Comment EI-21917
Received or sent (printed as 4/10/2016)
Hello, STB Board. My name is John W. Gay III (Chip). I have enjoyed trains since I was a young child. I am a railfan. I have a college degree from Marshall University Huntington, WV in business, sales, marketing, and logistics. In relation to the private investor line WI/IL/IN/MI a few things. An article in the Chicago Tribune paints a nice round 8 Billion Dollars for a line over 270 plus miles in 4 states going through some of the very expensive land just west of Chicago. 8 Billion is a very, very, very low cost. The investment group could easily blow that amount of money in just a few miles. Please really go over with them where they are getting such a low number for cost. Just moving a natural gas pipeline or building a bridge over a main highway can balloon the cost. Add in any number of lawsuits... The article also mentions 110 trains a day would use the line. What trains? They should provide the rail community and the stb board with what trains that currently run today they are using vs ones they think" will use the line. Give the list of train symbols by railroads to your staff and to the staff at Trains Magazine and Railfan and Railroad to go over. Let journalists in the railroad community actually look at the numbers and what trains are running today. 110 trains seems like a very large number. At the peak of coal before coal traffic started going down you could see say 30 to 50 coal trains on some days that could go around Chicago. However, that number is down from what it was. There are also some unit sand/oil/ethanol trains that could go around. I am sure there are intermodal trains and some manifests. However, without providing symbols of current traffic there is no accurate way of coming up with how many trains. Ask the group why are they not instead providing a toll 6 lane interstate with the railroad in the middle? If they proposed this idea the concept would be more likely to pass as there is no good way to get around Chicago from WI to MI via IL/IN. It is almost impossible for truck and car traffic to navigate from Milwaukee/Fox Cities/Green Bay to get to northwest IN and lower MI without going via Chicago. To use 43/39 and then backroads off 80 is not available you still have to go via the burbs on 80. At least with a private road with the railroad in the middle you might have a group who will back the plan. Even without the railroad if the private group instead went road only the idea might have a better chance. The illiana was not well thought out it only solved a small issue vs the whole issue of the 4 states. I live in Peoria, IL. Why is the US Government, Private Investors, Shortline-Regional Railroads (G&W), and class 1s UP/BNSF/CN/NS doing more to route traffic via Peoria? I could poke so many holes into the idea of a private around Chicago Railroad it is not even funny. The track is already at Peoria it just needs upgrades, sidings, maybe signals if it got to that many trains, and track put back in a few spots. Even if 20 extra trains were routed via Peoria it still would take down 20 trains not going via the Chicago Terminal! For example Up has a main line from Nelson, IL coming south into Peoria. The BNSF has a secondary coming east from their main hub in Galesburg, IL. At Galesburg a bnsf line from the PNW-Minn-St. Paul comes in and a line from the west via Denver-Omaha as well as lines via KC and the southwest. If the BNSF peoria line would have more sidings put in... On the east side of Peoria you have the NS and CN. One has to use one of 3 G&W railroads to navigate TPW-IL Midland, TZPR from UP/BNSF to NS/CN. Put the second track back in on the river bridge. Right now the TZPR could use the second track without the extra traffic I am suggesting. Put an automatic switch from the BNSF to TZPR back in (could be a pad from the cab they dial in cab not even a ctc signal) or they request the tzpr dispatcher to dial it as the dispatcher is not far from the switch location. The ns main also needs sidings put in as would the cn main. The biggest issue for NS would be an investment of a wye put in at Bement, IL. With this added traffic maybe NS would finally put in the southeast track to their mainline. At South Pekin, IL UP and CN run feet away on the north side of town and south side of town. A new short track could be added to connect both lines. This would keep all up traffic off of the G&W in town with a direct connection between both Class 1s (there was one between both former CNW/IC years ago). So where am I going with this? Traffic from the Pac North West and Minn St. Paul on BNSF many west south west metros and Pac Northwest traffic on the UP main via Nelson, IL could come down to Peoria or over to Peoria. This traffic (if the wye was built at Bement, IL on NS) could then go via NS and CN to Ohio/Northeast/Canada/Southeast USA with out going via Chicago. If the TPW had track upgrades, tie upgrades, and new sidings and maybe signals if that was needed do to traffic increases that would also be a way to get traffic to the csx in Watseka, IL and Reynolds, IN. CSX traffic could also go via NS to Danville, IL and via CN to Decatur, IL. Please explain to the public, the railfan community, and the STB itself how the private railroad makes any sense when the track basically is already in place at Peoria and needs upgrades. The cost to the upgraded track most likely would come in at a much lower cost then to build 270 plus miles new in 4 states! Also with upgraded lines Peoria could maybe have Amtrak come into the city. The government at large, the railroads, and private investors are doing a bad job of not using what is already in place. Even if a small amount of traffic was diverted via Peoria the amount of traffic would not be going via Chicago. You take 5 to 10 trains out of Chicago that is huge! The iais and ns had been using Peoria to re route ethanol around Chicago. Right now it is just being used for grain trains. In a really odd move NS put the ethaonal traffic back via the burbs Metra/CSX (they claim to having great new upgrades in IN and Ohio to their track) Yes wonderful, but due to Metra and if Amtrak someday uses Metra instead of CN at Joliet to downtown Chicago why would you be adding 3 to 5 ethanol trains to that track? IAIS only has so many track widows to get ns traffic to them do to them using CSX/Metra track. If the wye was finished at Bement, IL this would solve a whole host of issues. Also a few sidings between Gibson City/Bloomington-Normal/East Peoria, IL would really solve the issue for NS traffic. The STB board needs to sit down with their Class 1 counterparts to do a better job of re routing traffic around Metro Areas. So put in a mid million dollar investment at Peoria for track upgrades coming into and out of town sidings added, track upgrades, signals, possible wye at Bement, IL on NS/CN/BNSF/UP I am sure will easily come in at a cost that is much lower then a hypothetical 8 Billion dollars (that most likely is a very low estimate of the actual cost). Please read my comments when the board has time and feel free to ask me via phone or email on any ideas. Thank you for your time John Gay (Chip)"
Submitted by: John Gay
The Board publishes this comment in its environmental-comment table for this proceeding. It is quoted here as printed; nothing is inferred from it, and it states the commenter's own position in their own words, not this record's.
Permanent address docketyard.org/d/FD-35952/comment/EI-21917 · back to the docket sheet