Northeast and Midwest Recommended Industry Structure: Competitive Freight Service Mainline Routes

Details

• Alternative Title:
  USRA Preliminary System Plan Map: Northeast and Midwest Recommended Industry Structure-Competitive Freight Service Mainline Routes, February 1975
• Corporate Creators:
  United States Railway Association
• Subject/TRT Terms:
  Abandonment Bankruptcy Bibliographies Economics Financing Maps Marketing Railroads Regional Planning Regional Railroads
• Resource Type:
  Map
• Right Statement:
  Public Domain
• Geographical Coverage:
  United States ; New England ; West North Central States
• Corporate Publisher:
  United States Railway Association
• Abstract:
  This separately issued color map was prepared by the United States Railway Association in Washington, D.C., in February 1975 as an accompanying map to Preliminary System Plan, Volume I: For Restructuring Railroads in the Northeast and Midwest Region Pursuant to the Regional Rail Reorganization Act of 1973. Volume I expressly refers to an enclosed large color map titled Northeast and Midwest Recommended Industry Structure. The present map bears that title and adds the subtitle Competitive Freight Service Mainline Routes. The map presents USRA's preliminary recommended structure for competitive freight-service mainline routes in the Northeast and Midwest. Its legend identifies routes proposed for ConRail, Norfolk and Western, "EL East," Chessie, and the Delaware and Hudson-Boston and Maine grouping. Dotted lines indicate proposed trackage rights.
  
  Under this preliminary proposal, ConRail would be formed primarily from Penn Central and designated portions of the smaller railroads in reorganization. Norfolk and Western would operate its existing system together with the Erie Lackawanna routes from Buffalo through Binghamton to the New York-Newark area. The proposed assignment of "EL East" to N&W likely reflected, at least in part, N&W's historical financial and corporate interest in Erie Lackawanna through its wholly owned Dereco holding company, as well as the geographic value of the Erie Lackawanna route as an eastward extension of the N&W system. This is a historically supported interpretation rather than a rationale stated on the map itself.
  
  Chessie would retain its existing system and obtain access to the Reading's Philadelphia and Allentown markets, principally through proposed trackage rights over routes that would also serve as ConRail main lines. Delaware and Hudson would receive access over the Lehigh Valley route between Wilkes-Barre and Allentown, strengthening its connections with Chessie and the Boston and Maine. The map records a preliminary proposal rather than a final property-conveyance or operating arrangement. Following N&W's withdrawal from the proposed Erie Lackawanna expansion, USRA revised the structure for the July 1975 Final System Plan. See Map 3, Final System Plan Freight Service Lines Operated by ConRail, for the resulting ConRail network under the preferred Final System Plan structure, and Map 4, Recommended Major Acquisitions in Industry Structure of Final System Plan, for the revised allocation of properties and trackage rights that produced that network.
  
  The map is useful for studying the evolution of the Preliminary and Final System Plans, USRA's proposed competitive carrier structure, the historical relationship between N&W and Erie Lackawanna, proposed trackage rights, route rationalization, and the planning process that led to the formation of Conrail.
  
  
• Content Notes:
  United States Railway Association. (1975, February). Northeast and Midwest recommended industry structure: Competitive freight service mainline routes [Map accompanying Preliminary System Plan, Volume I].
• Format:
  PDF
• Collection(s):
  US Transportation Collection
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha-512:d4bc83a949095c4927e095d3e7f811396622759e3c7c2576266bdc9bb212deff68194c9c2ed6e7e14ed03e95268d3eb8e9e6167922ecfdc8bef6837b7a971397
• Download URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/92968/dot_92968_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 607.98 KB ]