Re: MTY's and WWII War Department Transpiration Storage facilities
|
John Barry
Shortly after Pearl Harbor, the Army set up regulating stations at Spokane, Ogden, Salt Lake City, Albuquerque, and El Paso to maintain fluid traffic conditions on the Pacific coast. They and additional sub-stations functioned throughout the war. Army freight movements were under control of the Army's Office of the Chief of Transportation (OCT) after March 1942, before that, Chief, Quartermaster Corps. All long distance carload traffic and all traffic destined to one of the ports was centrally routed through the OCT. To avoid congestion in the ports, OCT set up ten Holding and Reconsignment Points: Auburn, WA Elmira, NY Lathrop, CA Marieta, PA Montgomery, AL Pasco, WA Richmond, VA Shreveport, LA Voorheesville, NY Yermo, CA These points were used as transit storage for shipments through the ports they served. When the port couldn't accommodate an inbound shipment, it was held at the holding & reconsignment point. Lathrop served the San Francisco Port of Embarkation (POE) and Yermo served the LA POE. A short delay might be held on the inbound railcar. But any thing like a week or more (have to verify the exact cut off) would be unloaded and placed into Storage In Transit. When the port was ready for the shipment, it was reloaded and forwarded. John Barry ATSF North Bay Lines Golden Gates & Fast Freights Lovettsville, VA 707-490-9696 PO Box 44736 Washington, DC 20026-4736
From: "Tim O'Connor timboconnor@... [STMFC]" To: STMFC@... Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2017 8:39 PM Subject: Re: [STMFC] MTY's and WWII War Department Transpiration Storage facilities Also, demurrage is something charged to rail customers, not railroads. Railroads paid per diem to each other. If you took too long to load or unload your cars, you paid demurrage. Or if your cargo sat waiting for a boat at a port, the railroads charged demurrage for that. I think it was used as a fine, and was much more than per diem. Many railroads had NET INCOME from per diem, and none of them were happy about it, because it was generally lower than the cost of ownership of the cars. The NP and GN annual reports from the 1950's complain about it constantly. Of course Incentive Per Diem changes all that, but that hasn't happened yet. Tim O'Connor Schuyler Larrabee] wrote:
|
|
|