Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Results of WSDOT/WATCO transportation summit: Not much, since they decided during the meeting that they need to wait for some more study results to come in before they can provide a clearer picture of the situation. What was discussed relevent to the railroad situation in the State of Washington: - Truck traffic in the State of Washington has grown at three times the rate of automobile traffic, which suggests a loss or at least a stagnation of the railroads' willingness to move this traffic. Remember, trucks are the default transportation mode after the more efficient modes decline the business. - Only 50% of Washington grain growers expressed satisfaction with the State's transporation system, including rail, barge, and truck. And only 40% of grain associations are satisfied. - Of grain shipments in Washington, 51% move by truck/barge combinations, 19% move by truck/rail combinations (bulk rail e.g. multiple carload lots), and 30% are trucked to storage or moved by carload (most of which is pulses and canola). Don't ask me why they combine storage and carload into one catagory, they just do. - As of now the railroads have completely abandoned the shipping of malting barely domestically from the State. - The Columbia Basin sends 1400 trucks per day over to the Puget Sound ports. On a related subject, a representative of the Port of Quincy related that they had spent $6 million dollars to prepare for opening an intermodal terminal with BNSF, only to have BNSF pull out of the deal. Obviously, they question why BNSF orally agreed to participate in the deal, only to pull out much later after the Port and others had spent so much money on the deal. - WATCO stated that their revenues per carload for the ex-BN and ex-UP lines are $424 and $447 respectively, but the variable costs per carload are $530 and $269 respectively. Why such a disparity comes down to their Class I connections. UP is expedient in supplying requested cars, BNSF is slow and unresponsive. The WATCO man theorized that BNSF acted thus to encourage such traffic to be trucked to the Ritzville facility. It should also be noted that there is now a rumor that UP wants to have a shuttle facility on it's Washy mainline, which might change their willingness to supply cars to the PCC. So far that's just a rumor, and there were no Class I reps at the meeting, although there were a few other shortline reps there. - A rep from the 26 car grain facility at Fallon (just north of Pullman) complained how BN encouraged them to invest in this facility 20 years ago, and now BNSF won't even allow the current owner to utilize the facility in that manner. They are now looking at bankruptcy because of BN's con job. ("Con job" is my wording, not his). - On a progressive note, Ken Cassavant of WSU took note of the advantages of rail to barge transfer to solve the problems of rail congestion in the Gorge, and that this type of "new technology" (his phrasing, not mine) should be the focus for the State in addressing the freight transportation issues. In other words, it doesn't have to be truck/barge vs truck/rail. - He also noted that rail rates initially went down when the Ritzville facility was opened, but now the rail rates have risen to the point of being equal with the old carload rates from the early to mid 1900's (inflation adjusted). - Foss Maritime, one of the four competing barge lines that use the Columbia-Snake River waterway system, is in favor of more rail to barge transloading, since capacity on the river is nowhere near the congestion point, while rail capacity in the Gorge is at the breaking point for both UP and BNSF. They suggest that instead of the State's taxpayers paying for rail capacity improvements for BNSF, they instead "encourage" more rail to barge transloading. For the record, a four barge tow on the Columbia-Snake river system carries 14,400 tons, basically a unit train equivolence, and they can run the cycle from Pasco to Kalama and back in under 72 hours if need be, whereas the railroads often take a week or more to recycle the Ritzville shuttle. - Other WATCO talking points include * It is the State that forced the $870 surcharge, because the money is delayed for a few years, and WATCO needs it right now. * WATCO is also considering a $250 surcharge on it's ex-UP lines * They confirm that car supply from UP is starting to show signs of lagging behind orders, while BNSF car supply is now almost non existant * Everyone at the meeting pretty much agreed that BNSF has no business incentive to supply grain cars to the area shortlines since such could detract from the Ritzville facility. I'll add my commentary later.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag