Post on 18-Apr-2018
.. '"
-..
- -· - - - - ------- ,...__...__,.
THE MILWAUKEE ROAD STRATEGIC PLANNING STUDIES
PREPARED BY BOOZ, ALLEN & HAMilTON
TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING DIVISION
MAY 2, 1979
]Btc'JOZ ·AJLt·'"· , . .··lEN . . _·,:: . . .-' . •. . ·.. . . ·.
·• t ·' •
. ~-. -.\' . -~- . .. . . : - ·. . ... , • c , • , , . ' ,' ·, - , , , ..,. .... . .• :~' , -. ··, "'.• .- ,. I •
- c
PHASE I
PHASE II
STUDY OBJECTIVES
IS THERE A LONG TERM VIABLE RAILROAD NETWORK?
IF SO~ CAN THE MILWAUKEE RAILROAD GET FROM HERE TO THERE?
KEY ASSUMPTIONS
• PRELIMINARY STUDY BASED ON 1977 TRAFFIC LEVELS:
TRANSCONTINENTAL SYSTEMS WERE Nor PROFITABLE
MIDWEST STRUCTURE APPEARED TO HAVE GREATER PoTENTIAL
I NETWORK CONFIGURATIONS BEING STUDIED IN DETAIL
SYSTEM WITHOUT LIGHT DENSITY LINES:
MIDWESTERN HCOREH LEVEL SYSTEM
CORE EXTENDED TO MILES CITY
"SuB CoRE"
SUB CORE EXTENDED TO MILES CITY
SUB CORE WITH KANSAS CITY GATEWAY
LOUISVILLE-PORTLAND TRANSCON
TwiN CITIEs-WEsT TRANSCON
RouTE MILES
7)965 3)894
4)661 1)722
2)488
2)393 3)861
4)467
•
KEY ASSUMPTIONS (CONTINUED)
DETAILED STUDIES FocusED ON PROFORMA NET RAILWAY OPERATING INCOME:
STAND ALONE BAsis CRR ONLY - No DEBT SERVICE)
ICC BASIS (1977 FORMAT)
"NORMALIZED" MAINTENANCE
MARKETING OPPORTUNITIES
OPERATING EFFICIENCIES
fLEET AVAILABILITY
EcoNOMIC FoRECASTS BY CoMMODITY
8 ~ ., z 0 ;::: c ..J ..J c ..... (I)
~ ... ;:::
~ "' z 0 ... .J ;; ll:
"' .... z
- -.., .~
MILWAUKEE ROAD RAIL AND TIE INSTAllATIONS
a·.ooo.-.- - - -- - --- ---- - - - - --- - - - ---- - - - - - - - -------
a.ooo
•.•oo
1,000 ~~...L...::;L~j--7& -..=,;;;..-~~R~L~EO_I_9~ ~E~E~I~·~N~ 1_:! ::_:a~~;~ __ :<~ __ J -----------
aoo
o I c ;c ~ c ,c ( c , c r t; c , / <c. / r < c ( t;
~
''· '(<,~ 1940 it~O 1960
YEAR
' r> Li7 0
MILWAUKEE RAILROA 0
Tl[ INSTALLATIONS 1934--1977
1977
10-,- - - ----- - ---------------- - ---- ------
•o.....,.-- -- - - - - - --
•o
•o
~0
ro
10
0
/// . ---- ---:;~w:;:;:;</: ------ -1\-NORM:ZEO 1 97;:1~A~REOU:EM(rl;- -1 J...d.: . _ _ ...._._ . ---~- ------ .
· • '~ y /. I /·/ · ,· ;. _1_,- .· / rl (62 YeorNewi<OIILde) . ,...../ T j i-"7 .c--7 "-;r- /-/. r -~;r - - --- -- ---- -- ------ ____ _ // .· v ' .. . // / ( / 1/// /
', {.-~/);/~~> .. Y_,> </_/ .A'.-y_/;; , , 1 - i// , / I . t ' ' / ,/~-,1· //
· • ,o'- ' · /--' · • ' .,-- -./ -1 ---'---/ _r - - , :..LL ~ T-- -/ /·~/ ·A ---~ --- ------ -- - - - -- -/ v) /" '/· I · / /"'/ ,l-" ~ /c . . ·/,c /1/' /~ t ~/ . 1 v·// / ·/ ) --:_, ./· ///~/
/ l / r:. / . -'~/./ //~" ," L c/,0 -- yc/.( // ----· · - r , · -·- ·- --1.·--'- :--- ~~ ,.!_- 7,· /-;-',. •r- ~ _,/7=/- rr •-- --
.--1- I I , , r_ I · .· / / / j / ·~ // ·/' • , f/ ( / -' / / / ' r [ ·· . /,f~· j ·./·/_, I ·v / / . . f•/ ///>//,
/ / / ' // •/• .- ' / , // /I /_//_,_"..L_/ 1 ,·, /L,1,' • / • ~ //L.-/ /l.f, ·~L -' ¥',{ //,// r----r-·1 y · r· ·f - , /. . - ·t-rY y · T - ,---( ~-r----r
.. , '~ .. ,. 1940 ,,,0 1960 1970 1977
YEAR
MILWALIKE£ RAILROAD
NEW RAIL INSTALLED 1934- 1977
Tl'lom11t L'.. o,., , lt1 c .
