PORT BIENVILLE RAILROAD DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

A-1

APPENDIX A: PORT BIENVILLE FEASIBILITY 

REPORT
PORT BIENVILLE

Rail Feasibility Study

Presented to:

Mississippi Department of Transportation

In collaboration with:

Federal Railroad Administration

Hancock County Port and Harbor Commission

in association with HDR

September 19, 2013
		

Table of Contents

Executive	Summary	and	Next	Steps	..............................................................................................................................................	1	

Introduction	.............................................................................................................................................................................................	2	

Study	Area...........................................................................................................................................................................................	2	

Purpose	................................................................................................................................................................................................	3	

Regional	Needs,	Goals	and	Visions	..........................................................................................................................................	3	

Data	Collection	..................................................................................................................................................................................	4	

Economics	.................................................................................................................................................................................................	5	

The	Business	Case	for	Dual	Class	1	Rail	Service	in	Hancock	County	........................................................................	7	

Business	Competitiveness	and	Dual	Rail	Infrastructure	...............................................................................................	8	

The	Business	Case	for	Hancock	County	Businesses	.........................................................................................................	8	

Existing	and	Emerging	Industries	and	Rail	Transportation	Dependence	in	Hancock	County	..................	10	

Emerging	Growth	Industries	in	Hancock	County	...........................................................................................................	10	

Transportation	Dependence	and	Hancock	County’s	Economy	................................................................................	12	

Industrial	and	Business	Site	Evaluation	Factors	............................................................................................................	13	

Alternative	Analysis	..........................................................................................................................................................................	15	

Methodology	...................................................................................................................................................................................	15	

Generation	of	Conceptual	Alternatives	...............................................................................................................................	16	

Engineered	Alignments	.............................................................................................................................................................	17	

Reasonable	Alternatives	............................................................................................................................................................	17	

Agency	Coordination	and	Public	Involvement	......................................................................................................................	21	

Figures

Figure	1	–	Port	Bienville	Study	Area	..................................................................................................................2	

Figure	2	‐	Gulf	Coast	Multimodal	Corridor	......................................................................................................11	

Figure	3	‐	Employment	by	Sector	in	Hancock	County			..................................................................................13	

Figure	4	‐	Base	Scenario	showing	rankings	and	avoids		................................................................................16	

Figure	5	‐	Other	potential	corridors	for	run	S5	to	N1.....................................................................................17	

Figure	6	–	Engineered	alignments	and	section	numbers			.............................................................................19	

Tables

Table	1	‐	Projected	Rail	Car	Volumes	with	Dual	Class	1	Rail	Services	...........................................................6	

Table	2	‐	Transportation	Dependence	Rating	of	Hancock	County’s	Top	Industries			..................................13	

Table	3	–	Segment	Matrix	for	the	Reasonable	Alternatives	...........................................................................20	
1	

Executive Summary and Next Steps

The	Port	Bienville	Railroad	(PBVR),	a	short	line	railroad,	provides	rail	services	to	the	businesses	in	the	Port	

Bienville	Industrial	Park	and	connects		these	rail	users	to	CSX’s	east‐west	line	along	the	Gulf	Coast.	The	

proposed	rail	line	evaluated	in	this	feasibility	study	would	provide	a	connection	between	the	PBVR	and	the	

Norfolk	Southern	(NS)	rail	line	near	I‐59,	north	of	Stennis	Space	Center.	The	connection	would	provide	

existing	businesses	access	to	dual	Class	I	rail	service,	improving	transit	times	and	reliability	of	deliveries	to	

customers.	Dual	Class	I	rail	access	would	enable	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties	to	attract	new	industries	

to	this	region	that	require	this	level	of	rail	services,	creating	new	quality	jobs	and	investment	to	help	this	

area	to	continue	to	recover	from	recent	disasters	that	have	significantly	affected	their	economies.		

With	the	availability	of	dual	Class	I	rail	services,	the	businesses	served	by	the	proposed	rail	line	are	

projected	to	generate	41,951	rail	cars	annually.	The	largest	rail	car	user	is	currently	trucking	fracking	sands	

mined	in	Hancock	County	to	a	drying	facility	in	Pearl	River	County.	The	proposed	rail	line	would	allow	this	

company	to	move	a	significant	volume	of	their	materials	by	rail	rather	than	by	truck,	and	could	facilitate	an	

expansion	at	this	facility,	creating	additional	jobs	and	investment	in	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties.	

During	the	alternative	analyses	several	corridors	centrally	located	within	the	study	area	emerged	as	the	

least	costly	and	least	impacting.	These	corridors	were	evaluated	by	impacts	to	both	the	human	and	natural	

environments.	All	of	the	Reasonable	Alternatives	shared	a	common	central	corridor.	However,	two	distinct	

corridors	on	the	north	end	of	the	project	and	several	corridors	on	the	southern	end	were	identified.	To	

further	define	the	Reasonable	Alternatives,	the	study	team	divided	the	advanced	corridors	into	17	

segments	and	engineered	rail	alignments	centrally	within	each	corridor.	These	segments	represent	a	

possible	combination	of	40	potential	corridors.	Cost	estimates	were	developed	for	each	segment.	At	this	

stage	in	the	project,	the	alignments	are	considered	conceptual	and	the	estimates	are	preliminary.	The	total	

construction	cost	for	the	new	PBVR	was	estimated	between	$86.8	million	and	$104.5	million	(in	2013	

dollars)	depending	on	the	combination	of	segments	chosen.		

Given	the	business	case	for	dual	Class	I	rail	services,	the	demands	of	the	existing	and	emerging	business	

clusters	in	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties,	the	future	benefits	to		Stennis	Space	Center,	the	existing	

industrial	land	inventory,	and	the	workforce	and	transportation	assets	supporting	this	region,	the	

construction	of	this	new	rail	line	is	strongly	supported.	Based	on	the	feasibility	of	the	project	documented	

herein	and	in	the	supporting	technical	documents,	it	is	recommended	that	the	project	proceed	to	Phase	II	of	

this	study.	Completion	of	Phase	II	will	better	position	the	project	for	access	to	federal	construction	funds.	

The	scope	of	services	previously	developed	for	Phase	II	includes	environmental	studies	and	documentation,	

as	well	as	preliminary	design	and	other	supporting	efforts	for	development	of	the	proposed	railroad.	The	

level	of	detail	for	the	environmental	studies	to	be	undertaken	should	be	determined	at	this	time	through	

consultation	with	Federal	Railroad	Administration	(FRA),	Mississippi	Department	of	Transportation	

(MDOT)	and	the	Hancock	County	Port	and	Harbor	Commission	(HCPHC).		
2	

Figure 1 – Port Bienville Study Area.

Introduction

The	Mississippi	Department	of	Transportation	(MDOT),	in	conjunction	with	Federal	Rail	Administration	

(FRA)	and	the	Hancock	County	Port	and	Harbor	Commission	(HCPHC),	has	prepared	this	Feasibility	Study	

for	the	location	of	a	new	railroad	line	to	connect	the	Port	Bienville	Short	Line	Railroad,	located	at	the	Port	

Bienville	Industrial	Park,	Hancock	County,	with	the	Norfolk	Southern	Railroad	(NS)	in	the	vicinity	of	

Nicholson	in	Pearl	River	County.	Connections	to	the	John	C.	Stennis	Space	Center	(SSC)	and	the	Stennis	

International	Airport	were	also	evaluated.	The	Port	Bienville	Railroad	(PBVR)	would	link	to	both	CSX	and	

NS	main	lines	in	Hancock	County	providing	access	to	dual	Class	1	rail	service.			

Study Area

The	study	area	encompasses	a	portion	of	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties.	The	study	area	is	generally	

bounded	by	(the	communities	of)	Nicholson	and	Kiln	to	the	north,	Port	Bienville	to	the	south,	the	Pearl	

River	to	the	west	and	Stennis	International	Airport	and	SR	603/43	to	the	east,	representing	a	study	area	of	

approximately	180	square	miles	(see		

Figure	1).		

The	study	area	is	bisected	by	Interstate	

10,	while	Interstate	59	passes	through	a	

small	portion	of	the	study	area	in	the	

north.	Other	significant	features	within	

the	study	area	include	wetlands,	wetland	

mitigation	banks,	forests,	mines,	SSC,	and	

a	125,000‐acre	acoustical	buffer	zone	

surrounding	the	SSC.	This	acoustical	

buffer	makes	up	the	majority	of	the	study	

area.	The	two	major	facilities	and	key	

economic	factors	within	the	study	area	

are	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	and	

NASA’s	SSC.		

Port Bienville Industrial Park	‐	Port	

Bienville	is	a	shallow	draft	(12	ft.)	barge	

port	in	southwest	Mississippi,	located	off	

the	Intracoastal	Waterway	near	mile	

marker	24	on	Mullatto	Bayou	in	Hancock	

County.	The	Port	Bienville	property	

encompasses	approximately	3,600	acres,	

including	an	industrial	park	and	the	port	

facility.		In	2008,	the	market	area	had	a	

total	population	of	219,000	residents,	

with	approximately	140,000	employees,	

and	a	gross	regional	product	(GRP)	of	$9.7	billion.1			

																																																																		

1	Mississippi’s	Unified	Long‐Range	Transportation	Infrastructure	Plan,	pg	7	
3	

John C. Stennis Space Center	‐	For	more	than	four	decades,	the	John	C.	Stennis	Space	Center	(SSC)	in	

Hancock	County	has	served	as	NASA’s	primary	rocket	propulsion	testing	ground.	Today,	the	center	

provides	propulsion	test	services	for	NASA	and	the	Department	of	Defense	and	the	private	sector.	Stennis	is	

home	to	NASA’s	Rocket	Propulsion	Test	Program,	which	manages	all	of	the	agency’s	propulsion	test	

facilities.	State‐of‐the‐art	facilities,	a	seven‐and‐one‐half‐mile	canal	waterway	system,	and	the	125,000‐acre	

acoustical	buffer	zone	that	surrounds	SSC	enables	delivery	and	testing	of	large‐scale	rocket	engines	and	

components.2	Development	within	the	acoustical	buffer	zone	is	governed	by	development	restrictions	

purchased	by	the	Federal	Government.	Some	of	the	land	within	the	buffer	zone	was	purchased	by	the	

government	but	the	majority	of	this	property	remains	in	private	ownership	subject	to	the	development	

restrictions	that	do	not	allow	any	inhabitable	buildings	within	the	buffer	area.	

Approximately	5,000	employees	work	at	the	Stennis	Space	Center.	Over	the	years,	the	SSC	has	evolved	into	

a	multidisciplinary	facility	that	includes	NASA	research	facilities	and		other	resident	agencies	engaged	in	

space	and	environmental	programs	and		national	defense,	including	the	U.S.	Navy's	world‐class	

oceanographic	research	community.3		

Purpose

The	purpose	of	the	study	is	to	determine	the	feasibility	of	constructing	and	operating	a	new	rail	line	to	

connect	the	Port	Bienville	Short	Line	Railroad	with	the	NS	mainline	in	Nichols.	This	phase	of	the	study	

includes	the	development	of	reasonable	alternative	corridors;	identification	of	the	economic	benefits	and	

opportunities	associated	with	the	proposed	project;	and	the	recommendation	as	to	the	feasibility	of	the	

project	and	the	next	steps	taken,	if	appropriate.		

There	are	three	guiding	principles	(goals)	for	this	project:	

 First,	any	plan	to	locate	the	railroad	must	provide	benefits	for	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park,	the	

Railroads,	and	the	counties	involved.	

 Secondly,	the	railroad’s	location	corridor	must	be	compatible	with	the	natural	and	human	

environment	in	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties.	

 Finally,	MDOT	anticipates	a	high	degree	of	community	and	stakeholder	involvement	and	

participation	throughout	the	process.	The	MDOT	and	the	CDM	Smith	Team	will	be	proactively	

engaged	to	ensure	effective	stakeholder	involvement	during	the	course	of	this	study.	

This	study	outlines	the	processes	and	criteria	used	in	developing	and	evaluating	the	alternative	corridors	

for	the	PBVR;	provides	a	recommendation	of	the	reasonable	alternative	corridors	to	be	taken	into	Phase	II	

of	the	project;	identifies	the	economic	benefits	and	opportunities;	and	recommends	the	next	steps.	

Regional Needs, Goals and Visions

Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties	in	Mississippi	have	been	transformed	by	the	impacts	of	Hurricane	

Katrina	and	the	BP	oil	spill	in	the	Gulf.	Over	the	past	few	years,	these	counties	have	worked	to	recover	from	

the	economic	consequences	of	these	disasters.	As	identified	in	the	various	statewide	planning	documents,	

numerous	infrastructure	deficiencies	exist	within	the	study	area.	Some	of	the	deficiencies	identified	are	

part	of	MDOT’s	long‐range	plan,	2035	MULTIPLAN,	and	are	discussed	below.		

																																																																		

2	NASA’s	John	C	Stennis	Space	Center	Mission	Brochure	

3 http://www.nasa.gov/centers/stennis/about/history/history.html,	accessed	1/18/13	
4	

Mississippi’s	waterborne	transportation	is	a	critical	component	to	the	state’s	economy.	Mississippi	ports	

are	located	along	the	Gulf	of	Mexico,	the	Mississippi	River,	and	the	Tennessee‐Tombigbee	Waterway	(Tem‐

Tom).	4	These	ports	connect	the	State	to	the	nation’s	marine	network	and	international	trading	lanes.	By	

doing	so,	waterborne	transportation	is	a	critical	component	to	Mississippi	industries	that	ship	and	receive	

goods	in	today’s	global	economy.	5

The	2035	MULTIPLAN	identifies	planned	improvements	outlined	in	Port	Bienville’s	2010	Master	Plan	

Update.	Improvements	included	the	development	of	a	new	rail	connector	from	Port	Bienville	Railroad	and	

NS	near	Picayune,	Mississippi,	provide	a	connection	to	Palmer	Crossing	and	CN.	6

Port	Bienville	is	a	shallow	draft	barge	port	and	is	one	of	four	ports	serving	Mississippi’s	Gulf	Coast.	The	port	

is	located	with	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park,	a	3,600	acre	site	also	served	by	the	Port	Bienville	Railroad	

(PBRR)	with	multimodal	connections	to	support	the	movement	of	goods	nationally	and	internationally.		

PBRR	currently	provides	shippers	a	connection	to	CSX,	but	there	is	not	an	existing	connection	to	NS.	Access	

to	Norfolk	Southern	would	provide	dual	Class	I	rail	services	improving	the	timeliness	and	reliability	of	

deliveries	to	customers	enable	businesses	served	by	these	facilities	to	be	more	competitive	in	a	broader	

market	area.	This	additional	rail	connection	would	also	be	invaluable	in	the	event	of	other	natural	disasters,	

enabling	businesses	and	CSX	to	move	equipment	away	from	an	impending	disaster	area,	allowing	for	more	

rapid	recovery	if	a	disaster	did	occur.		The	Port	of	Gulfport	is	a	deep‐water	port	that	serves	container	ships	

and	barges.	This	Port	has	access	to	one	Class	I	railroad	and	is	planning	improvements	to	rail	to	allow	for	

increased	container	shipments.	With	the	expansion	of	the	Panama	Canal		in	2014,	it	is	anticipated	that	the	

capacity	of	the	Canal	will	more	than	double,	impacting	the	amount	of	cargo	and	related	logistics	for	

shipments	to	Mississippi	along	the	Gulf	Coast.	7	If	barges	could	be	utilized	to	move	some	goods	from	

Gulfport	to	Port	Bienville	this	may	allow	Gulfport	to	accommodate	additional	cargo	and	deliveries.

Data Collection

In	order	to	create	a	complete	picture	of	the	project	area,	it	was	necessary	to	compile	a	geographic	

information	system	(GIS)	data	for	the	study	area	in	the	following	categories:	environmental,	cultural,	

historical,	and	infrastructure.	The	majority	of	data	was	downloaded	from	the	Mississippi	Automated	

Resource	Information	System	(MARIS)	website	(http://www.maris.state.ms.us/).		

Historical	data	was	obtained	from	the	Mississippi	Department	of	Archives	and	History	(MDAH)	through	the	

Department’s	website.	Because	the	study	area	contains	the	SCC,	it	was	necessary	to	submit	a	Freedom	of	

Information	Act	(FOIA)	request	to	obtain	GIS	data	for	areas	inside	the	SCC	complex	boundaries.	Current	

aerial	photography	for	the	study	area	was	provided	by	MDOT.	

