STB 'Abandon Ship' dept. - McCloud Railway in northern CA Full Text of Decision 35986 SERVICE DATE – JULY 15, 2005 DO FR-4915-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Docket No. AB-914X] McCloud Railway Company —Abandonment and Discontinuance of Service Exemption— in Siskiyou, Shasta, and Modoc Counties, CA On June 27, 2005, McCloud Railway Company (MCR) filed with the Surface Transportation Board a petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 for exemption from the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 10903 to abandon, and discontinue service over, certain rail lines described below. MCR proposes to abandon approximately 80 miles of rail line in Siskiyou and Shasta Counties, CA.[1] The specific rail lines proposed for abandonment include: (1) a rail line between milepost 3.3 east of McCloud and the end of the track at milepost B-61 at or near Burney; (2) a rail line between milepost B-19 at or near Bartle and milepost B-31.4 at or near Hambone; (3) a rail line between milepost B-58 at or near Berry and milepost S-7 at or near Sierra; and (4) a rail line between milepost B-31.6 at or near Bear Flat and milepost P-3.93 at or near Pondosa. MCR also proposes to discontinue trackage rights over a BNSF Railway Company[2] rail line between milepost 31.4 at Hambone and milepost 0.0 at Lookout Junction, a distance of approximately 31.4 miles in Siskiyou and Modoc Counties, CA.[3] The lines traverse United States Postal Service Zip Codes 96067, 96057, 96013, 96054, and 96056, and include a station at Burney. The lines do not contain federally granted rights-of-way. Any documentation in MCR’s possession will be made available promptly to those requesting it. The interest of railroad employees will be protected by the conditions set forth in Oregon Short Line Railroad Co. —Abandonment— Goshen, 360 I.C.C. 91 (1979). By issuance of this notice, the Board is instituting an exemption proceeding pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(d). A final decision will be issued by October 14, 2005. Any offer of financial assistance (OFA) under 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2) will be due no later than 10 days after service of a decision granting the petition for exemption. Each OFA must be accompanied by a $1,200 filing fee. See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25). All interested persons should be aware that, following abandonment of rail service and salvage of the lines, the lines may be suitable for other public use, including interim trail use. Any request for a public use condition under 49 CFR 1152.28 or for trail use/rail banking under 49 CFR 1152.29 will be due no later than August 4, 2005. Each trail use request must be accompanied by a $200 filing fee. See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(27).[4] All filings in response to this notice must refer to STB Docket No. AB-914X and must be sent to: (1) Surface Transportation Board, 1925 K Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20423-0001, and (2) Thomas F. McFarland, 208 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1890, Chicago, IL 60604-1112. Replies to MCR’s petition are due on or before August 4, 2005. Persons seeking further information concerning abandonment or discontinuance procedures may contact the Board’s Office of Public Services at (202) 565-1592 or refer to the full abandonment or discontinuance regulations at 49 CFR 1152. Questions concerning environmental issues may be directed to the Board’s Section of Environmental Analysis (SEA) at (202) 565-1539 [Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800 877-8339.] An environmental assessment (EA) (or environmental impact statement (EIS), if necessary), prepared by SEA, will be served upon all parties of record and upon any agencies or other persons who commented during its preparations. Other interested persons may contact SEA to obtain a copy of the EA (or EIS). EAs in these abandonment proceedings normally will be available within 60 days of the filing of the petition. The deadline for submission of comments on the EA will generally be within 30 days of its service. Board decisions and notices are available on our website at: <http://www.stb.dot.gov>. Decided: July 6, 2005. By the Board, Joseph H. Dettmar, Acting Director, Office of Proceedings. Vernon A. Williams Secretary ----- [1] In a Draft Environmental and Historic Report that MCR submitted in this proceeding on March 8, 2005, the carrier proposed to abandon approximately 100 miles of rail line, the carrier’s entire system. Subsequent to that submission, however, MCR has decided to retain approximately 19.6 miles of rail line between MCR’s point of connection to Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) at milepost 16.3 at or neat Mt. Shasta, CA and milepost 3.3 east of McCloud, CA. MCR had mistakenly stated in its March 8 filing that the milepost of the MCR-UP connection was at milepost 15.2 rather than milepost 16.3. [2] Effective January 20, 2005, the name of “The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company” was changed to “BNSF Railway Company.” [3] The Board issued an exemption for abandonment of the Hambone-Lookout Junction rail line in Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company —Abandonment Exemption— in Modoc and Siskiyou Counties, CA, STB Docket No. AB-6 (Sub-No. 414X) (STB served May 21, 2004). However, an exemption was not sought in that proceeding for discontinuance of MCR’s operations over that line pursuant to trackage rights. [4] For the line where discontinuance rather than an abandonment is being sought, trail use/ rail banking and public use conditions are not appropriate.
