is a historic railroad station building at North 1st Street and East Walnut Street in
. The single-story masonry building was built c. 1917 by the
to house passenger and freight service facilities. It is built in the
Mediterranean Renaissance style which was then popular for building such
structures in Arkansas. It has a red clay tile roof, Italianate
bracketing, and Baroque quoin molding.
in 1992.
,
Gurdon was founded in the late nineteenth century, one of many
timber towns located along a railway. The town is famous for its role as
the founding place of the
, the oldest industrial fraternal organization in the nation.
In 1880 the town was incorporated. Located on US 67, the town grew up
around the railroad lines and timber industry, which continues to play
an important role in the area’s economy. Early development of the town
was tied to the arrival of the railroad to Clark County. Gurdon came to
be because of its location at the intersection of several important
lumbering railroads and it’s location near stands of timber.
Construction of railroads played a crucial role in the growth of the
lumber industry. The town started as a construction camp on the Iron
Mountain Railway, which was completed in 1873. Soon the railway
constructed a branch to
leaving a main line from Gurdon which increased the regional centrality
of town. The town was attractive as a mill site, allowing the town to
participate in the rapid expansion of the lumber industry in the South.
The small settlement was a junction for railway to
Womble-Amity-Mt.Ida-Glenwood, and another to Camden-El Dorado-Northern
Louisiana. 1968 marked final passenger service to the city.
The St. Louis Mill and Wood Cutter Co was one of the first businesses
in the city and was the parent company of the Gurdon Lumber Co. Today,
the city’s economy is based primarily on the timber industry.
Of historical significance is the Gurdon Jail, because of its
association with early social development of the city. In 1888 mills in
Gurdon, especially the Gurdon Lumber Co, exceeded the number of
shipments of cut lumber of all other milling towns in Clark Co.
combined. By this time, the population had approached about 1,000,
mostly of those working at the mills. The growth of the town led to need
for a jail.
Arkadelphia,
17 miles away, had a large jail and major offenders were sent there.
Typically only local offenders were sent to Gurdon. Constructed in 1907,
it is one of the few intact surviving structures from this ‘boom’ era
in the city’s history. It was added to the National Register of Historic
Places in 1989.
The town is probably best known as being the founding place of the
International Concatenated Order of the Hoo Hoo. This lumbermen's fraternity was founded in 1892 by a set of
lumber industry
workers stranded in town by rainstorms. They devised the social
organization as a joke, and created colorful officer designations such
as the “Grand Snark of the Universe”. The joke took hold as a social
organization, with branches worldwide.
The name Hoo Hoo refers to a tuft of hair on the bald head of the
first president, Charles McCarer. The number nine is important and the
unconventional organization also incorporates many symbols from ancient
Egypt. The Black Cat is the mascot of the order and in honor of the
cat’s nine lives there are nine members of the board, annual meetings
begin at the ninth hour on the ninth day of the ninth month, the
original dues were 99 cents, the initiation fee was $9.99, and the
membership was restricted to 9,999.
Elizabeth Taylor accepted the title of Miss Hoo Hoo in 1948.
Two U.S. presidents have had membership in Hoo-Hoo. Theodore Roosevelt
was given the prestigious membership number 999 for his work promoting
the importance of forests. Warren G. Harding was inducted in 1905.
After its beginnings in town, the organization grew tremendously. The
first club established outside the U.S. was founded in Canada in 1924,
and other groups started forming around the world. In 1981, the
organization moved its international headquarters from Boston (where it
had been since 1970) to Gurdon and dedicated the museum that same year.
The Museum and International Headquarters are located in a restored log
house on Main Street.
A
monument
commemorating the Hoo-Hoo’s is located on North First Street. The
monument features small statues of two black cats with their tails
curled upward in the shape of the number 9. The monument, which was
added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1999, gives
visitors a brief history of the organization and those who have served
in it. A bronze plaque, sculpted with Egyptian Revival engravings,
was sculpted by noted artist George J. Zolnay, was completed in 1909.
At that time it was affixed to a building, then occupying the site of
the Hotel Hall. When the building was demolished in 1927, the plaque was
moved to its present location and rededicated.
Aside from the Hoo Hoo’s, the city is also well known as being home to
‘The Gurdon Light’
an unexplained supernatural light based on local folklore. The light
has been featured on the TV show Unsolved Mysteries. As lore goes,
the light occurs in a wooded area by railroad tracks, and appears to
observers as a light or lights hovering in the air. It has been
described as being blue, green, white or orange and seems to be bobbing
around as if on a cord. Its location varies within a select geographic
area and witnesses have described it appearing at various times of the
day or night. According to legend, the light originates from a lantern
of a railroad worker who was killed when he fell into the path of a
train. The man's head was separated from his body and never found. The
light people see comes from his lantern as he searches for his head.
Jamie
Morgan
Arkansas
History
Dr.
Wendy Richter
The Gurdon Jail
The construction of the
railroads enabled the birth and growth of the timber industry here in Clark County. As is to be expected, with
industry comes community and the birth of the City of Gurdon. Gurdon began as a construction camp on the
Iron Mountain Railway (IMR) which was completed in the early 1870s, most likely
1873. From the main line there in
Gurdon, the IMR soon completed a branch to Camden which only added to the
activity and regional centrality of Gurdon.
With the completion of the Gurdon-Fort Smith railway by 1906 Gurdon was
connected to untouched timber resources in Montgomery County and other timber
operations throughout the Ouachita Forest.
The forests around Gurdon, especially to the Northwest, contained huge
stands of yellow pine which was very well suited for a rapidly growing and
building nation. Most of Clark County
participated in the timber industry but Gurdon took the lead. In 1888 Gurdon lumber mills shipped a total
of 4,178 carloads whereas the lumber mills of Arkadelphia, Smithton, Beirne,
Whelen, and Curtis combined only shipped a total of 3,346 carloads. This
industrial development led to commercial development so that by 1888 Gurdon
boasted a population of about 1,000, most of whom were employed by the mills. There were enough residents and visitors that
Gurdon was able to support six general stores, groceries, meat markets, barber
shops, mechanics’ shops, two hotels, a livery stable, a weekly newspaper, a
post office, and several churches. Four
physicians found sufficient clientele, and by 1900 there were also cotton gins,
a brick company, an ice plant, a bank, and several other “similar
conveniences”.
With all this activity and such
rapid growth, it comes as no surprise that law enforcement and a jail would
soon be needed. Some people say that the
Gurdon jail was built in 1897 because a map from that year shows a structure of
identical plan in the exact same location labeled “lockup”. The more accepted date, however, is
1907. It was designed and constructed by
M. D. Lowe, the co-owner of the Gurdon Brick Company who also designed the Old
Bank of Amity. It is a single story,
gable roof, red brick masonry structure with a simple rectangular floor plan. On the Eastern and Western sides there is a
small, central horizontal window and the North side has two of these windows
which are distributed one per cell. The
South side has two entries, a wood door on the Western side that is original to
the structure and a metal door on the Eastern side that was added when a
partition was added down the middle of the building and a second cell
created. It has a strip tongue-in-groove
wooden ceiling, original to the structure and early, if not original toilet
fixtures. It was typically used for
local offenders only (speeders and the occasional town drunk) while “outsiders”
and major offenders were sent seventeen miles Northeast up the road to the
large jail in Arkadelphia. Every road
leading into Gurdon had a sign that read “Drive slow, see our town. Drive fast,
see our jail.” The speed limit was
twelve miles per hour except around corners where it was eight miles per
hour. At some point in the jail’s life a
concrete floor was added to prevent standing water and the roof was replaced
with an exact duplicate. It is located
on W. Joslyn St. and was restored in 1985.
On Nov. 12, 1989 the National Park Service certified it as a national
historic site and placed it on the National Register of
Historic Places. It is no longer in use
and currently vacant but is one of the community’s few intact and surviving
structures from Gurdon’s “boom” era. The
jail finds its historical significance in the areas of law, exploration and
settlement, and social history.
MAUDIN (mentioned from above) Maudin was not on the Norman Branch. It was near Mt.Ida.
So, how did logs get to the Norman Branch mills? That below.
Mauldin or Mauldin Logging Camp is a ghost town in Montgomery County, Arkansas, United States. Established in 1918 by Billy Mauldin in cooperation with Thomas Rosborough, it became heavily populated by 1922 by workers drawn to industries cutting and processing virgin timber in the area. It was located between Mount Ida and Pencil Bluff.
Below is the Mauldin line exiting Norman in 1942.
This on Mauldin.
More Mauldin (a place on 270 with 2 ponds)
Mauldin existed from about 1922 to
1933 and was once a thriving little company town with a company store
called the 'Commissionary", business office, church, seven month
one-room school, accommodation house, picture show and post office.
Located between Pencil Bluff and Mt Ida it was established to house the
workers and the mill. The Caddo River Lumber Company had acquired much
land in western and northern Montgomery County so built a railroad in
1921 from Womble (Norman) through the Gaston Settlement on the upper
South Fork to the future town of Mauldin. The loggers worked together in
pairs using cross-cut saws. The logs were hauled the to the hardwood
sawmill in Mauldin by teams of mules or by spur engines trains that
traveled the railroad spurs that criss-crossed the hills that also
hauled the men to the forest for a hard day's work. Pine logs where
shipped by steam train to Glenwood and Rosboro mills in Pike County. The
old Billy Mauldin house was used to house the first family that moved
to the lumber camp.
There were
superintendents, foremen, engineers and loader operators lived in
two-three bedroom homes while the mill workers and loggers lived in
smaller two roomed vertical striped pattern board homes built along the
railroad and paid $5.00/month rental. The houses were built so they
could be moved on flatbed cars. There was a school house and a doctor.
Larger families rented two homes and enclosed the area in between. The
workers had no job security, health benefits, paid vacation or
retirement benefits in the1920s but managed to support their families.
After the land was cleared cut The Caddo River Lumber Company sold the
majority of the land to the US Forest Service.
The rails leaving Norman went to Mauldin.

History
William W. Mauldin, known as Billy Mauldin, was born in Greer County, Texas, and in 1906 had homesteaded 160 acres (0.65 km2) where Mauldin would later be located. Billy Mauldin worked in cooperation with Thomas Whitaker "Whit" Rosborough, who had formed the Caddo River Timber Company in 1906, when he started the town of Rosboro, in Pike County. The town of Mauldin first began heavy production of timber in 1922. It was, like Graysonia, Arkansas, a "company-owned town", but did have a post office, school, church, and a large number of shotgun houses, along with business offices. The Caddo River Lumber Company built a railroad line from Womble (now Norman, Arkansas) to Mauldin, through the Gaston Settlement. The pine timber was shipped via train to mills in Glenwood and Rosboro, the latter of which was Rosborough's main mill.
For a time the town thrived. But the company, functioning on a "cut and move" theory, packed up and disassembled the entire town almost overnight, in 1933, having cut all the virgin timber in the immediate area. The town had two 1-acre (4,000 m2) ponds used to float logs. The ponds still exist today, located just outside Mount Ida on Arkansas Highway 270. Nothing remains today short of a few concrete blocks where the mill once stood, and the two ponds. Both ponds were turned into a fish hatchery in 1940. There is a vacant field to the side of the ponds where the town once stood. All the larger buildings were torn down, while the smaller ones were moved to a new site near Forester, in Scott County.
The Caddo River Lumber Company later sold the majority of the land they owned there to the US Forest Service. In 1939 Thomas Rosborough moved his entire operation to the northwest, settling in Springfield, Oregon, and taking with him large numbers of loyal employees. Today his company, called "Rosboro", is one of the only fully integrated timber operators in the United States. It is also one of the largest private timberland holders of the Pacific Northwest.
A few more tour pictures. Leaving Smithton.
The mill at Birstill, the last remaining rail serviced mill on the branch.

Continuing north.
The end.
Under Eye 30.
The warning lights are still there.

The rails are preserved in the blacktop.

A lone warning sign remains.

Antoine mill location. Gone to Oregon.

Nice school sits by the ponds.
Glenwood's depot. The caboose has been recently painted red, not the original color. That below.



Before the red paint job: Sure wish I could get a side shot. That green looks familiar.

Sawmills
came with A.L. Clark constructing a large mill that was later sold to
T.W. Rosborough. A railroad and spurs were built to haul timber to the
mill and boosted the growth of the region. Today the sawmill in Glenwood
is still going full blast. Georgia-Pacific sold the mill and is now the
Curt Bean Lumber Co. and is the largest employer in the area.
Glenwood is located in Pike County and is around 30 miles west of Hot Springs.
The city was established in 1909.
The city is located near the Caddo River in the foothills of the Ouachita Mountains. Its origins can be traced to a number of ventures that began in the 1900’s including the building of the Gurdon and Fort Smith Railroad (G&FTS).
Construction on this rail line began in 1905 and a number of new communities, including Glenwood, were a result of this venture. (note the dates flounder around)
In 1907, the Caddo River Lumber Company built a large mill at Rosboro. Soon a few more companies moved into the area near a railroad depot in the town. With new mills under construction and the railroad in operation, two businessmen, Curt Hays and Will Fagan, laid out a new town site (Glenwood) on both sides of the depot. The town grew almost overnight.
A few years later, the Memphis, Dallas, and Gulf Railroad (MD&G) opened new tracks between Glenwood and Hot Springs. This made the town a major rail junction and one of the centers of the lumber industry in the southern Ouachita Mountains. The population of the area continued to grow when A. L. Clark Lumber Company built its own residential “town” for employees near its mill.
Do you remember that the MD&G RR later took over the route of the Caddo and Choctaw RR? It was built by the Caddo Lumber Co.
Me: I looked up Memphis, Dallas & Gulf RR and got this.
{The Memphis, Dallas and Gulf Railroad was initially incorporated in 1906
as the Memphis, Paris, and Gulf, with plans for a rail line to run from
Nashville, Arkansas, to Memphis, Tennessee, and Paris, Texas. The
railroad's name changed in 1910 when the Nashville Lumber Company merged
with the Grayson-McLeod Lumber Company. The railroad served mills and
logging camps in southwest Arkansas while also carrying passengers.
Financial difficulties after World War I resulted in foreclosure for the
line in 1922.}
Continuing:
In 1922, the Caddo River Lumber Company purchased the A. L. Clark Company mill and expanded it. In 1936, a lighting strike started a fire that destroyed most of this mill complex. Though the mill remained open for over a year, the company did not plan to rebuild the complex. Soon, the company relocated its entire operation to Oregon, taking many of the town’s prominent families with it. The town was able to survive the exodus of people due to a number of lumber operations that sprang up in the wake of the disaster.
In 1942, a new manganese processing plant was opened west of town. At the same time, a global shortage of mercury caused by World War II led to mining of that mineral in the area. These mills and their work force gave a boost to the local economy.
In the 1970s Curt Bean Lumber Company, one of the nation’s largest independently owned lumber producers, located its lumber mill in town. In 1994, the Glenwood Golf Club & Lodge was opened. Today, the population in town is around 2,100. The town is near many recreational outlets such as the Caddo River and the Ouachita National Forest. The town is also near Crater of Diamonds State Park in Murfreesboro, Mount Ida and Daisy State Park. Glenwood is centrally located between three major lakes: Greeson, Ouachita, and DeGray.
Glenwood (Pike County), on U.S. Highway 70 west of
Hot Springs (Garland County), is nestled in a bend of the
Caddo River with a spectacular view of Arkansas’s
Ouachita Mountains. It lies in what was once rated as the “best
timber country in western Arkansas” and was the home of Arkansas poet, journalist, and humorist, Graham Burnham, publisher of the
Glenwood Newspress and the
Houn’Dog. Glenwood is also the location of historic Bethel Missionary
Baptist Church, the oldest active church in the area, organized in August of 1848.
Early Twentieth Century
Redundant with extras.
Glenwood’s origins can be
traced to a number of large commercial ventures that began about 1900.
One was the building of the Gurdon and Fort Smith Railroad (G&FTS)
along the Caddo through the northeastern corner of the county. The other
concerned wealthy Texas and Missouri investors who desired access to
the vast pine forests of the area.
Construction on the rail line began in 1905. In its wake, a number of
new communities, most destined to be the location of large lumber
mills, sprang up. Among these were
Graysonia in Clark County,
Rosboro and Glenwood in
Pike County, and
Caddo Gap and Womble in
Montgomery County.
In 1907, the Caddo River Lumber Company, led by Mr. Thomas W. Rosborough, built a large mill a few miles north of
Amity
at a site named Rosboro. Soon, a second company, the A. L. Clark Lumber
Company from Gilmore, Texas, purchased an old cotton field across the
river from the old village of Rock Creek and began construction of an
even larger sawmill. It was located a short distance from a newly opened
railroad depot. About the same time, another timber company moved into the area from Louisiana.
With these new mills under construction and the railroad in full
operation, two local businessmen, Curt Hays and Will Fagan, laid out a
new town site on both sides of the depot. The business lots sold
quickly, and a boomtown grew almost overnight. Glenwood, reflecting the
beautiful location of the new community, was chosen for a name.
By July
1907, the new village, with a population at some 250, had obtained a
post office. It quickly replaced the old office at Rock Creek. In April
1908, at the request of a number of local citizens, Glenwood became an
incorporated town. By 1910, its population stood at 768.
In 1914, Glenwood received an additional economic boost when the
Memphis, Dallas, and Gulf Railroad (MD&G) opened new tracks between
Glenwood and Hot Springs, making the town a major rail junction as well
as one of the centers of the lumber industry in the southern Ouachita
Mountains.
By 1916, the community included several churches, a number of new
businesses, a telephone system, and a new public “dipping vat,” where
local farmers brought their livestock for dipping as part of the state’s
tick eradication program. By 1920, almost 900 citizens lived in the community.
While Hays and Fagan were busy developing Glenwood proper, the A. L.
Clark Lumber Company was building its own residential “town,” near its
mill. It consisted of an area of large white frame houses for mill
supervisors and office employees along Gilmer Street. Many smaller
worker houses, painted red and white, were built along nearby Clay
Street, sometimes called Candy Street.
In the fall of 1908, the company built a large frame community
building near downtown; it was used for church services and a school. A
few months later, the Glenwood Special School District was formed. The
next year, a two-story brick building was constructed.
In the 1920s, Glenwood’s population continued to grow. Its importance
as a transportation hub and a growing regional trade center was
enhanced when what is now U.S. 70 was paved between Glenwood and Hot
Springs and large tracts of land around the town were converted to
profitable
peach orchards.
The 1930s brought the Great Depression and hard times to Glenwood.
With it came a disaster that very nearly spelled the death of the town
itself. In 1922, the Caddo River Lumber Company purchased the A. L.
Clark Company mill at Glenwood and expanded it. Within a few years, the
new facility was humming with activity day and night. On a stormy night
in June 1936, a lighting strike started a blaze that consumed most of
the mill complex. Though the mill remained open for another eighteen
months, the company did not consider rebuilding. Within a short while,
it relocated its entire operation to Oregon and took many of the
community’s leading families with it.
Glenwood survived because of a number of more modest lumber
operations that sprang up in the wake of the destruction of the big
mill. However, the town’s population declined to 854 in 1940 and 843 in
1950.
World War II through the Faubus Era
In 1940, the
Arkansas Slate Manufacturing Company built a large mill north of
Glenwood to produce roofing granules. In 1942, a new
manganese processing plant was opened west of town. At the same time, a worldwide shortage of
cinnabar (mercury) caused by
World War II led to extensive
mining
of that mineral in the area. These mills and their work force gave a
much-needed boost to the local economy.
During the late 1940s, nearby
Bethel, Bonnerdale, and Rosboro schools consolidated with the Glenwood
district, necessitating new public school facilities in 1951 and 1956.
Modern Era
The 1970s witnessed an aggressive
campaign of industrial growth and annexation that brought the town’s
population up to 1,402 by 1980. During this period, the Curt Bean Lumber
Company, one of the nation’s largest independently owned lumber
producers, located its lumber mill in Glenwood. During the 1990s, the
Caddo River at Glenwood became one of the most popular canoeing streams
in western Arkansas. The population stood at 1,354 in 1990. Beginning in
1994, the Glenwood Country Club’s
golf
course, host to the annual Dick Kelly Golf Classics, named for
President Bill Clinton’s stepfather, was opened. In 1995, the Glenwood
School district consolidated with that of nearby Amity to form the
Centerpoint School District, with a new campus located at old Rosboro.
During the 1990s, the region’s flourishing
poultry industry, begun several years earlier, attracted a sizeable influx of
Hispanic immigrants who, as of 2010, make up more than twenty-two percent of Glenwood's population.
For additional information
“Glenwood, Arkansas, & Surrounding Area.” Glenwood, AR: Greater Glenwood Chamber of Commerce, 1997.
Hull, Clifton E.
Shortline Railroads of Arkansas. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1969.
Pike County Heritage Club.
Early History of Pike County, Arkansas: The First One Hundred Years. Murfreesboro, AR: Pike County Archives and History Society, 1978.
Caddo Gap
Graysoria
ANTOINE
Shawmut

Missour Pacific. Notice the mile markers start at Norman instead of from the south at Smithton or Gurdon. This is backwards from the ASR Schedule. This is a privateer's rendering. (enough to make me crazy)
Modern Era
Arkansas Midland
Caddo Valley RR
---------------------------------------------------------
Caddo Valley Railroad (reporting mark CVYR) is a short-line railroad headquartered in Glenwood, Arkansas.
CVYR operates a 52-mile line in Arkansas from Gurdon, Arkansas (where it interchanges with Union Pacific) to Bird Mill, Arkansas.
The line was first owned by Missouri Pacific, a predecessor of Union Pacific, and was sold to Arkansas Midland Railroad (AKMD) in 1992, then in 2000 sold by AKMD to its present owners under a sale ordered by the Surface Transportation Board.
CVYR and AKMD are involved in a controversy regarding a planned sale of CVYR to Pioneer, a shortline operator. AKMD claims that, under the provisions of the sale, before the line can be sold to another party, AKMD must be given the first opportunity to repurchase it. A hearing was pending in May 2006.[1]
In September 2010, Bean Lumber of Glenwood, AR (the main customer & owner of the line) closed its doors. The CVYR has not provided service since that time. A rail has been rolled near the AR-53 crossing, and a red flag rendering the line out of service beyond that point.
Arkansas Midland has been providing service between the UP interchange and Arkansas Route 53 (northwest of town) to service the Georgia-Pacific saw mill on US 67. MM GP10 #7530, presumably owned by the Caddo Valley, remains in unserviceable condition at the old open air shop in Antoine, Arkansas. Supposedly everything has been sold to a scrapper.
Arkansas Midland
Arkansas Midland Railway Company, Inc. AKMD #77
Nature of Firm
AKMD operates 112 miles of track in Arkansas over five disconnected lines. One line runs from Mountain Pine through Hot Springs to a UP connection at Malvern, Arkansas, (33.3 miles). A second line runs from Helena to a connection with UP at Lexa, Arkansas, (12 miles). The third segment comprises two lines that connect with the UP at North Little Rock, Arkansas. One line runs 6.6 miles to Galloway and the other is 7.4 miles, consisting of the Carlisle Industrial Lead. The fourth line is from Warren to Dermott, Arkansas, (39.4 miles), with 5.6 miles of trackage rights to interchange at McGehee, Arkansas. The fifth line connects the UP McGehee Yard to Cypress Bend (10 miles) and includes the Potlach Spur (3.4 miles). Traffic consists of forest and grain products, aggregates, building materials, cottonseeds and chemicals.
History
The Mountain Pine line was built by the Hot Springs Railroad and opened January 25, 1876, as a 3-foot gauge line, Hot Springs Railroad was sold to the Choctow, Oklahoma & Gulf (Rock Island) in 1902. The Helena branch was built by the Iron Mountain & Helena Railroad chartered in 1879 and purchased by the St. Louis & Iron Mountain in 1882. The Galloway to North Little Rock line was a former Rock Island Line. These three lines were purchased from the MP by the current operator on February 23, 1992. The Carlisle Industrial Lead which is a former Rock Island line was leased to the current operators by the UP on August 11, 2000. The Warren branch was leased to the current operators on December 13, 2004.
In 2011, AKMD reacquired a three-mile section from Gurdon, Arkansas, to MP 429.45 miles north of Gurdon.
Company Information
Mailing Address
Arkansas Midland Railway Company, Inc.
314 Reynolds Road, Bldg 41
Malvern, AR 72104
Arkansas Midland Railroad (1992)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Arkansas Midland Railroad Arkansas Midland Railroad logo.png
Arkansas Midland Railroad system map.svg
Reporting mark AKMD
Locale Arkansas
Dates of operation 1992–
Track gauge 4 ft 8 1⁄2 in (1,435 mm) standard gauge
Headquarters Malvern, Arkansas
The Arkansas Midland Railroad (reporting mark AKMD) is a Class III short-line railroad headquartered in Malvern, Arkansas.
AKMD operates 138 miles (222 km) of line in Arkansas consisting of seven disconnected branch lines and two sister railroads, the Prescott & Northwestern (PNW) and the Warren & Saline River (WSR). The AKMD branches were formerly part of the Union Pacific Railroad, or a predecessor, while the PNW and WSR lines were acquired from Potlatch Corporation. All branch lines connect (interchange traffic) with Union Pacific Railroad. AKMD also interchanges with BNSF in North Little Rock.
Hot Springs Branch: 33.3 mi (53.6 km) from Malvern, through Hot Springs, to Mountain Pine
North Little Rock Branch: 14.6 miles (23.5 km) from North Little Rock to Galloway (7.8 mi. former Cotton Belt, 6.8 mi (10.9 km). former Rock Island)
Warren Branch: 39.4 mi (63.4 km) from Warren to Dermott, with trackage rights over an additional 5.6 miles (9.0 km) to McGehee
Cypress Bend Branch: 11.2 mi (18.0 km) from McGehee to Cypress Bend
Helena Branch: 24.9 mi (40.1 km) from Lexa to Helena
Jacksonville Branch: 2.7 mi (4.3 km)
Prescott and Northwestern Railroad (PNW, affiliated): 5.7 mi (9.2 km)
Warren and Saline River Railroad (WSR, affiliated): 2.7 mi (4.3 km)
Gurdon Branch (emergency operation of a segment of the Caddo Valley Railroad): 3.1 mi (5.0 km)
AKMD traffic generally consists of forest and agricultural products, aggregates, aluminum, building materials and chemicals.
AKMD is a subsidiary of Pinsly Railroad Company, a holding company owning seven short-line railroads in the United States. The Hot Springs, Helena and Galloway branches are owned by AKMD (purchased in 1992); the Warren, Cypress Bend and Jacksonville branches are leased; the PNW and WSR are owned by Pinsly and operated by AKMD.
On December 5, 2014, Genesee & Wyoming filed a Notice of Exemption with the Surface Transportation Board to acquire AKMD (along with affiliates PNW and WSR) from Pinsly.[1]
Dardanelle and Russellville Railroad
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dardanelle and Russellville Railroad ChrisLitherlandDR.jpg
ALCO S-3 #19 undergoing maintenance in 2011
Reporting mark DR
Locale Arkansas
Dates of operation 1883–
Track gauge 4 ft 8 1⁄2 in (1,435 mm)
Headquarters Russellville, Arkansas
The Dardanelle and Russellville Railroad Company (reporting mark DR) is a Class III short-line railroad headquartered in Russellville, Arkansas.
DR operates a 4.8 mile line in Arkansas from Russellville (where it interchanges with Union Pacific) to a point beside the Arkansas River, across from Dardanelle, Arkansas. Current DR traffic generally consists of pulp board, plastics, and forest products. DR is currently owned by Arkansas Shortline Railroads, Inc., a short-line railroad holding company.
History
The line was initially chartered as the Dardanelle & Russellville Railway, and train operations began in August 1883.[1] After undergoing reorganization in 1900, operations continued as the Dardanelle & Russellville Railroad. When originally constructed, the railroad carried cotton and other agricultural products. The predominant traffic shifted to coal by 1900, thanks to extensive semi-anthracite coal production along the railroad. Coal production along the D&R ended in the mid-1950s when the last underground mines of McAlester Fuel Company were closed.
At one time, the railroad owned the Dardanelle Pontoon Bridge and Turnpike Company, which operated a pontoon bridge (for wagons and later automobiles, not trains) across the Arkansas River at Dardanelle. The D&R was also a leader in the trend for railroads to branch into other transportation modes, owning a highway subsidiary from 1919-1960. The highway subsidiary, Dardanelle Transfer Company, operated both bus and truck service over an expanded territory much larger than was served by the railroad itself.
References
*Hull, Clifton E. and Pollard, William A. (1995), The Dardanelle & Russellville Railroad, University of Central Arkansas Press, Conway, Arkansas. ISBN 9780944436189
Below are a few lawsuits, not as many as I thought as I'd repeated. You can actually get through them if you are so inclined. I was not.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caddo Valley Railroad Company-Abandonment Exemption-in Pike and Clark Counties, AR
A Notice by the Transportation Department and the Surface Transportation Board on
11/16/2011
Publication Date:
11/16/2011
Agencies:
Department of Transportation
Surface Transportation Board
Document Type:
Notice
Document Citation:
76 FR 71124
Page:
71124-71125 (2 pages)
Agency/Docket Number:
Docket No. AB 1076 (Sub-No. 1X)
Document Number:
2011-29592
Document Details
Published Document
On October 27, 2011, Caddo Valley Railroad Company (CVRR) filed with the Surface
Transportation Board (Board) a petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 for exemption from the
provisions of 49 U.S.C. 10903 to abandon a segment of the Norman Branch Line extending
between milepost 429.45, near Gurdon, and milepost 447, near Antoine, a distance of
17.55 miles, in Pike and Clark Counties, Ark. (the line).[1] The line traverses United
States Postal Service Zip Codes 71943 and 71922, and includes the stations of Summit
(milepost 433.1), Okolona (milepost 441.0), and Pike City Junction (milepost 446.5).
CVRR states that, based on information in CVRR's possession, the line does not contain
Federally granted rights-of-way. Any documentation in CVRR'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—Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch Between Firth & Ammon, in
Bingham & Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 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(b). A final decision will be issued by February 14, 2012.
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 $1,500 filing fee. See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25).
All interested persons should be aware that, following abandonment of Start Printed
Page 71125rail service and salvage of the line, the line 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 December 6, 2011. Each trail request must be accompanied by a $250 filing fee. See
49 CFR 1002.2(f)(27).
All filings in response to this notice must refer to Docket No. AB 1076 (Sub-No. 1X),
and must be sent to: (1) Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Washington, DC
20423-0001; and (2) Richard H. Streeter, 5255 Partridge Lane NW., Washington, DC 20016.
Replies to the petition are due on or before December 6, 2011.
Persons seeking further information concerning abandonment procedures may contact the
Board's Office of Public Assistance, Governmental Affairs and Compliance at (202) 245-
0238 or refer to the full abandonment regulations at 49 CFR pt. 1152. Questions
concerning environmental issues may be directed to the Board's Office of Environmental
Analysis (OEA) at (202) 245-0305. 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 OEA will be served upon all parties of record and upon any
agencies or other persons who commented during its preparation. Other interested
persons may contact OEA to obtain a copy of the EA (or EIS). EAs in these abandonment
proceedings normally will be made available within 60 days of the filing of the
petition. The deadline for submission of comments on the EA generally will be within 30
days of its service.
Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at http://www.stb.dot.gov.
Decided: November 10, 2011.
By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, Director, Office of Proceedings.
Jeffrey Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
Footnotes
1. On November 9, 2011, CVRR filed a letter with the Board attaching a letter dated
October 7, 2011, from counsel for Arkansas Midland Railroad Company, Inc. (AKMD). AKMD
notes that CVRR acquired the Norman Branch, which includes the line at issue here, from
AKMD under the Board's feeder line statute at 49 U.S.C. 10907. See Caddo Antoine &
Little Mo. R.R.—Feeder Line Acquis.—Ark. Midland R.R. Co. Line Between Gurdon & Birds
Mill, Ark., 4 S.T.B. 326 (1999). AKMD further states that on September 29, 2011, AKMD
reacquired from CVRR the segment of the Norman Branch between milepost 426.88 in Gurdon
and milepost 429.45 north of Gurdon and, as part of the same transaction, waived its
statutory right of first refusal with respect to the rest of the Norman Branch. See 49
U.S.C. 10907(h).
Back to Citation
[FR Doc. 2011-29592 Filed 11-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
Not a Legal Professional? Visit our consumer site
Register | Login
Search
Cases & Codes Practice Management Jobs & Careers Newsletters Blogs Law Technology
Forms Lawyer Marketing Corporate Counsel Law Students JusticeMail Reference
FindLaw
Caselaw
United States
US 8th Cir.
CADDO ANTOINE AND LITTLE MISSOURI RAILROAD COMPANY GS v. Arkansas Midland Railroad Company, Incorporated, Intervenor.
CADDO ANTOINE AND LITTLE MISSOURI RAILROAD COMPANY GS v. Arkansas Midland Railroad Company, Incorporated, Intervenor.
United States Court of Appeals,Eighth Circuit.
CADDO ANTOINE AND LITTLE MISSOURI RAILROAD COMPANY; GS Roofing Products Company, Inc.; Beazer West, doing business as Gifford-Hill & Company, Inc.; Bean Lumber Company; Curt Bean Lumber Company; Barksdale Lumber Company, Inc., Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES of America; Surface Transportation Board, Respondents, Arkansas Midland Railroad Company, Incorporated, Intervenor.
Glenwood and Southern Railroad Company, Amicus Curiae. CADDO ANTOINE AND LITTLE MISSOURI RAILROAD COMPANY; Dardanelle & Russellville Railroad Company; GS Roofing Products Company, Inc., Beazer West doing business as Gifford-Hill & Company, Inc.; Bean Lumber Company; Curt Bean Lumber Company; Barksdale Lumber Company, Inc., Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES of America; Surface Transportation Board, Respondents. Glenwood and Southern Railroad Company, Amicus Curiae.
Nos. 95-2006, 95-2582.
Decided: September 13, 1996
Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.Richard Streeter, Washington D.C., argued (Mark J. Andrews and Robert S. Hargraves, on the brief), for petitioners. Laurence R. Latourette and Craig M. Keats, Washington, D.C., argued (Lisa M. Helpert, Robert B. Nicholson, John P. Fonte and Evelyn G. Kitay, on the brief), for respondent.
This case involves consolidated petitions for review of decisions of the Interstate Commerce Commission (Commission).1
No. 95-2006 is a petition for review of the Commission's April 18, 1995, decision granting in part the application of the Caddo Antoine and Little Missouri Railroad Company to purchase under the feeder line development provisions of 49 U.S.C. § 10910 a 52.9-mile line of railroad located in southwestern Arkansas, known as the Norman Branch. Caddo Antoine and Little Missouri Railroad Company-Federal Line Acquisition-Arkansas Midland Railroad Company Line Between Gurdon and Birds Mill, AR, Finance Docket No. 32479 (April 18, 1995).
No. 95-2582 is a petition for review of the Commission's June 15, 1995, decision declining to extend a service order authorizing the Dardanelle and Russellville Railroad Company to operate over the Norman Branch.
I.
The petitioners are the Caddo Antoine and Little Missouri Railroad Company (CALM), five of the six shippers located on the Norman Branch, and Dardanelle and Russellville Railroad Company (D & R), which is an Arkansas-based short line railroad. Caddo Antoine and Little Missouri Railroad Company (CALM) is a non-carrier subsidiary of D & R. Both D & R and CALM are controlled by the five petitioners/shippers identified below. Arkansas Midland Railroad Company (Arkansas Midland), the intervenor in this action, is a subsidiary of the Massachusetts-based Pinsly Railroad Company, Inc.2 Arkansas Midland acquired ownership of the Norman Branch from the Union Pacific in February of 1992. In addition to the Norman Branch, Arkansas Midland consists of three additional branches: the Carlisle Branch, the Hot Springs Branch, and the Helena Branch, all of which are located within the state of Arkansas.
Since its completion in the early part of this century, the Norman Branch has been operated as a single line of railroad extending from its point of interchange with what was formerly the Missouri Pacific Railroad (now a part of the Union Pacific Railroad) at milepost 426.3 near Gurdon, Arkansas, to milepost 479.2 near Birds Mill, Arkansas.
On December 3, 1993, storm damage occurred at mileposts 475.9 and 477.2, near the northernmost tip of the Norman Branch. On December 16, 1993, Arkansas Midland announced an embargo of rail shipments to four of the six shippers on the Norman Branch: GS Roofing Products Company, Inc., Bean Lumber Company, Curt Bean Lumber Company, and Barksdale Lumber Company. On February 22, 1994, Arkansas Midland extended its embargo to terminate service to petitioner Beazer West, Inc. d/b/a Gifford-Hill & Company, which is located at milepost 446.6 on the Norman Branch. Arkansas Midland continued to provide service to the sixth shipper on the line, International Paper Company (International Paper), which is located at milepost 428.9 at the southernmost tip of the line, some 2.07 miles from the point of interchange with the Union Pacific line at Gurdon.
In response to the notice of embargo, the embargoed shippers entered into negotiations with Arkansas Midland and the Union Pacific in an attempt to have Arkansas Midland restore rail service on the remainder of the Norman Branch. The Union Pacific offered financial assistance in excess of $1.1 million in the form of increased car fees and track materials. The petitioner shippers offered financial assistance and intervened with Arkansas state officials to obtain funds for Arkansas Midland to use to make repairs to the line.
In addition to refusing to make the repairs or to restore service, Arkansas Midland filed a system diagram map (SDM) with the Commission on February 18, 1994, on which it designated the entire Norman Branch as being a candidate for abandonment. Thereafter, Arkansas Midland amended its SDM to modify the designation of the southernmost 3.7-mile portion of the line, on which International Paper is located. That portion of the line was changed from a category 1 status, which designates a line as being a candidate for immediate abandonment, to a category 5 status, meaning that operations would continue over that portion of the line. See 49 C.F.R. §§ 1152.10(b)(1) and (5).
In response to the prospect of losing railroad service, the five embargoed shippers took three related actions. First, they requested that CALM file a feeder line application in order to acquire the entire Norman Branch. Second, they asked CALM to file an emergency petition with the Commission seeking a directed service order that would allow CALM to begin immediate operations over the entire line. Finally, they filed a damage action against Arkansas Midland.
The feeder line application and the request for a directed service order were filed with the Commission on March 18, 1994.3 Because CALM was not aware of the amendment to Arkansas Midland's SDM when it filed its feeder line application, the application initially referred to 49 U.S.C. § 10910(b)(1)(A)(ii), which relates to lines designated for abandonment, as providing the basis for the acquisition of the entire Norman Branch. The application further indicated, however, that “CALM will seek a finding by the Commission that public convenience and necessity permit or require acquisition.”
Arkansas Midland filed a response opposing the request for a directed service order, referring to that portion of the Norman Branch line north of milepost 430.0 as the “northern segment.”
On March 28, 1994, the Commission issued an emergency service order pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 11123(a)(1) authorizing the D & R and CALM to “enter upon and operate [Arkansas Midland's] Norman Branch.” The service order authorized D & R/CALM to operate over the full extent of the Norman Branch, but permitted it to provide service only to the five shippers located on the 49.2 miles of track located north of milepost 430.0. Arkansas Midland was authorized to continue serving International Paper, the sole shipper located on the 3.17-mile portion of the line between milepost 430.0 and the point of interchange with the Union Pacific Railroad. Thereafter, the service order, which was originally issued for a period of thirty days, was extended and was scheduled to expire at 11:59 p.m. on June 15, 1995.
On April 12, 1994, the Commission published its notice of acceptance of CALM's feeder line application in the Federal Register, 59 Fed.Reg. at 17400, establishing a deadline of May 12, 1994, for the receipt of competing applications.
In compliance with the notice, CALM filed comments and evidence in support of its showing that the public convenience and necessity required or permitted the sale of the entire Norman Branch. CALM alleged that if International Paper was not included among the shippers it could serve on the Norman Branch, it projected a net operating loss of $124,701, whereas it expected to achieve net annual operating income of $264,649 if it was permitted to acquire the entire Norman Branch and to serve all six shippers located thereon.4
The five embargoed shippers submitted statements in support of CALM's acquisition of the entire Norman Branch. They alleged that they had already suffered damages in excess of $650,000 because of failure to obtain rail service from Arkansas Midland and that they would be forced to shut down or severely curtail their operations if reliable rail service was not restored and maintained. International Paper filed a one-page statement saying that it would like to have Arkansas Midland continue to serve its plant rather than to have Arkansas Midland be forced to sell to CALM that portion of the Norman Branch that serves International Paper.
In its response to CALM's feeder line application, Arkansas Midland recited the worsening track conditions, declining car loads and revenues, and increasing losses it had experienced on the Norman Branch. It alleged that International Paper is the second largest shipper on Arkansas Midland's entire system, the loss of which would put Arkansas Midland at serious financial and operational risk. Included within Arkansas Midland's reply to CALM's application was a statement of Michael P. Root, the majority stockholder, president and director of the Glenwood & Southern Railroad Company (GSR), which set forth that GSR had entered into a lease and option to purchase agreement with Arkansas Midland to purchase and operate the Norman Branch from milepost 430.0 to milepost 479.2.
GSR filed a notice seeking an exemption from the otherwise applicable regulatory requirements to permit it to acquire and operate the Norman Branch. GSR and Arkansas Midland also filed a joint petition to terminate the earlier-issued service order permitting the D & R to operate the line. Thereafter, the Commission issued decisions ordering GSR not to consummate its proposed transaction with the Arkansas Midland, denying Arkansas Midland and GSR's motion to dismiss CALM's feeder line application, and rejecting GSR's notice of exemption.
In November 1994, GSR filed a competing feeder line application. On March 9, 1995, the Commission issued a decision, which has not been challenged on judicial review, affirming the decision of its Director, Office of Proceedings, that GSR had not sufficiently shown that it was a financially responsible person, as required by 49 U.S.C. § 10910(a).
The Commission concluded in its April 18, 1995, decision on CALM's feeder line application that the feeder line statute did not authorize it to direct the forced sale of the entire Norman Branch. It found that because the northern segment had been listed on Arkansas Midland's SDM as a category 1 candidate for abandonment and because service on that segment was inadequate, CALM was entitled to purchase that portion of the line under the provisions of section 10910(b)(1)(A)(ii). The Commission found that CALM had made a showing of financial responsibility sufficient to satisfy the Commission that it would be likely to be able to cover expenses for three years.
The Commission then considered the 3.7-mile southern segment of the line under the public convenience and necessity (PC & N) standard of section 10910(b)(1)(A)(i). Because CALM had submitted no PC & N evidence regarding the southern segment standing alone, the Commission granted the feeder line application only as to the northern segment. Because it believed that operations serving only the five shippers located north of milepost 430.0 would be incapable of sustaining an operating profit, CALM declined to acquire this truncated portion of the Norman Branch.
Following the entry of the Commission's decision, petitioners sought an extension of the service order under which D & R/CALM had been providing service during the pendency of CALM's feeder line application. In response, the Commission agreed to only a thirty-day extension. On May 17, 1995, GSR filed an ex parte notice of exemption to lease and operate the portion of the Norman Branch north of milepost 430.0. On May 31, 1995, petitioners filed a motion to have GSR's notice of exemption declared void. On the same day, CALM requested an extension of the service order pending completion of judicial review. On June 15, the Commission issued its decision granting only a fifteen-day extension and ordering CALM to clear the Norman Branch of its equipment and supplies and cease rail operations on the Norman Branch by 11:59 p.m., June 30, 1995. On June 29, 1995, we granted petitioners' motions for stay of the Commission's April 18 and June 15, 1995, decisions pending judicial review.
II.
The petitioners contend that the Commission erroneously and artificially bifurcated the Norman Branch into a “northern” and “southern” segment in an attempt to circumvent the otherwise logical conclusion that the entire Norman Branch is a “particular railroad line” as that term is used in section 10910(b)(1)(A)(i). They contend that the Commission's “two line” assumption is not only arbitrary but is at odds with the text of the statute, pointing out that although other portions of the statute contemplate transactions involving a “part” or a “portion” of a line, section 10910(b)(1)(A)(i) speaks only in terms of a “particular railroad line” and not in terms of a part or portion of a line. For example, sections 10903(a)(1) and (2) provide that a rail carrier may abandon “any part” or discontinue the operation over “any part” of its railroad lines. Sections 10905(b)(1), (d)(1), and (f)(4) relate to offers of financial assistance to maintain service on all or a “portion” or “part” of an abandoned railroad line. Section 10910(h) provides that a purchasing carrier may propose to sell or abandon “all or any portion of a purchased railroad line.”
Arkansas Midland, on the other hand, argues that the feeder line development program was never intended to give an adversary carrier a mechanism by which to force a rail carrier to sell a profitable segment of line which is adjacent to a line being abandoned.
III.
Concerned about the deteriorating rail service provided on some of the secondary railroad lines throughout the country, Congress enacted the Staggers Rail Act of 1980 (the Act). The Act is codified at 49 U.S.C. § 10910 and provides two methods whereby a line of railroad can be acquired other than through a mutually agreed upon sale and purchase. The relevant portions of the Act read as follows:
§ 10910. Railroad development
(a) In this section-
(1) “financially responsible person” means a person who
(A) is capable of paying the constitutional minimum value of the railroad line proposed to be acquired, and (B) is able to assure that adequate transportation will be provided over such line for a period of not less than 3 years. Such term includes a governmental authority but does not include a class I or a class II rail carrier.
․
(b)(1) When the Interstate Commerce Commission finds that-
(A)(i) the public convenience and necessity require or permit the sale of a particular railroad line under this section; or
(ii) a railroad line is on a system diagram map as required under section 10904 of this title, but the rail carrier owning such line has not filed an application to abandon such line under sections 10903 and 10904 of this title before an application to purchase such line, or any required preliminary filing with respect to such application, is filed under this section; and
(B) an application to purchase such line has been filed, in accordance with regulations required under subsection (k) of this section, by a financially responsible person, the Commission shall require the rail carrier owning the railroad line to sell such line to such financially responsible person at a price not less than the constitutional minimum value.
․
(c)(1) For purposes of this section, the Commission may determine that the public convenience and necessity require or permit the sale of a railroad line if the Commission determines, after a hearing on the record, that-
(A) the rail carrier operating such line refuses within a reasonable time to make the necessary efforts to provide adequate service to shippers who transport traffic over such line;
(B) the transportation over such line is inadequate for the majority of shippers who transport traffic over such line;
(C) the sale of such line will not have a significantly adverse financial effect on the rail carrier operating such line;
(D) the sale of such line will not have an adverse effect on the overall operational performance of the rail carrier operating such line; and
(E) the sale of such line will be likely to result in improved railroad transportation for shippers that transport traffic over such line.
․
Emphasis Added.5
Whether the difference between the descriptive terms “a particular railroad line,” as set forth in section 10910(b)(1)(A)(i), and “any part,” “portion,” or “part,” as used in the other statutes cited above, would be controlling in the absence of further circumstances, we need not say. Rather, as we conclude below, when viewed in the light of the history of the operation of the Norman Branch, the circumstances under which Arkansas Midland and the Commission bifurcated the line, and the legislative history of the feeder line development program, the term “a particular railroad line” in the circumstances of this case includes the Norman Branch in its entirety.
IV.
The legislative history of section 10910 explains Congress's purpose in enacting the feeder line development program provisions of the Act:
To provide shipper groups and government agencies an alternative to inadequate rail service and to preserve feeder lines prior to the total downgrading of such lines, the House amendment provides for a feeder line development program which would require a rail carrier to sell a railroad line to a financially responsible person at a price not less than the constitutional minimum, if the Commission makes a finding that the present or future public convenience and necessity required or permitted the abandonment or discontinuance of a railroad line, or if the Commission makes a finding that the transportation provided over a particular line is inadequate. Inadequate transportation is defined by five criteria. The Commission must affirmatively determine the existence of the conditions set forth in all five criteria as a prerequisite to the sale of a railroad line under this section. The burden of proving inadequacy of service is on the person filing to acquire the rail line.
․
The Conferees believe that the feeder line program will give shippers and communities an opportunity to insist upon adequate rail service. Where such service is not forthcoming the provision provides, through acquisition, a viable alternative to poor service or total abandonment.
H.Conf.Rep. No. 1430, 96th Cong., 2nd Sess. 124, reprinted in 1980 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4110, at 4156-57. (For a review of the circumstances leading to the enactment of the Act and the purposes it was designed to achieve, see Simmons v. I.C.C., 871 F.2d 702, 706-07 (7th Cir.1989).) As the Commission has recognized, “The overriding intent of the feeder line provisions is to preserve service over lines that may be abandoned or downgraded.” Sandusky County-Seneca County-City of Tiffin Port Authority-Feeder Line Application, 1990 WL 288059, *3 (I.C.C.).
V.
We undertake our review of the Commission's decision cognizant that “we must defer to the [Commission's] interpretation of the statutes or regulations it administers ‘unless there are compelling indications that the Commission's interpretation is incorrect.’ ” Simmons v. I.C.C., 871 F.2d at 705 (quoting Black v. I.C.C., 762 F.2d 106, 114-15 (D.C.Cir.1985)). We are to ask only whether, in those cases in which Congress has not directly addressed the precise question at hand, the Commission's action “is based on a permissible construction of the statute.” Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 843, 104 S.Ct. 2778, 2782, 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984). With all due respect to the Commission, we conclude that its interpretation of section 10910(b)(1)(A)(i) in the circumstances of the present case is not a permissible construction of the statute, for, as we view the case, the Commission's interpretation frustrates rather than effectuates the purposes which the feeder line development program was designed to achieve.
As indicated above, section 10910 establishes alternate bases for permitting approval of feeder line applications where the owning carrier is either not providing adequate service or has identified the line in category 1 or 2 on its SDM as a candidate for abandonment but has not yet applied for abandonment. Although an SDM designation may eliminate the necessity for the applicant to prove inadequate service, we conclude that the statute does not preclude the Commission from considering an application under the PN & C standard simply because a line owner providing inadequate service to a majority of the shippers on the line decides to place a portion of the line on its SDM.
In its July 24, 1991, revision of its feeder railroad development rules, the Commission discontinued its automatic rejection policy for feeder line applications filed after the filing of an overlapping abandonment application, explaining that
[u]nder § 10910, a line is available for forced sale if either: (1) the owning carrier has identified the line in category 1 or 2 of its SDM as a candidate for abandonment but has not yet applied for abandonment authority (“SDM standard”); or (2) the operating carrier is not providing adequate service (“PC & N standard”). Under either standard the applicant must show that it is a financially responsible person and the Commission must establish the constitutional minimum value of the line.
Only the SDM standard explicitly excludes lines already subject to pending abandonment applications. Nothing in the statute precludes the PC & N standard from applying to lines already the subject of abandonment applications. There is no language to limit its use, as is the case with the separate SDM standard. Clearly, if Congress had intended that we reject all post abandonment feeder line applications, it easily could have included limiting language in the PC & N subsection. By its failure to do so, we may infer that Congress envisioned circumstances where it would be appropriate for us to consider and grant post-abandonment feeder line applications.
․
A rigid automatic rejection policy does not harmonize well with the rail transportation policies of preserving rail service and reducing regulatory barriers to entry, particularly when the abandonment application does not encompass all of the line sought in the feeder line application. Additionally, the automatic rejection policy leads to an undesirable filing race. This results from the line owner's ability to abort unilaterally a feeder line application by submitting an abandonment application first, even if it is filed just a few minutes before the feeder line application and covers only a small portion of a longer line covered by the feeder line application․
7 I.C.C. 902, 911, 913 (1991) (footnotes omitted).
We agree with petitioners that the Commission's position with respect to considering after-filed feeder line applications in abandonment cases is inconsistent with the position it has taken in the present case. The rejection of CALM's application to acquire the entire Norman Branch does not harmonize well with the policies of preserving rail service and reducing regulatory barriers to entry.
As we read the Commissioner's revised policy, it is designed to prevent what appears to have occurred in the present case, i.e., the owning carrier (Arkansas Midland) downgrades (by failing to maintain and repair its tracks) services over a portion of its line that it deems more expensive to operate, while maintaining service to a single shipper that it deems easier and more profitable to serve, and then files a SDM covering only the undesirable portion of the line shortly before the abandoned shippers are able to file a feeder line application. If the Commission's position is affirmed in this case, Arkansas Midland will have succeeded in lopping off service to the majority of its former shippers while “cherry-picking” the single, more easily served shipper on the remaining seven percent of the line it elected to retain. There may be situations in which such a result may ultimately obtain, as, for example, where no carrier files an application to acquire the portion of the line sought to be abandoned. But that is not the situation here, where CALM desires to acquire a line that from the date of its construction has been operated as a unitary line of railroad.
The Norman Branch presents the type of situation that the feeder line development program was designed to address. Arkansas Midland, for whatever reasons of its own, apparently overstated the damages resulting from the December 3, 1993, storm (CALM alleges that the storm damage was minimal and was repaired in less than four hours once it and D & R were authorized to commence operations over the line). Rather than try to repair this relatively minor damage, Arkansas Midland used the damage as a justification for embargoing further shipments on the greater portion of the line, leaving the petitioner shippers to fend for themselves. Accordingly, in light of CALM's application to provide service over the entire length of the Norman Branch, a line that had historically been operated as a unitary operation, the Commission should have treated the entirety of the Norman Branch as “a particular railroad line” and thus have reviewed CALM's application under the PN & C standard of section 10910(b)(1)(A)(i) rather than under (A)(ii).
The Commission contends that its decisions to segment lines designated for abandonment have been consistently endorsed by the courts. For example, in Futurex Industries, Inc. v. I.C.C., 897 F.2d 866, 870-73 (7th Cir.1990), the court held that the Commission's decision to approve the abandonment of a 14.58-mile segment of track was not arbitrary or capricious. In reaching this conclusion, the court noted that:
When segmentation of transportation lines is involved, we consider whether the segmentation satisfies three conditions: (1) does the proposed segment have logical termini?; (2) does the segment have substantially independent utility?; and (3) will abandonment of the disputed segment foreclose alternate treatment of the remaining segments? The satisfaction of these three criteria tends to ensure that carriers will not abuse the out-of-service exemption by carving out one segment of a line in an attempt to make the remainder of the line useless and subject imminently to abandonment. We must, of course, be vigilant to detect and restrain the latter phenomenon should it appear.
Id. at 872 (footnote and citations omitted). In Indiana Sugars, Inc. v. I.C.C., 694 F.2d 1098 (7th Cir.1982), the court held that the Commission acted arbitrarily and capriciously in not bifurcating from a proposed 42.89 mile abandonment of a seven-mile segment of track on which a showing of serious shipper need had been established.
We agree with the petitioners that neither of those holdings controls our decision in the present case. To say that the Commission was warranted in segmenting a portion of line in one case and was not warranted in not segmenting a portion of line in another is hardly the same that it must segment in all cases. The Commission itself has acknowledged that its analytical focus should “be on the ultimate issue: whether abandonment of one segment would foreclose the viability of contiguous segments, making their eventual abandonment a foregone conclusion.” Central Michigan Railway Co.-Abandonment-East of Ionia to West of Owosso-In Michigan, 8 I.C.C.2d 166, 173 (1991).
Although the Commission cites Cheney Railroad Co. v. I.C.C., 902 F.2d 66 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 985, 111 S.Ct. 519, 112 L.Ed.2d 530 (1990), in support of its decision to segment the Norman Branch, we conclude that that case has little relevance to the facts of the present case. Cheney involved a line of railroad that had been designated for abandonment in its entirety. Cheney filed an application to purchase the entire route. Tyson Foods filed an application to purchase only the 1.61-mile segment on which its plant was located. The question for decision was whether the Commission was required to consider the applications only in the order received and to accept the first qualifying application filed, or whether it could divide the line between applicants. The Commission's decision to do the latter was upheld. Cheney involved an abandonment, however, and thus was governed by the provisions of section 10910(b)(1)(A)(ii), rather than (A)(i). In light of our holding that the Commission should have considered CALM's application to purchase the entire Norman Branch under the PN & C provisions of (A)(i), we find Cheney to be inapposite. We do note, however, the Cheney court's approval of the Commission's reasoning that to consider applications one at a time might delay transfer of a line, which “ ‘would be contrary to the purposes of the feeder line development program, one of which is to preserve feeder lines.’ ” Cheney, 902 F.2d at 69 (quoting 5 I.C.C.2d 250, 254 (1989)). The Cheney court went on to characterize the Commission's decision as “both reasonable in itself and faithful to a Staggers Act objective ‘to preserve [rail] service to protect existing shippers.’ ” Id. (quoting Simmons v. I.C.C., 697 F.2d 326, 329 (D.C.Cir.1982)). If, as the Cheney court noted, and as we have found, the purpose of the feeder line development program is to preserve feeder lines and to preserve service to existing shippers, then to segment the Norman Branch so as to deny CALM the right to bid for the entire line under the provisions of (A)(i) would be to frustrate those purposes in light of the evidence that the revenue from the northern segment will never be adequate to preserve the line and to protect the five shipper petitioners. In a word, what the Commission has done in this case is that which it said in Central Michigan Railway Co. it should guard against: a segmentation of lines that would have the effect of foreclosing the viability of contiguous segments, making their eventual abandonment a foregone conclusion.
In reaching this conclusion, we have considered Arkansas Midland's contention that it will suffer grievous financial loss that will jeopardize the remainder of its rail line operations if it is required to sell the 3.7-mile portion of the line serving International Paper. That argument, however, will be a factor to be taken into account when the Board considers CALM's application in the light of the five criteria set forth in section 10910(c)(1). Likewise, it will be for the Board to determine, as it did with respect to CALM's ability to operate the northern 49.2-mile segment of the Norman Branch, whether CALM has the financial resources to operate the entire Norman Branch.
Our interpretation of section 10910 may strike some as reflecting a utilitarian view of the law-the greatest good for the greatest number of shippers. Nevertheless, we conclude that the words “a particular railroad line,” when viewed in the light of the history of the Norman Branch, the purposes of the feeder line development program, and the circumstances of this case, must be read to describe the entirety of the Norman Branch. Thus, on remand the Board must consider under the provisions of section 10910(b)(1)(A)(i) CALM's application to purchase the entire line. What decision the Board may reach, we do not know. In any event, we are satisfied that our holding, narrow as it is, will not result in the widespread depredation of the weak by the strong in the short line railroad industry.
VI.
In No. 95-2006, we reverse the Commission's decision and remand the case to the Board for further proceedings consistent with the views set forth in this opinion.
In No. 95-2582, we direct the Board to extend the service order authorizing CALM/D & R to continue providing service over the Norman Branch pending disposition of CALM's application to purchase the entire Norman Branch.
FOOTNOTES
1. Section 101 of the ICC Termination Act of 1995, Pub.L. No. 104-88 (effective January 1, 1996), abolished the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). Section 201 of that Act established the Surface Transportation Board. Section 204(c)(2) provides that the Board shall continue any suit brought by or against the ICC to the extent the suit involves ICC functions that have been transferred to the Board.For ease of reference, we will use the term “Commission” throughout the opinion when we refer to past events, and we will use the term “Board” when we discuss actions to be taken on remand.
2. The Pinsly Railroad Company, Inc. also controls the following short line railroads: Florida Central Railroad, Florida Midland Railroad Company, Florida Northern Railroad, Greenville & Northern Railway Company, and Pioneer Valley Railroad.
3. After notification by the Commission that CALM was not eligible to apply for a directed service order because it was not yet an operating railroad, D & R was substituted as the operating carrier for purposes of the emergency order.
4. Indeed, CALM's predictions may have already been proved to be correct, for on August 27, 1996, we entered an order granting the emergency motion filed by the petitioner shippers authorizing them to engage an alternative carrier on the Norman Branch, D & R having advised the shippers that because it had lost more than $100,000 during the first seven months of 1996 operating the Norman Branch, it intended to cease operations on August 30, 1996.
5. Sections 10903 and 10904 of Title 49 read as follows:§ 10903. Authorizing abandonment and discontinuance of railroad lines and rail transportation(a) A rail carrier providing transportation subject to the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission under subchapter I of chapter 105 of this title may-(1) abandon any part of its railroad lines; or(2) discontinue the operation of all rail transportation over any part of its railroad lines;only if the Commission finds that the present or future public convenience and necessity require or permit the abandonment or discontinuance. In making the finding, the Commission shall consider whether the abandonment or discontinuance will have a serious, adverse impact on rural and community development.․§ 10904. Filing and procedure for applications to abandon or discontinue(a)(1) An application for a certificate of abandonment or discontinuance under section 10903 of this title, and a notice of intent to abandon or discontinue, must be filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission.․(e)(2) Each rail carrier shall maintain a complete diagram of the transportation system operated, directly or indirectly, by the carrier. The carrier shall submit to the Commission and publish amendments to its diagram that are necessary to maintain the accuracy of the diagram. The diagram shall-(A) include a detailed description of each of its railroad lines potentially subject to abandonment; and(B) identify each railroad line for which the carrier plans to file an application for a certificate under subsection (a) of this section.
WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge.