Re: Abandonment Rio Grande San Juan Alamosa Durango

Sharrod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am curious that when I search the forum on the
> word "abandonment", I do not actually find many
> results, and the results I do find are actually
> just in the last few months. Does anyone know more
> about the regulatory and legal issues in the
> abandonment of the San Juan Extension? For
> example, what rules guided when the Rio Grande was
> required to offer service? I read that service was
> essentially twice monthly in 1968. How was that
> determined? Was there an agreement with the ICC?
> And then, the last service was in August 1968 as
> stated, but abandonment was not final until
> December of the following year. So why was there
> no service in 1969? What is the difference between
> refusing service and abandonment?

In the end they were pushing freight on their trucks and servicing what they could that way. They wouldn't run freights regularly because they wanted to discourage customers from using their rail, seems moronic but they really wanted to abandon the NG. The last freight to Farmington included 2 loads of wall board which were delivered the previous month by truck and refused by the customer so they had to haul it all back to Alamosa and deliver it by rail as the customer demanded it be delivered by rail. Not sure why they didn't take the loads to Durango and transload it there and run a short freight to make the delivery. The RG did everything they could to kill the NG in those final yrs.

William
aka drgwk37