OTHER ASSUMPTIONS AND ISSUES
1 1977 CosTs AND RATES - No INFLAT ION
I CURRENT REGULATORY CLIMATE
1 CuRRENT (1978) LABOR AGREEMENTS
• No LABOR PROTECTION
I AsSET TRANSFERS LIMITED TO ROLLING STOCK REQUIREMENTS IN
REDUCED SYSTEM CONFIGURATIONS (NO TRACK STRUCTURE)
• REHAB/EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS EsT IMATED
... _. .. -
ANALYTICAL PROCESS SYSTEM OVERVIEW
1977 MARKET REVENUE SURVEY - BASE
.... ECONOMIC MARKET DIVERSION
PROJECTIONS ASSESSMENT ~ - AND DIV ISION
~ ANALYSIS
MARKET OPPORTUNITIES
r-
POTENTIAL REVENUE BASE
0 / D FLOWS ADJUSTMENTS
t t 1977
CAR HIRE SIMULATION r.--- NETWORK COSTS AND
MODEL MODEL DEFINITION CYCLE TIMES
I I
' + FREIGHT CAR LOCOMOTIVE
REQUIREMENT REQUIREMENT
COST .... FINANC IAL I BASE MODEL
J REHAB
J REQUIREMENTS :
(TRACK & LOCOS) i
PRO FORMA ADJUSTMENTS STATEMENTS
NROI
t t 1977 NORMALIZED IMPROVEMENT
COSTS (R -1l MAINTENANCE ANALYSIS AND ESTIMATES ADJUSTMENTS
+ NROI
ADJUSTED
-' I I
INDEX
270
260
250
240
230
220
210
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
70
60
50
40
30
20
MILWAUKEE ROADS VS. BURLINGTON NORTHERN TON-MILE TRENDS
1970 TO 1977
• • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • ·-• •• •
• •
BN COAL
,_ ___ MILW COAL
•
••• •••• •• •
•
.• BN TOTAL
., - BN NON-COAL
~-·-•• • ....... INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION ~ . ..,..... INDEX .
10
0
.- -/.... GNP (REAL)
1..::£?:'-J,.~ . ::"--.L '·:/" /.,.,....-•-MILWTOTAL
1 1 ~ «1 1 MILW NON-COAL
90
80
70
1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 I
1975 I
1976 I
1977
'::.ot.c ·~"'
I ! f ) I
i - - -
i
MILS
(
PROJECTED NROI COMPARISONS (WITH IMPROVEMENTS)
0~------------------------------------~~~--~~~~---------------_ .. -· . . ~·~~~.,.,.· .. -·· ... ,..-:::·· .,.,.. . .,.. .. ,.,. . . . . .,.. .,. ., . . . . . , """' . . """".. . . . .,.. ...... ., ,-
"'.. . • . :_ ....,., .., _..,. • • . _., .., .A .. . _.,.. ,....,. ,.-, .. ~ ,·-- --- .-· , . .t-,, .....-: ·····:....,.-- .,..,.. . ..,.,.- ,
J'- . ,.- .-· __ ., ~ :-····· ,...._..... _,.,. ,....-:. ..-- . , .,., / ·····~ / ,.-su BCORE.. _, •• •••• •:;_../ • .-
MILES CITY SUBCORE-'.• •• ······.:;........ )/' 1,, .. ., . . TWIN CITY TRANSCON···::,..,... • • ~ 1'
KANSAS CITY SUBCORE .; 1
MILES CITY CORE • I
I I
~ I
I I
SYSTEM'
. 1977 LEVEL
I I
I
I
I I
I
I I
I
MKT OPPOR MKT OPPOR SHORT TERM
MKT OPPOR LONG TERM
-
UP
•
j
~
J
THE MILWAUKEE ROAD CORE NETWORK
KCS ~73 Rl ROAD
., .. ~9 ~e KANSAS CITY ~g~ 174MKT~ e/~ 8\
175 TOFC
176
SLSF MP
100
NORTHFIELD MNS
MASON CITY
Y"'-'\ 13 /78
-~g .... / ~ELDON
... ._,.,.""-""
MARQUETTE
_y~~ ~e~ SOU LN TOFC
•
~
-
-.. ----r-----------------------------------'"---- -\~--.. ---·· - -- ___ _ ,....,. __ ·- ·- --· · --- '-'~ ·-
c A N D A A
THE MILWAUKEE ROAD
1977 SYSTEM
SYSTEM WITHOUT LIGHT DENSITY Ll : ----·'"'· l -~ l
I ·------.-- • ------------r--,----- I '-"-~-'-----.../·,___ I . . l
I I MINNESOTA I "· . 7 } .
1977 SYSTEM INCLUDES RED & BLACK LINES SYSTEM WITHOUT LDL INCLUDES ONLY BLACK LINES
i NORTH DAKOTA i I I
----- (
'· i I - 1 J ) '
. \ I .~ ~ . r·--------- ------, L. I D A H o -.......~ . ....1 '7 , OR£ coN
Bil liNGS
fAITH~ I , I . I , ! . I I I ' . • I
I I w y 0 M I N G f---. __ ----- . . . -- -"~------- I I I
I - ---- ' • --- - - I I 1 ·r------ -~
· · i I I I . ,
i i l _____ ,... _____________ j_ ___ l
S 0 UIT H
·------
' ' I ' . I I I . I 1 N E vADA I j N ~ B R A S K A
z i UyAH i \ . '
· I I \ . ' \ I I N I A \ ' •
~-~-------·----·---
· I I \ . \ I
\ \
• r--------------1. __ • I
"tt!!Ji."~'-
C OLoRADo I . I I
I KANSAS
• I
M I ·
ILLINOIS 1ND\A 't'
TERRE HAUll
\ I
r1 . /\. f t.-"'·y·v . { KENT
,,
I .
oRE coN
I -·--J
'· ) ' J
/" , L. I
I i . ---._ . I ----.,.____ I
1 -- I ·---
\'? ( i
c A
~.........1.
