Revised impact assessment includes new data

WASHINGTON — Federal authorities have finished one of the last hurdles before the Surface Transportation Board decides whether or not to allow a merger between Canadian Pacific and Kansas City Southern railroads. The Office of Environmental Analysis published its final impact assessment last week, a three-volume report totaling 5,727 pages responding to over 700 public comments on a draft version published over the summer.

If approved, the merger would establish the first single-line railroad spanning Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. The resulting decrease of transportation costs is expected to raise train traffic along the way, nowhere more so than mainline stretch through Southeast Iowa, where the tracks cut through Washington, Ottumwa and Columbus Junction. That increase: approximately 14.4 trains per day by the merger’s third year.

Canadian Pacific Media Relations Manager Andy Cummings said the company was reviewing the massive document.

“We would like to thank the Surface Transportation Board’s Office of Environmental Analysis for its thorough review of the proposed CP-KCS combination,” he said in an email. “CP remains committed to working with communities as we advance through this process and looks forward to receiving the STB’s decision on the CP-KCS merger application in the weeks ahead.”

The final version of the packet acknowledged the railroad’s voluntary mitigation agreements with cities like Washington and Muscatine, and “recommends that the (Surface Transportation) Board impose mitigation requiring the Applicants to abide by the conditions of these agreements,” in its final decision, ensuring that the arrangements are binding.

As for the impacts themselves, a few changes stand out in Iowa. Regulators paid special attention to the Hawkeye State’s complaints regarding noise, vibration, traffic and wildlife.

Traffic study expands data, to similar results

Regulators replied to extensive traffic delay concerns with a swath of new information. The final impact assessment provided gate-down time tables for all 1,365 at-grade crossings studied by authorities.

While rail traffic would increase the amount of gate-down time per day at every crossing in Southeast Iowa, regulators said it would actually decrease the average amount of time commuters spent waiting on those trains. Every crossing in Ainsworth and Washington would see an over-20-second reduction to the average wait time per vehicle, according to one table in the packet’s appendix.

“The Proposed Acquisition would result in a decrease in average delay per delayed vehicle and a decrease in average queue length,” the report said. “This is because the Applicants expect that, although average rail traffic would increase at those grade crossings, the length of the average train would decrease.”

Several commenters on the original draft statement worried the frequency of roadway disruptions could present a problem for emergency response efforts, especially in areas like Ainsworth, where most of the community lives across the tracks from the fire station.

“Among the first responder community in Iowa, there is fear the merger will put people at risk by increasing the response time to emergencies and community members in need,” said one written comment on the merger from the Iowa Professional Firefighters organization. “In many small towns in Iowa, fire stations and emergency service providers are located near at-grade crossings and their route of response naturally requires responders to utilize the at-grade crossing. In many towns, there is no alternative route. While we do not oppose the merger, we feel that safeguards need to be instituted.”

The final version of the report analyzed 751 crossings with a specific focus on the risk of merger traffic delaying emergency vehicle routes. Eventually, regulators reached the same conclusion as the first draft of the study: emergency response disruptions were possible, but unlikely.

“Emergency vehicles would typically wait for the train to pass,” the report said. “Although an infrequent occurrence, a grade crossing can become blocked when a train comes to a stop before clearing the crossing. While also infrequent, it is possible that an emergency could occur at the same time that a stopped train blocks a grade crossing. These simultaneous events are rare, but represent a potentially serious situation.”

Regulators emphasized that such a perfect storm was unlikely or unrealistic for most Iowans. A total of 13 Iowa cities — including Fredonia, Muscatine, Davenport and Sabula — had a crossing without a reasonable alternate route, but regulators said they used intentionally overzealous criteria to reach that total.

“For the 751 grade crossings that OEA included in the alternative route analysis, the majority (approximately 82 percent) have a viable alternative route that is less than 10 miles long,” the assessment said. “For the majority of the 1,365 grade crossings in the study area, average gate down time per train would decrease, which means that, although the frequency with which emergency vehicles would be stopped by trains would increase, those emergency vehicles would have to wait for a shorter time, on average, for a train to pass.”

Wildlife issues pose minimal concern

Federal authorities heard countless comments on the proposed merger’s potential effect on wildlife. The draft document said construction and traffic from the proposed merger could affect habitats for endangered or near-endangered species including two types of bats and some eagles, but would not substantially harm the animals.

“Animals living near active rail lines have likely already become habituated to train noise over many years of regular exposure,” the draft version said. “To the extent that wildlife may still use the remaining patches of forested habitat along the existing rail line, those animals have likely adapted to the fragmented and heavily altered state of the habitat, as well as … intermittent noise from passing trains.”

Still, some commenters worried the change would disproportionately affect some species more than others, such as echolocation-dependent bats. The final document acknowledged those concerns, but ultimately reached the same conclusion as its first draft.

“OEA recognizes that certain species of wildlife may not become habituated to train noise,” the agency said in response to one comment. “However, to the extent that such species may have once lived in the areas where CP and KCS rail lines are located, those animals will have relocated long ago in response to train noise.”

In Washington County, local authorities said a planned construction project for new siding east of Washington posed little ecological risk, despite its overlap with bat habitats.

“The Department has searched for records of rare species and significant natural communities in the project area and found no site-specific records that would be impacted by this project,” a publicly filed email from the Iowa DNR’s Washington County office said. “However, these records and data are not the result of thorough field surveys. If listed species or rare communities are found during the planning or construction phases, additional studies and/or mitigation may be required.”

Regulators emphasize noise impact, but little change for Iowa

The final impact assessment expanded the scope of noise studies in Texas, where it found a handful of previously unreported “receptors” — any type of building sensitive to noise, such as a home, library, or church — that would be adversely affected by the higher frequency of noisy train traffic.

In light of the new data close to Houston, regulators noted that increased noise from train traffic was the widest-spread, highest-impact implication of the proposed merger between CP and KCS.

“Most of the potential adverse impacts of the Proposed Acquisition, including impacts on grade crossing delay and emergency vehicles, would be negligible, minor, and/or temporary,” a summary portion of the packet said. “However, train noise associated with increased rail traffic resulting from the Proposed Acquisition would result in adverse impacts on many residences and other locations that are sensitive to noise.”

For Iowans, however, the implication remains largely the same. The state can expect an increased number of receptors whose daily noise exposure exceeds “annoyance thresholds.” Those receptors, especially in Washington, are disproportionately low-income residents or racial minorities, a demographic the study calls “Environmental Justice” or EJ populations.

In Washington, the study said 82% of the receptors in the annoyance threshold would live in EJ block groups. While that’s lower than the 95% number under current conditions, the change would take the total number of residencies affected from 42 to 206.

In Columbus Junction, 100% of adversely affected receptors would be members of EJ populations, but the number would rise from 5 people to 21. In Muscatine, the percentage would go from 97% to 92% under the proposed acquisition, but the number of EJ block group buildings would jump from 108 to 302. Similar patterns were seen in Fredonia and Seymour.

Still, regulators said environmental justice was not a concern for enough impacted communities to recommend against a merger, after studying the implications for 70 cities across the U.S.

“For the vast majority of communities (56 out of 70 communities, or 80 percent of the total), most of the adversely affected receptors are located in non-EJ block groups,” the packet said.

As with the draft assessment, regulators said vibration from increased train traffic would not harm buildings, unless they were on top of the railroad’s right of way, a feat that would universally violate building codes.

“Vibrations caused by passing trains are generally not nearly strong enough to cause damage to even the most susceptible buildings,” both the draft and final impact statement said. “OEA has concluded in past cases that vibration from passing trains has the potential to exceed FTA’s criteria for fragile buildings only within the rail ROW, where no such buildings are present. Outside of the rail ROW, vibration could cause annoyance, but not damage to structures.”

Comments: Kalen.McCain@southeastiowaunion.com