New Push for Boston-to-Montreal Passenger Trains

(SOURCE: Wilson Ring, Holly Ramer, https://apnews.com/article/travel-boston-canada-d2600621dc5fa2ce2af2a3b7825a65b7)

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Rail advocates are dusting off a proposal for passenger train service between Montreal and Boston, riding a renewed interest in train travel to bolster a concept that has been around for more than a decade.

“It’s not a hard sell at all. A lot of people want this,” said Francois Rebello, a former national assembly member in Quebec and a consultant on the project.

Hundreds of travelers would ride a privately operated, overnight train each day if obstacles can be overcome to make the service a reality in coming years, according to a ridership study.

It wouldn’t be a high-speed affair. Promoters envision a different experience — a relaxed ride with a meal and sleep before arriving bright-eyed at the destination. The 14-hour ride would travel through Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and Quebec.

The proposal comes against a backdrop of a rail revival, and more than $100 billion in railway infrastructure funding approved by Congress.

Maine State Sen. Richard Bennett, a Republican who lives in a district where the train would pass, said there’s much work to be done.

“I’m both excited and skeptical,” he said. “I certainly support the concept and I think it has a lot of promise. I think this can be done.”

But the proposal is in the early stages and the obstacles are many.

The track on the Canadian side of the border requires more than $100 million in upgrades and repairs. The track is in good shape through northern New England but the speed is limited to about 35 mph (56 kph) for a long stretch, and there’s little hope of securing additional funding to boost the speed.

Operators would have to negotiate agreements with several private owners of the rail — the Saint Lawrence and Atlantic, CSX and others — and there could be multiple crews required for the train. Then there’s the question of clearing customs with people coming and going at multiple train stops, and finding scarce equipment.

The idea for restoring Montreal-to-Boston passenger rail service for the first time since the 1960s has been bounced around for more than a decade, and several different rail routes have been floated over the years.

This time, the proposed route would follow Canadian Pacific Railway track from Montreal to Sherbrooke, Quebec, and then the St. Lawrence and Atlantic across Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine, where a CSX-owned rail passes through Old Orchard Beach, a popular Maine tourist destination for Canadians. The final stretch is operated by the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority.

Carl Fowler, a member of the Vermont Rail Advisory Council, is a rail advocate who likes the idea of expanded passenger rail service. But he said people have to be realistic about the proposal’s challenges.

“There are a lot of loose ends to be resolved,” he said. 

Proponents have engaged with the Canadian Pacific Railway and the corporate parent of St. Lawrence and Atlantic, and the Canadian government already has considered investing in railway upgrades, Rebello said. Montreal real estate entrepreneur Nikolai Ray has signed on an investor.

About 60 rail advocates, legislators, tourism officials and others gathered recently in Coaticook, Quebec, to discuss the vision promoted by Montreal-based Fondation Trains De Nuit, or Night Train Foundation, and view a proposed map. Notably absent were state transportation officials from Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont.

But the project won’t start anytime soon. The most optimistic view is that the project would need at least two years to become a reality, he said. However, it could take longer to secure funding and rail agreements.

A motorist could get from Boston to Montreal twice as fast but rail advocates say riders would get there in style. People could have dinner, be entertained and sleep in a comfortable bed, proponents say. They’d also be spared the cost of a hotel fee, since they’d be sleeping and showering on the train, supporters said.

The project holds appeal both for older riders who are nostalgic about trains and a younger generation that’s less enthralled with cars, Rebello said.

Rail enthusiast Sarah LeBaron von Baeyer, who lives outside Boston and doesn’t drive, said she “wholeheartedly” embraces mass transit that would allow her to visit family and friends in Canada several times a year.

“I love train travel. I lived in Japan for many years. It was absolutely the best way to get around,” she said.

Federal Transit Administration Issues Directives to MBTA / Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities to Correct Safety Issues

https://www.transit.dot.gov/about/news/federal-transit-administration-issues-directives-massachusetts-bay-transportation

https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-programs/safety/special-directives-massachusetts-bay-transportation-authority-and

Wednesday, June 15, 2022

WASHINGTON – To improve safety for the Greater Boston Area's rail transit system, the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Transit Administration (FTA) today issued a series of special directives to the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) and the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU), the state agency responsible for safety oversight of the MBTA's rail transit operations.