THE MILWAUKEE ROAD
N D 1977 SYSTEM A A
SYSTEM WITHOUT LIGHT DENSITY LINES
----- I ·---- ·'""-. --r·-·- I 1 I ·---·-----.--·---' . \ \ . I .· . ' · ~.----. ( \. .......... ./.'-. I l i NORTH DAKOTA ! '!MINN E SOTA
i i \
1977 SYSTEM INCLUDES RED & BLACK LINES SYSTEM WITHOUT LDL INCLUDES ONLY 8 LACK LINES
·._..... I ) . \ I . r----------------~ 1 '\! I I D A /j 0 ........ ~ • .J I .
BilliNGS
. I I . . I I . SOUTH
. I .
I • I
MICHIGAN
• I ----· '· I w y 0 M I N G i---------i i -·-·r ; ,· ·-----. ._...,
. i i I . . i l _____ , ___________ -.1_ ___ -,
• I ,
\. \
IV£v4D4 \ . \ . \
NEBRASKA
.
\
L 4LIFoRJyl \.
\ 4 \
i i i ----1-·---!-...._, I i ~------. i u T A /j i I
i i COLORADo i . . I
tND\A.NA. \ ILLINOIS \ •
\\ \
\ •
I I . • I i i I
• t-------------1._ • I
. t : .... i ~F~!~' ''~. ~ -~
KANSAS URI
1ERRE HAUT(
\ I
r' . l\..
SEY!o10Ut·\.
l ,...,.y·V . { KENTucKY
j) ____:_.·. L ___ · - :\...:____ ____ "- h . \.;~~ .. .;,\;·\.; \r.,,, .. , , . '\ ·~ · ·:, ' * ... , ';; jdi ;'Jb\Wv
-..... . .__ ·-.... ___
---.. r·-r-"siiiNcroN'I;o~ i )
c A N D A A
---- -·-· ----------------~- .-....
THE MILWAUKE-E ROAD
CORE
MILES CITY CORE
' ' I ., "" I I ·
i \. I \
___ _J l ---.- .... ........ --·-- \ ~....... "\. -......
( ...... ../ ~!!! ~-~-~-----) <
! ~ !
MoNTANA NORTH DAKOTA
OREGoN
~ \ r·---------------1 ID"IIo '-.~4 , , I f I . • • I
I f i . ____ '""· --·-. I I w y 0 "' I N G i-·-·---·-· ~ -.......,._____ i i i ------ ' ' ---._ I I I t-·------~
I i f i i j l __ ·-·y·---------- -.l_ ___ l
$ ~if!{ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
SOUTH D A K 0 T A
' ' ' NEB A S K A
l ~ MINNESOTA \ . ( ·~
DELMAR
M
I I . I • I . I N E v " D ..\ I i 1-· -' \ I ur..t, I I \.\ i i C 0 L 0 R ..\ D 0 i CALIFoRN \\ I ! •
1 N 0 I A ILLINOIS
. . I 1
" • I I ! ' . I I o I
. --------- -- --1.---·
KANSAS
_..._, ________ ~
·- -·
c A N THE MILWAUKEE ROAD
CORE
MILES CITY CORE D
·"'-.
-.....__ ' ~ l --- --· -----..,._ - ---·----, ·, . ...,__"""""'-\. - -/·' 7 ---------------------r----- I i ....... ../A~j ~~'.o~ '\ • I J l ..
SI{INGTOJV\ i ) i \ MINNESOTA
.\. • H DAKOT I l I I NORT \
• • •
/ \, MoNTANA ~f .... "'""'-""'-·~-------) ~
A A
ORE coN ! ~ ! ; \ r·---------------J I D 4 II 0 '--.-.../'7 !
. I I I · . . I I I '
. I -- ~ /--. I i II' y 0 M I N G i------------ .
··----- . . . ·-----. I I I r-·--·--. . ----- . . ·-----~ -I I
I
·-··-- -· A S K A I I
I I . .
i i l _____ .,... ___________ --.L·---,
SOUTH D A K 0 T A
I I •
. I NEBR ' • I ' I I .
• J DElMAR
..
MICHiGAN
----·-,-...-· \ ;
\ . \
/ lV£v"-o 4 f /
\ I UT"" ! \ ! ! c~t 1
\ I I FoR.Nt.;, '1. • •
. 1--·-·-·---------~ ILLINOIS
JNDIA!oiA
I I • • I I • • ·--------------1._
COLORADo
•• ,., ,, " .. .., , ,, .. .)\'·:' < ·' ( ----.-·---~----- .. -·----.... \. --····-
. I . I • I • I
KAN AS
-r--
KAIIISAS CITY
MISSOURI
-------------~ ------------------ --+- --__ \ _______ _ - __ ..:...-a_______.,_-~~___,_.._~.,____~-__..:..~.-.........
c A N A D A
THE MILWAUKEE ROAD
SUB CORE
MILES CITY SUB CORE
SUB CORE INCLUDES ONLY BLACK LINES
\
·"·
..________ --·-1 l
----- --~ ~ ~ --.,.._ --- ----- \ '·---.. .\. . .._ ! ! ·------------------,._____ ' i ......... ./ . "' oe, 1 I j I
1
.AtsH,NGroN~ ,·, • • ! \ NESOTA
0 • I I MIN
MILES CITY SUB CORE INCLUDES RED & BLACK LINES
i (\ i NORTH DAK, OTA \ '""-""--·~-~---~ ( . . . . ( J \ MoNTANA I j · '; i
~
I " ~ if~ , . ~ " s~ # J \ I ~ \ § ~$ ~ • ~ • .. I
OREGoN
( ID \ .../~----·-·-·-·-·---~ SOUTH DAj<:OTA j .J
I A H 0 ..... ~. I i !! ~----------·-· ?l ! . I • .,
I ! i I . .... ·-. l I 0 w A -c. I I w y 0 M I N G i-·-·-·-·-·-·r- •./' ...,\ ) . . . ,)
r- -----. .._ __ ·-·-. . I l l DES MOINES 'l 1 r·-------1 1 NEB R A s A ..... }\ __ /
I
I I I --- ) 0 Is • • • • . ---· I I L L I N
I ! L.---.,. __________ --.L... __ ! \
I N £ v A 0 A I . 1-· -. -- (
. . ' . I \..r KAUAI CITY u R I
' I UyAH I I MISSO
\
. . . I \ ! ! COLoRADo ' K 1 NSAS '
c~LIFo 11 N 1 A \\ ! I I
I I I • 0
I J ,
----------- ----.1.. __
-...~--
M l
INDIA
•
c A N -..... . ...._ . ...._ . ...._ A
.~ .. ~
D A
THE MILWAUKEE ROAD
SUB CORE
MILES CITY SUB CORE
SUB CORE INCLUDES ONLY BLACK LINES
--._,_____ --·----"\i, '·""""·-·, '\..-! ! ·-------------·-·---,---·--- i ............ ./ . ..,. ~ I I j 1l A.sH,NcroNrt,~ ,· ., • 1 NESOTA
0 • I ' MIN
MILES CITY SUB CORE INCLUDES RED & BLACK LINES
·"· ~-·---' l
; ( ; NORTH DAKOTA •\ ' \ . !( . I \ MoNTANA J ~ L.'-.._...._.~.~-----z. ( I
J I
.1 \ I ORE coN
( " r------------·---, I IDA H 0 '"'-~ • ../) ' ________ .J_
. I ! f·-·-· ? I . I t., i I . i w A "t'' • ' I - ....... ,...__ \ I 0 ) I I w y 0 M I N G i---·---·---- '# "'
·-..... . ...__ ,. . . / --·--. I 1 r
(·--------.,_______ . , I l .~, ""'"" ' -r-·--·-·--·--! I N E B R A s K ... ·····}\
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .... ct)
SOUTH DAKOTA
I I I I I ·-·-·-· ' ' • • I ·---' 1 l. ___ ·r·-·---·--·-- --L·-·-, ·
i i i i -·-·-·---~ I
N £ \1 A. D A. I ,. 1--· -. -. -- (
• ' ' , \.r KAMIAJ an U R I \.\ i i C 0 L 0 R A D 0 i K A N S A S •
1
. . I A L I I' 0 l! N I A \\ I ! .
\ I !
ILLINOIS
MICHIGAN
----·r--· \ • \ \ .
INDIANA
~
\ I ! ! \ r-' ·------ I \ I
' ----...... --.~-\ ;
•· ·-·----~ ___ ........ ··-·~ ... ,,,_ ....... ....- ........... ~~· ., .-
._ ......
\
A
·"-
________ _ __ _J I
----~ ----T ~ ~ . -- --- '-~- -. ----- ----- --' I ---------------,. i '-. .....___, I I · · IY•sifltvcrotv ' \ I I I, sorA
• 0 I ' I ' I MINNE ........ ' [ • DAKOTA '\ I \ I NORTH I . i \ 7
MoNTANA i ' \ ) . I . -..... .._ . ..__.~------. ...._ rL. ---------·J
' i . ------- ,/ / '1 ! .,1 J . I . . \ I / ' r·---------------, k T A '
L. ID \ .J\! I SOUTH DA
0
I
I
4 H o ....___ 1 • , __ -· _.
I I j_ --i I · ,---------· . . I . I I ' 1
. . I - -- ..._ .r--. ..,_\ --- ! I IVy 0 M I N G i----------- . 'lo'"'""
--- ' ' ' ----.,.______ I ! I I -,
I ------- ' I \
1 ·-·r--------1 ! ", •• As •
1
A OMAHA. . , I I o I I ' ' I
i i L.----~-------------L.. __ , ' . . '
I I i ! -------·--1 IV£v•o
4
f 1 !--·----\ I urA H i I
\_ i i COLORADo j \ . ' i C A L I F 0 R IV I A \_\ ! ',' · I I \ ' '
\ I I
\ ~-------------~---\ I
. I
D
THE MILWAUKEE ROAD c A N A KANSAS CITY SUB CORE
ORE coN
MICHIGAN
I 0 W A
ILLINOIS
\ \
INDIANA\ •
KANSAS
".J'-· KENTucKY
j ,;
Iii
I '·
c A ----·----·--------·------. I
• ~-"Sif,N '\..~I
N A D
..............
A THE MILWAUKEE ROAD
LOUISVILLE TRANSCONTINENTAL
J ·"'· ___ _j I --·-- --,- . - . .
-------·---,..._____ \ '·-· .\. .1'-"'.-
' I -~./·~-~ I . . I ,
·' N 0 R T H D A K 0 T A )\ M I N N E S 0 T ~ULU~Yl1 '~!,.; •
~~~ I \. ~... . 7
"'-'-·-....·~------., r
•~tco!d~q~/f!4J.,. c roN'-' •
. . } .
