Facts ignored in CN rail purchase plan
On Nov. 18, the environmental staff of the Surface Transportation Board (STB) presented its environmental analysis of Canadian National Railway's (CN) proposed acquisition of the EJ&E rail line. Although this briefing was open for public observation, the public was not allowed to participate in the proceeding or ask any questions.
Any observer at the meeting would have quickly noticed several flaws in the facts reported to the STB. These flaws, however, were not addressed at the meeting because of the ban against public comments or questions. Of particular concern to the Village of Wayne and its residents are the following:
1. The environmental staff reported that CN's acquisition of the EJ&E rail line would benefit the region by reducing the number of trains on one of CN's current lines in Chicago from 48 trains per day to 45. The staff did not report, however, that CN's acquisition will increase the number of trains on the EJ&E from four trains per day to 25. How can the STB staff claim that the region will benefit from a reduction of three trains per day on one line (a 6.25 percent decrease), while the EJ&E will suffer an increase of 21 trains per day, a 625 percent increase?
2. The environmental staff reported that CN's acquisition of the EJ&E rail line would benefit the region by reducing the risk of hazardous material accidents along CN's current rail lines. This might be true, due to the slight reduction in the number of trains expected to run on CN's current rail lines. However, the staff did not report on the increased risk of hazardous material accidents along the EJ&E (of great concern to residents such as those in Wayne who rely on private wells.)
3. The staff reported that higher train speeds are favored to reduce delays at rail crossings. However, the staff did not report on whether higher speeds may increase the risk of train accidents (particularly accidents at intersections and those involving hazardous material spills). Moreover, has the staff considered the cost of those accidents in comparison to the cost of grade separations that would enable trains to travel safely at these higher speeds?
4. In an apparent effort to minimize concerns over the impact of increased train traffic on the EJ&E, the staff reported that, during World War II, the EJ&E's traffic level was higher than its current level. However, the staff failed to report on the massive influx of people to the region since World War II, who now live, go to school and go to work in proximity to the EJ&E. Surely the staff is bright enough to understand the changes that have occurred in our community since the 1940s. So why did they fail to address this obvious issue?
Eileen Phipps
Village President
Wayne