A special directive is an order from the Federal government that requires an FTA-regulated transit agency or oversight organization to take immediate action on safety issues within a specific period. The special directives being issued today—four of which are being issued to the MBTA and one to the DPU—are a result of the FTA's safety management inspection of the MBTA that began April 14, 2022, following several incidents that resulted in one fatality and several injuries to passengers and employees on MBTA’s transit rail systems. These special directives require the MBTA, the MBTA Board of Directors, and the DPU to work together to remedy safety concerns and improve the MBTA's safety culture.

"Safety is our number one priority and must be the primary focus for the MBTA and the DPU," said FTA Administrator Nuria Fernandez. "Every transit passenger deserves a safe ride. Every transit worker deserves a safe workplace. The MBTA must immediately take action to improve its safety procedures for its passengers and workers."

FTA underscores that transit riders in the Boston area should not interpret the special directives issued today as a reason to avoid the MBTA subway or light rail. Rather, FTA's actions provide system-wide measures to fix longstanding issues with the agency's overall safety program and culture.

The four special directives issued to the MBTA concern:

• Operating Control Center staffing;
• General safety operating procedures;
• Delayed critical maintenance; and
• Lapses in staff safety certifications.

Each directive includes specific timeframes – ranging from 24 hours to 35 days -- for the MBTA to provide responses and take actions.  

The directive to the DPU affirms the need for the agency to enforce the special directives to the MBTA and address outstanding safety issues from FTA's most recent audit of the DPU. The audit, conducted in October 2019, resulted in sixteen findings, of which seven remain open. Those findings concern:

• hazard management;
• accident investigations;
• corrective action plans;
• and rules compliance.

FTA will provide technical assistance both to the DPU to enhance its enforcement role, and to the MBTA to help address the agency's safety issues. 

FTA's actions direct the two agencies to adopt system-wide measures to fix longstanding issues with the MBTA’s overall safety program and safety culture, including involvement of the members of the MBTA’s Board of Directors, who are the ultimate decision-makers for the agency, along with leadership of the DPU.  

FTA issued the directives as part of its oversight role and to continue to ensure transit remains the safest mode of surface transportation. FTA's Public Transportation Safety Program regulation lays out the agency's authority and process for overseeing and supporting transit safety, including issuing special directives.

Recent New England Model Railroad Announcements JAN 2019

It had been a while since I sifted through my model railroad new-release emails, so I finally sat down and put together this update:

HO SCALE

ATHEARN:  50’ Waffle High Cube Box Car – Guilford (MEC)

ATHEARN:  50’ FMC 5347 Box Car – Green Mountain (red oxide)  

INTERMOUNTAIN:  Wood Sided Refrigerator Cars – Bangor & Aroostook (white, 6 road #s)

ATLAS:  EMD GP7 Diesel Locomotive – Bangor & Aroostook

ATLAS:  EMD GP40-2 Diesel Locomotive – Guilford (B&M)

ATLAS:  Alco RS1 Diesel Locomotive – Green Mountain (# 400, 401, 405)

ATLAS:  Alco RS3 Diesel Locomotive – New Haven (orange/green/black)

ATLAS:  GE 8-40C Diesel Locomotive – Pan Am (MEC # 7552, 7635)  

ATLAS:  Heavyweight Single Window Coach – Rutland (green)

ATLAS:  Paired Window Coach – New Haven (MOW maroon)

ATLAS:  Evans Gondola – Maine Central (green)

ATLAS:  70 Ton 9 Panel Hopper – Central Vermont (green)

INTERMOUNTAIN:  R-70-15 Refrigerator Cars – Bangor & Aroostook (blue, 6 road #s)

INTERMOUNTAIN:  5283 Cubic Foot Box Car – Bangor & Aroostook (teal, 6 road #s)

RAPIDO:  EP-5 Electric Locomotive – New Haven

RAPIDO:  Alco FB-2 Unit - New Haven (2 schemes)

RAPIDO:  EMD SW1200 Diesel Locomotive – New Haven

RAPIDO:  Alco RS-11 Diesel Locomotive – New Haven  

RAPIDO:  Stainless Steel Dining Car – New Haven
TANGENT:  GATC 4180 Airslide Covered Hopper - B&M/Prince Spaghetti

N SCALE

ATHEARN:  50’ FMC 5347 Box Car – Green Mountain (red oxide) 

ATHEARN/ROUNDHOUSE:  Eastern 2 Window Caboose – Boston & Maine (2 road #s)

ATLAS:  Alco RS1 Diesel Locomotive – Green Mountain (# 400, 401, 405)

ATLAS:  EMD GP38 Diesel Locomotive – Bangor & Aroostook

ATLAS:  GE 8-40C Diesel Locomotive – Pan Am (MEC # 7552, 7635)  

ATLAS:  60’ Passenger Cars (RPO/Combine/Coach/Baggage) – Boston & Maine (maroon)

ATLAS:  40’ PS1 Box Car – Rutland

ATLAS:  Single Door Boxcar – Boston & Maine (McGinnis Blue)

ATLAS:  Russell Snow Plow – Boston & Maine (blue)

ATLAS:  Evans Gondola – Maine Central (green)

ESM/ATLAS:  NE-5 TraiLiner Caboose – New Haven (very limited run, 2 #s)

INTERMOUNTAIN:  ACF Type 27 Riveted 8,000 Gallon Tank Car – Baker’s Chocolate

INTERMOUNTAIN:  50’ AAR Double Door Box Car – New Haven (red, 6 road #s)

MICRO TRAINS:  Weathered 2-Boxcar Set – Boston & Maine (#020 44 696) 

O SCALE

ATLAS:  50’ PS-1 Plug Door Box Car – Bangor & Aroostook/State of Maine

ATLAS:  Pulp Wood Flatcar – Maine Central

ATLAS:  50’6” Box Car – Pan Am (MEC, 2 #s)

BACHMANN/WILLIAMS:  GE 70-ton Locomotive – Rutland

CSX Rules Out Sale of Former Boston & Albany Line

SOURCE:  Times Union - Friday, January 26, 2018 

CSX Transportation, responding to a report earlier this week from trade publication trains.com, said Friday afternoon that a list of lines under review for possible sale was "inaccurate." The list included the former Boston & Albany line between Albany and Worcester, Mass., now operated by CSX.

"I can definitively say that this line is not for sale," a CSX spokesman told the Times Union. The trains.com report had led to speculation about potential purchasers and the continued operation of Amtrak's Lake Shore Limited over the line.

CSX has undertaken a review of its network "to be sure our assets are maximized for efficiency and add value to the company's long-term business needs," the spokesman said. But he added that the list published by trains.com "did not originate from anyone authorized to speak on behalf of the company and is not right."

CSX operates a major rail yard and auto distribution terminal in Selkirk. It had planned to close its hump yard there, used to sort individual rail cars into new trains, as it sought to reduce transit times, then Chief Operating Officer Cindy Sanborn told analysts at an investment conference last May.

Sanborn was replaced by James Foote as COO last autumn. Foote became CEO, succeeding E. Hunter Harrison, who was in the midst of rolling out his "precision scheduled railroading" concept at CSX, died in December.

Meanwhile, CSX  reversed course and the Selkirk hump operation remains.

Last autumn, CSX planned to consolidate train dispatching operations in Jacksonville, Fla., where the railroad is headquartered. But that move apparently has been delayed.

Foote plans to continue Harrison's efforts, which include precision railroading where trains operate on set schedules. Foote told regulators at the beginning of January that assets are better utilized, transit times and customer service have improved, and costs have been reduced.

Rapido Releases Drawings of Upcoming MBTA GM New Look "Fishbowl" Bus

OK, OK... this isn't exactly a train related item... UNLESS you are into the history of trolleys, which DID use rails.  After all, many buses were called "trackless trolleys"!

I just have to add this info to the blog, because the product looks way too cool to skip over.

The Rapido website has many interesting photos and video regarding their upcoming HO scale General Motors "New Look" bus, and also of their own personal bus.

The MBTA version will come in three "road numbers", in two versions, Standard and Deluxe.  
Pre-orders are due May 8, 2017 for Fall 2017 delivery.

Micro Trains NEW HAVEN 3-2 Heavyweight Observation Car Released in N Scale

Micro Trains NEW HAVEN 3-2 Heavyweight Observation Car

Product Code: 144 00 100

This 3-2 heavyweight observation car is green with white lettering and runs on 6-wheel passenger trucks. Built by the Pullman Company in Chicago in 1917 it had the appearance of a conventional observation car, containing an observation room, dining room, and sleeping births. It received air conditioning in May of 1943, and continued to operate across the New Haven network for another decade or more.

Milk on the Boston & Maine...

MBTA Union Vows Fight Over Baker’s Plan for Agency

(SOURCE:  Boston Globe - By David Scharfenberg)

The MBTA’s largest employee union is vowing to sue the state, or petition the federal government to cut off millions of dollars in aid for the agency, if state lawmakers approve a key provision of Governor Charlie Baker’s T overhaul plan.

Union officials argue the proposal, which would give a new Baker-appointed board final approval of labor contracts, runs afoul of a federal law designed to protect the collective bargaining rights of the nation’s public transit employees.

Specifically, the governor’s board would be able to reject the binding ruling of a neutral arbitrator, an arrangement used for decades to decide MBTA contract disputes.

James M. O’Brien, president of the Boston Carmen’s Union Local 589, said he does not relish the idea of choking off federal transportation funds. But the governor’s plan, he said, amounts to a reckless and fundamentally unfair shift in the bargaining process.

“It doesn’t make sense,” he said, of Baker’s push. “You’re [risking] hundreds of millions of dollars in grants.”

State official lobbies for changes at MBTA

Transportation Secretary Stephanie Pollack asked lawmakers for a range of changes at the MBTA.

Baker administration officials play down the risk. They note the courts have given states wide latitude to alter public transit labor policy and they argue their proposed change is a modest, procedural one rather than a substantial blow to collective bargaining.

Tim Buckley, a spokesman for the governor, said the administration “is confident that the limited changes that we have proposed” will be approved by the federal government. And he hinted that the state, after passage of the law, could simply rewrite it if the federal government moved to withhold funds and the courts upheld the move.

“The administration will not forfeit any available federal dollars under any circumstances,” he said.

The conflict, if it comes to a head, would be the latest in a string of high-stakes fights over workers’ rights and federal funding for mass transit — some breaking for labor and some for management.

Wisconsin lawmakers, fearing losing millions in federal funding, exempted certain transit workers from Governor Scott Walker’s high-profile push to roll back public employees’ collective bargaining rights four years ago.

But in California, a federal judge ruled in February that US Labor Secretary Thomas Perez had gone too far in cutting off funds for transit agencies in that state after the Legislature passed a pension reform law that trimmed benefits for transit employees, among others.

The disputes here and elsewhere turn on a transportation law signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964 that launched an era of substantial federal funding for the nation’s transit system.

One section of the legislation requires the US labor secretary to certify that a public transit agency is protecting its employees’ collective bargaining rights before the federal government disburses funds.

The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and its unions came to a 20-page agreement in 1974 meant to satisfy the requirements of the law. The secretary has repeatedly cited it, in the decades since, to authorize federal grants for the agency.

The agreement, among other things, mandates that labor disputes should be settled by arbitration procedures set out in any “then-applicable collective bargaining agreement.”

The current Carmen’s agreement mandates binding arbitration when the union and the T come to an impasse in contract negotiations — allowing a neutral arbitrator to impose changes in wages and benefits.

Baker’s legislation, now before the Legislature’s Joint Committee on Transportation, would give a new MBTA fiscal and management control board the right to approve or deny any arbitrator’s award.

