In a perfect world, we’d have fond memories of a bottle of champagne being ceremoniously smashed across the pilot of an Amtrak P42 heading the maiden trip of long-sought passenger service between Mobile, Ala., and New Orleans. And we’d be able to take the train to the beach at Biloxi or the aquarium at Gulfport, Miss.
Instead, after more than five years of studies and fruitless negotiations, Amtrak this month hauled CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern before the Surface Transportation Board in the hopes of forcing the freight railroads to host four daily state-supported passenger trains – or show why they can’t.
This sets up a clash with stakes that are much higher than simply restoring passenger service on a 144.1-mile stretch of the Gulf Coast. The fate of Amtrak’s growth strategy – developing regional corridors by connecting cities that are less than 400 miles apart – may hinge on the outcome.
What’s not in dispute is that Amtrak has a legal right to access freight rail lines and that it must pay for passenger-related upgrades. Rail traffic control studies are always performed to sort out how passenger and freight trains can coexist. And they determine what track and capacity improvements are needed.
The latest New Orleans-Mobile study, due out in January, never crossed the finish line. Amtrak and its partner, the Southern Rail Commission that includes officials from Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, accuse CSX and NS of dragging their feet. And so Amtrak asked the STB to step in so that passenger trains can roll as soon as January 2022.
The Class I railroads rightly fear the precedent that would be set by Amtrak launching service without a traffic study. They’re also nervous about the Federal Railroad Administration’s new Amtrak performance standards, which require host railroads to ensure that at least 80% of passengers arrive on time. This is uncharted territory.
Amtrak rightly fears the precedent that would be set by freight railroads needlessly delaying proposed passenger service, raising unreasonable objections, and putting up prohibitively expensive roadblocks. On the Gulf Coast, all the stars have aligned for new service: The Southern Rail Commission has $66 million to fund improvements to CSX’s 138.5-mile single-track New Orleans & Mobile Subdivision. If Amtrak can’t launch service here, the thinking goes, then it will be unable to do so anywhere.
An exhaustive 2017 study looked at running two New Orleans-Mobile regional trains along with the resumption of the Sunset Limited east of New Orleans. You’d think that the ill-fated 2020 study would go quickly: Dust off the 2017 report, update it to reflect current freight operations including a 3.3-mile stretch of NS in the Crescent City, and then toss four daily passenger trains into the mix.
But CSX has raised a host of operational issues. Among them: Potential delays posed by seven drawbridges on the line, inadequate siding capacity, and concerns that the Amtrak trains would interfere with freight traffic heading to and from the busy Port of Mobile. Privately, operations people say these concerns are overblown and would be solved by the publicly funded track improvements and Coast Guard agreements giving Amtrak priority on drawbridges.
In the court of public opinion, CSX has painted itself into a corner. CSX executives have said their existing network has the capacity to handle 30% more traffic. Plus, CSX is the self-proclaimed best-run railroad in North America and boasts that it has the top operating team in the business. CSX now runs only eight daily freights between Mobile and New Orleans. So you wonder if CSX can really say with a straight face that adding four Amtrak trains to a beefed up, lightly used route would bring such a crackerjack railroad to its knees.
Despite passenger advocates’ claims that CSX has taken a “death by study” approach to new passenger service, CSX insists that it is only opposed to Amtrak launching service without following the usual traffic study process.
There’s plenty of blame to go around. While the latest study was under way, Amtrak and the Southern Rail Commission moved the goalposts by considering the use of Talgo equipment, only to shelve the idea, and Mobile suggested an alternate site for its passenger stop. In December the Southern Rail Commission said the study was going well. But bad data from a host railroad subsequently set back the traffic modeling, and that was the last straw for Amtrak. This blindsided CSX and NS, who stress the need to complete the study.
What’s clear from this mess is that there must be a better way.
You can reach Bill Stephens at bybillstephens@gmail.com and follow him on twitter @bybillstephens
”
But CSX has raised a host of operational issues. Among them: Potential delays posed by seven drawbridges on the line, inadequate siding capacity, and concerns that the Amtrak trains would interfere with freight traffic heading to and from the busy Port of Mobile. Privately, operations people say these concerns are overblown and would be solved by the publicly funded track improvements and Coast Guard agreements giving Amtrak priority on drawbridges”
”
Well, ya, sorry but no duh. Capacity can be increased by spending a lot of $$$$$$$. But nearly none of that $$$$$$$$ is in place and their are not any concrete plans in place on exactly what to do & where.
Amtrak is not promising to wait for the needed capacity to be built. If they have, I haven’t seen it. And if one starts to operate before that capacity is added, it will likely cause problems.
Remember, when CSX is talking about extra capacity that’s for the system, not specific points on the system. That’s an important distinction. I’m not sure if Mr. Stephens just didn’t have time to think that one through. Seems pretty obvious for anyone whose worked in the industry, no?
As a taxpayer and voter, I would like to point out that y’ll are avoiding the most important aspect of this —-> $$$$$$.
Why is Amtrak pushing ahead so forcefully for a passenger train that the 3 _funding states_ of LA, MS and AL have repeatedly rejected funding in the past? Amtrak can’t force the states to pay for it. And beyond a couple years, Amtrak can’t pay for it, either.
Amtrak’s business plan seems to be little more than punt + pray. Spend $100million and pray that all 3 states will change their stance before Amtrak has to stop. As a taxpayer and voter, this sort of wasteful gambling should not be allowed to be done on the public dime.
My assumption is that the “for profit” mandate will be eliminated because USDOT will have total financial control over Amtrak. Currently Congress gets two budget requests on Amtrak: one directly from Amtrak and one as part of the USDOT budget. With the change, Amtrak becomes just another USDOT component, like FRA, FAA, etc. USDOT doesn’t have a “for profit” mandate. If Amtrak did make a “profit”, you can bet USDOT would spend it elsewhere.
It always feels the South is over-served by the Federal government. For region that claims to be so independent, the top 5 states receiving the largest federal aid (SNAP, SSA, Medicaid, Unemployment) per person are in the South. Add in the massive military presence and it is even more skewed. I argue more people people would be better served by an additional Chicago-Twin Cities train, KC-STL-IND-COL-CLE-NYC train, and perhaps a second CHI-KC train over yet another attempt to coax southerners to ride trains while they complain about government being too big while enjoying oversized benefits already.
Well written article Mr. Stephens! I especially liked the part about CSX saying how great and efficient they are but couldn’t see adding 4 trains!
Why is it always impossible to run passengers on current rail lines lines?We used to do it all the time often only on TT and train order. They do it all the time in Europe. Why do we not have dedicated true high speed lines in the US and when we do try, as in Calif, they take a politically expedient route rather than the fastest direct route LA to SF ? When are we going to start making sense?
With a permanent appropriation, our federally operated passenger service will be fully (and finally) nationalized. No “for profit” mandate; “least cost” is the goal.
Mr. Blackwood – A good point. Does statutory “for profit” language actually get deleted (it has been used, as we all know, to justify some terrible policies) or is your argument based on a logical assumption, a rare bird these days?
Amtrak’s legal standing may be strengthened should the proposed legislation pass to give the company a permanent appropriation line in the Federal operating budget.
In my opinion, Amtrak is in the right, the 2017 study is good enough, actually, it’s better than waiting on the 2020 study…unless the volume in 2020 was magically higher than it was in 2017(fat chance with the COVID drop in freight traffic). Neither CSX nor NS are thinking straight on this one.
Why stop at Mobile? You’ve cut off some of Georgia and all of Florida rail customers from riding a reasonable westward route. Go on to Jacksonville!
The plan is to extend the service to Orlando in a few years, New Orleans-Mobile is a sort of trial balloon.
There is no ___PLAN___ to extend this line beyond Mobile. Florida has given no indications that it’s interested in funding such an expensive venture.
On and off since 2005 there has been speculation and talk about doing such a thing. There is, however, no plan.
Stop making sense.
Boo Hoo for CSX and NS, they’ve cried enough already, quite tired of them. Don’t want to see anything rammed down their throats but they have delayed this long enough.