Cape Cod Branch Connector

[malbojah]

Well, there will be fewer MC runs to UCRTS. Only C/D is going to be accepted going forwards. No MSW = no green Energy Cars

So now what happens to all the MSW ? Back on trucks again contributing to road congestion on the canal bridges ?

Yup, 3-4 trucks multiple times a day

[fogg1703]

What changed?

[malbojah]

I have my theories, and it all comes down to money

[Falmouth Secondary to Otis]

Could be a poor profit margin as long as msw is railed to SEMASS, unless an alternate can be found that is cheaper. While out of state options are being used for C&D disposal I had read last fall that those same options were being looked at for msw as well. Considering that SEMASS has a monopoly on msw for southeastern MA and doesn't have much competition, they can pretty much set the disposal rate unless an alternate comes into play. Hopefully that will change as road congestion on the Cape Canal bridges and highways gets worse as each year goes by and needs alternatives such as the expanded use of the railroad to address that issue.

[Safetee]

The rail operation at semass is a terribly inefficient operation. The original design of the rail unloading facility was not like typical bulk facilities that allow unloading in a continuous flow. For the semass carrier to unload a "train", every car has to be individually placed, unloaded, and then brought back to the yard etc etc. Compared to the SEmass truck operation rail doesn't work very well. Not because of the failure of the carrier but entirely because of the poor unloading facility design.

[fogg1703]

The terribly inefficent operations and monopoly based rates have been in effect for years at SEMASS. One would assume that with the restarting of MSW hauling from UCRTS all factors would have already figured prior to the first MSW railcar load. From an outsider, it was an olive branch to get the C&D operations going under the guise of reducing truck traffic, all the while knowing it wasn't fiscally prudent to ship MSW to SEMASS again.

[Safetee]

Well with a rumor that the MBTA is looking to build or expand a yard for impending commuter operations in Rochester, the pieces start falling together.

[Falmouth Secondary to Otis]

The terribly inefficent operations and monopoly based rates have been in effect for years at SEMASS. One would assume that with the restarting of MSW hauling from UCRTS all factors would have already figured prior to the first MSW railcar load. From an outsider, it was an olive branch to get the C&D operations going under the guise of reducing truck traffic, all the while knowing it wasn't fiscally prudent to ship MSW to SEMASS again.

Cavossa clearly knew what he was getting into as he was not dumping MSW at the UCRTS facility as he was required to do when it was run by the 4 upper cape towns. As a result of that the Town of Falmouth had to pay a penalty fee for not meeting the tonnage shipment agreement. He had stated that it was cheaper for him to truck it to SEMASS or at that time the Bourne landfill than to use the UCRTS facility. At several meetings years prior to the UCRTS closing he also said he could run the station more efficiently and at a lower cost than the Towns could. Well now that he is in charge of running the station, we'll see if Cavossa can comply with the contract as the waste that is received at the facility is required to be shipped out by rail unless rail service isn't available, along with meeting tonnage rates and financial payments to the 4 upper cape towns. Also he may have realized that the UCRTS facility is too small to accept two different types of waste, as C&D is required to be sorted before loading into RR cars and takes up more space. In comparison the Yarmouth rail transfer facility is twice as large, but not sure if it does any C&D in addition to the MSW it currently ships to SEMASS. May possibly get a clear answer on the elimination of MSW shipments going forward as business / progress reports are required to be presented to the UCRTS managers and after the public meeting minutes are posted, we'll have to see what the answer is. I have included a link to a article from the Falmouth Enterprise dated 6/11/2010 which will give a little back ground on what I had posted above. Hopefully the link will open up as it is an old article.

https://www.capenews.net/falmouth/trans ... 90ca4.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[fogg1703]

Thanks for the back story and the link. Is this the site Saltine Warrior has been talking about for its salt transload?

[Falmouth Secondary to Otis]

Yes this is the site that Saltine Warrior is talking about. Ideal location for establishing a regional salt supply for the Cape as there is plenty of room on the UCRTS land area. Saltine Warrior had participated in the RFP for the site expressing interest in using a section of the land with the selected operator of UCRTS. Cavossa didn't start operating until mid October which was too late in the season to consider any salt supply establishment, so we'll see what happens this year. From news articles posted last year the UCRTS board of managers supported the establishment of a regional salt supply as it would be a benefit to the towns on the Cape.

[Falmouth Secondary to Otis]

Update on UCRTS transfer station on Otis / JBCC. Was reading last posted public minutes from 1/24 /18 on UCRTS and Cavossa has been approved by Mass DEP to accept C&D materials now from all haulers, as he was limited to shipping his own C&D to begin with. Have seen more Rail activity as a result and would think it will continue to pick up as time moves forward seeing that all haulers can now use the facility. Included link is where the UCRTS is sending it's C&D material. Lafarge C&D in Lordstown Ohio and they have a large capability to handle rail cars with rotary dumping and 2 radio controlled locomotives. Also on another note it looks like the Barlows landing Rd RR crossing in Pocasset may be getting repaired or replaced soon as it is all marked off by digsafe



http://www.lordstownlandfill.com/why-choose-us" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[malbojah]

He's been taking C/D from all companies since mid-February (right about the time MSW front load was kicked out). I've talked to him about sending MSW to other landfills (Tunnel Hill in particular) and the biggest hurdle is the coverings needed for the cars. He would need to provide some kind of containment for the tops of the cars (not a problem with the MC cars as they already have lids). It's not like he can fabricate 40-50 lids and hope they eventually make it back to him if the company he leases the cars from has a large pool of cars to deliver to him.


**Ramble mode on**

I had a theory way back when (before I got a good look at the the back setup of Semass) of sending the MSW cars up, empty them, fill with ash and return full ash cars to UCRTS and then unload into Feeney trucks for transport to Bourne landfill. No wasted trips with empty cars, and get tractor trailers off the Bourne Bridge. But then I saw there way no track setup for ash to be loaded onto cars unless they wanted to fill in some of the ponds around the back.

My new theory is to build a second building on the second track at the transfer station strictly for MSW. Set it up like Yarmouth where the trucks dump perpendicular to the cars instead of parallel. Get Republic to bring the town of Falmouth residential MSW here and send it up to Semass instead of landfilling in Bourne. Ash should take up less space than MSW which = longer lifespan for Bourne landfill to stay open (last I've heard is somewhere around 2030 at current pace of filling).

Oh, and Semass is closed all week for repairs so everything is being brought to CMW landfill. I wonder how everyone who normally dumps in Yarmouth is handling this.

[Falmouth Secondary to Otis]

As far as sending MSW to other landfills by rail I would be looking at the requirements for the cover and what other haulers are doing to address that issue. Perhaps a disposable type cover could be used that could be buried with the MSW, resulting in eliminating the return of it as a possibility.

The Cape towns had a 30 year contract with Semass at $35 a ton which ended 12/31/2014 and for it to continue the renewal rate was proposed to be $70 - $73 per ton which resulted in all Cape towns searching for an alternate / cheaper rate for disposal. This made the UCRTS facility too costly to operate for MSW as Falmouth signed a 10 year contract with the Bourne landfill for $58 per ton and other towns either trucked it to Semass or found other disposal sites to cut the cost per ton rate. For the UCRTS facility to ship out MSW again it would have to be railed to an alternate less costly site besides Semass as it has a monopoly on MSW and operates an inefficient material handling system which has been talked about before in previous posts. If Semass could ship fly ash back to the Cape by Rail it probably would be more efficient to run a rail line from the UCRTS site through the Base directly to the Bourne landfill to dump, eliminating Feeney trucks and any truck traffic on the highway. But that's not likely to happen as Semass isn't about to spend any money on that, seeing that it won't even update it's inefficient rail car dumper handling process.

[fogg1703]

I've talked to him about sending MSW to other landfills (Tunnel Hill in particular) and the biggest hurdle is the coverings needed for the cars. He would need to provide some kind of containment for the tops of the cars (not a problem with the MC cars as they already have lids). It's not like he can fabricate 40-50 lids and hope they eventually make it back to him if the company he leases the cars from has a large pool of cars to deliver to him.

What ever happened to the MSW containers on flat experiment? They would show up on occasion at Rochester years ago. Would this not solve the majority of issues if a container crane could be utilized at UCRTS? It could also work at SEMASS, however they are entrenched in their cumbersome rotary unloader and highly inefficient use of rail. Imagine containers filled in Yarmouth, UCRTS or even Braintree, trucked to a siding, loaded onto flats and sent to SEMASS. No major infrastructure improvements needed. Of course the lucrative trucking contracts would suffer and SEMASS would have to be on board with a change in the way they view rail, which hasn't changed since 1989.

[Falmouth Secondary to Otis]

Sending MSW to Semass by rail in any configuration is too costly per ton and Cavossa wants to ship MSW out of state by rail to lower disposal costs, but needs a solution to the cover issue on the rail car to be able to do so. There are covered rail cars that are made for various materials but not sure if they are available to lease or if you would have to construct your own, such as the MC Energy rail cars they use to ship MSW to Semass.