CSX Acquisition of Pan Am Railways

I bet that took them since then to scan it! lol

No - just to upload on a slow DSL connection... It's all electronic submissions these days - nothing's actually on paper anymore.

Skip to page 305 for the Operating Plan.

roberttosh wrote: ↑Thu Jul 01, 2021 6:08 am CSX wants to undercut and/or raise clearances all the way to Keag?

Are you talking double-stack all the way?

There was an interesting proposal a while back about putting in a mini drawbridge in some town in Maine because they couldn't lower the tracks or raise the road. It will be interesting to see how that goes.

Some interesting stuff:

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

• re: Wachusett Reservoir issues: "And unlike the PAR Railroads, CSXT has the financial wherewithal to reasonably
  address these stakeholder concerns. "

• Freight density map on P. 217

• Current operations for PAS/PAR & CSX starting on P. 319

• P. 340 "CSXT expects that it will eventually be possible to decrease the number of trains run on the PAR System, while maintaining the roughly same gross tonnage (subject to organic growth) and routings"

• P. 340 "For example, the PAR System line segment between Mattawamkeag, ME and Waterville, ME is currently under a 10 mph maximum speed restriction. After CSXT implements the proposed infrastructure upgrades described in detail below, CSXT expects to increase the maximum speed limit to 25 mph on this line segment, "

• P. 342 on the state of B&E software vs. current state of the art: "These tools will replace the manual combination of paper forms and spreadsheets currently used by Springfield Terminal to operate the PAS Network."

• P. 356 - Improvements to Ayer yard detailed

• P. 386 - "Following consummation of the transaction, CSXT plans to restore the PAR System mainline track conditions from FRA Class 1 to FRA Class 2 track standard"

• P. 449 - Agreements re: Ayer operating protocols, improvements, etc.

I skimmed through the latest filing and didn't really find anything new - I'm wondering if the added / revised information was mostly proprietary ops data and forecasts that ended up being redacted?

Yes the market analysis numbers are not entirely in the public version.

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

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

Framingham CP yard is totally missing. Still used occasionally for storage but a good size piece of the puzzle that is no longer utilized.

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

• P. 356 - Improvements to Ayer yard detailed

Surprised that they plan to remove the new switch on the west wye that was just recently installed.

The comparison of the organization charts and ownership data (Exhibit 11, pp 231-277) between CSX and PAR (and what's revealed vs kept secret) is interesting - Timmy's still trying to keep everything hidden that he can....

A few observations:

- I forget the exact percentage, but seems very hard to believe that rail's marketshare on paper in Maine is only something like 8%. I would have figured more like 60-80%.
- As expected, the one place where they see a pretty quick increase in business is traffic off the Irving roads going to or from CSX that currently moves adverse to PAR. That is a no-brainer and could be significant.
- They are clearly on to the Irving Oil traffic, as it was mentioned several times in the submittal. They are almost certainly the customer with the single most potential for new business for CSX.

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

• P. 356 - Improvements to Ayer yard detailed

Surprised that they plan to remove the new switch on the west wye that was just recently installed.
[/quote]

The drawings of the yard improvements at Ayer are a bit hard on the eyes, but it would appear that by removing the turnout that connects to the second track on the West wye, you're eliminating the possibility of having 2 trains simultaneously accessing the yard at the same time from the west and east wye's, or essentially making the yard throat single track. Unless they're actually making the turnout the active track and cutting off the main track in which case it looks like they would have 2 tracks through the throat. Still seems like they would have much more flexibility if they were able to put in a 3rd track on the west side of the 2 track stretch connecting the west wye to the yard lead.

Interesting note in the passenger train operating plan:
"CSXT has committed that PAS will operate freight service on the PAS Adams Branch on a schedule that will continue to accommodate the operation of MassDOT-designated excursion trains."

Aside from the fact that this would be putting restrictions on PAS/B&E (which they said they would avoid), it sounds like they're trying to smooth some ruffled feathers at MassDOT...

And this nugget in the trackage rights settlement agreement with NS:
"NSR will assume the capital cost of the connections and infrastructure necessary to double stack the route, including:
(a) the Voorheesville/Schenectady connection;
(b) the clearance upgrades needed on the P&W segment south of Ayer; and
(c) the clearance upgrades needed between Barbers Station and Harvard;"

So NS pays for clearances on the Worcester Main. However, if CSX cancels those rights within 20 years, they have to reimburse NS for the costs.

roberttosh wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 9:50 am The drawings of the yard improvements at Ayer are a bit hard on the eyes, but it would appear that by removing the turnout that connects to the second track on the West wye, you're eliminating the possibility of having 2 trains simultaneously accessing the yard at the same time from the west and east wye's, or essentially making the yard throat single track. Unless they're actually making the turnout the active track and cutting off the main track in which case it looks like they would have 2 tracks through the throat. Still seems like they would have much more flexibility if they were able to put in a 3rd track on the west side of the 2 track stretch connecting the west wye to the yard lead.

There's a note on this on p.450:
"Reconfiguration of the northern throat of Ayer Yard in such a way that accommodates 2 simultaneous moves of
(1) inbound or outbound trains through the north end
(2) merchandise switching and/or
(3) Intermodal switching.

1. The plan as drawn would need to be modified to meet this objective."

So the diagram doesn't actually show everything they plan to do.

roberttosh wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 9:12 am - They are clearly on to the Irving Oil traffic, as it was mentioned several times in the submittal. They are almost certainly the customer with the single most potential for new business for CSX.

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).

Ok thanks, that makes a lot more sense as I would assume that CSX wouldn't want to be held up by a B&E move over the west wye and vice versa. With the 2 distinct pathways through the throat you would essentially be able to separate a good amount of B&E movements from the CSX east wye track, making things a lot more fluid.