Trackage rights, Run Through power, and "where is this train going?"

[TimChgo9]

I like to consider myself as savvy, intelligent, sort of a "man about town" or probably more accurately a "man that spends way too much time analyzing things"....  I have a question.  In my time being out and taking railroad photos, I have discovered that I understand little about how they operate in some ways. I have noted that railroads use each other's tracks, under what barely understand as "trackage rights". On the BNSF, I see UP, NS, and CSX trains, as well as the occasional CN. On the UP, I have seen NS, and CSX trains, and on the IHB, I see everyone's stuff. 

The question I have, is how are trackage rights determined, and how does a railroad get them from another railroad?  Is it a "you share yours, and I'll share mine in an equal manner" kind of thing, or is it "Hey,we need to take this train from point A, to point F, and we need your tracks, so, how much do we owe you to use your rails?"  Is it a simple thing? Like a negotiated type of thing, or, is it part of some complex formula, involving more math computation than I care to contemplate? (I would guess it is probably the last one)... And, what exactly is "run through power". I still think it's funny to see UP and BNSF engines together on the same train...  I saw a CN train with ex-Conrail, BNSF, NS, CSX, and FURX power on it.  To add to that, I see alot of UP power on the IHB, one night, while a freight train passed by, powered by 3 UP diesels, the person that was with me explained that it was a CP Rail train with UP power.... Now, how does that happen? 

And finally, I caught the eastbound IAIS at Joliet yesterday... it was all tank cars, that appeared to be loaded. They were ADM tank cars, placarded "1987" (I don't have my DOT book, so I had no idea what 1987 is) was it ethanol, and if it is, is it destined for a refinery?  Unless I am totally wrong, and it was corn oil.  Have a look: 

 

And, I was told, or read somewhere that the CSX owns the ex-Rock Island west of Joliet, so, does this IAIS train have trackage rights, or, is it IAIS/CSX joint ownership, as I had been told it was.  I don't expect answers to all the questions,  I am just trying to get something of a grasp on how things work..... 

 

 

 

 

[MP173]

Tim:

Things get confusing in the railroad industry with run thru trains, leased power, and other things.

Then, throw in the Chicago situation and you get an everything bagel at no charge.  I dont think you can say who's train it is, without knowing the symbol of the train.  The locomotives really are not a definative measure of who's operation it is, particularly in Chicago.

When you see trains on the Harbor, Belt, or J there is a great chance it is being operated by trackage rights.  Do you have a CORA Chicago Terminal Distric Map and the timetable (for lack of better term)?  These are really valuable tools for understanding the Chicago operations.

Like you, I am really fascinated by the entire trackage rights situation.  The company with the rights probably pays a per car and perhaps a tonnage charge.  I say probably, because no one has ever stated the terms, at least on this forum.  There was an article in Trains years ago on trackage rights/haulage rights, etc.  I will try to find it.

My guess, only a guess is the ADM train was an ethanol train.  The DOT 1987 designates the HazMat commodity.  I pitched my HAZMAT tariff years ago, so I cant help you out on the specifics. 

Nice photo.  How many cars were there?  Decals look ok on the ADM cars?

ed

[jeffhergert]

For the IAIS portion.

The ex-RI was leased to CSX from Joliet to Bureau on a 50 year lease.  When the Chessie System leased this portion back in the early 1980s, there was a stipulation that any buyer of the ex-RI tracks beyond Bureau would be allowed trackage rights to access interchanges with other railroads in the Chicago area.  The Iowa Railroad which operated west of Bureau for a few years only leased the tracks from the RI estate, so they were not entitled to the trackage rights and interchanged with Chessie at Bureau.  The Iowa Interstate Railroad actually purchased the tracks west of Bureau so were able to exercise the trackage rights.  Both CSX and IAIS have trackage rights over Metra from Joliet to Chicago.  The IAIS also sub-leases from CSX a portion of the western end of the Joliet-Bureau line.      