Douglas Taylor, a lawyer representing the Carmen’s union, said the move would make the arbitration no longer binding, giving veto power to management and fundamentally altering the balance of power between the T and its workers.

“Collective bargaining means co-determination,” he said. “Co-determination means that both sides have a say. . . . Binding arbitration accomplishes that. It does it in an imperfect way. . . . But at least each side’s got an equal shot.”

Baker officials maintain they are not doing away with binding arbitration but merely adding another step to the process. They point out that, under state law, city councils, town councils, and town meetings have the right to vote up or down on arbitrators’ awards for police and fire contracts.

Harold Lichten, a labor lawyer who represents unions, said the police and fire system works “relatively well.” But he said there is a difference between giving a representative body such as a city council veto power and handing that authority to an arm of the executive branch.

“I think by giving the governor veto power, it really does render fairly meaningless the whole process,” said Lichten, who has represented a union of mid-level managers at the T.

Joseph E. Slater, a professor at the University of Toledo College of Law who has written about public sector labor law, said in an e-mail that he has “never heard of a body that is that directly involved in day-to-day managing having the power to reject a contract ordered by an . . . arbitrator.”

A spokesman for the US Department of Labor declined to comment on the debate in Massachusetts.

Supporters of Baker’s proposal say binding arbitration has long favored the T’s unions. In their view, the changes would help rein in costs.

“There is no chance that the state government will be able to bring T costs under control unless they address this question of binding arbitration,” said Gregory Sullivan, research director for the conservative-leaning Pioneer Institute, who testified before the Legislature in favor of the measure.

Sullivan and administration officials add that the courts have given states broad discretion to alter transit labor policy. But Taylor said effectively eliminating binding arbitration — particularly for a union that does not have the right to strike — would be such a blow to collective bargaining that the courts would be compelled to side with the union.

And whatever the legality of the move, he noted, the union could go to the US secretary of labor and attempt to block federal grants for the T, arguing the state is not protecting workers’ collective bargaining rights.

The federal Labor Department does not always side with the unions. In the 1980s it sided with the state in a dispute over management rights such as the power to hire part-time workers. But when T unions objected to a 2009 state attempt to change workers’ health care plan, federal officials sided with labor and directed both sides to negotiate a resolution.

Micro-Trains Releases Bangor & Aroostook "State of Maine" 50' Boxcars in N & Z Scales

Micro-Trains' March rolling stock releases include Bangor & Aroostook "State of Maine" 50' boxcars in 2 road numbers.  They are available in both N and Z scales.  

N scale - #031 00 471 RD# BAR 10027...$29.95
N scale - #031 00 472 RD# BAR 10038...$29.95 

Z scale - #505 00 321 RD# BAR 10027...$29.95
Z scale - #505 00 322 RD# BAR 10038...$29.95 

Recent New England Model Railroad Announcements

N SCALE

Athearn:  50´ SIECO Box Car – Bay Colony, B&M

Athearn: GATC 2600 Airslide Hopper – Bay State Milling

Atlas:  GP38-2 Locomotive - Low Hood - Massachusetts Central (Blue/Black/White)

Atlas Trainman:  PS-2 Covered Hopper – Rutland

HO SCALE

Athearn: 50´ SIECO Box Car – B&M, Bay Colony 

Athearn: GATC 2600 Airslide Hopper – Bay State Milling

Atlas: Alco C420 Low Nose Locomotive – Guilford/D&H

Atlas Trainman:  PS-2 Covered Hopper – Rutland

Bachmann:  USRA 0-6-0 Locomotive – New Haven (DCC/Smoke)

 

Recent New England Model Railroad Announcements

N SCALE

Atlas:  Alco RS-3 Locomotive – Rutland

Atlas:  Extended Vision Caboose – New England Central  

Intermountain:  USRA Drop Bottom Gondola – Boston & Maine

HO SCALE

Athearn:  40' Youngstown Door Box – Maine Central

Atlas:  Alco S-2 Locomotive – Central Vermont

Atlas:  Postwar Box Car w/8' Door – Bangor & Aroostook

Atlas:  Extended Vision Caboose – New England Central  

Intermountain:  USRA Drop Bottom Gondola – Boston & Maine

Pan Am Official Says NH Rail 'quiet zones' a Safety Hazard

(SOURCE:  Seacoast Online)

PORTSMOUTH — City councilors tried but couldn't get all the commitments they wanted from Pan Am Railways Executive Vice President Cynthia Scarano, and they weren't shy about showing their unhappiness with the entire process.