The		source	water	protection	areas	(SWPAs)	data	was	obtained	through	a	direct	request	from	the	

Mississippi	Department	of	Environmental	Quality	(MDEQ).		This	data	is	more	accurate	and	current	than	the	

source	water	data	available	from	the	MARIS	website.			

																																																																		

4 Mississippi’s	Unified	Long‐Range	Transportation	Infrastructure	Plan,	Final	Report	May	2011,	MDOT,	page	9	

5 Mississippi’s	Unified	Long‐Range	Transportation	Infrastructure	Plan,	Final	Report	May	2011,	MDOT,	page	11	

6 Mississippi’s	 Unified	 Long‐Range	 Transportation	 Infrastructure	 Plan,	 Final	 Report	 May	 2011,	 MDOT,	 Appendix	 H,	

page	10	

7 Mississippi’s	 Unified	 Long‐Range	 Transportation	 Infrastructure	 Plan,	 Final	 Report	 May	 2011,	 MDOT,	 Appendix	 H,	

page	10
5	

Data	for	the	existing	wetland	mitigation	banks	was	compiled		from	three	sources:		the	U.S.	Army	Corps	of	

Engineers	(USACE),	MARIS,	and	Wetlands	Solutions	LLC.		The	USACE	also	provided	data	for	proposed	

wetland	mitigation	banks.		

With	the	exception	of	the	mines	layer,	all	of	the	GIS	data	were	preexisting.	Although	there	are	a	significant	

number	of	mines	in	the	study	area,	there	was	no	readily	available	GIS	data	layer	showing	their	locations.		

The	only	available	mine	information	was	a	list	of	mine	locations	containing	township	and	range	

information	obtained	from	the	MDEQ.		By	using	the	list	of	mines,	a	township	and	range	layer,	a	parcel	layer	

and	aerial	photography,	a	new	mines	layer	was	created.			

In	addition	to	the	GIS	data	and	mapping,	interviews	were	conducted	with	the	owners	or	plant	managers	of	

18	businesses	in	Hancock	County,	as	well	as	several	business	leaders	and	business	support	organizations	in	

Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties	in	Mississippi.	These	interviews	were	conducted	to	understand	the	

region’s	economic	development	assets	and	opportunities,	clarify	local	economic	conditions	from	the	

business’	perspective,	and	gain	insight	into	transportation	and	supply	chain	issues,	especially	as	they	relate	

to	the	rail	improvements	proposed	for	Port	Bienville.	

Economics

Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	and	Stennis	Space	Center	(SSC)	have	played	a	pivotal	role	in	the	recovery	of	

this	region,	sustaining	employment	and	attracting	new	investments	and	jobs	that	have	helped	to	rebuild	

and	enhance	the	area’s	economy.		The	proposed	project	would	provide	PBVR	access	to	two	Class	1	

railroads.	Providing dual Class 1 rail access would generate immediate economic and transportation

benefits for businesses in the Port Bienville Industrial Park and provide rail access to the Shale

Support Services facilities in Hancock and Pearl River Counties trucks 84,000 tons of fracking sands

each month from Hancock County to a rail spur in Picayune.	The	proposed	rail	connector	would	repair	

and	upgrade	a	portion	of	an	inactive	rail	line	and	re‐establish	rail	access	to	a	transload	facility	previously	

developed	for	SSC,		providing	rail	services	to	other	companies	in	the	region.	Improvements	and	repairs	to	

the	NS	line	that	previously	served	SSC	could	facilitate	access	to	rail	transportation	for	existing	research	and	

development	businesses	within	SSC	and	provide	an	additional	transportation	mode	that	may	be	important	

to	attract	future	operations	and	development.			

The	economic	development	benefits	and	opportunities	identified	in	this	study	make	a	compelling	argument	

for	pursuing	this	project.	Consider	the	following:	

 Industrial	parks	providing	dual	Class	1	rail	services	are	a	scarce	resource	in	the	U.S.	There	are	

significant	industrial	projects	that	require	access	to	dual	rail	service	to	meet	the	transportation	

demands	of	these	operations.	This	study	identified	only	seven	industrial	parks	or	logistics	centers	

in	the	U.S.	that	currently	provide	dual	Class	I	rail	services.		Access	to	two	Class	1	railroads	would	

position	Hancock	County	and	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	to	be	included	in	this	group	of	

“crown	jewel”	industrial	parks.			

 Currently	there	are	two	industrial	prospects	evaluating	sites	in	Hancock	County.	Both	prospects	

require	access	to	dual	Class	1	rail	service	and	the	decision	to	proceed	with	this	rail	connector	

project	would	keep	Hancock	County	in	the	running	for	both	of	these	facilities.	Based	on	

information	from	the	Mississippi	Development	Authority,	these	prospects	indicate	they	would	

invest	slightly	over	$650	million	in	plant	and	equipment	and	employ	450	people.	

 Existing	businesses	in	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	currently	utilize	6,261	rail	cars	

annually.		Based	on	interviews	with	existing	companies	and	information	from	the	Mississippi	
6	

Development	Authority	(MDA),	the	rail	car	usage	on	the	Port	Bienville	Short	Line	Railroad	could	

increase	significantly	given	access	to	dual	Class	1	railroads	(see	Table	1	below).	The	largest	

projected	rail	car	user,	Shale	Support	Services,	is	currently	trucking	fracking	sands	from	Hancock	

County	to	its	drying	facility	in	Picayune.	Additional	product	lines	are	planned	for	this	facility	in	the	

near	future	if	dual	rail	access	are	available,	and	the	Phase	II	expansion	planned	for	2014	would	

move	168,000	tons	(1,680	rail	cars)	of	material	monthly	from	the	Hancock	County	facility.		

Table 1	‐	Projected Rail Car Volumes with Dual		

		Class 1 Rail Services

Current Annual Rail Car Volume for

Existing Port Bienville Industrial Park Tenants 6,261 rail cars

Future Additional Annual Rail Car Volume for

Existing Port Bienville Industrial Park Tenants 3,530 rail cars

Projected Annual Rail Car Volume for MDA

Industrial Prospect 12,000 rail cars

Projected Annual Rail Car Volume for Phase II (2014)

Shale Support Services facility in Hancock County 20,160 rail cars

Total Projected Annual Rail Car Volumes for

Existing Industries and MDA Industrial Prospect 41,951 rail cars

Access	to	dual	Class	1	rail	services	would	result	in	a	significant	increase	in	rail	volumes	for	the	PBVR.	This	

increased	rail	car	usage	may	generate	additional	revenues	that	could	be	utilized	to	support	a	portion	of	the			

debt	service	for	construction	of	this	rail	line.	For	more	information	on	additional	funding	resources,	please	

see	the	Economic	Development	Benefits	and	Opportunities	Analysis	(appended	as	a	reference).	

The	potential	economic	benefits	and	opportunities	generated	from	the	construction	of	the	proposed	rail	

line	providing	dual	Class	I	rail	services	for	Port	Bienville	include:	

 Studies	document	that	facilities	with	access	to	more	than	one	rail	provider	often	realize	30	to	45	

percent	lower	rail	rates	than	those	paid	by	captive	production	facilities.	The	proposed	rail	

connector	could	produce	transportation	savings	for	businesses	in	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	

Park,	SSC,	Pearl	River	Industrial	Park,	and	other	businesses	with	access	to	this	rail	line,	enabling	

these	companies	to	be	more	competitive	and	increase	sales	and	production,	creating	additional	

employment	and	investment	in	Hancock	County.8

 Currently	1,200	people	are	employed	in	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park.	Based	on	information	

from	the	industries	in	the	park,	companies	anticipate	hiring	up	to	450	new	employees	over	the	

five‐year	period	following	the	completion	of	the	proposed	PBVR			to	meet	increased	customer	

demand.					

 The	most	significant	long‐term	economic	development	benefits	and	opportunities	from	this	rail	

connector	will	result	from	additional	employment	and	new	investment	in	plant	and	equipment	

from	existing	businesses	and	the	location	of	new	companies	that	require	or	would	benefit	from	

access	to	dual	Class	1	rail	services.		Hancock	County	has	over	6,640	acres	of	industrial	land	

available	for	lease	or	sale,	including	3,600	acres	available	for	lease	within	the	SSC	complex.	The	

Hancock	County	Port	and	Harbor	Commission	(HCPHC)	has	also	identified	a	1,500‐acre	site	near	

the	existing	industrial	park	for	future	expansion.	Pearl	River	County	has	505	acres	of	industrial	

land.	With	this	substantial	industrial	land	inventory,	access	to	dual	Class	1	rail	services,	the	

highway,	airport,	and	port	transportation	infrastructure	serving	this	area,	Hancock	County	could	

																																																																		

8	“Analysis	of	Freight	Rail	Rates	for	Chemical	Shippers,”	American	Chemistry	Council	
7	

meet	the	site	location	requirements	of	a	significant	number	of	the	mega‐projects	and	major	

industrial	facilities	that	have	located	in	the	U.S.	over	the	past	10	years.	

 Exports	to	Latin	America	are	increasingly	important	for	businesses,	particularly	as	Central	and	

South	America’s	economic	performance	“remains	the	world’s	second	best	performing	region	after	

Asia.”9	Businesses	in	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	already	export	products	to	a	number	of	

Latin	American	countries	and	most	anticipate	greater	opportunities	for	exports	to	this	region	

within	the	next	two	years.			

The Business Case for Dual Class 1 Rail Service in Hancock County

For	businesses	that	ship	or	receive	heavy	or	oversized	materials	or	large	quantities	of	materials,	freight	rail	

can	be	significantly	more	cost‐effective	than	other	transportation	modes.	While	cost	factors	are	important,	

businesses	today	increasingly	utilize	transportation	strategies	to	achieve	competitive	advantages	that	

enable	them	to	meet	delivery	requirements	because	customers	want	the	product	when,	where,	and	how	

they	choose.	Goods	movement	is,	therefore,	an	increasingly	crucial	part	of	a	company’s	competitiveness	

strategy.	Reliable	transportation	services	and	speeds	to	market	have	become	significant	differentiators	for	

many	businesses.	While	cost	is	always	important,	other	critical	factors	such	as	on‐time	deliveries	and	

reliability,	also	influence	a	customer’s	purchasing	choices.	

The	critical	importance	and	benefits	of	dual	Class	1	rail	services	in	the	U.S.	can	be	readily	demonstrated	by	

the	companies	who	have	made	and	continue	to	make	investment	choices	to	locate	or	expand	significant	

industrial	facilities,	and	consider	access	to	dual	Class	1	railroads	an	essential	“go/no‐go”	criteria	in	their	

site	selection	evaluation.	Major	manufacturing	facilities	normally	require	access	to	two	Class	1	railroads	in	

their	site	location	criteria,	and	the	locations	these	companies	ultimately	selected	met	that	requirement.		

Additionally,	these	types	of	facilities	would	employ	over	a	thousand	people	at	higher	than	average	

manufacturing	wages,	and	because	of	the	substantial	investment	in	plant	and	equipment	they	provide	

significant	contributions	to	local	and	state	tax	revenues.	

In	addition,	rail‐served	industrial	parks	are	a	relatively	scarce	resource,	and	industrial	land	with	dual	rail	

services	is	considered	the	“crown	jewel”	in	the	industrial	development	profession.	An	intensive	search	of	

available	industrial	parks	or	logistics	centers		found	only	seven	industrial	parks	or	mega‐sites	in	the	U.S.	

that	currently	provide	dual	Class	1	rail	services.	Sites	like	Port	Bienville	that	can	meet	the	requirements	

outlined	below	are	extremely	scarce:			

 Availability	of	utilities;	

 Accessibility	to	transportation	services	(at	least	one	four‐lane	highway);	

 Dual	Class	1	rail	services	on	site	or	within	reasonable	proximity	of	the	site;	and		

 Property	currently	zoned	for	industrial	uses	and	available	“for	sale”	with	an	established	pricing	

structure.		

The	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	provides	access	to	a	single	Class	1	railroad;	sufficient	utility	

infrastructure	for	water,	wastewater,	electrical	service,	natural	gas,	and	broadband;	a	workforce	catchment	

area	with	a	growing	population	and	skilled	labor;	and	excellent	industrial	training	and	educational	

facilities.		The	transportation	network	serving	this	area	provides	access	to	I‐10	and	I‐59;	proximity	to	

																																																																		

9	“Latin	American	Outlook	2012:	Recovering	the	Potential,”	Moody’s	Analytics,	and	“Growth	in	Latin	

America	Moderating	but	Resilient,”	International	Monetary	Fund:	Regional	Economic	Outlook,	October,	

2012	
8	

Stennis	International	Airport	with	an	8,500	foot	runway	and	terminal	and		air	cargo	facilities;	a	barge	port	

with	access	to	the	Gulf	of	Mexico	via	a	navigable	channel	to	the	Pearl	River;		and	8,645	acres	of	land	

available	for	development.10	As	one	former	MDA	official	stated,	“Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	is	the	best	

deal	for	the	dollar	of	any	location	around;	you’ve	got	rail,	barge,	and	highway	access	plus	available	land.”		

Business Competitiveness and Dual Rail Infrastructure

New	transportation	infrastructure	enables	businesses	to	take	advantage	of	additional	capacity	and	modify	

their	logistics	and	supply	chains,	improving	delivery	services	to	their	customers.	The	proposed	PBVR	will	

allow	companies	in	the	park	to	modify	supplier	networks,	which	may	reduce	their	costs	or	enhance	the	

quality	of	inputs.	Access	to	dual	Class	1	rail	service	can	improve	transit	times,	provide	alternative	response	

options	in	the	event	of	natural	disasters,	increase	transportation	service	levels,	and	provide	access	to	

broader	markets	and	more	customers	–	all	of	which	are	critical	to	a	company’s	ability	to	successfully	

compete	in	an	international	marketplace.	It	is	not	easy	to	quantify	the	benefits	that	can	result	from	the	

addition	of	another	Class	1	railroad;	however,	the	information	below	can	provide	some	insight	into	the	

impact	of	some	of	these	benefits.	

A	number	of	Port	Bienville	businesses	are	engaged	in	the	polymers	and	plastics	industry,	which	is	

considered	part	of	the	chemical	sector.	Chemical	producers	reported	that	73	percent	of	their	facilities	with	

inbound	rail	transportation	are	captive	to	a	single	railroad.	“When	these	companies	compared	their	captive	

and	non‐captive	facilities	(those	facilities	with	access	to	more	than	one	railroad	provider)	and	considered	

comparable	volumes,	distances,	and	services,	they	estimated	that	on	average	rail	rates	for	their	captive	

production	facilities	are	30	percent	higher.”11			

Higher	transportation	costs	have	caused	a	number	of	these	companies	to	source	raw	materials	to	off‐shore	

locations	and	to	site	new	production	facilities	in	areas	“based	on	access	to	competitive	rail	services”.12	

Transportation	costs	and	service	conditions	have	caused	some	companies	to	decide	to	forego	expanding	

their	U.S.	facilities,	to	shut	down	a	line	of	production,	or	to	close	a	facility	and	increase	production	in	

another	country.	The	American	Chemistry	Council	estimates	that	if	the	premium	on	chemical	shipments	

was	reduced,	then	the	chemical	sector	could	create	up	to	25,000	additional	American	jobs	with	$1.5	billion	

in	new	wages	and	$6.8	billion	in	new	economic	output.	

The Business Case for Hancock County Businesses

In	September	and	October	of	2012,	interviews	were	conducted	with	owners	or	plant	managers	of	18	

businesses	in	Hancock	County	as	well	as	several	business	leaders	and	business	support	organizations	in	

Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties	in	Mississippi.	These	interviews	provided	an	understanding	of	the	

region’s	economic	development	assets	and	opportunities;	clarity	of	local	economic	conditions	from	the	

business’	perspective;	and	insight	into	the	transportation	and	supply	chain	issues,	specifically	as	they	relate	

to	the	rail	improvements	proposed	for	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park.		

																																																																		

10	Includes	total	undeveloped	acres	owned	by	HCPHC,	existing	industrial	park	tenants,	property	within	the	

secure	fee	area	at	Stennis	Space	Center,	remaining	acreage	at	the	Airport	Industrial	Park,	industrial	sites	in	

Pearl	River	County,	and	a	future	industrial	site	adjacent	to	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park.		

11	“Analysis	of	Freight	Rail	Rates	for	Chemical	Shippers,”	American	Chemistry	Council,	conducted	by	Veris	

Consulting,	Inc.	2012	

12	Ibid	
9	

Eleven	of	the	businesses	surveyed	are	located	at	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	in	western	Hancock	County.	

The	companies	at	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	employ	over	1,200	people,	providing	significant	job	

opportunities	for	the	county	and	the	region.	Of	these	eleven,	seven	are	engaged	in	manufacturing	and	

research	and	development	involving	plastics,	chemicals,	and	metals.	Several	of	these	companies	are	owned	

by	major	global	firms.	Three	businesses	provide	logistics	services	including	shipping	and	warehousing,	and	

one	is	part	of	a	large	nationwide	firm	that	leases	and	repairs	rail	cars.	

The	remaining	seven	companies	or	agencies	interviewed	are	located	at	SSC	in	Hancock	County.	SSC	is	home	

to	a	number	of	federal	and	state	agencies	and	aerospace	and	defense	contractors.	The	firms	interviewed	are	

involved	in	research	and	development,	manufacturing,	and	testing	of	equipment	and	devices	used	in	

scientific	research,	defense,	aerospace,	geospatial	technology,	and	space	systems.	The	companies	employ	

federal	and	military	staff	as	well	as	a	number	of	civilian	workers	from	Hancock	and	surrounding	counties.	

Over	5,500	people	work	at	SSC,	and	it	is	a	major	contributor	to	the	economy	of	the	County	and	the	region.		

The	businesses	interviewed	generally	viewed	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties	as	a	desirable	location	for	

business.	Owners	and	managers	mentioned	the	area’s	reasonable	taxes,	quality	community,	supportive	

business	environment,	and	strong	workforce	as	assets.	The	companies	interviewed	at	the	industrial	park	

expect	their	business	employment	to	remain	stable	or	to	increase	over	the	next	few	years	despite	recent	

economic	constraints,	and	a	few	are	considering	significantly	expanding	capacity	or	adding	new	product	

lines	if	more	competitive	transportation	services	become	available.	All	of	the	manufacturing	firms	surveyed	

cited	access	to	multiple	modes	of	transportation	as	a	significant	factor	in	their	decision	to	locate	in	Hancock	

County	and	an	ongoing	benefit	to	their	existing	operations	and	future	expansion	plans.		

The	industrial	park	is	located	near	Interstate10	and	Interstate	59,	with	excellent	highway	access.	It	is	

positioned	between	major	seaports	in	Mobile,	AL	and	New	Orleans,	LA.	Additionally,	Port	Bienville	

Industrial	Park	is	accessible	by	barge	via	the	Pearl	River.	The	airport	at	Gulfport,	MS	is	within	a	45‐minute	

drive	and	New	Orleans	International	Airport	is	also	within	a	reasonable	distance.	The	Stennis	International	

Airport	provides	general	aviation	services	as	well	as	air	cargo	facilities,	and	is	also	utilized	by	the	military	

for	training	operations.			

A	number	of	companies	in	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	currently	export	finished	goods	to	

international	customers	in	Mexico,	Brazil,	Peru,	Panama,	and	Canada.	Most	of	the	businesses	interviewed	

were	aggressively	working	to	expand	their	customer	base	and	were	actively	engaged	in	efforts	to	export	

their	products	to	new	markets	in	the	coming	year.	Rail	access	to	ocean	ports	was	critical	to	these	efforts.		

SSC	does	not	have	rail	service	at	present,	although	rail	was	available	in	the	past.	The	proposed	alignment	

for	the	proposed	PBVR	would	run	east	of	the	SSC	facility	and	access	to	the	proposed	PBVR	could	be	

extended	near	the	north	gate.		Three	SSC	businesses	interviewed	for	this	study	identified	that	they	are	

interested	in	shipping	by	rail,	particularly	if	transportation	rates	are	competitive	for	oversized	loads.		

The	PBVR,	a	short	line	railroad	serving	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park,	offers	rail	access	connecting	the	

industrial	park	to	CSX’s	east‐west	line.	The	PBVR	received	high	marks	from	the	businesses	that	utilize	rail	

services	for	their	customer	focused	operation,	competitive	rates,	and	dedication	to	working	with	companies	

to	facilitate	shipments	and	deliveries	including	working	nights,	weekends,	and	holidays	to	help	businesses	

meet	major	customer	needs.	Port	Bienville	companies	who	currently	use	rail	anticipate	definite	benefits	

from	the	proposed	rail	connector	linking	the	industrial	park	to	the	NS	rail	line.	For	businesses	located	at	

Port	Bienville,	transit	time	and	reliability	of	deliveries	are	critical.	Rail	shipments	bound	for	Port	Bienville	

now	travel	to	Gentilly	Yard	in	New	Orleans	via	CSX	and	are	then	backhauled	to	Port	Bienville.	The	
10	

additional	time	and	distance	adds	to	the	cost	of	rail	transport.	The	Gentilly	Yard	can	be	congested	and	it	is	

not	unusual	for	cars	to	take	at	least	seven	days	to	move	from	the	yard	in	New	Orleans	back	to	Port	Bienville.		

Transit	times	of	28	days	have	been	documented	by	several	businesses	in	the	park.					

Severe	storms	are	also	a	threat	all	along	the	Gulf	Coast.	Companies	with	facilities	at	Port	Bienville	Industrial	

Park	prior	to	Hurricane	Katrina	described	how	the	storm	impacted	their	operations.	Though	damage	to	

buildings	was	extensive	(requiring	a	complete	rebuild	in	one	case),	damage	to	the	CSX	rail	line,	which	

caused	the	rail	line	to	be	out	of	operation	for	six	months,	was	a	more	serious	problem.	Access	to	two	rail	

lines	could	facilitate	the	movement	of	critical	production	equipment	away	from	a	pending	disaster	area,	

allowing	these	businesses	to	get	back	into	production	and	put	people	back	to	work	more	quickly	after	a	

natural	disaster.			

Existing and Emerging Industries and Rail Transportation Dependence in

Hancock County

Innovation	is	the	linchpin	for	Hancock	County’s	targeted	growth	sectors	and	continues	to	drive	a	significant	

number	of	existing	industries	as	well.	The	HCPHC	identified	four	major	growth	sectors	for	the	community:	

aerospace	and	aviation,	cargo‐oriented	development,	polymers	and	advanced	composite	materials,	and	

geospatial	technology.	In	addition	to	these	four	target	industries,	manufacturing	and	exports	continue	to	

represent	a	significant	opportunity	for	future	growth.			

Emerging Growth Industries in Hancock County

Aerospace and Aviation

A	number	of	major	aerospace	and	aviation	companies	are	located	in	Hancock	County,	including:	Rolls	

Royce,	Pratt	and	Whitney,	Raytheon	Technical	Services,	and	Lockheed	Martin.	SSC	is	also	a	world	leader	in	

rocket	and	jet	engine	testing;	aerospace	research,	and	satellite	propulsion	cores.	The	rockets	that	powered	

the	Apollo	Space	Mission	were	developed	and	tested	at	SSC.			

Cargo‐Oriented Development

The	State	of	Mississippi	has	identified	six	strategic	freight	corridors	providing	a	range	of	freight	

infrastructure	that	best	serve	the	freight	needs	of	the	state’s	existing	and	emerging	industries.13	The	

multimodal	freight	system	that	serves	the	state	include	the	Gulf	Coast	and	river	ports,	interstates	and	

highways,	Class	1	and	short	line	railroads,	airports,	intermodal	facilities,	and	pipelines.	The	Gulf	Coast	

Multimodal	Corridor	shown	in	Figure	2	below	has	been	designated	as	one	of	these	six	strategic	freight	

corridors.	Freight	infrastructure	in	this	corridor	includes	Port	Bienville	and	the	Ports	of	Pascagoula,	Biloxi,	

and	Gulfport.	Rail	and	highway	infrastructure	includes	CSX,	NS,	and	KCS	rail,	as	well	as	several	short	line	

railroads,	Interstate	10,	and	U.S.	Highways	90	and	49.	

			

																																																																		

13 Mississippi Goods Movement and Trade Study,	prepared	for	Mississippi	Dept.	of	Transportation,	2010	
11	

Figure 2	‐	Gulf Coast Multimodal Corridor

There	are	several	specialized	freight	and	logistics	companies	located	in	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	

and	include	Andersons,	Inc.,	Anderson	Rail	Group,	SSA/Gulf,	and	A	&	R	Distribution.	The	existing	

transportation	infrastructure	within	the	Gulf	Coast	Multimodal	Corridor	and,	more	specifically,	the	unique	

transportation	assets	in	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	will	continue	to	support	the	expansion	of	these	

companies	in	Hancock	County.	Access	to	an	additional	Class	1	rail	provider	would	enhance	this	sector.	

Polymers and Advanced Composite Materials

More	than	400	plastics	and	polymer	companies	are	located	in	Mississippi	and	over	100	of	them	are	

engaged	in	manufacturing	chemicals.		DAK	Americas,	Sabic	Innovative	Plastics,	SNF/Polychemie,	Calgon	

Carbon,	and	MAC	LLC,	all	located	in	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park,	are	engaged	in	polymer,	plastics,	and	

chemical	manufacturing.			

Geospatial Technology

Geospatial	technology	was	essentially	developed	at	SSC,	building	on	geospatial	research	conducted	by	

NASA,	the	Department	of	Defense,	Department	of	Commerce,	and	the	private	sector.		Geospatial	products	

allow	consumers,	businesses,	and	governments	to	utilize	geographic	data	in	a	variety	of	equipment	and	

services,	research	facilities	at	SSC	continue	to	provide	new	innovations	in	this	industry.	The	U.S.	geospatial	

industry	generated	approximately	$73	billion	in	revenues	and	at	least	500,000	well‐paid	jobs	in	2011.14			

Manufacturing and Exports  

The	2013	Global	Manufacturing	Competitiveness	Index	recently	identified	ten	key	drivers	of	global	

competitiveness.	Six	of	those	drivers	relate	directly	to	the	proposed	PBVR:	

																																																																		

14	“Putting	the	U.S.	Geospatial	Services	Industry	on	the	Map,”	The	Boston	Consulting	Group,	December	2012	
12	

 Cost	and	availability	of	labor	and	materials	

 Supplier	networks	

 Talent‐driven	innovation	

 Physical	infrastructure	

 Economic,	trade,	financial	and	tax	systems	

 Government	investments	in	manufacturing	and	innovation	

In	addition,	manufactured	goods	account	for	93.2	percent	of	Mississippi‘s	exports	and	support	over	

317,900	trade‐related	jobs	in	the	state.15	Businesses	in	Mississippi	exported	$12.2	billion	in	goods	and	

services	in	2012.16	The	state’s	largest	export	market	is	Panama,	followed	by	Canada,	Mexico,	China,	

Honduras,	Colombia,	and	Brazil.	Primary	exports	include	petroleum,	coal,	chemicals,	computer	and	

electronic	products,	transportation	equipment,	and	paper.	

Sixty‐four	percent	of	the	businesses	in	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	are	engaged	in	manufacturing	and	

a	number	of	agencies	and	contractors	at	the	SSC	are	also	involved	in	ongoing	manufacturing,	re‐fabrication,	

or	research	and	development	activities	that	involve	moving	heavy,	over‐sized	equipment	and	engines.			

Transportation Dependence and Hancock County’s Economy

An	industry	sector’s	dependence	on	transportation	can	be	measured	by	examining	the	amount	a	business	

sector	spends	on	transportation	as	a	share	of	the	total	output	of	the	sector.17			

Key	industrial	sectors	were	evaluated	to	better	understand	the	role	freight	and	goods	movement	play	in	

Hancock	County	and	how	multimodal	transportation	contributes	to	the	economic	vitality	for	this	area.	The	

evaluation	was	based	on	the	non‐governmental	employment	concentrations	in	the	county	that	make	up	

these	key	industrial	sectors.	Sixty‐three	percent	of	the	non‐governmental	employment	is	concentrated	in	

five	industrial	sectors:	construction,	manufacturing,	wholesale	and	retail	trade,	and	professional	and	

technical	services.18		Figure	3	shows	the	breakdown	of	these	employment	sectors	in	Hancock	County.	

																																																																		

15	Data	from	Bureau	of	Economic	Analysis,	Bureau	of	Labor	Statistics,	and	USITC	

16	U.S.	Department	of	Commerce,		International	Trade	Administration,	Office	of	Trade	and	Industry	

Information,	February	2013	Report,	and	Mississippi	Business	Roundtable	

17	“Transportation	Satellite	Accounts:	A	Look	at	Transportation’s	Role	in	the	Economy,”	U.S.	DOT	Research	

and	Innovative	Technology	Administration	

18	Bureau	of	Labor	Statistics	
13	

Figure 3	‐	Employment by Sector in Hancock County

Source: U.S. Census, Bureau of Labor Statistics

It	was	determined	that	Hancock	County	industries	are	most	dependent	on	freight	rail	services	including		

aerospace	and	aviation	businesses;	polymers,	chemicals,	and	plastics;	manufacturing;	geospatial	

technology;	cargo‐oriented	development;	and	retail	and	wholesale	trade,	as	shown	in	Table	2.	

Table 2	‐	Transportation Dependence Rating of Hancock County’s Top Industries

Industry Sector: Highways Freight Rail Waterways/Ports Air Transportation cost

per dollar of output

Aerospace & Aviation High High High High 9%

Cargo‐Oriented

Development High High High Medium 9%

Polymers &  

Composite Materials High High Medium Low 9%

Geospatial Technology High Medium Low High 6.5%

Manufacturing High High High Medium 9%

Retail and

Wholesale Trade High High Medium Low 6.5%

Industrial and Business Site Evaluation Factors  

Economic	development	is	a	very	competitive	business.	Understanding	the	critical	factors	that	influence	a	

company’s	decision	to	locate	a	new	facility,	or	expand	or	retain	an	existing	operation	is	a	quintessential	

economic	development	activity.	The	economic	prosperity	of	Hancock	County	and	south	Mississippi	

depends	upon	the	businesses	and	industries	within	the	region,	and	the	ability	to	meet	their	unique	

requirements	for	workforce,	land,	transportation,	utilities,	and	other	services.			

Over	the	past	26	years,	a	corporate	site	location	study	has	been	conducted	to	identify	the	most	important	

factors	affecting	the	location	decisions	of	businesses,	and	to	track	these	factors	over	time	to	assess	evolving	

trends	and	conditions	driving	business	location	decisions.19	Eleven	of	the	26	site	selection	factors	identified	

related	to	the	movement	and	accessibility	of	goods	and	people.			

																																																																		

19	Area	Development	Site	and	Facility	Journal,	“Annual	Corporate	Site	Consultant	Survey,	2012”	

Construction

Manufacturing

Wholesale and Retail

Trade

Professional and

technical services 18%

17%

9.6%

11%

8.2%
14	

The	eleven	transportation	and	freight	factors	considered	most	important	in	the	2012	study	include:	

 Highway	accessibility	

 Availability	(accessibility)	of	skilled	labor	

 Proximity	(accessibility)	to	major	markets	

 Inbound/outbound	shipping	costs	

 Proximity	(accessibility)	to	suppliers	

 Availability	(accessibility)	of	unskilled	labor	

 Accessibility	to	major	airports	

 Raw	material	availability	(accessibility)	

 Proximity	(accessibility)	to	technical	college/training	

 Railroad	services	

 Waterway	or	ocean	port	accessibility	

These	transportation	factors,	along	with	other	competitive	conditions,	influence	the	site	decisions	that	

businesses	make	when	locating,	expanding,	or	consolidating	operations.	While	freight	rail	transportation	

alone	will	not	foster	economic	growth,	improved	freight	services	and	connectivity,	multi‐modal	

transportation	services,	and	competitive	costs	can	significantly	differentiate	the	region’s	economic	

environment,	providing	opportunities	to	attract	and	retain	businesses	and	jobs	for	Hancock	County	and	the	

region	in	the	future.	For	some	major	industrial	projects,	access	to	two	Class	1	railroads	is	essential.	

The	most	significant	benefits	and	opportunities	generated	from	the	proposal	rail	connectors	would	be	

derived	from	new	employment	and	additional	investment	in	plant	and	equipment	by	existing	businesses	

and	from	the	location	of	new	companies	that	require	or	would	benefit	from	access	to	dual	Class	I	rail	

services.	Hancock	County	currently	has	over	6,640	acres	of	industrial	land	available	including	3,600	acres	

of	land	available	within	the	SSC	complex.	Pearl	River	County	has	an	additional	505	acres	of	industrial	land	

available.	This	substantial	industrial	land	inventory,	coupled	with	the	future	access	to	dual	Class	I	rail	

services	and	the	existing	multimodal	transportation	network	servicing	this	area,	meet	the	site	location	

requirements	of	a	number	of	significant	industrial	and	business	facilities	that	could		locate	in	this	region.	
15	

Alternative Analysis

The	alternative	selection	process	for	any	transportation	facility	begins	with	the	identification	and	

quantification	of	a	“universe”	of	preliminary	alternatives	and	selection	of	reasonable	alternatives	that	

address	the	project	objectives.	To	evaluate	preliminary	alternatives,	and	then	identify	a	selection	of	

reasonable	alternatives	on	this	project’s	aggressive	schedule,	a	streamlined	selection	process	was	

developed	in	regard	to	the	NEPA	process.	The	streamlined	screening	and	selection	process	incorporated	

GIS,	an	automated	corridor	analysis	tool	called	the	Alignment	Alternatives	Research	Tool	(AART),	limited	

field	reconnaissance	and	data	validation,	engineering	design	criteria,	and	review	and	evaluation	by	the	

project	team	that	consisted	of	planners	and	engineers.	The	process	also	took	into	account	and	incorporated	

client	input,	public	and	other	stakeholder	comments	and	concerns,	as	well	as	consideration	of	previous	

studies.	The	process	was	iterative	in	nature,	providing	a	continuous	quantification	and	comparison	of	

impacts	to	an	equal	level	of	detail	at	each	stage	associated	with	the	various	alternatives,	as	they	are	

modified	based	on	design	criteria,	cost,	and	other	considerations	during	project	development.	The	

remainder	of	this	report	provides	a	detailed	explanation	of	the	process	that	was	utilized	to	determine	

reasonable	alternatives	for	the	proposed	PBVR	corridor.	

Methodology

As	stated	above,	the	selection	process	of	the	alternative	corridors	included	the	use	of	an	automated	tool	to	

assist	and	accelerate	the	identification	and	evaluation	of	the	preliminary	alternatives.	The	AART	is	a	series	

of	GIS‐based	functions	designed	to	route	conceptual	alignments	among	the	various	natural	and	human	

resources	within	a	study	area.	The	program	allows	users	to	interactively	weight	geographic	features	and	

attributes	collected	from	public	and	project‐derived	databases.

Individual	data	layers	are	assigned	rankings	to	provide	criteria	for	the	AART	to	create	a	path	of	least	

impact.	Areas	that	are	ranked	low,	such	as	less	sensitive	resources,	would	be	used	over	a	highly	sensitive	

resource.	Although	the	tool	attempts	to	utilize	the	lower‐ranked	areas	as	much	as	possible,	it	also	tries	to	

minimize	the	overall	length	of	the	path/corridor.	In	some	cases,	AART	may	impact	a	few	acres	of	highly‐

ranked	areas	if	the	overall	impacts	of	the	path	are	less	than	if	those	areas	that	are	avoided.	

Additionally,	“avoid”	areas	can	be	included	to	effectively	block	any	areas	where	the	potential	rail	line	

should	not	be	considered.	Areas	that	have	been	set	as	avoids	will	be	automatically	avoided	while	locating	a	

path	that	would	minimize	impacts	to	the	remaining	resources.	The	desired	corridor	width	is	then	applied	

and	the	environmental	and	cultural	impacts	of	the	corridor	are	calculated.	The	AART	will	summarize	the	

impacts	for	each	alternative	alignment	and	display	a	potential	alignment	for	each	model	run.	
16	

Once	all	of	the	layers	have	been	

ranked	or	set	as	an	avoid,	the	AART	

processes	all	of	the	layers	and	

generates	a	single,	composite	

“suitability”	layer	comprised	of	the	

highest	rankings	from	all	input	

layers.	In	other	words,	for	each	grid	

cell	in	the	study	area,	the	AART	

reviews	each	input	layer,	selects	the	

highest	value	for	that	cell	and	

assigns	that	value	to	the	

corresponding	cell	in	the	suitability	

layer	Figure	4.		

In	summary,	the	“corridors”	are	

developed	through	a	simple	

“opportunities	and	constraints”	

approach.	The	tool	finds	the	least‐

impact	path	between	user‐selected	

endpoints	by	attempting	to	stay	

away	from	high‐ranked	areas,	while	

maintaining	as	short	a	path	as	

possible	between	points.	

Generation of Conceptual

Alternatives

Once	the	data	was	compiled,	the	

rankings	determined,	and	the	

endpoints	chosen,	the	AART	was	

ready	to	begin	generating	conceptual	

corridors.	Various	combinations	of	

start,	end	and	waypoints	were	developed	in	order	to	generate	a	number	of	corridor	alternatives	to	

evaluate.			

As	the	conceptual	corridors	were	generated,	their	locations	and	impacts	were	reviewed.	In	cases	where	the	

corridors	would	veer	into	unexpected	areas,	explanations	were	sought	by	investigating	the	data	layers	and	

their	assigned	rankings.	

The	AART	generated	an	impacts	report	for	each	corridor	detailing	the	cultural	and	environmental	impacts	

for	that	corridor.	The	corridor	locations	and	the	impacts	reports	were	used	by	the	project	team	in	the	

corridor	evaluation	process,	along	with	factors	such	as	future	development	and	other	intangibles.	Staff	

experience	and	expertise	in	conducting	corridor	studies	played	an	important	part	in	the	corridor	review	

and	evaluation	process.	

Once	the	initial	AART	developed	alternative	corridors	were	identified	the	refinement	process	began.	Early	

on,	numerous	corridors	were	eliminated	from	further	study	for	various	reasons,	as	documented	in	the	Rail	

Alternatives	Development	Technical	Methodology	Report	(appended	as	a	reference).	

Figure 4 ‐ Base Scenario showing rankings and avoids.
17	

Engineered Alignments

After	the	initial	round	of	cuts,	several	alternative	corridors	were	identified	from	Scenarios	25,	26,	USACE01,	

USACE02	,	EPA03,	EPA04	and	EPA05	that	were	then	further	refined.	By	using	the	standard	fixed‐width	

corridors	and	the	irregular	corridors	generated	by	AART,	the	study	team	was	able	to	make	slight	

adjustments	to	the	alignments	in	order	to	meet	the	engineering	design	criteria	for	the	proposed	PBVR	line.		

To	assist	the	engineers	make	these	adjustments,	the	AART	also	generated	irregular	pathways	which	

identified	the	next‐best	areas	for	potential	consideration	of	the	alignment	(see	figure	5).		These	areas,		

while	not	as	good	as	the	least‐impact	corridor,	were	also	worth	considering	and	provided	options	for	the	

design	engineers.			

Additionally,	study	team	engineers	also	identified	several	new	segments	for	consideration.	These	new	

manually‐developed	segments	were	derived	by	taking	into	account	the	irregular	corridors	as	shown	in	

Figure	5.	These	new	alignments	were	developed	with	the	intent	to	maintain	minimal	impacts	to	the	

environment	where	practical,	while	meeting	the	design	criteria.	These	engineered	alignments	were	then	

used	to	generate	new	1,000‐foot	corridors	centered	about	theses	alignments.	A	new	set	of	corridor	impact	

reports	was	generated,	and	initial	cost	estimates	for	each	corridor	were	prepared	and	compiled	in	a	matrix	

format.	Impacts	were	summarized	based	

on	the	refined	1,000‐foot	wide	corridors.	

However,	the	actual	impacts	for	the	

proposed	PBVR	would	be	considerably	

less,	probably	90%	less,	since	the	final	

constructed	footprint	of	the	rail	bed	is	

expected	to	be	typically	less	than	100‐

feet	in	width.	Detailed	field	

investigations	have	not	been	performed	

yet	and	the	1,000‐foot	wide	corridors	

will	allow	flexibility	to	adjust	the	

alignment	in	the	future	to	further	

minimize	impacts	once	the	detailed	field	

work	has	been	completed.	The	impacts	

within	these	1,000‐foot	wide	corridors	

and	the	initial	cost	estimates	for	the	

engineered	alignments	were	used	for	

comparing	one	alternative	to	another	

and	further	refinement.			

Reasonable Alternatives

Once	the	initial	corridor	matrix	was	

completed	and	the	comparison	

performed,	several	corridors	centrally	

located	within	the	study	area	emerged	

as	the	least	costly	and	least	impacting.	

Every	one	of	these	Reasonable	

Alternatives	shared	a	common	central	

corridor.	However,	two	distinct	

Figure 5 ‐ Other potential corridors for run S5 to N1.		

These corridors depict “next‐best” areas.
18	

corridors	on	the	north	end	of	the	project	and	several	corridors	on	the	southern	end	were	identified.		

To	further	define	the	Reasonable	Alternatives,	the	study	team	divided	the	advanced	corridors	into	

segments	as	identified	in	Figure	6.	These	17	segments	represent	a	possible	combination	of	40	potential	

corridors.	Following	the	development	of	the	segments,	the	study	team	re‐quantified	impacts	and	cost	by	

segment,	as	shown	in	Table	3.		Additionally,	the	costs	estimates	were	further	refined	by	taking	into	account	

the	anticipated	bridging	of	high‐value	wetlands	and	stream	mitigation.	These	costs	estimates	are	

considered	all	inclusive	and	represent	potential	“implementation	costs”	which	include	final	design,	right‐of‐

way	acquisition,	and	construction	and	inspection	services.	The	estimates	are	based	on	the	true	engineered	

alignments	within	each	refined	corridor	and	are	representative	of	2013	unit	cost	data	derived	from	other	

rail	projects	and	from	cost	experience	on	other	similar	projects.		

At	this	stage	in	the	project	development	the	alignments	are	considered	conceptual,	therefore	20%	

contingencies	have	been	included	in	the	cost	estimates.	Table	3	contains	the	Segment	Matrix	for	the	

Reasonable	Alternatives.	Depending	on	the	combination	of	segments,	the	cost	estimate	of	the	project	varies	

from	$86.6million	to	$104.5	million.		
19	

Figure 6 – Engineered alignments and section numbers
CATEGORY Unit of Measure Segment 1a Segment 1b Segment 2a Segment 2b Segment 2c Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5 Segment 6a Segm

Length Miles 1.02 0.89 1.95 2.47 1.95 0.64 1.54 0.05 0.92 0

Total Estimated Implementation Cost $ Millions 2.10 1.60 3.80 9.20 3.90 5.50 7.10 2.90 7.90 2

Wetland Impacts Acreage 5 0 8 39 9 12 13 6 55 

Wetland Quality Value 33 0 56 262 64 82 90 44 387 3

Cost of Impacts to Wetlands $60K per acre @ 10% $12,600 $9,600 $22,800 $55,200 $23,400 $33,000 $42,600 $17,400 $47,400 $1

Devil's Swamp Mitigation Bank Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Proposed Texas Flat Mitigation Bank Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Cost of Impacts to Mitigation Banks $120K per acre @ 10% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

Length of Wetland Bridging LF 0 0 0 430 430 430 283 587 

Stream Crossings # of Crossings 3 2 7 5 5 1 3 0 0 

HydroLine‐Connector Miles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

HydroLine‐ Ditch Miles 0.90 0.71 0.87 0.66 1.00 0.09 0.72 0.00 0.00 0

HydroLine‐ Stream Miles 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Stream/River ‐ named Miles 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.20 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Stream/River ‐ other Miles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Streams 303(d) # 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Artificial Path Miles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Total Stream Impacts Miles 0.90 0.71 1.60 1.26 1.27 0.09 0.72 0.00 0.00 0

Total Stream Impacts Feet 4,752 3,744 8,437 6,653 6,706 465 3,802 0 0 

Cost of Impacts to Streams $200 per linear feet @ 10% $95,040 $74,870 $168,749 $133,056 $134,112 $9,293 $76,032 $0 $0 

CERCLA Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Archaeological Sites Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Farmland (Prime) Acreage 14.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Farmland (Prime if Drained) Acreage 0.00 42.04 63.42 94.70 60.81 49.23 94.93 0.04 64.04 6

Farmland (Statewide Importance0 Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Mines Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.78 2.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Recreational Facilities Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Water Wells Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.20 1.02 0.67 0.78 0.72 0

Transmission Line Crossings # 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Gas Line Crossings # 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

MAN-MADE FEATURES INFRASTRUCTURE

TABLE 3 - SEGMENT MATRIX FOR THE REASONABLE ALTERMATI

PORT BIENVILLE FEASIBILITY STUDY - PORT BIENVILLE TO NICHO

ENGINEERING 

CRITERIA NATURAL FEATURES
21	

Agency Coordination and Public Involvement   An	Agency	Scoping	Meeting	was	held	on	August	23,	2012	at	the	MDOT	Administrative	Building	to	introduce	

the	Port	Bienville	project	to	the	resource	agencies.	The	goal	of	the	meeting	was	to	present	the	methodology	

for	the	feasibility	study	and	verify	the	data	to	be	used	for	analysis.	The	study	team	provided	an	overview	of	

the	project,	the	study	area	for	the	feasibility	study	and	the	Alignment	Alternatives	Research	Tool	(AART).		

The	agencies	were	asked	to	review	data	and	the	associated	criteria	collected	by	the	project	team.	Agencies	

provided	their	initial	input	on	the	available	data.	A	demonstration	of	the	AART	tool	was	given	to	explain	

how	the	data	would	be	used	to	identify	rail	corridors	and	the	refinement	process.			

A	Coordination	meeting	with	the	Stennis	Space	Center	was	held	August	21,	2012.	The	study	team	provided	

an	overview	of	the	proposed	PBVR,	its	objective,	and	the	feasibility	study.	SSC	representatives	provided	

input	on	areas	of	the	facility	that	would	be	unavailable	for	rail	corridors.			

A	Public	Information	Meeting	was	held	on	October	16,	2012	from	5:00	–	7:00	p.m.	in	Bay	St.	Louis,	MS	at	the	

St.	Louis	Public	Library.	The	meeting	was	hosted	by	Mississippi	Department	of	Transportation	(MDOT)	in	

cooperation	with	HCPHC,	and	was	conducted	in	an	open	house	format	which	invited	the	public	to	comment	

on	the	Feasibility	Study	for	Port	Bienville	Railroad.	Forty	people	attended	the	meeting.		

An	Agency	Coordination	Meeting	was	held	on	December	18,	2012	with	resource	and	regulatory	agencies.		

Representatives	from	MDOT,	FRA,	and	HCPHC	were	in	attendance.	The	study	team	provided	a	summary	of	

the	previous	meeting	and	presented	the	results	of	the	alternative	corridors	identified,	including	criteria	

used	and	the	process	used	to	analyze	and	refine	the	corridors.	The	presentation	covered	identification	of	

the	initial	corridors,	refinement	of	the	corridors	and	the	recommended	reasonable	alternatives.	

PORT BIENVILLE

Economic Development Benefits 

and Opportunties Analysis

Presented to:

Mississippi Department of Transportation

In collaboration with:

Federal Railroad Administration

Hancock County Port and Harbor Commission

in association with HDR

September 19, 2013
Port Bienville: Economic Development

Benefits and Opportunities Analysis

	 	

i	

© 2013 CDM Smith 

All Rights Reserved 

Table of Contents

Economic	Development	Benefits	and	Opportunities	Analysis	.........................................................................	1	

The	Business	Case	for	Dual	Class	1	Rail	Service	in	Hancock	County	...........................................................	4	

Prospective	Industries	in	Hancock	County	....................................................................................................	6	

Business	Competitiveness	and	Dual	Rail	Infrastructure	...................................................................................	6	

The	Business	Case	for	Hancock	County	Businesses	............................................................................................	8	

Existing	and	Emerging	Industries	and	Rail	Transportation	Dependence	in	Hancock	County	......	11	

Emerging	Growth	Industries	in	Hancock	County.	....................................................................................	12	

Aerospace	and	Aviation.	..............................................................................................................................	12	

Cargo‐Oriented	Development.	..................................................................................................................	13	

Polymers	and	Advanced	Composite	Materials.	.................................................................................	14	

Geospatial	Technology.	................................................................................................................................	15	

Manufacturing	and	Exports.	......................................................................................................................	15	

Transportation	Dependence	and	Hancock	County’s	Economy.	..................................................................	17	

Industrial	and	Business	Site	Evaluation	Factors	................................................................................................	20	

Stennis	Space	Center	and	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park:	Setting	Hancock	County	Apart	..............	21	

Stennis	Space	Center	.............................................................................................................................................	21	

Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	............................................................................................................................	22	

Transportation	Infrastructure	...................................................................................................................................	22	

Freight	Rail	................................................................................................................................................................	22	

Highway	Access	.......................................................................................................................................................	23	

Air	Cargo	.....................................................................................................................................................................	23	

Port	and	Barge	.........................................................................................................................................................	23	

		Recommended	Next	Steps	............................................................................................................................................	23	

Appendices

Appendix	A:	Concentrations	of	Freight	and	Economic	Activity	....................................................................	25	

Appendix	B:	Port	Bienville	Economic	Impacts	.....................................................................................................	34	

Appendix	C:	Potential	Funding	Sources	for	Port	Bienville	Rail	Improvements	.....................................	59	

Appendix	D:	Current	Study	Area	Rail	Movements	and	Impacts	...................................................................	68	
Port Bienville Railroad   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities and Economic Feasibility  

    

ii

Appendix	E:	Stennis	Space	Center	....................................................................................................................................................	70	

Appendix	F:	Hancock	County	Business	Interview	Guide	........................................................................................................	72	

List of Figures

Figure	1		Gulf	Coast	Intermodal	Corridor	......................................................................................................................................	13	

Figure	2		Queen	City	Tower	.................................................................................................................................................................	17	

Figure	3		Employment	by	Sector	in	Hancock	County	...............................................................................................................	18	

Figure	4		Transportation	Cost	as	a	Share	of	Sector	Output	...................................................................................................	19	

Figure	B‐1		Impact	Approach	of	Access	to	a	Second	Class	I	Railroad	...............................................................................	35	

Figure	B‐2		REMI	Model	Sector	Linkages	......................................................................................................................................	37	

Figure	B‐3		REMI	Regions	in	Mississippi	.......................................................................................................................................	38	

Figure	B‐4		Total	Employment	–	Historical	and	Baseline	Forecast	...................................................................................	43	

Figure	B‐5		Manufacturing	Employment	–	Historical	and	Baseline	Forecast	................................................................	44	

Figure	B‐6		Manufacturing	Output	–	Historical	and	Baseline	Forecast	............................................................................	45	

Figure	B‐7		Job	Impacts	by	Region	and	Component	.................................................................................................................	55	

Figure	B‐8		Regional	Job	Impact	Distribution		.............................................................................................................................	56	

Figure	B‐9		Direct	Manufacturing	Employment	Impacts	........................................................................................................	57	

Figure	E‐1		Louisiana/Mississippi	Coast	Region	Recent	Marine	Data	NOAA	National	Data	Buoy	.......................	70	

List of Tables

Table	1		Projected	Rail	Car	Volumes	with	Dual	Class	I	Rail	Services	...................................................................................	2	

Table	2		North	American	Industrial	Classification	for	Targeted	Industrial	Sectors	in	

	 	Hancock	County	...................................................................................................................................................................	18	

Table	3		Transportation	Dependence	Rating	of	Hancock	County’s	Top	Industries	....................................................	19	

Table	4		Hancock	County	Port	and	Harbor	Commission	Industrial	Land	.......................................................................	22	

Table	A‐1		Rail	Freight	Movement	Component	Data	................................................................................................................	29	

Table	A‐2		Rail	Freight	Component	Index	Values	......................................................................................................................	30	

Table	A‐3		Freight	Related	Employment	Component	Data	and	Index	Values	...............................................................	30	

Table	A‐4		Rail	Freight	Intensity	Index	Results	..........................................................................................................................	31	

Table	A‐5		Sales	Tax	Component	Data	and	Results	...................................................................................................................	31	

Table	A‐6		Income	Tax	Component	Data	and	Results	..............................................................................................................	32	

Table	A‐7		Property	Tax	Component	Value	and	Results	.........................................................................................................	32	

Table	A‐8		Economic	Preparedness	Index	and	Results	...........................................................................................................	33	

Table	B‐1		Baseline	Socioeconomic	Summary	(2012,	2040)	................................................................................................	39	

Table	B‐2		Baseline	Employment	by	Sector	(2012,	2040)	.....................................................................................................	40	
Port Bienville Railroad   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities and Economic Feasibility  

    

iii

Table	B‐3		Baseline	Employment	Detail	(2012,	2040)	............................................................................................................	41	

Table	B‐4		Baseline	Transportation	Employment	Detail	(2012,	2040)	...........................................................................	41	

Table	B‐5		Capital	Infrastructure	Investment	Costs	(in	2012	$)	.........................................................................................	47	

Table	B‐6		Revenue	per	Ton	–	Captive	vs.	Competitive	Markets	........................................................................................	49	

Table	B‐7		Study	Area	Developable	Acres	.....................................................................................................................................	51	

Table	B‐8		Business	Operation	–	Related	Economic	Impacts	(2025,	2040)	...................................................................	56	

Table	D‐1	Study	Area	Rail	Freight	Movements	(2006)	...........................................................................................................	69	
Port Bienville: Economic Development

Benefits and Opportunities Analysis 	 	

1	

© 2013 CDM Smith 

All Rights Reserved 

Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities

Analysis  

Globalization	 and	 new	 technologies	 have	 transformed	 economies	 around	 the	 world,	

redefining	 the	 way	 businesses	 operate,	 challenging	 supply	 chains	 and	 transportation	

networks,	 and	 creating	 new	 customer	 opportunities	 in	 places	 where	 they	 were	

previously	 inconceivable.	 	 To	 compete	 in	 this	 global	 marketplace,	 businesses	 must	

optimize	 every	 asset:	 workforce	 skills,	 competitively	 priced	 products,	 and	 reliable	

transportation	 systems	 to	 ensure	 their	 customers	 receive	 quality	 goods	 and	 services	

when	 they	 expect	 them.	 As	 the	 importance	 of	 global	 trade	 and	 the	 demands	 of	

customers	 continue	 to	evolve,	American	 companies	are	more	 dependent	 than	ever	 on	

integrated,	 agile,	 and	 efficient	 transportation	 networks	 to	 sustain	 and	 enhance	 their	

competitive	position	in	the	marketplace.			

Hancock	and	Pearl	River	counties	in	Mississippi	have	faced	transforming	conditions	as	

well	 in	 the	 past	 few	 years	 as	 they	 worked	 to	 recover	 from	 the	 effects	 of	 Hurricane	

Katrina	and	the	oil	spill	in	the	Gulf,	and	the	economic	consequences	of	these	disasters.		

The	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	and	Stennis	Space	Center	played	a	pivotal	role	in	the	

recovery	of	this	region,	sustaining	employment	and	attracting	new	investments	and	jobs	

that	have	helped	to	rebuild	and	enhance	the	area’s	economy.			

The	Port	Bienville	rail	connector	evaluated	in	this	study	would	link	the	CSX	and	Norfolk	

Southern	(NS)	main	lines	in	Hancock	County	providing	access	to	two	Class	1	rail	roads.		

The	objective	of	this	report	is	to	examine	the	potential	economic	development	benefits	

and	opportunities	resulting	from	access	to	dual	Class	1	rail	services	in	Hancock	County.		

This	 project	 would	 generate	 immediate	 transportation	 benefits	 for	 businesses	 in	 the	

Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 and	 provide	 rail	 access	 to	 the	 Shale	 Support	 Services	

facilities	 in	 Hancock	 and	 Pearl	 River	 Counties	 that	 currently	 truck	 84,000	 tons	 of	

fracking	 sands	 each	 month	 from	 Hancock	 County	 to	 a	 rail	 spur	 in	 Picayune.	 	 The	

proposed	rail	connector	would	repair	and	upgrade	a	portion	of	an	abandoned	rail	line	

and	 provide	 rail	 access	 to	 a	 transload	 facility	 previously	 developed	 for	 Stennis	 Space	

Center	that	could	provide	rail	services	to	other	companies	in	the	region.		Improvements	

and	 repairs	 to	 the	NS	line	 that	previously	 served	Stennis	Space	Center	 could	 facilitate	

the	return	of	rail	services	to	some	areas	of	the	space	center	to	serve	existing	operations	

and	future	development.	

The	 economic	 development	 benefits	 and	 opportunities	 identified	 as	 a	 result	 of	 the	

consultant	 team’s	 research,	 data	 analysis,	 and	 meetings	 with	 business	 and	 industry,	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

2

Stennis	 Space	 Center,	 Mississippi	 Development	 Authority,	 and	 the	 Hancock	 County	 Port	 and	

Harbor	Commission	are	compelling.		Consider	the	following:	

 Industrial	parks	providing	dual	Class	1	rail	services	are	a	scarce	resource	in	the	U.S.	and	

certain	 significant	 industrial	 projects	 require	 access	 to	 dual	 rail	 service	 to	 meet	 the	

transportation	demands	of	these	operations.		An	analysis	of	industrial	parks	and	logistics	

centers	that	provide	dual	Class	1	rail	services	and	meet	other	minimal	site	criteria	found	

only	 seven	 industrial	 parks	 or	 logistics	 center	 in	 the	 U.S.	 that	 currently	 meet	 those	

requirements.	 	 Access	 to	 two	 Class	 1	 railroads	 would	 position	Hancock	 County	 and	 the	

Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	in	this	group	of	“crown	jewel”	industrial	parks.			

		

 Currently	 there	 are	 two	 industrial	 prospects	 evaluating	 sites	 in	 Hancock	 County.	 	 One	

company	is	considering	only	one	site	in	Mississippi,	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	site.		

Both	prospects	require	access	to	dual	Class	1	rail	service.		A	decision	to	proceed	with	this	

rail	connector	project	would	keep	Hancock	County	in	the	running	for	these	two	facilities.	

Collectively	these	prospects	indicate	they	would	invest	slightly	over	$650	million	in	plant	

and	equipment	and	employ	450	people.		

 Existing	businesses	in	the	industrial	park	served	by	the	Port	Bienville	Railroad	currently	

utilize	 6,261	 rail	 cars	 annually.		 Based	 on	 information	 provided	 by	 these	 existing	

companies	who	would	be	directly	served	by	this	proposal	rail	line	and	information	from	

the	Mississippi	Development	Authority	(who	provided	rail	car	usage	data	for	an	industrial	

prospect	evaluating	a	location	in	Mississippi	at	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park)	the	rail	

car	usage	on	the	Port	Bienville	Short	Line	Railroad	could	increase	significantly	with	access	

to	 two	 Class	 1	 railroads.	 	 The	 largest	 projected	 rail	 car	 user,	 Shale	 Support	 Services,	 is	

currently	trucking	 fracking	sands	 from	Hancock	County	to	its	drying	 facility	in	Picayune.		

Additional	product	lines	are	planned	for	this	facility	in	the	near	future.		If	dual	rail	services	

were	 available	 to	 serve	 this	 company	 their	 Phase	 II	 expansion	 planned	 for	 2014	 would	

move	168,000	tons	(1680	rail	cars)	of	material	monthly	from	the	Hancock	County	facility.			

The	projected	rail	car	volumes	anticipated	with	access	to	dual	Class	1	rail	services	are	as	

follows:	

Table 1 Projected Rail Car Volumes with Dual Class 1 Rail Services

Current Annual Rail Car Volume for

Existing Port Bienville Industrial Park Tenants 6,261 rail cars

Future Additional Annual Rail Car Volume for

Existing Port Bienville Industrial Park Tenants 3,530 rail cars

Projected Annual Rail Car Volume for MDA

Industrial Prospect 12,000 rail cars

Projected Annual Rail Car Volume for Phase II (2014)

Shale Support Services facility in Hancock County 20,160 rail cars

Total Projected Annual Rail Car Volumes for

Existing Industries and MDA Industrial Prospect 41,951 rail cars

The	volume	of	rail	cars	projected	in	the	table	above	represent	a	significant	increase	in	rail	

volumes	for	the	Port	Bienville	Short	Line	Railroad.		According	to	CDM	Smith	rail	experts,	it	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

3

is	 possible	 to	 accommodate	 this	 volume	 of	 rail	 cars	 on	 the	 proposed	 rail	 line	 however,		

additional	 rail	 planning	 and	 engineering	 will	 be	 necessary	 to	 define	 the	 infrastructure	

requirements	 and	 operating	 policies	 needed	 including	 additional	 sidings,	 signaling,	 and	

adequate	 interchange	 capacity	 at	 the	 yard.	 	 Also,	 this	 significant	 increase	 in	 rail	 car	

volumes	 for	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Short	 Line	 Railroad	 could	 provide	 an	 opportunity	 to	

generate	 some	 revenues	 from	 rail	 connector	 operations	 to	 cover	 a	 portion	 of	 the	 debt	

service	for	construction	of	this	rail	line.	Additional	funding	resources	are	in	Appendix	C.	

 A	 number	 of	 studies	 document	 the	economic	 benefits	 of	 non‐captive	industrial	 facilities	

(those	facilities	with	access	to	more	than	one	railroad	provider)	that	realize,	between	30	

to	45	percent	lower	rail	rates	than	those	paid	by	captive	production	facilities.	Additional	

research	 on	 non‐captive	 rail	 impacts	 is	 included	 in	 the	 study.	 	 This	 proposed	 rail	

connector	 could	 produce	 similar	 transportation	 savings	 at	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	

Park,	 Stennis	 Space	 Center,	 and	 Pearl	 River	 Industrial	 Park,	 enabling	 companies	 in	 the	

parks	 to	 be	 more	 competitive	 and	 increase	 sales	 and	 production,	 which	 can	 lead	 to	

additional	employment	and	investment	in	Hancock	County.1

 1,200	 people	are	 currently	employed	in	 the	 Port	Bienville	 Industrial	Park.	Based	 on	 the	

five‐year	 business	 plans	 of	 the	 industries	 currently	 in	 the	 park,	 companies	 anticipate	

hiring	as	many	as	430	new	employees	over	the	five	year	period	following	the	completion	

of	 the	 proposal	 rail	 line	 to	 meet	 increased	 customer	 demand	 that	 could	 result	 from	

reduced	 delivery	 times,	 improved	 reliability,	 and	 lower	 transportation	 costs	 resulting	

from	 the	 availability	 of	 dual	 Class	 1	 rail	 service	 in	 the	 park.	 	 The	 industries	 in	 the	

industrial	park	have	worked	with	the	Hancock	County	Port	and	Harbor	Commission	for	a	

number	of	years	to	help	facilitate	the	construction	of	this	proposed	rail	connector.	

 The	 most	 significant	 long	 term	 economic	 development	 benefits	 and	 opportunities	 from	

this	rail	connector	will	be	generated	from	new	employment	and	additional	investment	in	

plant	 and	 equipment	 by	 existing	 businesses	 and	 the	 location	 of	 new	 companies	 that	

require	 or	 would	 benefit	 from	 access	 to	 dual	 Class	 1	 rail	 services.	 	 Hancock	 County	

presently	has	over	6,640	acres	of	industrial	land	available	for	lease	or	sale	including	3,600	

acres	available	 for	lease	within	 the	Stennis	Space	Center	complex.		The	Hancock	County	

Port	 and	 Harbor	 commission	 has	 also	 identified	 a	 1,500	 acres	 site	 near	 the	 existing	

industrial	park	for	future	expansion.		Pearl	River	County	has	505	acres	of	industrial	land.		

With	this	substantial	industrial	land	inventory,	access	to	dual	Class	1	rail	services	and	the	

highway	and	port	 transportation	infrastructure	serving	 this	area,	Hancock	County	could	

meet	 the	 site	 location	 requirements	 of	 a	 significant	 number	 of	 the	 mega‐projects	 and	

major	industrial	facilities	that	have	located	in	the	U.S.	over	the	past	ten‐years.	

 Exports	to	Latin	America	are	increasingly	important	for	businesses,	particularly	as	Central	

and	South	America’s	economic	performance	“remains	the	world’s	second	best	performing	

																																																																		

1	“Analysis	of	Freight	Rail	Rates	for	Chemical	Shippers,”	American	Chemistry	Council	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

4

region	 after	 Asia.”2	 	 Businesses	 in	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 already	 export	

products	 to	 a	 number	 of	 Latin	 American	 countries	 and	 most	 anticipate	 greater	

opportunities	 for	exports	 to	 this	region	within	 the	next	 two	years.		The	proximity	of	 the	

Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 to	 the	 Gulf	 Coast	 and	 Latin	 America	 coupled	 with	 the	

availability	 of	 multimodal	 transportation	 services,	 particularly	 dual	 Class	 1	 rail,	 were	

identified	 by	 nine	 companies	 as	 very	 important	 factors	 for	 their	 future	 export	 and	

business	growth.	

