of the Blue Seal switch.

PUBLIC NOTICE STB No. AB 32 (Sub-No. 100) Notice of Intent to Abandon or to Discontinue Service Boston and Maine Corporation (the "B&M") and the Springfield Terminal Railway Company ("ST") hereby gives notice that on or about September 10, 2008 it intends to file with the Surface Transportation Board, Washington, D.C. 20423, an application for permission for the adverse discontinuance of operating authority of New England Southern Railroad Company, Inc. on, a line of railroad known as the New Hampshire main line extending from railroad milepost near B80.68 at Penacook, New Hampshire to milepost B56.00 at Manchester, New Hampshire; (2) the portion of the former Claremont and Concord Railroad line from the switch to the New Hampshire main line at valuation station 1839+42.15 to valuation station 41+98; and (3) one track for interchange purposes in the B&M yard at Manchester, New Hampshire (the "Subject Line") which traverses through United States Postal Service ZIP Codes: 03101, 03301 and 03303, an approximate distance of 27 miles, in Hillsborough and Merrimack Counties, New Hampshire. The reason(s) for the proposed adverse discontinuance is to resume possession and operation of the line by B&M and ST. Based on information in our possession, the line does not contain federally granted rights-of-way. Any documentation in the railroad's possession will be made available promptly to those requesting it. The interest of railroad employees will be protected by all applicable laws and regulations. The application will include the applicant's entire case for discontinuance. Any interested person, after the application is filed on or about September 10, 2008, may file with the Surface Transportation Board written comments concerning the proposed discontinuance or protests to it. These filings are due 45 days from the date of filing of the application. All interested persons should know that following any discontinuance of operations, B&M and ST shall operate the provide service to its sh ippers. Persons who may oppose the abandonment or discontinuance but who do not wish to participate fully in the process by appearing at any oral hearings or by submitting verified statements of witnesses, containing detailed evidence, should file comments. Persons opposing the proposed abandonment or discontinuance that do wish to participate actively and fully in the process should file a protest. Protests must contain that party's entire case in opposition (case in chief) including the following: (1) Protestant's name, address and business. (2) A statement describing protestant's interest in the proceeding including: (i) A description of protestant's use of the line; (ii) If protestant does not use the line, information concerning the group or public interest it represents; and (iii) If protestant's interest is limited to the retention of service over a portion of the line, a description of the portion of the line subject to protestant's interest (with milepost designations if available) and evidence showing that the applicant can operate the portion of the line profitably, including an appropriate return on its investment for those operations. (3) Specific reasons why protestant opposes the application including information regarding protestant's reliance on the involved service [this information must be supported by affidavits of persons with personal knowledge of the fact(s)]. (4) Any rebuttal of material submitted by applicant. Written comments and protests will be considered by the Board in determining what disposition to make of the application. The commenting party or protestant may participate in the proceeding as its interests may appear. If an oral hearing is desired, the requester must make a request for an oral hearing and provide reasons why an oral hearing is necessary. Oral hearing requests must be filed with the Board no later than 10 days after the application is filed. Those parties filing protests to the proposed discontinuance should be prepared to participate actively either in an oral hearing or through the submission of their entire opposition case in the form of verified statements and arguments at the time they file a protest. Parties seeking information concerning the filing of protests should refer to 1152.25. Written comments and protests should indicate the proceeding designation STB No. AB 32 (Sub-No. 100) and must be filed with the Secretary, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, DC 20423, no later than on or about October 27, 2008. Interested persons may file a written comment or protest with the Board to become a party to this discontinuance proceeding. A copy of each written comment or protest shall be served upon the representative of the applicant Michael Geary, 1700 Iron Horse Park, No. Billerica MA 01862. The original and 10 copies of all comments or protests shall be filed with the Board with a certificate of service. Except as otherwise set forth in part 1152, each document filed with the Board must be served on all parties to the abandonment proceeding. 49 CFR 1104.12(a). Persons seeking further information concerning discontinuance procedures may contact the Surface Transportation Board or refer to the full abandonment or discontinuance regulations at 49 CFR part 1152. A copy of the application will be available for public inspection on or after September 10, 2008 at 1700 Iron Horse Park, No. Billerica, MA 01862. The carrier shall furnish a copy of the application to any interested person proposing to file a protest or comment, upon request. August 15, 22, 29

Okay, I need that to be translated into something I can understand because that just sounded like mumble-jumble to me.
What I gathered is that the B&M is filing with the STB to take over the operations north of Manchester and then there's the protest part of it, if you’re for or against. How soon (if the STB even allows it) could Pan Am be operating in Concord? What will this mean for NEGS, the customer in Tilton, etc.?

As far as I know Pan Am still owes Peter a shit ton of $$ and they haven't paid a dime. Not sure how that factors into things