, • CliJQIJ(JQ .. I ( J I o--'1 - I / \ j - ~ \ r----------------,
OREGoN
"
SOUTH L. IDA H 0 '--.~ . ..1'1 • ---·-· I . I , _1 ·-·-· . I · I ,---1 . I .
i I j-.,} ._. ( 1 j IVY 0 M I N G t-·-·---·---- · ~ -\to -·- • <, I -- . . .. / -- --~------L_______ - ! ! ll. I \ ,;, ...... c;
1- r---------1 I NEBRASKA ...... \ ,..1
i i f ! L __________ )
MICHIGAN
. . l 1._ l . . I I -----,·------------ ---, , 'l. \
i i j i -·---·---~ '\ i NEvADA I i r------- ~-rKAISASCITY I" . . ' I 0 u R \ I UyA H I i MISS
\ i i COLORADo i KANSA ~ \ . . I I CAL \ I I . I ''o•NtA \ · • 1
\ ! ! . \ I I
\ ~-----------~--\ . . I
I 0 W A ~::JnE~fR;.t ~·· j ~--·-· .,._--
\ \ \
INDIANA\
\ • ILLINOIS
-; d:· : · :~~~>!\'
·.; .~ .,.
~"ltt:-...
c A N A D A
THE MILWAUKEE ROAD
TWIN CITIES TRANSCONTINENTAL
--- - --- ----·--- I ~ -~--------·-,---,--. • ....J ., i . . ....... ___ _
. ) ( '\. ........ ./'\--. I I I . I \, } .
--~ (
j ~ I
i N 0 R T H D A K 0 T 'A \ M I N N E S 0 T A . \ \
) \ i r \ r·---------------1 L_ I D A H 0 '-.~--AJ , I . I
f I · . . I I I . ' , . I - -- -/ I w y 0 M I N G i-----------
-·r-------. I i i -....... .. _____ -1 . I ·--~------- I . ' i i I I • .
i i l.----~----------- --L. __ I . ' ' '
I I i ! _ I N £ v A D A I i r-- -. ----z i UTAH i I
OREGoN
SOUTH RAI'IOCITY
NEBRASKA
r
t\ ;-I OMAHA~ 0\
I OW A
0 DES MOIIES
L----·---·-· ~-
-------~ ( \..
\_\ i i C 0 L 0 R A D 0 j CAL \ I I I IFoRNIA \ , ' I
\ I ! . \ I I \ ;.._ ____ - ; r KAISAS CITY i MISSOURI KANSAS
. ' - -----..... __ _ \ . I I
r
IIADIIOI o
ILLINOIS
__ ... -4,_.--· \ \ \
INDIANA\ I
\
}·, _;:.. .....
OPERATING ASSUMPTIONS
I MILEAGE OF MAIN AND YARD TRACKS WAS ADJUSTED TO REFLECT 1978 CHANGES
AND PoTENTIAL CHANGES APPROPRIATE TO THE SYSTEM STUDIED
I RUNNING TIMES WERE REDUCED TO REFLECT REHABILITATED MAIN TRACKS
ROAD CREW COSTS WERE REDUCED TO REFLECT ELIMINATION OF RE
LIEVING CREWS AFTER 12 HOURS OF SERVICE
ROAD CREW OVERTIME WAS REDUCED TO 1973 - 1976 AVERAGE LEVELS
I TRAINS WERE RESTRICTED TO 120 CARS AND ALL RoAD AND YARD CREWS REFLECT
THE SAVINGS OF REDUCED CREW SIZE UNDER THE 1978 AGREEMENT
I BLOCKING PATTERNS WERE OPTIMIZED WHERE PRACTICAL WHEN FLOWS WARRANTED
OR WHEN EXISTING YARD FACILITIES BECOME OVERBURDENED
No CAPITAL FACILITY WORK FOR YARDS IS REQUIRED IN THE OPERATING
PLAN EXCEPT FOR FIFE YARD AT TACOMA ' IN APPROPRIATE SCENARIO
I MILWAUKEE TERMINAL OPERATING COSTS WERE ADJUSTED TO REFLECT THE ExTENSIVE ECONOMIES ALREADY INSTITUTED
• RoAD THROUGH TRAINS AND YARD CREWS WERE ADDED oR DELETED DEPENDENT
UPoN TRAFFIC VoLUMEs AND SERVICE REQUIREMENTS
OPERATING ASSUMPTIONS ...
• AssiGNMENT oF LocoMOTIVE UNITS REFLECTS REPLACEMENT OF LowER HP
RoAD UNITS WITH FEWER HIGH HP UNITS WHEN PossiBLE
I ORIGINATED AND TERMINATED TRAFFIC To AND FROM STATIONS ON LIGHT
DENSITY LINES IS TREATED AS IF 100 PERCENT IS LOST TO THE MILWAUKEE
ROAD
I EXISTING RoUTES WERE RETAINED AND TRACKAGE RIGHTS OPERATION BETWEEN
CLINTON-TAMAJ BLuE IsLAND-TERRE HAUTE) AND CuLVER-PoLo WERE NoT
INCLUDED IN NETWORK MoDELS
I DERAILMENT RELATED COSTS WERE REDUCED TO REFLECT NORMALIZED TRACK
CONDITIONS BASED ON THE REPORTED EXPERIENCE OF WESTERN RAILROADS
• JoiNT FACILITIES AT PoiNTS Nor INCLUDED AND THEIR RELATED 1977 CosTs WERE ELIMINATED FROM THE STUDY OF REDUCED SYSTEMS
CARHIRE ASSUMPTIONS
• A NoRMALIZED MILWAUKEE FLEET CMILW MARKS) WAs AssuMED To BE AvAILABLE
• FoREIGN CARS WERE DISPLACED BY MILWAUKEE CARS) TO THE EXTENT PERMISSABLE
UNDER CAR SERVICE RuLES) WHERE SucH DISPLACEMENT WAs EcoNoMICALLY BENEFICIAL
OR NECESSARY TO PRESERVE MARKET SHARE
• FREIGHT CARs REQUIRED TO DISPLACE FoREIGN CARS AND SuPPORT THE GROWTH IN
TRAFFIC WERE OBTAINED THROUGH ADDITIONAL LEASES
ADDITIONAL LEASE COSTS WERE BASED ON THE AVERAGE LEASE COST OF
THE MILWAUKEE LEASED FLEET IN 1977 IN THE EVEN OF AN EXCESS OF CARS) LEASES WERE CANCELLED WITHOUT
PENALTY
• THE 1977 PER DIEM AND MILEAGE RATES APPLICABLE TO MILWAUKEE CARS WERE
ADJUSTED TO REFLECT THE NORMALIZED CONDITION OF THE FLEET) AND THE DIFFERENCES
IN THE AGE AND OWNERSHIP PROFILES OF THE REQUIRED FLEETS AND THE 1977 FLEET
• No IMPROVEMENTS IN YARD OPERATIONS WERE AssuMED) HowEVER) REDUCTIONS IN
TRANSIT TIMES RESULTING FROM AN OPTIMIZED OPERATING STRATEGY AND REHABILITATED
PLANT WERE INCORPORATED
LOCOMOTIVE ASSUMPTIONS
• LocoMOTIVE REQUIREMENTS WERE BASED ON SPECIFIC TRAIN OPERATING AND YARD
REQUIREMENTS
SELECTION OF DROP-OUTS WAS NOT AFFECTED BY OWNERSHIP STATUS
No NEED WILL EXIST FOR SHORT TERM LEASE UNITS
• REQUIRED FLEET WAs AssuMED TO BE REHABILITATED- REHAB CosTs WERE EsTIMATED
AVAILABILIT.Y IMPROVED TO 90 PERCENT
MAINTENANCE EXPENSE AT NORMALIZED LEVEL REFLECTS TYPE OF SERVICE:
THROUGH) LOCAL) UNITJ AND YARD SWITCHING
NORMALIZED OVERHAUL FREQUENCY WILL BE AT 4 YEARS (GE) OR 5 YEARS
(EMD) INTERVALS) OR 45QJQQQ MILES) WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST
• FUEL CONSUMPTION WILL REMAIN CONSTANT AT 1.9 GALLONS PER MGTM BEFORE AND
AFTER CONVERSION
1 LEASE AND DEPRECIATION CHARGES WERE CALCULATED BY AcTUAL UNITS SELECTED
To REMAIN IN EACH INDIVIDUAL SCENARIO
MARKETING ANALYSIS
• CusTOMER SuRVEY
• •
PRoJECTION OF NEw TRAFFIC BY MILW. SALEs/MARKETING DEPT .
REVIEW OF SUCCESS PROBABILITIES
• AssuMPTIONS GovERNING SuccEss PROBABILITY DETERMINATION
I ADJUSTED CARLOADS AND REVENUES FOR SEVERAL SCENARIOS
• DIVERSIONs/DivisioNs AssuMPTIONs
FoR REDUCED SYSTEM CONFIGURATIONS, 1977 TRAFFIC THAT HAD BOTH ORIGIN AND DESTINATION IN THE SYSTEM UNDER STUDY WAS RETAINED IN ITS ENTIRETY. IF BOTH WERE OUT, THE TRAFFIC WAS DELETED FROM CONSIDERATION , IF ONE END WAS IN AND ONE END OUT OF THE SYSTEM UNDER STUDY, TRAFFIC WAS CONSIDERED AS SUBJECT TO DIVERSION
TRAFFIC SUBJECT TO DIVERSION WAS REVIEWED AND EITHER DROPPED AS NOT RETAINABLE OR RETAINED WITH A NEW u!Nu GATEWAY REPLACING THE "OUT" END OF THE ORIGINAL MOVEMENT WITH AN APPROPRIATE DIVISION OF REVENUE,
EFFECT OF MARKET
OPPORTUNITIES AND ECONOMIC FORECAST
PERCENTAGE SYSTEM MCITY MCITY KC LVLLE TCITY ... f
INCREASE IN: wLo LDL (ORE CORE SuB CORE SuB(ORE Su~CORE IB~SC~ IRNSCN -
% % % % % % % %
MARKET OPPORTUNITIES Vs 1977 LEVEL
(ARLO ADS 25 26 25 23 22 23 22 13 REVENUE 34 32 31 26 26 27 30 26
1986 EcoNOMIC FoRECAST
Vs MARKET OPPORTUNITIES
LEVEL
CARLOADS 8 9 9 11 10 10 9 4
REVENUE 9 11 10 13 12 13 11 8
LONG TERM COMPOUND
EFFECT Vs 1977 LEVEL
CARLOADS 35 37 36 36 35 36 33 18
REVENUE 47 46 45 42 41 44 44 35
INDEX
270
260
250
240
230
220
210
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
50
40
30
20
10
0
90
80
70
1970
MILWAUKEE ROADS VS. BURLINGTON NORTHERN TON-MILE TRENDS
1970 TO 1977
BN COAL
,---- MILW COAL
I
1971
• • • •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • . . • •• •
• • •
•• •
•• •• •• ••
.• BN TOTAL
• _ BN NON·COAL
"-•• ~··- ...-INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION ~·-- INDEX .
~ ... -GNP (REAL)
-- ;--•- MILWTOTAL . ~ k L . MILW NON-COAL
I 17/4 I
1972 1973 1974 I
1975
I
1976 I
1977
... <! .........
INDEX
185
180
175
170
165
160
155
150
145
140
135
130
125
MILWAUKEE ROAD TOTAL TONS CARRIED
I I I I I I
MILW COAL TRAFFIC
,. ,. ,.
,. ""'----
I 120 I
I I
115
I I MILW TOTAL TRAFFIC
110
L 4:---- ~I ·' . --.1 100 I I > ........ I / I ~ 105
95 \ '·------............-......._... I
\ -90
85
80
75
70
1970
\ --,-\ ,. \ ,. '- __ _,
,.