The ADM cars are probably from the ADM-Corn Sweeteners (they also produce ethanol there) facility in Cedar Rapids, IA.  The IAIS runs trains to Cedar Rapids on the Crandic's ex-MILW branch.  Instead of the Crandic running a road train to Iowa City to interchange with the IAIS, the IAIS runs up to CR and they interchange on the Southwest side of town.  My understanding is the Crandic still does any local work on an as-needed basis on the line.  Much of the ethanol coming out of CR I believe currently goes towards the East Coast.  Exactly where, I couldn't say.

Jeff

[TimChgo9]

Tim:

Things get confusing in the railroad industry with run thru trains, leased power, and other things.

Then, throw in the Chicago situation and you get an everything bagel at no charge.  I dont think you can say who's train it is, without knowing the symbol of the train.  The locomotives really are not a definative measure of who's operation it is, particularly in Chicago.

When you see trains on the Harbor, Belt, or J there is a great chance it is being operated by trackage rights.  Do you have a CORA Chicago Terminal Distric Map and the timetable (for lack of better term)?  These are really valuable tools for understanding the Chicago operations.

Like you, I am really fascinated by the entire trackage rights situation.  The company with the rights probably pays a per car and perhaps a tonnage charge.  I say probably, because no one has ever stated the terms, at least on this forum.  There was an article in Trains years ago on trackage rights/haulage rights, etc.  I will try to find it.

My guess, only a guess is the ADM train was an ethanol train.  The DOT 1987 designates the HazMat commodity.  I pitched my HAZMAT tariff years ago, so I cant help you out on the specifics. 

Nice photo.  How many cars were there?  Decals look ok on the ADM cars?

ed

Ed.

Thanks for the photo compliment. I think there were about 85 cars on the train, some of them looking like newer cars.  I am one of those people that, when I run across something I don't understand, I have to analyze, and then I have to know the "why" or at least as much of the "why" as I can.  I don't have a CORA timetable, or anything like that. I have a scanner, and I glean whatever I can off of that while I am listening. I will sometimes catch train symbols, but it's very rare.  I guess the other question would be: If the NS has rights over the BNSF, then, how does that come about? Did NS bid with that shipper, and then negotiate with the BNSF to be able to run a train to get there OR, did the shipper approach the railroad??? And, if that's the case, could not the BNSF been able to serve the shipper directly?? 

[diningcar]

Trackage rights have been a means for two RR's to operate over the same tracks owned by one of them and have been in existance for more than a century. The STB has come into the picture in recent years when mergers were permitted with conditions which mandated trackage rights. The latter situation can be very complex while the former was just a contractural agreement negotiated between willing participants. 

The terms of the former varied as to specifics, which themselves could be simple or complex. Three classic examples on western RR's would be: Daggett to Riverside, CA where UP operates over BNSF; Mojave to Bakersfield, CA where BNSF operates over UP (former SP) and the Joint Line in CO where UP and BNSF alternately operate over each others track between Denver and Pueblo. All three of these have existed for many years and no doubt have been renegotiated repeatedly since they were first conceived. So there is no simple answer to your question but perhaps with the responses here you will have some understanding.

 

[CShaveRR]

Tim:  Yes, "1987" is in fact the placard designation for ethanol.  That's one of a few I have memorized.

[joemcspadden]

I have a few comments to throw in here which might be at least
minimally helpful (at least I hope).

1) All trackage rights agreements are filed with the Surface Transportation
Board and are available to anyone as a matter of public record. As has been
written above, the terms vary all over the map--so if you are interested in
the provisions of a given trackage rights contract, you can find out what
they are.

2) As Diningcar wrote, some trackage rights are mandated by the STB when
it is important that major shippers retain access to competing lines. The
textbook examples of this can be found in the splitting up of Conrail by
NS and CSX in 1999. The government mandated all sorts of rights in
New England, metropolitan New York City, and Detroit, for example, to
make sure the two railroads would be part of a competitive environment
for the large shippers in those areas.

3) Tim--regarding how you worded your question, the best answer would
be "all of the above." Sometimes, rights have been swapped. In the 1980's,
both NS and CSX needed certain connections on the other's line for
coal-hauling in northeast Tennessee and western Virginia. So even though
the roads are fierce competitors, they each gave the other important
rights on certain routes in these areas; the arrangement continues as a
huge benefit to both companies to this day. More often, though, such
rights are negotiated on a unilateral basis and are purely a matter of
money (see below).

4) Trackage rights seldom revolve around a single shipper. A railroad will
try to negotiate an acceptable agreement with another because it needs
the route--for lots of different shippers (and often for several different
trains). A shipper will never be the instigator of trackage rights. The
shipper couldn't care less about stuff like that--he just wants his goods
transported in the cheapest and most reliable fashion possible from point
a to point b--either by truck or by train. If the railroad wants his
business, how the railroad gets the job done is the railroad's problem.

5) Rights are most easily agreed to when A) one railroad needs a route
belonging to another to lower its operating costs and/or to serve certain
customers, and B) the railroad that owns the line both has room for
more trains and would like the trackage rights revenue to help defray
the maintenance costs which are more or less fixed on that line.
A good example of this would be the agreement struck about five
years ago wherein NS granted trackage rights on the Chicago Line
to CP between Butler, IN and Elkhart. CP had been using rights
on CSX lines that went straight west from Detroit and then south
to Elkhart.

These new rights allowed CP to knock over a 100 miles
off the distance between Detroit and Elkhart, and gave NS some
nice new revenue in the form of rights payments. Of course, a new
connecting wye had to be built--this time in the north-west quadrant--
of the diamond at Butler (where the Chicago Line crosses the
Huntington District) at a cost of about $1.5 million. So obviously,
the cost of this second wye had to be figured into the agreement.
I'm not sure of the exact figure, but I think CP runs about 8 trains
a day in each direction utilizing these trackage rights. So, as you
can see, the terms of this agreement would be unique. They might
not even resemble the terms of another agreement in another part
of the country.

6) Sometimes, such agreements fall apart or cannot be worked out
to the satisfaction of both parties. An example of this also involves
NS and CSX. CSX was given the ex-Pennsy between Crestline. OH
and Chicago as part of the Conrail splitup, but NS retained trackage
rights. In the early 2000's, NS operated some stuff in NW Indiana
utlilizing these rights, but a while back, CSX decided to jack up the
rates (the line is leased for 20 years to CFER,anyway). As a result,
NS no longer utilizes these trackage rights except in the city of
Fort Wayne.

7) Finally, the most common use of trackage rights throughout
history involves belt railway situations (a topic already well-
covered) and "Union Stations" for passenger trains.

I hope this helps,

Joe

[TimChgo9]

It is all starting to make more sense. Thanks for the great answers.

[MP173]

Joe:

You mentioned trackage rights agreements filed with STB...do you know how to find those?   Also, do those agreements stipulate the costs (per car, per train, tonnage, etc)?

Also, I believe the CP ran its trains all the way from Detroit to Porter, In on the CSX via Grand Rapids, rather than down to Elkhart.  Those trains entered the NS at Porter. 

Wonder how NS feels about those trackage rights with all the trains on that line these days.   As we have discussed, the ex PRR line sure seems to hold a lot of promise, especially for the NS to relieve pressure off of the Elkhart line and the Ft Wayne line.  I can think of 4 trains NS added to the Ft Wayne line this year (110, 150, 186, 242, and sometimes a 308 is running).  That is stretching things a bit at times.

ed

[joemcspadden]

Ed--

I assume it would work about the same way as a request for any other
government document available under FIA. I would suggest emailing
them and finding out what the deal is. Again, though--I get the impression
that trackage rights are pretty much "free enterprise;" I'm not sure if
reading the financial terms and conditions about TR agreement "A"
would give you much of a clue about the provisions of TR agreement "B."

As for your second point--wow!! I had quite a brain fade there. CSX tracks
don't even run to Elkhart. Thanks for pointing that mistake out. The CP
trackage rights on CSX were indeed Detroit to Porter via Grand Rapids.

I doubt if the current level of traffic on the Chicago and Fort Wayne lines
has come as much of a surprise to NS. The Chicago Line was awfully busy
when the agreement with CP was made. You're right, though--there isn't
room for a whole lot more traffic on either line. I don't know what the
game plan for future growth might be. CSX seems to have made it
pretty clear, though, that they aren't all that anxious to have NS running
a lot of trains on the CFER Line.

It looks to me that NS is focusing its future growth plans around the
Memphis and Meridian MS gateways.

Joe

[gabe]

I have always wondered what CSX was running to on that line?  Is there something in Bureau that is particularly valuable to CSX?

Gabe

[edbenton]

There are a few major industries in that area in the Ottawa IL there is GE Plastics also a major Glass sand quarry plus in Seneca IL they are putting in a HUGE and I mean HUGE biodeiesel plant on the order of 100 million gallons a year production.  There are also a few other industries in the area I can not remember them all but there is enough that CSX will not sell the line to Iowa Interstate.

[gabe]

There are a few major industries in that area in the Ottawa IL there is GE Plastics also a major Glass sand quarry plus in Seneca IL they are putting in a HUGE and I mean HUGE biodeiesel plant on the order of 100 million gallons a year production.  There are also a few other industries in the area I can not remember them all but there is enough that CSX will not sell the line to Iowa Interstate.

Thanks Ed,

Is the HUGE biodeiesel plant served by both the Iowa Interstate and CSX or Just CSX.  All this time, I thought it was the Peoria Interchange that kept CSX interested in this line--it just does not seem to fit within its system.

I have never understood why CSX keeps some lines while it sells others.

Gabe

[edbenton]

With it being in Seneca before were the Iowa Interstate takes over CSX will serve it normally however if the feedstocks are coming in from the west Iowa Interstate may haul them in.  I do know this Seneca gave that plant everything they wanted and more to land it and are more than happy with the taxes they will be getting from it even after the TIF district abatement for 10 years.

[route_rock]

  CSX forgot it owned that line a few years ago ( the New Rock sub that is) and rumor has it IAIS is trying to buy the entire line. Great shot Tim.

 

  Now about the "trackage rights" the only trains that are operated by non BNSF crews are the UP trains. When we get lets say a NSIKCK,CNIGAL,etc etc. it is a BNSF crew onboard.They dont get to serve any industry on our line most of their traffic is bridge traffic really. Getting from point a to point b in a hurry or on a better route than they can provide.

[gabe]

  CSX forgot it owned that line a few years ago ( the New Rock sub that is) and rumor has it IAIS is trying to buy the entire line. Great shot Tim.

 

  Now about the "trackage rights" the only trains that are operated by non BNSF crews are the UP trains. When we get lets say a NSIKCK,CNIGAL,etc etc. it is a BNSF crew onboard.They dont get to serve any industry on our line most of their traffic is bridge traffic really. Getting from point a to point b in a hurry or on a better route than they can provide.

Route Rock,

Can you provide a larger version of your picture and an explanation behind it?  It looks interesting.

Thanks,

Gabe

[snagletooth]

CSX keeps the line because of US Silica in Ottowa. Much of it goes east on CSX, (mostly to Toledo I think) And as far I remember, they only own it to Bureau, the line down to Peoria is owned by Iowa Interstate. IIRC, B&OCT is the actual owner of the line from Joliet to Bureau, and Metra owns it from Joliet to Chicago, but I could be wrong about that.