Bob, yeah, that's a shame.. We won't see this little guy running there again for long, as No. 18 has been sold to the Virginia and Truckee.
Will there be any freight operations remaining? Or even potential? I fear this remnant won't survive for long. Boxcab E50
Boxcab E50- I was a little slow picking this thread up. Sorry. To answer your question, there is minimal potential for freight traffic on what is slated to be the remaining portion of the railroad. There is a possibility that Dicalite Corp. may relocate their reload to McCloud, but I doubt that is in the stars based on what I heard last week up in McCloud. The one possibility out there is a new Nestle water bottling facility that is planned for the site of the old sawmill, and they may ship and/or receive some freight once they are up and running, but a month of so ago a judge threw out the contract that Nestle signed with the McCloud Community Services District, which brings everything back to stage 1 of the process. Nestle still appears to be committed to coming to McCloud, but any actual construction or operation are a long way off now. The railroad intends to survive on the remaining trackage on just the dinner and diesel excursion trains. It will be interesting to see how long that lasts. Lastly, Dicalite Corp. filed a protest/opposition statement to the abandonment right before the deadline to do so. That's the latest on the abandonment process. JDLX Elko, NV
What a sad process! Can you tell me the story about that judge throwing out their contract? What happened there? Boxcab E50
Things have been kinda of tough for shortlines here in Northern California. The Yreka Western and the McCloud have hit hard times. These two shortlines are pretty much all thats left of what about twenty different lumber and mining roads that once abound in the area. And both the McCloud and the Yreka Western have been around since the late 1880's when the Southern Pacific built put together the Shasta Route.
SP Cabforward...one slight correction...the first tracks of what would become the McCloud River did not go down until 1896, and the company itself was not incorporated until 22 January 1897, or something close to that. The YW had a decade or more under its belt by that point. Boxcab...the basic story behing the Nestle court cast lies in the fact that California has a law on the books called the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)...it serves the same purpose as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on the Federal level. Basically both acts require government agencies to analyze the impacts of their actions on the quality of the human environment before making decisions that will affect the quality of the environment. A lot of people view these acts as a hinderance to progress...and a great many more view the acts as THE route to get projects they don't like or agree with stopped. When Nestle first announced their plans to build a water bottling facility in McCloud, one of their first acts was to sign an agreement to purchase water from the McCloud Community Services District. They then purchased the old McCloud sawmill for their planned facility. As usual in such cases, there is a substantial portion of the community in favor of the plant and an equally substantial portion of the community dead set against it. Those against the project filed suit against Nestle and the Services district. The main basis of their claim was that environmental review documents required by CEQA should have been completed before the water purchase contract was signed. Nestle and the District claimed that the agreement did not require completion of CEQA documentation and that the environmental reviews would be completed before the plant was actually built. The judge agreed with the plaintiffs and threw out the contract between Nestle and the District. Nestle still wants to build in McCloud, and I assume that the required documentation will be completed before the two sides sign a new contract this time. Are you sorry you asked? JDLX Elko, NV
Well, sort of... I have my answer. And the reason for the situation is extremely weak at best. Boxcab E50
JDLX, You're right about the date for the McCloud, I knew it was later too, I guess I should pay more attention to what I'm writing next time.