I
1971 1972 I
1973 I
1974 I
1975 I
1976
~·"'""-·
I
1977
INDEX
165
160
155
150
145
140
135
130
125
120
115
_....,
RAIL TONNAGE vs.
REAL GNP
---US RR TONNAGE , ' 110
105 - , ,, j~ --L,·-' 1 I X "'!, 1.~ I 'q;~- .,.=:1
100 -· .~ -._' ,.~ .,, --
95 I .__,...-MILW RD TONNAGE
90
85
80
75
70
I
19G8 I
1969
I I I I I I I I 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977
..........
INDEX
200
195
190
185
180
175
170
165
160
155
150
145
140
135
130
125
120
115
110
105
100
951 . . 90
85
80
75
70
I
1970 1971
WESTERN DISTRICT CLASS I RAILROADS NET TON MILE INDEX
I I
I
1972
1970 TO 1977
I / ..
IBN :
I /'· I
/.· -~ :
I
1973
··~ UP
"\·· .. .\/' . . .. ·
I
1974
\ "'
I
1975
...........__ ___ CRIP
1976 I
1977
1977 LEVEL STATISTICS
;·
GROSS fREIGHT REVENUE MILES OF ESTIMATED NUMBER t
REVE~UE (f1IL2 C8RL08DS (0002 ~08D 0EEB8IED OE EMELOYEES {0002 f
BASE 434.8 467 9)566 11.4
SYSTEM w/o LDL 423.6 "--845 7)965 10.7
CORE 248.2 645 3)894 6.6
MILES CITY CoRE 269.4 683 4)661 7.1
SuB CORE 146.3 444 1)722 4.4
MILES CITY SuBCORE 168.1 480 2)488 4.9
KANSAS CITY SuBCORE 182.0 498 2)393 5.1
LOUISVILLE TRANSCON 271.1 572 3)861 7.0
TwiN CITY TRANSCON 168.8 270 4)467 4.3
LONG TERM LEVEL STATISTICS
GROSS fREIGHT REVENUE ESTIMATED NUMBER REVENUE (MIL) CARLOADS (000) OF EMPLOYEES (000) .f·
t
SYSTEM w/o LDL 621.6 1)138 12.6
CORE 361.8 885 7.8
f1ILES CITY (ORE 390.2 930 8.3
SuB CORE 208.5 605 5,1
MILES CITY SuBCORE 237.4 648 5.6
KANSAS CITY SuBCoRE 261.9 677 6.0
LOUISVILLE TRANSCON 390.7 763 8.2
TWIN CITY TRANSCON 228.6 318 5.0
FREIGHT CAR REQUIREMENTS
------------------------THOUSANDS OF CARS---------------------
SYSTEM MC MC KC LVLLE TWINCY w/o LDL (ORE (ORE SU6CORE SuBCORE SuB CORE TRt:lSC~ TRNSCN
I f
TRAFFIC RECOVERY TO 1977 LEVELS
DIFFERENCE FROM 1977 NoRMALIZED FLEET 5.8 (1.7 ) (1.4) (5.5) (5.3) (4.4) (2.9) (5.9)
TRAFFIC ADJUSTED FoR MARKET OPPORTUNITIES
DIFFERENCE FROM 1977 NoRMALIZED FLEET 12.8 4.1 4.5 (2.6) (2.2) (0.5) 2.1 (5.1)
MARKET OPPORTUNITIES AND GROWTH To LoNG TERM LEVELS
DIFFERENCE FROM 1977 NoRMALIZED FLEET 14.7 5.4 6.0 (1.1) (0.6) 1.1 4.0 (4.7)
OVER 40 YEAR OLD DROPOUTS* ___Ll 1.8 2.5 L1 1.~ 1.4 2.3 1.8
ToTAL ADDITIONAL CARS REQUIRED 17.8 7.2 8.5 0.8 2.5 6.3 (2.9)
*40 YEAR DRoPours HAVE Nor BEEN INCLUDED IN THE NROI PROFORMAS
LOCOMOTIVE SUMMARY-TOTAL UNITS REQUIRED
1977 ACTUAL - 705
1977 BAsE NoRMALIZED - 628
NC MC KC LVLLE TwiN CITY SvsTEH CQRf. Ulli.E. SuaCoRE Sua CoRE SuaCoRE TRANS CON TRANSCON
TRAFFIC RECOVERY TO 1977 LEVELS 563 349 376 217 246 257 346 209
TRAFFIC LEVEL WITH MARKET OPPORTUNITY RECAPTURE 664 400 426 241 271 285 399 235
TRAFFIC RECAPTURE AND GROWTH TO LONG TERM LEVEL 703 422 451 255 284 303 416 240
SYSTEM LESS
CORE
MC CORE
SuB CoRE
r1C SuB CoRE
KC SuB CoRE
PLANT REHABILITATION ESTIMATES MILLIONs ' OF DOLLARS
TOTAL REHABILITATION
REQUIREMENT TO BRING TRACK To CoM
PETITIVE LEVELS AT THE END OF 1977
WITHOUT CooR- WITH Dit:IATIQ~S CooBDit:l~IIOt:~s
LDL 482 447 248 213 285 251 125 108
153 145
159 128
NET REHABILITATION
f1INIMUM REQUIREMENT IN ExcEss oF
TEN YEAR NoRMALIZED MAINTENANCE
WITHOUT CooR- WITH Dlt:l8IIOt:IS CooRDit:l~IIot:~s
231 215 103 87 131 115
51 45
74 58
72 51)
L'VILLE TRANSCON 249 232 13Lt 128
TC TRANSCON 258 25~ 130 131)
POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENT
COMPONENTS
I OPERATING IMPROVEMENTS IN MAJOR TERMINALS SIMILAR TO THOSE ACCOMPLISHED
IN MILWAUKEE
• TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT EXPENSE REDUCED TO 1977 CNW-RI RATIO OF 2.1% OF TOTAL REVENUES
• GENERAL EXPENSES REDUCED TO 1977 CNW-RI RATIO OF 4.6% I POTENTIAL CONTRIBUTION OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SPRINT OPERATION BEYOND
TRAFFIC WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE MoDEL
I LONG TERM BENEFIT OF WELDED RAIL IN REDUCING NORMALIZED MAINTENANCE
ExPENSES
• INCOME PoTENTIAL FROM MARKETABLE MILWAUKEE OwNERSHIP CARS AND Loco
MOTIVES THAT PROJECTED TRAFFIC LEVELS Do Nor REQUIRE.
