Trains.com

Powder River Basin question

7681 views
47 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August 2009
  • 91 posts
Posted by Bill Stephens on Thursday, February 11, 2021 8:03 AM

Lithonia,

Many of the answers you seek about the timing of construction are in the various segments on the map that appears with the column. But I can understand, given the shorthand version of history in those two paragraphs, how you could have questions.

Burlington Northern began building what became the Joint Line in 1972. It began as a 15-mile spur off the main line that runs from Alliance, Neb., to Billings, Mont. The spur, which began at Donkey Creek Junction near Gillette, reached the Belle Ayr mine, the first to open in the Southern Powder River Basin. Work progressed southward as more mines opened. Chicago & North Western also eyed the coal fields, but its most direct route was a ramshackle 519-mile branch across Nebraska that would require rebuilding at more than $1 million per mile. It wasn’t until 1980 that CNW arranged financing, backed by UP, for a cheaper alternative: Building a brand new 56-mile line from the UP at Joyce, Neb., to its own Chadron, Neb.-Casper, Wyo., route at a spot called Crandall, Wyo. West from Crandall, CNW had to totally rebuild 45 miles of its existing route to handle heavy coal traffic. And it had to build the the brand new 6-mile Shawnee Cutoff to reach the Joint Line at Shawnee Junction.

There were some legal squabbles between BN and CNW, along with delays related to environmental issues. Thus CNW did not begin construction until 1982.

If you want to learn more, see if you can find a copy of the November 1989 issue of Trains, which contains Fred W. Frailey’s 24-page masterpiece on the PRB.

Thanks for reading!

 

Cheers,

Bill

 

  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 1,768 posts
Posted by MMLDelete on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 9:48 PM

Although I have known for several years the significance of the PRB regarding coal and railroads, I didn't know anything about the history. So I was intrigued when I saw that the current issue of Trains had an article about the PRB. Before I read the feature article (and I still haven't yet) I noticed that Bill Stephens' column was about the Basin. Since it was only one page, I decided to read it first.

These are, verbatim, the first two sentences of his third paragraph: "The Joint Line's final spike was driven home on Oct. 6, 1979. Five years later and bankrolled by UP, Chicago & Northwestern built into the Basin and ran its first loaded train on Aug, 15, 1984."

(During that time period, I was not paying attention to railroads at all.)

In his column, Stephens at that point jumped 19 years ahead in time; so those two quoted sentences comprised all I "knew" about the early history. A quick skim of the feature article seemed to show that it's not about the history. I then went online and googled Powder River Basin railroad history, and got nothing of value; so I gave up.

This is why I made my original post.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 9:30 PM

My recollection is that the joint line was an extension of a BN line into the powder river basin south of Gillette

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 6:10 PM

NP Eddie
I came off the NP as of the 1970 merger and was a clerk at Northtown (Minneapolis).

Three answers:

1.  In St. Paul, the only door between the two railroads was the door between the president of the NP and the president of the GN.

That is the only door necessary.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 1,002 posts
Posted by NP Eddie on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 6:03 PM

I came off the NP as of the 1970 merger and was a clerk at Northtown (Minneapolis).

Three answers:

1.  In St. Paul, the only door between the two railroads was the door between the president of the NP and the president of the GN.

2.  The X-CBQ line through Alliance was in terrible shape and the CBQ knew it. The late Eldon Phillips was a CBQ man who said that the "new company" would have to rebuilt it and the BN had to build it up from the ground up, which they did.  I can confirm that drugs and alcohol were a problem, what the adding of new employees to the railroad at that time. The Trainmaster and Road Foreman were over worked.

3. I can confirm that the BN had many terrible wrecks from 1970 to 1995 some where involving coal trains and some were not. Del Grosso's book on "Locomotives of the Burlington Northern" lists 158 locomotives destroyed during the above time period---of that 100 were high horse power locomotives. A dispatcher error (I knew the fellow) caused a lap order into Motley, MN. Three good men were killed, one received a disability, and the conductor and rear brakeman (on the cabooses) were not injured. Six big locomotives were destroyed. I saw the scrap loaded into gons when I worked in the Material Department at Northtown Diesel Shop.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 4:16 PM

wjstix
 
BaltACD
While the CB&Q, GN and NP were separate companies, they were commonly referred to a 'The Hill Lines' and the all danced to the tune set by James J Hill - The Empire Builder and Hill's descendents.  The formation of the corporation BN was more of a sanctification of what the Hill Lines had been doing all along than it was a actual merger. 

Not so much. Although NP and GN did jointly own CB&Q and SP&S, and James J. Hill owned stock in both, they really did operate as two separate railroad entities. They had separate presidents and boards of directors, separate facilities etc. They didn't really co-ordinate what they did anymore than any other two neighboring railroads. 

They did share a headquarters building in downtown St. Paul...sort of. NP was on one side of the building and GN on the other. Each had their own entrance, and I believe the only doors between the two were on the first floor and on one of the upper floors - and the doors were usually kept locked.

 

Yep......same building, give me a break.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 2:01 PM

BaltACD
While the CB&Q, GN and NP were separate companies, they were commonly referred to a 'The Hill Lines' and the all danced to the tune set by James J Hill - The Empire Builder and Hill's descendents.  The formation of the corporation BN was more of a sanctification of what the Hill Lines had been doing all along than it was a actual merger.

Not so much. Although NP and GN did jointly own CB&Q and SP&S, and James J. Hill owned stock in both, they really did operate as two separate railroad entities. They had separate presidents and boards of directors, separate facilities etc. They didn't really co-ordinate what they did anymore than any other two neighboring railroads. 

They did share a headquarters building in downtown St. Paul...sort of. NP was on one side of the building and GN on the other. Each had their own entrance, and I believe the only doors between the two were on the first floor and on one of the upper floors - and the doors were usually kept locked.

Stix
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 1:39 PM

Lithonia Operator
Not really sure what you're saying. And 100 years ago there was no BNSF.

While the CB&Q, GN and NP were separate companies, they were commonly referred to a 'The Hill Lines' and the all danced to the tune set by James J Hill - The Empire Builder and Hill's descendents.  The formation of the corporation BN was more of a sanctification of what the Hill Lines had been doing all along than it was a actual merger.

The creation of BNSF from the merger of the BN and the ATSF was a infact merger.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 1:06 PM

Lithonia Operator

Not really sure what you're saying. And 100 years ago there was no BNSF.

Anyway, I was confused by Bill Stephens' column, and hoped someone could explain.

 

Sorry, I hope you didn't feel I was being snarky. That wasn't my intention. The Chicago, Burlington & Quincy> later Burlington Northern> later BNSF built through the area a long time ago. I lived in Gillette Wyoming in the early 80's. It's the only real city in the PRB. The BNSF runs right through the middle of town. It was a big deal when they built and overpass for vehicle traffic.

      Related- when I lived there, the BN would crash a coal train about once a month. They were having seious problems with drugs and alcohol at the time.

      The bad soil Mudchicken talks about was refered to as clay expansive soil- think bentonite. In the town of Wright, south of Gillette, it was common back then to build houses with wood basement floors because the soil was so weird it would break up a concrete floors.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 12:01 PM

BaltACD
Penn Central was a pioneer in the area

Not just an early adopter; they achieved cult-movie scene star status doing it.

  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 1,768 posts
Posted by MMLDelete on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 9:51 AM

BaltACD

 

 
Lithonia Operator
Standing derailments!! Yikes.

 

Penn Central was a pioneer in the area

 

It's heartening to know that they distinguished themselves in one way at least.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 9:22 AM

Lithonia Operator
Standing derailments!! Yikes.

Penn Central was a pioneer in the area

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 1,768 posts
Posted by MMLDelete on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 5:35 AM

Thanks, MC. Very interesting stuff.

Standing derailments!! Yikes.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 5:16 AM

LO: All of the railroad in that country (BNSF/CB&Q plus the CNW Cowboy line were in crappy condition. CB&Q/BN had already drawn up abandonment docket paperwork. Crawford Hill and Belden Tunnel were a derailment a day nightmare in the beginning of the coal boom. SD70Dude got it partially right about the track condition, but the subgrade issues were far worse. CNW/DM&E used to suffer "standing derailments" where if you left a train parked on the main and came back later, parked cars would derail overnight in the soft expansive soils. Tons of money was wasted on band-aid solutions until what was to become the PRB Jointline was thoroughly rebuilt. (BN's way of doing things would bite them multiple times over, they made money in spite of their blunders. CNW less so.)

Chadron (CNW) and Alliance (BN/CB&Q) dealt with all kinds of problems going from jerkwater to frontline status. (The alcohol and aspirin makers must have made a killing.) They crossed at Crawford, NE and CNW split at Dakota Jcn outside Chadron.

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 1,768 posts
Posted by MMLDelete on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 5:07 AM

Thank you, Dude, for your excellent, detailed explanation.

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Wednesday, February 10, 2021 12:45 AM

Trains had a special issue on coal about 10 years ago.  Among other things it contained an excellent article on the railroad history around the PRB coalfield.

As I recall, Northwestern was broke and had no real chance of building their own line into the coalfield, but they had submitted an application to do so anyway.  Having also received a similar application from BN, the regulator (still the ICC at this time) called representatives from both railroads to DC and told them that they would approve only one application, not both.  The representatives were then directed to an empty conference room and told to "work things out".  This meeting resulted in the Joint Line agreement between BN and CNW, UP was not in the picture at this point and I don't believe they had applied to build into the coalfield.

BN then built the Joint Line in fairly short order and started running their trains on it right away, it was UP and CNW's trains that did not run until later on.

BN had ready access to eastern Wyoming and was already serving some mines in the area, but Northwestern's trains would have had to brave their 'Cowboy Line', hundreds of miles of decrepid pioneer-quality track with lots of 60 lb rail in order to reach Wyoming.  

Northwestern considered upgrading this route, but ultimately struck a deal with UP to avoid this, giving all three railroads access to the joint line.  The CNW/UP access came from the south, using a shorter section of new track to get to UP's main route and almost completely avoid the Cowboy Line.  This process took years, and BN tried to freeze CNW out of the Joint Line for missing a deadline that was in the original agreement, but the ICC ruled that clause to be anticompetitive and therefore illegal.

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 1,768 posts
Posted by MMLDelete on Tuesday, February 9, 2021 11:05 PM

Not really sure what you're saying. And 100 years ago there was no BNSF.

Anyway, I was confused by Bill Stephens' column, and hoped someone could explain.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Tuesday, February 9, 2021 11:02 PM

Lithonia Operator

A column in the current Trains mentions that UP and BNSF built the Joint Line, and then five years later CNW, backed by UP, built a line into the Basin. Then the first train ran.

So, why did it take five years to go from the completion of the Joint Line to the running of the first train?

And why was CNW the one to get there first? Why wasn't it UP or BNSF?

 

BNSF was already there from probably 100 years ago.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • 2,671 posts
Powder River Basin question
Posted by Lithonia Operator on Tuesday, February 9, 2021 10:57 PM

A column in the current Trains mentions that UP and BNSF built the Joint Line, and then five years later CNW, backed by UP, built a line into the Basin. Then the first train ran.

So, why did it take five years to go from the completion of the Joint Line to the running of the first train?

And why was CNW the one to get there first? Why wasn't it UP or BNSF?

Still in training.


Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy