JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — CSX Transportation on Friday filed an amended version of its application to acquire Pan Am Railways with the Surface Transportation Board, addressing additional information requested by the regulatory body.
The STB had rejected the initial application in May, saying it failed to “include all of the information needed” for the required market analysis [see “Federal regulators reject CSX-Pan Am merger application …,” Trains News Wire, May 26, 2021].
The new 1,262-page filing includes a 25-page market analysis among a dozen new or updated elements, as well a 60-page operating plan. The public version of the filing, available here, is significantly redacted, removing details including all financial figures.
In a press release, CSX CEO Jim Foote stressed the acquisition’s ability to create “seamless single-line service” which will “provide substantial benefits to shippers with low-cost, environmentally friendly rail service with truck-like reliability.” In his statement that is part of the new STB filing, Foote says CSX “will invest significantly in rail infrastructure where [Pan Am] lacked the resources to do so.”
Foote’s statement also says “CSX commits to maintain or improve existing service” by Amtak across the Pan Am system and “knows how to do so,” citing the railroad’s 93.6% on-time performance with Amtrak trains in 2020. An Amtrak filing in May indicated the passenger railroad’s concerns over the CSX-Pan Am, with CEO Bill Flynn subsequently issuing a statement opposing the acquisition, saying it would”adversely impact the performance of Amtrak trains and threaten future growth opportunities’ [see “Amtrak CEO voices opposition …,” News Wire, June 4, 2021].
Everyone seems to be missing the point of this move by CSX: it has nothing to do with New England per se; it is all about positioning themselves for stopping the Canadian roads and being able to compete with CN especially. I also suspect that CSX would like to be still standing in the coming final round of cross country mergers. I really have no idea what NS is going to do to survive.
To Phillip’s comments, it also interesting to note that is a mini version of CP’s playbook when it went back and bought rail access back to Eastern Seaboard. The buyout gives CSX a nice pickup with expanding metro areas in Portsmouth and Portland but just as important is deep water port access via trackage rights to St. John’s Port
Timothy I got busted when I once posted something about “St. John” on this forum. I was told it can only be spelled Saint John. Bad me, I’ve actually been there. Maple Leaf Forever.
Has anyone noticed, except for NS rights on Pan Am Southern and possibly what NYNJ can float across NY Harbor, this gives CSX a complete monopoly on rail service to New England from USA points.
Ehhh, not really. The map only shows CSX, PAR, and PAS. There’s several other routes not there, including VT railway, and NECR. And PAR only has 1 route to Canada. I do believe it’s a chess move against CP since they moved into Maine again. If they don’t make a stand now, red will be making its way further south. They’re going to have to make substantial infrastructure investments but I feel they believe it’s worth it for their long term survival.
I’m honestly surprised amtrak and the mbta are against this. Let’s face it, PAR doesn’t maintain ANYTHING. I live in NH and work next to the Bow coal plant, which is the line amtrak has expressed interest in using for Concord passenger service. The rail is from 1946, multiple ties are broken, and the last time the coal train came up it derailed. Derailments are a common occurrence in Nashua. So amtrak would have to fight to upgrade the line just like they had to for the downeaster. You think csx will let that line stand? No way! They’re about efficiency. My sentimental attachment to the new England railroads went away when the G went on the side of locomotives.
William Flynn should keep his large mouth shut. He (and MassDOT) can confront CSX later if their pledges to prioritize current, and even aid in the expansion, of passenger train operations are not met. Meanwhile, the hugely modally-biased in favor of highways and aviation DOT is not dealing with a straight deck on passenger rail expansion in the state. Mr. Flynn, you are fighting with CSX on the NOL-Mobile service expansion. Please don’t open a two-front war you probably cannot win.
Mark – Your post (above) is spot-on. One would think that Mr. Flynn, having gotten this far in corporate life, would know when saying nothing and taking no position is the correct thing to do. You’re right, Mark. If Mr. Flynn has some issues with CSX nationwide (I’m sure he does) this isn’t the tactic to fix those.
Aside from his need to put a sock in it, I’m not sure I see his point. Don’t know what he’s getting at.