..,..,, r_.
NET RAILWAY OPERATING INCOME ESTIMATES ..
($ ~1ILLIONS)
NRnr NROI 4DJUSTED
NROI lr'1PRD I FIJR DEPRN. SYSTEM LESS LDL 1977 LEVEL (60.9) (55.3) C42~!J)
LONG TERM (3.9) +8.4 +2215
CORE 1977 LEVEL (41).2) (33. 2) (23. 3) LoNG TERM (9.5) +2.3 + 12.8 MC CORE 1977 LEVEL (ll215) (36.0) (25.7) LoNG TERM (6. 8) +4.9 +1518
SUB CORE 1977 LEVEL (2616) (15 I 6) (7.5) LONG TERM C11. 4) +3.8 +1212
MC SIJB CORE 1977 LEVEL (2813) (18.4) (lf),l))
LONG TERM (6.5) +7.5 + 16.2
KC SUB CORE 1977 LEVEL (32.4) (22.6) (1319) LONG TERM (10.6) +3.5 +12.4 L'VILLE TRA~SCO~ 1977 LEVEL (36 ,1) (2910) (18. 7)
LONG TERM +2.9 + 15 II) +25.8 T.C. TR~NSCO~
1977 LEVEL (31.2) C21.ll) (14.5) LoNG TERM ( 10 I 3) +5.5 +13.5
I ITEMS OF POTENTIAL IMPACT OUTSIDE THE IMMEDIATE CONTROL OF TRUSTEE AND
Nor INCLUDED IN DETAILED STUDIES
PRICING FREEDOM AND ABILITY TO ESTABLISH RATES THAT WILL BE FULLY
COMPENSATORY FOR ALL TRAFFIC BEING HANDLED
MAJOR REVISIONS IN LABOR WORK RULES
INFLATION AND AB ILITY OF RATE ACTIONS AND PRODUCTIVITY
IMPROVEMENTS TO OVERCOME THE HISTORICAL LAG
PosiTIVE OR NEGATIVE VALUE OF RECENT AND CONTEMPLATED
CHANGES IN RULES AND RATES GOVERNING DEMURRAGE AND
PER DIEM
EFFECT OF RECENT FUEL PR ICE CHANGES AND THE ENERGY SITUATION
EFFECT OF RocK ISLAND REORGANIZATION OR NEW PUBLIC OR PRIVATE
SHORT LINE RAILROADS
EFFECT OF INCREASES IN CAR CAPACITY
Cl)
2 c :::::i _, -:! 2 -Cl) a: s ...... c c
400
I 300
I
200
I
100
40
20
NET PLANT EXPENDITURE AND ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT VALUES ASSUMED COMPARED TO NROI
326
~· ~
I 237
I I ~~
(1977 DOLLARS)
395
"''"'-'1
~~
~ EQUIPMENT VALUE
D PLANT EXPENDITURE
(:-:-:-:1 NROI RANGE
149
335
ol I Ng I 6?, I F, I tg I ~ I bk, I bJ I b6
(55)
SYSTEM W/0 LDL
CORE MILES CITY CORE
SUBCORE MILES CITY KANSAS CITY SUBCORE SUBCORE
LOUISVILLE TRANSCON
TWIN CITY TRANSCON
t f
MIL$
PROJECTED NROI COMPARISONS (WITH IMPROVEMENTS)
. " .. .. -.. -/; ... - /,·· ~ -·- ~·· ~ .-··-r" ., ·""
0~--------------------------------------~~~~--~~r'~-----------------_ .. -· .· ... ....:~ ..... ,·
(1 0)
(20)
.. -·· ...... ~·· ~· _,_ •• --- ••• ... -""'.···#Ifill' ·' _..... . . .. ...,.,. ... ·· ""...-""""" . . - ... ., r ,/· . • . :..-- . . _, A . . - -- ,./' ··""' , . .,...~ ..,.__..,.,. . ...,.. ,
/ ... ~ ······ -- .-·-- , , .. ...- .-· , / .. _ . ·-- -· ,.,..., .,.:.• .. ,. . ,., , .,. ...,-:. .. . .,. SUBCORE .. " ./ ••• ····:;;." / __ , , ••• tlfll!" • __ .,.
MILES CITY SUBCORE/ •••• ······_:,....-:. :/' 1,--.. , . .
TWIN CITY TRANSCON ···::,_, • • ~ / KANSAS CITY SUBCORE / 1
LOUISVILLE TRANSCON •• ·/..A
CORE/.
MILES CITY CORE . / I
I
I I
I
;;!: I
I I
SYSTEM'
1977 LEVEL
I
I I
I
I I
I
MKT OPPOR MKT OPPOR SHORT TERM
MKT OPPOR LONG TERM