Scarano told the council Monday night that the number of rail cars carrying propane from the Sea-3 propane terminal in Newington through Portsmouth would jump from between 1,000 and 1,500 to between 2,000 and 3,000 if the decision allowing the expansion of the Sea-3 facility is not overturned.

The city of Portsmouth has appealed the Newington Planning Board's decision to approve the expansion.

Scarano said the railroad company has already installed 5,000 new rails on the line that runs from Newington through the city of Portsmouth as part of a commitment they made to the town of Newington.

If the decision is not overturned, Pan Am would upgrade its tracks from Class 1 to Class 2 status, allowing them to move the cars at speeds up to 25 miles per hour.

When that happens, Pan Am would add 5,000 more new ties.

Scarano repeated Monday night that she didn't see any time in her lifetime "where we need to go more than that," meaning faster than 10 mph................ READ WHOLE ARTICLE

Derailment in Lawrence MA 7/11/14

Raw video from NECN of Pan Am derailment at Lawrence MA this morning:
http://www.necn.com/pages/video?PID=xdCiR9oNBYlsqK_QwAziufhzO72KUI_E

Connecting Boston and Montreal By Rail

(SOURCE:  Vermont Public Radio - By Maggie Cassidy and Valley News)

Rail enthusiasts and regional planners turned out to a hearing Wednesday night to advocate for more frequent stops along two passenger rail routes to connect Boston with Montreal and southern Connecticut, while several attendees with Claremont ties urged for that city to be included in the loop.

Transportation officials from Vermont and Massachusetts were at the Hotel Coolidge hosting the first public meeting on a Northern New England Intercity Rail Initiative study, which will examine the feasibility of improved intercity rail service along the two lines, which both connect in Springfield, Mass.

“Frequency is the key,” Carl Fowler, president of Rail Travel Adventures and a member of the Vermont Rail Council, said in an interview following the two-hour hearing. “That’s what they’ve got to address.”

On top of advocating for greater frequency, many of the nearly 40 people in attendance urged officials and consultants to consider regional connectivity as they advance the study and develop a firm list of goals. In addition to being able to easily move along the two corridors, attendees said, they also want the train schedules to work in a way that allows them to pick up connecting trains that travel further south or head west.

Others, though, were feeling left out of the mix altogether.

Although the initiative is designed to improve passenger service to Quebec and four New England states — Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Hampshire — there are currently no New Hampshire stations included as potential stops. The omission of Claremont, in particular, led to questions from several people in the crowd, including N.H. Rep. Ray Gagnon, D-Claremont, who asked why Claremont officials weren’t being consulted about the potential need for a stop there.

“We’re out of the loop,” he said.

New Hampshire Rail Authority member Jonathan Edwards, of Hanover, said it would be “a mistake to not give Claremont the fullest consideration possible,” noting that Springfield, Vt., and Windsor would also be served by that station. A representative from the New Hampshire Department of Transportation also advocated for the Claremont stop.

The two nearest stops north and south of White River Junction included on the list are Montpelier and Brattleboro, Vt.

Ron O’Blenis, senior rail project manager with HDR Engineering who led the presentation, responded that the list of potential participating stations was the result of a “preliminary screening” of stations that would bring in a high volume of passengers without having to stop the train too frequently that it slows down service.

He said a stop in Claremont is not off the table and will be researched further as the study progresses.
“Lots of times it’s local groups and initiatives to make it happen that can dictate that,” he said in an interview afterward.

Some questioned why the Boston to White River Junction leg had to go through Springfield, Mass., which one person compared to keeping the two s ides of a triangle and “cutting out the hypotenuse.” Sixty miles of track between Concord and White River Junction was removed years ago, and New Hampshire put the brakes on a proposal in 2003 that would have possibly had it reinstated.

The study is being funded by federal funds matched by Vermont and Massachusetts. It builds upon projects already completed or in the works thanks to funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009, including upgrades to 220 miles of New England Central Railroad completed last spring.

Similar upgrades are underway in Massachusetts and Connecticut.

Several attendees noted afterward that they had expected to see a more substantive study and are looking forward to September, when another round of hearings will take place and, as Fowler said, “hopefully there will be more meat on the proposal.”

Christopher Parker, executive director with the Vermont Rail Action Network, an advocacy group for rail services in Vermont, said it seemed like people were ready for more substantive discussions beyond an easy consensus that greater frequency is better and, instead, take a hard look at train schedules and other details.

Still, he said, he was glad that things were moving forward.

“For us, this is super,” he said. “This is what we want to see happen.”

Written comments about this phase of the study will be accepted through the end of February, O’Blenis said. More information is available at http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Planning/Main/CurrentStudies/NorthernNewEnglandRailStudy.aspx or by calling Scott Bascom, planning coordinator at the Vermont Agency of Transportation, at 802-828-5748.

Pros & Cons of Portsmouth NH Rail Line Revival

(SOURCE:  Seacoast Online)

December 16, 2013 2:00 AM

 

The prospect of a resurgence of freight shipped by rail may be a positive development on multiple fronts, however, residents who live along the local rail system and motorists in general are right to express their concerns.

Use of the rail line from Newington through Portsmouth, Greenland and Stratham to the Rockingham Junction on the Newfields-Newmarket town line has been largely dormant for as long as most residents can remember. However, the line was never abandoned and the day was likely to come that its use would rise again. Beyond the shipping of freight — and it is the plan of Sea-3 in Newington to ship propane via the Newington-Portsmouth branch that produced concerns — it remains the hope of many that passenger service could also resume.

Increased freight shipping via railroads can get many tractor-trailers and other commercial shipping vehicles off local and state roads and interstates and decrease the reliance on standard fuels. The operation of trains would also potentially have a regional and national economic impact.

Furthermore, increased rail freight could lead to substantial upgrades of the tracks, which would improve the chances of restoring passenger service that must operate at speeds in excess of the 10 mph currently allowed on the Newington-Portsmouth branch.

With all that said, the many residents whose homes are near the rail lines need to have their concerns addressed. Because of federal regulations, local communities have no legal say over what is shipped on rail lines. However, that doesn't mean the rail company, Pan Am Railways, the Federal Railroad Administration, Sea-3 and its parent company, Trammo, can't address resident concerns in a fair and open manner.

This is particularly true when it comes to shipping a fuel such as propane, or others for that matter.

There are many concerns about the condition and safety of the current tracks that roll through downtown Portsmouth, pass through rural areas of Greenland and cross over Great Bay. The first attempt to assess the condition of the tracks proved difficult. The FRA was not forthcoming with information on the condition of the tracks last week. It provided only a fact sheet on federal track safety standards, and said the latest track inspection report would be made available only through a Freedom of Information Act request, which Seacoast Media Group filed.

The issue extends beyond the current condition of the tracks. According to Cynthia Scarano, executive vice president of Pan Am Railways, the tracks of the Newington-Portsmouth branch currently limit train speed to 10 mph. Ensuring the safety of the tracks to allow for the shipping of propane is step one, but learning more about any potential improvements that would allow faster speeds must be discussed.

The area is not used to seeing trains on the tracks, and the few that do use them crawl along. More trains, traveling faster through areas not used to seeing them, is one reason to bring all parties to the table to discuss how rail commerce can be safely permitted.

All crossings must be thoroughly inspected to ensure there is proper sight distance and signage and, wherever necessary, to feature lighted signals and stopping arms. Any other protective measures, such as fencing in residential areas, should also be considered.

Federal regulations protect the right of interstate commerce along the rail system, and that is a good thing as rail for freight and passenger service, is a vital link; a promising alternative to highways. But that doesn't mean local residents' concerns should be pushed aside. There is promise here. The ability to revive rail service lies in the hands of the business that owns the lines, the businesses that will use them and the federal agency that regulates them. It is necessary that a balanced approach is taken to the revival of the rails.

Recent New England Model Railroad Announcements

N SCALE

Atlas:  EMD GP-9 Torpedo Tube Locomotive – Central Vermont, Clarendon & Pittsford, Vermont Railway, GT

Atlas:  40' PS-1 Boxcar w/ 8' Door – B&M

HO SCALE

Atlas:  ACF 50' 6" Box Car - Clarendon & Pittsford

O SCALE

Atlas:  Coalveyor Bathtub Gondola – Sullivan Scrap Metal (Holyoke MA)

CT Rail Mishap Takes $62M Chunk Out of State Economy

(SOURCE - HartfordBusiness.com)

A recent 12-day disruption to train service between Stamford and New York City cost Connecticut's economy $62 million, according to an analysis released by the state's Department of Economic and Community Development.

First obtained by the Associated Press, the analysis by Mark Prisloe, an associate economist at DECD, concludes that the gross state product took a $62 million hit, that the service disruption resulted in lost productivity equivalent to 260 jobs, and that the state lost $2.5 million in revenue during the 12 days.

The analysis utilizes an estimation method developed by Regional Economic Models Inc.

MBTA Cape Cod Weekend Service Extended Six Weeks

(via the Trains.com newsletter)

BOSTON, Mass. – Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority's popular CapeFlyer service between Boston and Cape Cod will run until October. The trains started operating on Memorial Day weekend and were originally slated to end on Labor Day weekend, but the popularity of the Friday, Saturday, and Sunday service has led to a six-week extension.

“Continuing Cape Rail service through the fall will be a boost for residents and tourists alike,” Gov. Deval Patrick says. Since the service began, it's attracted more than 11,000 customers, more than enough to cover the $165,000 annual operating cost of the train. Tickets cost $20 for one-way or $35 round trip between Boston's South Station and Hyannis, where passengers can transfer to buses or ferries. Operated in partnership with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation and Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority, the CapeFlyer is the first regularly scheduled passenger train to run to Cape Cod in nearly 25 years.

“This service has been a huge hit with Cape visitors, and we are pleased to keep the trains running for the busy late summer and early fall weekends following Labor Day,” says Richard A. Davey, secretary and CEO of the state transportation department.

More MBTA Fitchburg Line Weekend Disruption Coming

(SOURCE:  Wicked Local LINCOLN MA - By Kimberly A. Hooper)

Lincoln — Joe Nolan, a community outreach official for the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), confirmed Thursday that the MBTA will continue weekend commuter rail service from North Station to South Acton until Saturday, Sept. 7.

Originally, weekend commuter rail service was slated to be suspended beginning August 3 at several stops on the Fitchburg line, including Concord, West Concord and Lincoln, due to track work.

Beginning Sept. 7, weekend trains will only run from North Station to Brandeis/Roberts.

Weekend service has already been suspended along the Fitchburg line at stops including Fitchburg, North Leominster, Shirley, Littleton/Interstate 495 and South Acton, and Nolan said these stops, with the exception of South Acton, will remain closed on the weekends in August. The stretch includes a stop in Lincoln.

According to the MBTA, no weekend commuter rail service will be available in South Acton, Concord, West Concord, Lincoln, Kendall Green and at Brandeis/Roberts from Sept. 7 until Nov. 24.

No alternative transportation will be provided by the MBTA, according to the website.

Nolan said the MBTA doesn't expect the restoration of service in August to have an impact on the project's anticipated timeline.

"We were able to make efficiencies in the contract and the completion dates remain the same," he said.

The $200 million “Fitchburg Line Improvement Project” will improve reliability of service and reduce trip times for commuters. It is scheduled for completion by the end of 2015.

Nolan said the project includes construction of a second track between Acton and Ayer and two new stations in Littleton and South Acton.

In addition to these improvements, there will also be improvements to seven bridges and upgrades to the signal system and track improvements to allow maximum train speed to increase from 60 mph to 80 miles per hour.