The Business Case for Dual Class 1 Rail Service in Hancock County

For	businesses	that	ship	or	receive	heavy	or	oversized	materials	or	large	quantities	of	materials,	

freight	rail	can	be	significantly	more	cost‐effective	than	other	transportation	modes.		While	cost	

factors	 are	important,	 businesses	 today	increasingly	 utilize	 transportation	 strategies	 to	achieve	

competitive	advantages	that	enable	them	to	meet	delivery	requirements	because	customers	want	

the	product	when,	where,	and	how	 they	choose.		Goods	movement	is,	 therefore,	an	increasingly	

crucial	part	of	a	company’s	competitiveness	strategy.		Reliable	transportation	services	and	speed	

to	 markets	 have	 become	 significant	 differentiators	 for	 many	 businesses.	 	 While	 cost	 is	 always	

important,	 other	 critical	 factors,	 such	 as	 on‐time	 deliveries	 and	 reliability,	 also	 influence	 a	

customer’s	purchasing	choices	today.	

The	 critical	 importance	 and	 benefits	 of	 dual	 Class	 1	 rail	 services	 in	 the	 U.S.	 can	 be	 readily	

demonstrated	 by	 the	 companies	 who	 have	 made	 and	 continue	 to	 make	 investment	 choices	 to	

locate	or	expand	significant	industrial	 facilities,	and	consider	access	 to	dual	Class	1	railroads	an	

essential	 “go/no‐go”	 criteria	 in	 their	 site	 selection	 evaluation.	 	 Major	 manufacturing	 facilities	

including	 Toyota	 Motor	 Company	 North	 America,	 Severstall	 Steel	 Columbus,	 Katoen	 Natie,	 a	

Belgium	 plastics	 and	 petrochemical	 products	 firm	 that	 recently	 located	 in	 Louisiana,	

ThyssenKrupp	Steel	USA,	Ford	Motor	Company,	Sanyo	Logistics,	Volkswagen	North	America,	and	

CenterPoint	 Logistics	 Center	 all	 required	 access	 to	 two	 Class	 1	 railroads	 in	 their	 site	 location	

criteria,	and	the	locations	these	companies	ultimately	selected	met	that	requirement.		All	but	one	

of	 these	 facilities	employ	 over	 a	 thousand	 people	at	 higher	 than	 average	manufacturing	wages,	

and	 because	 of	 the	 substantial	 investment	 in	 plant	 and	 equipment	 they	 provide	 significant	

contributions	to	local	and	state	tax	revenues.	

Consider,	 for	 example,	 the	 Boeing	 7E7	 site	 selection	 process	 for	 the	 Boeing	 Aerospace	 project	

now	located	in	North	Charleston,	South	Carolina.		The	transportation	and	freight	criteria	were	key	

considerations	 in	 the	 site	 selection	 process	 for	 this	 project.3	 	 Boeing’s	 transportation	

requirements	included	provisions	of	a	suitable	runway,	proximity	to	a	port	capable	of	providing	

round‐the‐clock	 operations,	continuous	availability	 of	 heavy	 traffic‐ways	 between	 the	plant	 site	

and	 the	 port,	 and	 proximity	 to	 railways	 and	 interstate	 highways.	 	 The	 availability	 of	 dual	 rail	

infrastructure	was	also	considered	crucial	to	the	recent	expansion	at	the	Port	of	Charleston.	

																																																																		

2	“Latin	American	Outlook	2012:	Recovering	the	Potential,”	Moody’s	Analytics,	and	“Growth	in	Latin	

America	Moderating	but	Resilient,”	International	Monetary	Fund:	Regional	Economic	Outlook,	October,	

2012	

3	Boeing	Corporation	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

5

Rail	 served	 industrial	 parks	 are	 a	 relatively	 scarce	 resource,	 and	 industrial	 land	 with	 dual	 rail	

services	is	considered	the	“crown	jewel”	in	the	industrial	development	profession.4	An	intensive	

search	of	available	industrial	parks	or	logistics	centers		found	only seven industrial parks or mega‐

sites in the U.S. that currently provide dual Class 1 rail services. 	Properties	were	evaluated	based	

on	 several	 criteria:	 	 availability	 of	 utilities,	 including	 at	 a	 minimum	 water,	 wastewater,	 and	

electrical	utilities	on	site;	accessibility	to	transportation	services	including	at	least	one	four‐lane	

highway,	and	dual	Class	1	rail	services	on	site	 or	existing	rail	on	site	connecting	 to	 two	Class	1	

railroads	within	reasonable	proximity	of	the	site;	and	property	currently	zoned	for	industrial	uses	

and	available	for	sale	with	an	established	pricing	structure.	

The	seven	industrial	parks	or	mega‐sites	that	currently	meet	those	criteria	are:	

 CenterPoint Intermodal Center, near Rochelle, Illinois:	 access	 to	 BNSF	 and	 Union	 Pacific	

(UP),	I‐88	and	I‐39,	with	338	acres	remaining	

 Crawford Diamond Industrial Park, Nassau County, Florida:	 1,800	 acre	 site	 zoned	

industrial,	 currently	 under	 development;	 FDOT	 road	 construction	 underway,	 utility	

improvements	on	site	under	contract	

 LogistiCenter, Logan, New Jersey:	 access	 to	 NS	 and	 CSX	 rail,	 I‐295	 and	 I‐95;	 1,100	 acre	

master	planned	business	park	with	utilities	and	rail	on	site	

 CenterPoint Intermodal Center and Illinois Inland Port, Will County, Illinois:	approximately	

3,200	acres	 remain	 of	a	 6,300	acre	 site,	with	access	 to	UP	and	BNSF	 rail,	 I‐55	and	 I‐80;	

utilities	on	site	

 Riverport West, Paducah, Kentucky:	1,200	acres	available,	access	to	BNSF	and	CN	rail	and	

I‐69;	Southland	Renewal	Fuels,	a	biodiesel	facility,	is	being	constructed	on	this	site	

 Port of Montana, Butte, Montana:	access	 to	BNSF	and	UP,	 I‐15	and	 I‐90;	utilities	 on	 site;	

full‐service	river	port	

 Frank C. Pidgeon Industrial Park, Memphis, Tennessee:	1,436	acres	with	access	to	CSX	and	

NS	rail,	I‐40,	and	the	Mississippi	River	Port	

It	 is	 worth	 noting	 that	 several	 of	 these	 properties	 are	 logistics	 centers	 and	 while	 some	

manufacturers	 may	 be	 welcomed,	 several	 of	 these	 parks	 focus	 primarily	 on	 warehousing	 and	

distribution	 facilities.	 A	 limited	 number	 of	 greenfield	

sites	 also	 have	 access	 to	 two	 Class	 1	 railroads.		

However,	 these	 properties	 lack	 the	 necessary	

infrastructure,	proximity	to	appropriate	workforce,	and	

other	 critical	 requirements	 to	 meet	 the	 general	 site	

selection	criteria	for	a	major	industrial	facility	location	

at	 this	 time.	 	 Properties	 that	 can	 meet	 these	

requirements	are	extremely	scarce.			

The	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 currently	 provides	

access	 to	 one	 Class	 1	 railroad;	 sufficient	 utility	

infrastructure	for	water,	wastewater,	electrical	service,	

natural	gas,	and	broadband;	a	workforce	catchment	area	with	a	growing	population	and	skilled	

																																																																		

4	Mark	Sweeney,	McCallum	Sweeney	Group,	IEDC	Industrial	Site	Location	Panel	2010	

“Port Bienville Industrial Park

is the best deal for the dollar

of any location around; you’ve

got rail, barge, and highway

access plus available land.”

	‐		former MDA official
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

6

labor;	 excellent	 industrial	 training	 and	 educational	 facilities;	 a	 transportation	 network	 that	

provides	 access	 to	 I‐10	 and	 I‐59;	 proximity	 to	 Stennis	 International	 Airport	 with	 an	 8,500	 foot	

runway,	terminal	and	hanger	facilities,	and	air	cargo	facilities;	a	barge	port	with	access	to	the	Gulf	

of	 Mexico	 via	 a	 navigable	 channel	 to	 the	 Pearl	 River;	 suitable	 adjoining	 land	 uses	 that	 buffer	

future	industrial	development;	and	8,645	acres	of	land	available	for	development.5		As	one	former	

MDA	 official	 put	it,	 “Port	Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	is	 the	 best	 deal	 for	 the	 dollar	 of	any	location	

around;	you’ve	got	rail,	barge,	and	highway	access	plus	available	land.”		

Prospective Industries in Hancock County

During	 the	 site	 selection	 process,	 negotiations	 with	 prospective	 companies	 are	 conducted	 in	 a	

strictly	confidential	environment.		Limited	information	about	two	industrial	facilities	considering	

Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	and	Hancock	County	has	been	provided	to	the	consultant	team	by	

Mississippi	 Development	 Authority	 and	 two	 site	 consultants	 with	 whom	 the	 team	 has	 worked	

previously.	 	 The	 anticipated	 investment	 from	 these	 two	 facilities	 would	 exceed	 $650	 million	

dollars.	 	 Permanent	 long‐term	 employment	 at	 these	 facilities	 is	 projected	 at	 450	 people,	 with	

approximately	 500	 employees	 anticipated	 during	 the	 construction	 phase.	 	 One	 prospect	 would	

utilize	 rail	 freight	 as	 the	 primary	 source	 for	 outbound	 shipment	 of	 finished	 products,	 with	

inbound	materials	delivered	by	water‐based	shipping	for	one	project	and	a	combination	of	barge	

and	 rail	 for	 the	 second	project.		These	prospects	will	not	consider	a	 site	without	access	 to	dual	

Class	1	rail	services,	and	the	only	site	in	Mississippi	these	facilities	are	considering	is	in	Hancock	

County.		Without	the	commitment	of	dual	rail	access	these	facilities	will	not	locate	in	Mississippi.				

Business Competitiveness and Dual Rail Infrastructure  

New	 transportation	 infrastructure	 enables	 businesses	 to	 take	 advantage	 of	 additional	 capacity	

and	modify	their	logistics	and	supply	chains,	improving	delivery	services	to	their	customers.	The	

proposed	 Port	 Bienville	 rail	 connector	 will	 allow	 companies	 in	 the	 park	 to	 modify	 supplier	

networks,	which	may	reduce	their	costs	or	enhance	the	quality	of	inputs.		Access	to	dual	Class	1	

rail	service	can	improve	transit	times,	provide	alternative	response	options	in	the	event	of	natural	

disasters,	increase	transportation	service	levels,	and	provide	access	to	broader	markets	and	more	

customers	 –	 all	 of	 which	 are	 critical	 to	 a	 company’s	 ability	 to	 successfully	 compete	 in	 an	

international	marketplace.		It	is	not	easy	to	quantify	the	benefits	that	can	result	from	the	addition	

of	another	Class	1	railroad;	however,	several	research	studies	have	sought	to	quantify	the	impact	

of	some	of	these	benefits.	

In	 2012,	 the	 American	 Chemistry	 Council	 released	 a	

study	 assessing	 the	 extent	 to	 which	 chemical	

companies	 rely	 on	 rail	 services,	 and	 how	 access	 to	

competitive	 rail	 services	 affected	 their	 business.	 	 A	

number	 of	 Port	 Bienville	 businesses	 are	 engaged	 in	

the	 polymers	 and	 plastics	 industry,	 which	 is	

considered	 part	 of	 the	 chemical	 sector.	 The	

																																																																		

5	Includes	total	undeveloped	acres	owned	by	HCPHC,	existing	industrial	park	tenants,	property	within	the	

secure	fee	area	at	Stennis	Space	Center,	remaining	acreage	at	the	Airport	Industrial	Park,	industrial	sites	in	

Pearl	River	County,	and	a	future	industrial	site	adjacent	to	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park.		

“...on average rail rates for

captive production facilities

are 30 percent higher.”
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

7

companies	participating	in	this	study	operate	677	major	chemical	production	facilities	in	the	U.S.		

Nearly	75	percent	of	 these	 facilities	rely	on	rail	and	a	substantial	number	receive	raw	materials	

and	ship	chemical	products	by	rail.		Chemical	producers	report	that	73	percent	of	their	facilities	

with	 inbound	 rail	 transportation	 are	 captive	 to	 a	 single	 railroad.	 	 “When	 these	 companies	

compared	 their	 captive	and	 non‐captive	 facilities	 (those	 facilities	with	access	 to	more	 than	 one	

railroad	 provider)	and	 considered	 comparable	 volumes,	 distances,	and	 services,	 they	estimated	

that		on	average	rail	rates	for	their	captive	production	facilities	are	30	percent	higher.”6			

Higher	transportation	costs	have	caused	a	number	of	these	companies	to	source	raw	materials	to	

off‐shore	locations	and	 to	site	new	production	 facilities	in	areas	“based on access to competitive

rail services”.7	 	 Transportation	 costs	 and	 service	 conditions	 have	 caused	 some	 companies	 to	

decide	 to	 forego	 expanding	 their	 U.S.	 facilities,	 to	 shut	 down	 a	line	 of	 production,	 or	 to	 close	 a	

facility	and	increase	production	in	another	country.		The	American	Chemistry	Council	estimates	

that	if	the	premium	on	chemical	shipments	were	reduced	the	chemical	sector	could	create	up	to	

25,000	additional	American	jobs	with	$1.5	billion	in	new	wages	and	$6.8	billion	in	new	economic	

output.	

The	 State	 of	 Montana,	 Governor’s	 Office	 of	 Economic	 Development	 conducted	 a	 rail	 freight	

competition	study	to	analyze	the	cost	and	benefits	of	investing	in	state‐owned	rail	infrastructure	

to	bring	additional	rail	services	to	the	state	and	promote	reasonable	rail	freight	competition	and	

rates.	The	study	 found	 that	areas	of	 the	state	where	multiple	rail	providers	were	located	saw	a	

substantial	 increase	 in	 jobs,	 higher	 market	 value	 for	 agricultural	 products	 and	 properties,	

improved	business	development,	and	significant	improvement	in	on‐time	deliveries.8			

A	recent	analysis	of	the	benefits	of	dual	rail	access	by	the	State	of	South	Carolina	found	a	number	

of	benefits	resulting	from	dual	freight	rail	services,	including:	

 Ability	to	develop	a	single	intermodal	rail	facility	to	equitably	serve	both	Class	1	railroads,	

a	more	efficient	and	economical	solution	than	constructing	two	separate	facilities	to	serve	

the	Port	of	Charleston	

 Creating	 alternative	 routes	 for	 each	 Class	 1	 railroad	 in	 the	 event	 of	 an	 emergency	 or	

natural	 disaster	 to	 support	 disaster	 response	 for	 the	 railroad,	 businesses,	 and	

communities	

 Expanding	employment	opportunities	and	development	of	land	 for	businesses	that	need	

access	to	rail	services	

Washington	 State	 Department	 of	 Transportation	 conducted	 a	 strategic	 freight	 transportation	

analysis	 to	 document	 the	 impacts	 of	 modal	 competition	 on	 the	 shipment	 of	 Washington	

																																																																		

6	“Analysis	of	Freight	Rail	Rates	for	Chemical	Shippers,”	American	Chemistry	Council,	conducted	by	Veris	

Consulting,	Inc.	2012	

7	Ibid	

8	“Rail	Freight	Competition	Study,”	prepared	for	State	of	Montana,	Office	of	Economic	Development	by	R.	L.	

Banks	&	Associates,	Washington	DC	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

8

agricultural	 products.9	 	 The	 study	 found	 significant	 benefits	 from	 competition	 in	 the	 market	

among	transportation	modes,	including	lower	transportation	prices,	more	options	for	customers,	

the	ability	to	reach	new	and	more	distant	markets,	innovations	in	marketing	and	technology,	and	

improved	transportation	services.		Development	of	competitive	rail	alternatives	generates	a	win‐

win‐win,	including	shorter	 transit	 times	 for	some	commodities,	more	reliable	 transit	 times,	and	

reasonably	competitive	rates.	

In	2006	U.S.	Department	of	Transportation	conducted	a	comprehensive	economic	study,	“Guide	to	

Quantifying	 the	 Economic	 Impacts	 of	 Federal	 Investment	in	 Large‐Scale	 Freight	 Transportation	

Projects.”10			The	study	concluded	that	“supply	chain	benefits	of	an	infrastructure	investment	that	

reduces	 direct	 transport	 costs	 by	 30	 percent	 also	 has	 the	 potential	 to	 reduce	 a	 company’s	

operating	cost	by	an	additional	1.5	percent.”11			

The Business Case for Hancock County Businesses

In	 September	 and	 October	 of	 2012	 the	 consultant	 team	 interviewed	 the	 owners	 or	 plant	

managers	of	18	businesses	in	Hancock	County	as	well	as	several	business	leaders	and	business	

support	 organizations	 in	 Hancock	 and	 Pearl	 River	 counties	 in	 Mississippi.	 Through	 these	

interviews	 the	 team	 sought	 to	 understand	 the	 region’s	 economic	 development	 assets	 and	

opportunities,	clarify	local	economic	conditions	from	the	businesses’	perspective,	and	gain	insight	

into	 transportation	 and	 supply	 chain	 issues,	 especially	 as	 they	 relate	 to	 the	 rail	 improvements	

proposed	for	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park.	A	copy	of	the	business	stakeholder	interview	guide	is	

included	in	Appendix	F.		

Eleven	 of	 the	 businesses	 surveyed	 are	 located	 at	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 in	 western	

Hancock	 County.	 The	 companies	 at	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 employ	 over	 1,200	 people,	

providing	significant	job	opportunities	 for	 the	county	and	 the	region.	Of	 these	eleven,	seven	are	

engaged	 in	 manufacturing	 and	 research	 and	 development	 involving	 plastics,	 chemicals,	 and	

metals.	Several	of	these	are	owned	by	major	global	firms	that	rank	highly	within	their	respective	

industries.	Three	businesses	provide	logistics	services	including	shipping	and	warehousing,	and	

one	is	part	of	a	large	nationwide	firm	that	leases	and	repairs	rail	cars.	

The	 remaining	 seven	companies	 or	agencies	interviewed	are	located	at	Stennis	Space	Center	in	

Hancock	 County.	Stennis	is	 home	 to	a	 number	 of	 federal	 and	 state	agencies	and	aerospace	 and	

defense	 contractors.	 	 The	 firms	 interviewed	 are	 involved	 in	 research	 and	 development,	

manufacturing,	 and	 testing	 of	 equipment	 and	 devices	 used	 in	 scientific	 research,	 defense,	

aerospace,	geospatial	technology,	and	space	systems.	The	companies	employ	federal	and	military	

staff	as	well	as	a	number	of	civilian	workers	from	Hancock	and	surrounding	counties.	Over	5,500	

people	work	at	Stennis,	and	it	is	a	major	contributor	to	the	economy	of	the	county	and	the	region.		

																																																																		

9	“Value	of	Modal	Competition	for	Transportation	of	Washington	Fresh	Fruits	and	Vegetables,”	Kenneth	

Casavant	and	Eric	Jessup	

10	“Guide	to	Quantifying	the	Economic	Impacts	of	Federal	Investments	in	Large‐Scale	Freight	

Transportation	Projects,”	U.S.	DOT,	2006	

11	Ibid	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

9

The	 businesses	 interviewed	 generally	 viewed	 Hancock	 and	 Pearl	 River	 counties	 as	 a	 desirable	

location	 for	 business.	 The	majority	 of	 the	 firms	in	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 have	 been	

there	more	than	five	years,	and	two	of	the	newer	firms	were	started	by	employees	of	other	firms	

located	there.	Owners	and	managers	mentioned	the	area’s	reasonable	taxes,	quality	community,	

supportive	business	environment,	and	 strong	workforce	as	assets.	A	 few	 noted	a	lack	 of	 skilled	

workers	 for	 specific	 technical	 requirements,	 though	 several	 have	 created	 their	 own	 training	

programs	 to	 offset	 this	 potential	 challenge	 and	 were	 very	 pleased	 with	 the	 resulting	 technical	

workforce.		One	manager	mentioned	that	it	can	sometimes	be	difficult	to	compete	with	the	high	

wages	 offered	 by	 the	 oil	 companies	in	 the	 region.	 The	 companies	interviewed	 at	 the	industrial	

park	expect	 their	business	employment	 to	remain	stable	or	 to	increase	over	 the	next	 few	 years	

despite	recent	economic	constraints,	and	a	 few	are	considering	significantly	expanding	capacity	

or	adding	new	product	lines	if	more	competitive	transportation	services	become	available.						

All	 of	 the	 manufacturing	 firms	 surveyed	 cited	 access	 to	 multiple	 modes	 of	 transportation	 as	 a	

significant	 factor	in	 their	 decision	 to	locate	in	Hancock	 County	 and	 an	 ongoing	 benefit	 to	 their	

existing	 operations	 and	 future	 expansion	 plans.	 The	industrial	park	is	 near	 I‐10	 and	 I‐59,	 with	

excellent	highway	access.	It	is	between	the	major	seaports	in	Mobile	and	New	Orleans,	and	Port	

Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 is	 accessible	 by	 barge	 via	 the	 Pearl	 River.	 The	 airport	 at	 Gulfport	 is	

within	a	45	minute	drive	and	New	Orleans	International	Airport	is	within	a	reasonable	distance	

as	well.	The	Stennis	International	Airport	provides	general	aviation	services	as	well	as	air	cargo	

facilities	 and	 is	 also	 utilized	 by	 the	 military	 for	 training	 operations.	 	 One	 firm	 mentioned	

proximity	to	the	Port	of	New	Orleans	as	a	definite	advantage	because	of	the	port’s	familiarity	with	

materials	handling	requirements	 for	chemicals.		Finally,	 the	Port	Bienville	Railroad,	a	short	line	

railroad	serving	the	industrial	park,	offers	rail	access	connecting	the	industrial	park	to	CSX’s	east‐

west	 line.	 The	 short	 line	 received	 high	 marks	 from	 the	 businesses	 that	 utilize	 rail	 services	 for	

their	customer	 focused	operation,	competitive	rates,	and	dedication	 to	working	with	companies	

to	 facilitate	 shipments	and	 deliveries	including	working	 nights,	weekends,	and	 holidays	 to	 help	

businesses	meet	major	customer	needs.			

Stennis	Space	Center	does	not	have	rail	service	at	present,	although	rail	was	available	to	this	site	

in	 the	 past.	 	 The	 proposed	 alignment	 for	 the	 new	 rail	 connector	 would	 run	 east	 of	 the	 Stennis	

facility,	and	access	to	the	proposed	rail	connector	could	be	extended	near	the	north	gate.		Three	

Stennis	 businesses	 interviewed	 for	 this	 study	 are	 interested	 in	 shipping	 by	 rail,	 particularly	 if	

transportation	 rates	 are	 competitive	 for	 oversized	loads.	One	 firm	 ships	 by	 truck	 now,	 and	 the	

size	of	the	equipment	they	produce	requires	expensive	special	handling.	Each	piece	is	fifteen	feet	

wide;	not	only	is	this	considered	a	wide	load	for	highway	travel,	but	bridge	height	clearances	can	

be	an	issue.	Shipping	by	rail	could	be	less	expensive.	A	second	company	ships	very	large	and	very	

heavy	items	 by	 flatbed	 truck,	 but	 has	 used	 rail	in	 the	 past.	Timing	and	 cost	were	mentioned	as	

critical	factors	in	their	transportation	decisions.	The	third	company	also	ships	large	components	

by	 truck,	 but	 says	 rail	 could	 be	 a	 viable	 option	 for	 them	as	well	if	it	were	available.	 	 They	 also	

noted	 they	 were	 aware	 of	 other	 research	 contractors	 that	 would	 be	 more	 inclined	 to	 move	

facilities	to	Stennis	if	rail	were	available.	

Seven	of	the	eleven	businesses	interviewed	at	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	are	current	rail	users,	

and	 two	 own	 their	 own	 rail	 cars.	 One	 company	 is	 involved	 in	 specialty	 fabrication,	 and	 their	

customers	are	located	 throughout	 the	U.S.	Customer	destinations	are	different	 for	each	job,	but	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

10

they	 use	 rail	 when	 it	 offers	 the	 best	 combination	 of	 cost	 and	 delivery	 time.	 Several	 park	

businesses	 are	 major	 rail	 users,	 relying	 on	 rail	 for	 both	 incoming	 raw	 materials	 and	 outbound	

shipments.	Companies	also	use	a	combination	of	the	modes	available	within	the	park:	truck,	rail,	

and	barge.	Several	businesses	receive	products	that	come	by	container	ship,	often	to	 the	Port	of	

New	Orleans,	and	then	the	product	travels	to	or	from	Port	Bienville	by	rail,	barge,	or	truck	to	the	

Port	 of	 New	 Orleans.	 	 A	 number	 of	 companies	 in	 the	 industrial	 park	 currently	 export	 finished	

goods	 to	 international	 customers	 in	 Mexico,	 Brazil,	 Peru,	 Panama,	 and	 Canada.	 	 Most	 of	 the	

businesses	 interviewed	 were	 aggressively	 working	 to	 expand	 their	 customer	 base	 and	 were	

actively	 engaged	 in	 efforts	 to	 export	 their	 products	 to	 new	 markets	 in	 the	 coming	 year.	 	 Rail	

access	 to	 ocean	 ports	 was	 critical	 to	 these	 efforts.	One	 of	 the	 companies	interviewed	may	 ship	

their	products	to	South	American	customers	via	barge	from	the	port	in	the	future.	

Port	 Bienville	 companies	 who	 currently	 use	 rail	 anticipate	 definite	 benefits	 from	 the	 proposed	

rail	 connector	 linking	 the	 CSX	 in	 the	 industrial	 park	 to	 the	 Norfolk‐Southern	 rail	 line.	 	 Four	

companies	who	do	not	use	rail	presently	would	consider	doing	so	if	costs	were	more	economical	

and	 shipments	 and	 deliveries	 were	 more	 reliable.	 	 A	 logistics	 firm	 in	 the	 park	 could	 gain	 new	

business	if	direct	rail‐to‐barge	transfer	were	feasible.	Two	companies	that	use	rail	now	could	do	

so	 much	 more	 economically	 and	 efficiently	 because	 many	 of	 their	 customers	 are	 served	 by	

Norfolk‐Southern.	 Another	 firm	 currently	 trucks	 inbound	 shipments,	 but	 would	 use	 rail	if	 they	

could	access	Norfolk‐Southern	because	some	of	their	suppliers	are	served	by	NS.	This	same	firm	

sends	most	of	its	finished	product	overseas,	and	previously	used	rail‐to‐ship	for	outgoing	freight.	

However,	they	now	use	trucks	and	barges	because	the	rail	service	available	at	present	costs	more	

and	 shipments	 take	longer	 to	 reach	 their	 customers.	 	Dual	 Class	 1	 access	 would	 allow	 them	 to	

make	 logistics	 decision	 based	 on	 speed	 to	 market	 factors.	 	 One	 company	 that	 currently	 trucks	

outbound	products	because	rail	is	not	available	could	move	materials	destined	for	Mexico,	South	

America,	and	other	U.S.	markets	via	the	CSX	line.		

Two	 firms	 noted	 they	 are	 currently	 at	 a	 disadvantage	 because	 companies	 they	 routinely	 bid	

against	 have	 access	 to	 multiple	 rail	 providers	 and	 thus	 have	 more	 competitive	 transportation	

costs	and	better	delivery	times.		Access	to	a	second	Class	I	rail	line	could	result	in	lower	costs	and	

better	 delivery	 schedules,	 improving	 their	 ability	 to	 compete.	 	 For	 many	 businesses	 at	 Port	

Bienville,	 transit	 time	 and	 reliability	 of	 deliveries	 are	 critical.	 Rail	 shipments	 bound	 for	 Port	

Bienville	now	 travel	 to	Gentilly	Yard	in	New	Orleans	and	are	 then	backhauled	 to	Port	Bienville.		

The	additional	time	and	distance	also	adds	to	the	cost	of	rail	transport.		The	Gentilly	Yard	can	be	

congested	and	it	is	not	unusual	for	cars	to	take	at	least	seven	days	to	move	from	the	yard	in	New	

Orleans	 back	 to	 Port	 Bienville.	 	 Transit	 times	 of	 28	 days	 have	 been	 documented	 by	 several	

businesses	in	the	park.					

One	manufacturer	ships	its	 finished	products	throughout	the	U.S.	via	Burlington	Northern	Santa	

Fe,	Union	Pacific,	and	Norfolk	Southern	through	Gentilly	Yard.		Their	customer	contracts	include	a	

$1.3	 million	 penalty	 for	 delayed	 deliveries.	 	 Two	 years	 ago,	 this	 company	 was	 forced	 to	 hire	

hundreds	 of	 trucks	 to	 off‐load	 a	 shipment	 in	 Gentilly	 Yard	 that	 was	 delayed	 there	 after	 being	

delivered	 from	 their	 plant	 in	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park.	 	 Their	 heavy,	 oversized	 steel	

products	were	shipped	by	truck	to	the	customer	to	avoid	incurring	the	$1.3	million	penalty	and	

the	 customer’s	 dissatisfaction.	 	 As	 the	 company	 executive	lamented,	 “if	 that	 happens	 again,	 we	

may	 have	 to	 rethink	 our	 overall	 production	 here.	We	just	 can’t	 risk	 having	 to	 pay	 that	 penalty,	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

11

those	trucking	costs,	or	having	a	major	customer	drop	our	business	because	we	can’t	deliver	on	

time.”	 	 Dual	 Class	 1	 rail	 service	 could	 result	 in	 significantly	 improved	 reliability	 and	 improved	

delivery	times	helping	area	firms	avoid	such	penalties.		

Another	company	relies	on	shipments	 through	Gentilly	Yard	 for	raw	materials.	 If	shipments	are	

held	 up	 the	 plant	is	 faced	 with	 a	 potential	 shut	 down	in	 operations.	 	 This	 company	 has	 paid	 a	

premium	 of	 $39,000	 to	 get	 just	 25	 cars	 moved	 from	 Birmingham	 to	 Port	 Bienville	 to	 avoid	 a	

disruption	in	their	production	line.	Yet	another	firm	has	had	to	transfer	materials	from	rail	cars	to	

trucks	 –	 and	 pay	 the	 extra	 transit	 cost	 –	in	 order	 to	meet	 customers’	 deadlines.	 Their	logistics	

manager	noted	that	“this	happens	more	than	it	should.”	A	Port	Bienville	logistics	firm	mentioned	

that	 their	 production	 stops	 when	 rail	 cars	 are	late	 or	 cannot	 be	moved.	 Lack	 of	 timeliness	is	 a	

serious	issue	for	them.		

Severe	storms	are	a	threat	all	along	the	Gulf	coast,	and	six	of	the	companies	with	facilities	at	Port	

Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 prior	 to	 Hurricane	 Katrina	 described	 how	 the	 storm	 impacted	 their	

operations.	Though	damage	to	buildings	was	extensive,	requiring	a	complete	rebuild	in	one	case,	

the	damage	 to	the	CSX	rail	line	which	caused	the	rail	line	to	be	shut	down	 for	six	months	was	a	

more	serious	problem.	Until	the	rail	line	reopened,	one	company	related	that	its	shipments	from	

Houston	had	to	travel	through	Arkansas,	Tennessee,	and	Alabama,	tripling	both	delivery	time	and	

cost.	 Another	 firm	 shipped	 everything	 via	 truck	 after	 Katrina,	which	 cost	 four	 times	 more	 and	

took	twice	as	long.	Katrina	was	a	severe	storm,	of	course,	and	it	caused	unprecedented	damage.	

But	several	businesses	were	concerned	that	the	CSX	line	was	out	for	almost	two	months	following	

tropical	 storm	 Isaac	in	 September	 2012.	 	 Access	 to	 two	 rail	 lines	 could	 potentially	 allow	 these	

businesses	to	get	back	into	production	and	put	people	back	to	work	more	quickly	after	a	natural	

disaster.		One	plant	manager	noted	that	had	the	proposed	rail	connector	line	been	in	place	prior	

to	 Katrina,	 his	 firm	 possibly	 could	 have	 moved	 their	 rail	 cars	 and	 critical	 manufacturing	

equipment	 north	 to	 avoid	 the	 path	 of	 the	 storm;	 perhaps	 other	 firms	 and	 transportation	

providers	could	have	moved	their	rail	cars	and	equipment	as	well.			

The	existing	industries	at	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	recognize	the	advantages	of	their	current	

location	 and	 the	improvements	 that	 could	 be	 realized	if	 the	 proposed	 rail	 connector	 line	 were	

constructed.		The	potential	for	dual	Class	1	rail	services	in	Hancock	County	has	also	attracted	the	

attention	 of	 several	 companies	 engaged	 in	 the	 site	 location	 process.	 	 These	 businesses	 are	

working	 directly	 with	 the	 Hancock	 County	 Port	 and	 Harbor	 Commission,	 the	 Mississippi	

Development	Authority,	and	two	site	location	consultants.		Because	of	the	extreme	sensitivity	and	

confidentiality	of	the	site	location	process,	limited	information	is	available	about	the	impacts	that	

could	 result.	 	However,	 these	 prospects	 require	 access	 to	 dual	Class	 1	 rail	 service	 and	 will	 not	

consider	a	site	that	cannot	meet	that	requirement	within	a	specified	time	frame.		Together	these	

companies	would	invest	over	$650	million	in	plant	and	equipment	and	employ	450	people.		

Existing and Emerging Industries and Rail Transportation Dependence in

Hancock County  

Innovation	is	an	important	key	 to	 future	economic	prosperity	and	competitiveness.		 In	Hancock	

County’s	case,	innovation	is	the	linchpin	of	their	targeted	growth	sectors	and	continues	to	drive	a	

significant	 number	 of	 existing	 industries	 as	 well.	 The	 Hancock	 County	 Port	 and	 Harbor	

Commission	 identified	 four	 major	 growth	 sectors	 for	 the	 community:	 aerospace	 and	 aviation,	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

12

cargo‐oriented	 development,	 polymers	 and	 advanced	 composite	 materials,	 and	 geospatial	

technology.	 In	 addition	 to	 these	 four	 target	 industries,	 manufacturing	 and	 exports	 continue	 to	

represent	 a	 significant	 opportunity	 for	 future	 growth.	 	 The	 analysis	 below	 describes	 these	

economic	drivers	and	the	importance	of	freight	rail	to	these	businesses,	and	thus	to	the	future	of	

Hancock	 County.	 Relating	 these	 existing	 and	 emerging	 businesses	 to	 the	 transportation	

dependence	 of	 their	 associated	 business	 sectors	 underscores	 the	 critical	 relationship	 between	

Hancock	County’s	economy	and	multimodal	transportation.	

Emerging Growth Industries in Hancock County

Aerospace and Aviation

According	to	the	Aerospace	Industries	Association	of	America,	aerospace	sales	in	the	U.S.	reached	

a	new	high	of	$212.7	billion	in	2010,	and	that	upward	trajectory	continues.12		A	number	of	major	

aerospace	and	aviation	companies	are	located	in	Hancock	County	including	Rolls	Royce,	Pratt	and	

Whitney,	 Raytheon	 Technical	 Services,	 and	 Lockheed	 Martin.	 	 These	 businesses	 are	 leaders	 in	

performance‐based	 logistics,	 aerospace	 research	 and	 development,	 propulsion	 systems,	 and	

rocket	engines.		Stennis	Space	Center	is	a	world	leader	in	rocket	and	jet	engine	testing;	aerospace	

research,	satellite	propulsion	cores,	and	the	rockets	that	powered	the	Apollo	Space	Mission	were	

developed	 and	 tested	 here.	 	 Contractors	 in	 the	 three	 south	 Mississippi	 counties,	 Hancock,	

Harrison,	 and	 Jackson,	 won	 $20	 billion	 in	 Department	 of	 Defense	 aerospace	 work	 from	 2000	

through	 2010.	 	 The	 products	 shipped	 by	 these	 companies	 are	 often	 heavy,	 oversized	 loads	

requiring	special	handling	and	security	during	transport.	

Stennis	 Space	 Center	 has	 anchored	 a	 growing	 number	 of	 aerospace	 and	 aviation	 companies	 in	

Hancock	County	and	along	the	Mississippi	Gulf	Coast.		Other	aerospace	and	aviation	companies	in	

Hancock	County	include	Applied	Geo	Technologies,	Jacobs	Engineering,	Optech	International	Inc.,	

and	 SELEX	 Galileo.	 	 Stennis	 is	 home	 to	 six	 aerospace	 research	 and	 applied	 technology	 centers,	

including	 the	Engineering	and	Test	Directorate	and	 the	Applied	Science	and	Technology	Project	

Office	that	uses	satellites	to	assess	the	environmental	health	of	coastal	areas	including	the	Gulf	of	

Mexico.	 	 Engine	 testing	 for	 the	 Airbus	 manufacturing	 facility	 in	 Mobile	 will	 be	 conducted	 at	

Stennis	Space	Center	as	well.	

The	Mississippi	Technology	Transfer	Center	on	the	Stennis	campus	assists	aerospace	and	aviation	

entrepreneurs	 in	 taking	 research	 from	 testing	 to	 commercially	 viable	 research	 and	 products.		

Technology	 transfer	 is	 also	 part	 of	 the	 mission	 of	 the	 Mississippi	 State	 University	 Science	 and	

Technology	Center,	which	brings	together	four	major	research	partners	under	one	roof.			

In	addition	 to	 the	aerospace	and	aviation	activities	at	Stennis,	 the	Stennis	 International	Airport	

has	 become	a	 center	 for	military	aviation	 testing	and	 training	and	is	also	 the	 home	 of	 the	 Joint	

Airborne	 Lidar	 Bathymetry	 Technical	 Center	 and	 a	 joint	 use	 agreement	 with	 Kessler	 Air	 Force	

Base.		Sixty	to	seventy	percent	of	the	tower	operations	at	this	airport	are	military	operations.			

																																																																		

12	Aerospace	Industries	Association,	Aerospace	Industry	Report	2011	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

13

Cargo‐Oriented Development

The	State	of	Mississippi	has	identified	six	strategic	 freight	corridors	providing	a	range	of	 freight	

infrastructure	 that	best	serve	 the	 freight	needs	of	 the	state’s	existing	and	emerging	industries.13		

The	 multimodal	 freight	 system	 that	 serves	 the	 state	 include	 the	 Gulf	 Coast	 and	 river	 ports,	

interstates	 and	 highways,	 Class	 1	 and	 short	 line	 railroads,	 airports,	 intermodal	 facilities,	 and	

pipelines.		The	Gulf	Coast	Multimodal	Corridor	shown	in	 the	map	below	has	been	designated	as	

one	of	 these	six	strategic	 freight	corridors.		Freight	infrastructure	in	 this	corridor	includes	Port	

Bienville	 and	 the	 Ports	 of	 Pascagoula,	 Biloxi,	 and	 Gulfport.	 Rail	 and	 highway	 infrastructure	

includes	 CSX,	 NS,	 and	 KCS	 rail	 as	 well	 as	 several	 short	 line	 railroads,	 Interstate	 10,	 and	 U.S.	

highways	90	and	49			

Figure 1    Gulf Coast Multimodal Corridor

Cargo‐oriented	development	includes	distribution	centers,	port	and	inland	port	facilities,	foreign	

trade	 zones	 (HCDC	 has	 secured	a	 Foreign	 Trade	 Zone	 for	 Port	Bienville),	intermodal	 terminals,	

bulk	or	transload	facilities	(including	an	existing	transload	facility	north	of	Stennis	Space	Center),	

hub	 terminals,	 and	 city	 terminals.	 	 Successful	 cargo	 oriented	 development	 depends	 upon	

available	 site	 and	 transportation	 infrastructure	 that	 meets	 the	 site	 selection	 needs	 of	 private	

industry,	 and	 ongoing	 policies	 that	 support	 the	 location	 of	 these	 types	 of	 facilities.	 	 Hancock	

County	 Port	 and	 Harbor	 Commission	 has	 made	 strategic	 choices	 and	 investments	 in	 order	 to	

create	an	environment	 that	supports	 the	operation	of	cargo‐oriented	 facilities.		Cargo	or	 freight	

facilities	 can	 also	 be	 a	 catalyst	 for	 attracting	 other	 industries	 concerned	 about	 transportation	

																																																																		

13 Mississippi Goods Movement and Trade Study,	prepared	for	Mississippi	Dept.	of	Transportation,	2010	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

14

reliability,	 cost,	 and	 services.	 	 The	 critical	 site	 selection	 factors	 that	 cargo	 or	 freight	 facilities	

consider	 include	 the	 factors	 identified	 in	 the	 section	 beginning	 on	 page	 20	 of	 this	 report,	 and	

additional	factors	including:14

 Interaction	with	the	transportation	network	

 Modal	choice	

 Permitting	and	regulatory	environment	

 Access	to	key	markets	

Several	 specialized	 freight	 and	 logistics	 companies	 are	 located	 in	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	

Park.		The	Andersons,	Inc.	is	part	of	a	publicly	traded	company	headquartered	in	Maumee,	Ohio.		

The	 Anderson	 Rail	 Group	 ranks	 seventh	 among	 privately	 owned	 rail	 fleets	 in	 the	 U.S.	 GSD	

Logistics,	LLC	is	a	bonded	warehouse	providing	warehousing,	transloading,	end	loading,	and	pick‐

and‐pack	 services.	 	 The	 company	 primarily	 handles	 soft	 goods	 and	 ships	 to	 several	 regions	

around	 the	 country.	 	 SSA/Gulf	 a	 third‐party	 shipper,	 handles	 barge‐to‐truck	 shipments	 and	

transportation	 and	 warehousing	 for	 barge‐to‐warehouse‐to‐truck	 freight	 shipments.	 	 A	 &	 R	

Distribution	provides	bulk	transportation	and	warehousing	services	including	rail	shipping.			

The	existing	 transportation	infrastructure	within	 the	Gulf	Coast	Multimodal	Corridor	and,	more	

specifically,	 the	 unique	 transportation	 assets	 in	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 support	 the	

continued	expansion	of	this	key	growth	sector	in	Hancock	County.	Access	to	an	additional	Class	1	

rail	provider	would	enhance	this	sector.	

Polymers and Advanced Composite Materials

More	than	400	plastics	and	polymer	companies	are	located	in	Mississippi	and	over	100	of	them	

are	 engaged	 in	 manufacturing	 chemicals.	 	 DAK	 Americas,	 Sabic	 Innovative	 Plastics,	

SNF/Polychemie,	 Calgon	 Carbon,	and	MAC	 LLC,	all	located	in	 the	Port	Bienville	 Industrial	 Park,	

are	engaged	in	polymer,	plastics,	and	chemical	manufacturing.		

Plastics	and	polymer	manufacturing	is	projected	to	continue	to	grow	in	the	future	at	a	rate	of	3.5	

percent	 annually.15	 	 Innovation	 and	 technology	 drives	 the	 polymer	 and	 advanced	 composite	

materials	 industry,	 accounting	 for	 a	 significant	 component	 of	 the	 sector’s	 growth.	 	 Ford	 Motor	

Company	and	Oak	Ridge	National	 Laboratory	 have	 partnered	 to	 develop	 composite	automobile	

body	 panels	 to	 reduce	 vehicle	 weight	 by	 as	 much	 as	 25	 percent.	 	 Advances	 in	 nanotechnology	

utilizing	 new	 composite	 materials,	 industrial	 biotechnology,	 and	 additive	 manufacturing	 –	

fabricating	 solid	 three‐dimensional	 objects	 directly	 from	 digital	 models	 through	 depositing	 or	

“printing”	 –	 are	 driving	 this	 industry	 sector,	 now	 collectively	 valued	 at	 approximately	 $21	

trillion.16			

DAK	 Americas	 is	 a	 division	 of	 Alpek	 S.A.	 de	 C.V.,	 one	 of	 Mexico’s	 largest	 corporations.	 	 This	

company	is	the	largest	producer	of	PTA	resin	in	the	world.		DAK	manufactures	food	grade	plastic	

pellets	for	a	variety	of	uses,	each	with	unique	composite	requirements	depending	upon	the	food	

																																																																		

14	NCFRP	Project	23:	“Economic	and	Transportation	Drivers	for	Siting	Freight	Intermodal	and	Warehouse	

Distribution	Facilities,”	for	Transportation	Research	Board	

15	“Market	Report:	Plastics	Industry	Will	Follow	Manufacturing	Growth,”	Mali	R.	Schantz,	April	2012	 16	The	Manufacturing	Institute,	“Facts	about	Modern	Manufacturing,”	2009	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

15

that	will	be	stored.		DAK	is	a	significant	rail	user.		Sabic	Innovative	Plastics	has	been	in	operation	

in	Hancock	County	for	over	31	years.		The	company	manufactures	plastic	pellets	that	are	shipped	

to	 customers	 around	 the	 world.	 	 This	 company	 is	 actively	 involved	 in	 developing	 new	

technologies	 and	 designing	 new	 products	 for	 their	 customers.	 	 SNF/Polychemie	 makes	 water‐

soluble	polymers	that	are	used	in	municipal	and	industrial	wastewater	treatment,	in	mining,	and	

in	 oil	 field	applications	around	 the	world.		Reliable	product	delivery	is	crucial	 to	 their	business	

model.	 	 MAC	 LLC	 is	 a	 new	 technology‐based	 business	 developing	 polymer	 products	 for	 the	

military.	 	 Calgon	 Carbon	 is	 a	 specialty	 chemical	 business	 that	 develops	 and	 manufactures	

granulated	activated	carbon	for	use	in	water	and	air	purification	systems.			

Geospatial Technology

Geospatial	 technology	was	essentially	developed	at	Stennis	Space	Center,	building	on	geospatial	

research	 conducted	 by	 NASA,	 the	 Department	 of	 Defense,	 Department	 of	 Commerce,	 and	 the	

private	 sector.	 	 Geospatial	 products	 allow	 consumers,	 businesses,	 and	 governments	 to	 utilize	

geographic	data	in	a	variety	of	equipment	and	services,	research	facilities	at	Stennis	continue	to	

provide	new	innovations	in	this	industry.		The	U.S.	geospatial	industry	generated	approximately	

$73	billion	in	revenues	and	at	least	500,000	well‐paid	jobs	in	2011.17			

Manufacturing and Exports  

	The	 2013	 Global	 Manufacturing	 Competitiveness	 Index	 recently	 released	 by	 Deloitte	 and	 the	

Council	 on	 Competitiveness	 identified	 ten	 key	 drivers	 of	 global	 competitiveness.	 Six	 of	 those	

drivers	relate	directly	to	the	Port	Bienville	Rail	connector	project:	

 Cost	and	availability	of	labor	and	materials	

 Supplier	networks	

 Talent‐driven	innovation	

 Physical	infrastructure	

 Economic,	trade,	financial	and	tax	systems	

 Government	investments	in	manufacturing	and	innovation	

International	executives	who	participated	in	this	study	in	2013	ranked	supplier	networks	as	the	

fourth	most	important	driver	of	manufacturing	competitiveness;	in	2010	supplier	networks	only	

ranked	eighth.	The	increase	in	international	business	operations,	expanding	exports,	and	efforts	

to	locate	new	production	near	emerging	consumer	markets	have	played	a	role	in	 the	increasing	

focus	 on	 moving	 goods	 cost	 effectively	 and	 reliably.	 	 Companies	 are	 investing	 in	 their	 supply	

chains	 to	 mitigate	 risks	 resulting	 from	 natural	 disasters,	 and	 to	 ensure	 greater	 control	 over	

deliveries	to	customers	and	more	in‐depth	knowledge	of	material	sourcing.			

Physical	infrastructure,	which	includes	 the	infrastructure	required	 for	goods	movement,	ranked	

sixth	in	the	2013	competitiveness	study.		Research	in	the	U.S.	and	other	nations	reveals	physical	

infrastructure	investment	reduces	costs	and	improves	efficiencies	in	conducting	business,	boosts	

job	creation,	and	fosters	growth	cycles	within	countries.18

																																																																		

17	“Putting	the	U.S.	Geospatial	Services	Industry	on	the	Map,”	The	Boston	Consulting	Group,	December	2012	 18	“2013	Global	Manufacturing	Competitiveness	Index,”	Deloitte	LLP	and	the	Council	on	Competitiveness	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

16

Manufacturing	continues	 to	be	a	vital	part	of	 the	American	economy.		Manufacturing	in	 the	U.S.	

generated	$1.8	trillion	in	gross	domestic	product	(GDP)	in	2011,	or	12.2	percent	of	total	U.S.	GDP.		

The	U.S.	exported	more	than	$1.3	trillion	in	manufactured	goods,	or	more	than	86	percent	of	all	

U.S.	exports,	in	2011.19		Manufacturing	firms	employ	nearly	12	million	people,	and	for	every	direct	

manufacturing	 job	 an	 additional	 1.6	 jobs	 are	 created	 in	 research	 and	 development,	 trade,	

professional	services,	and	transportation.20			Manufacturing	matters	in	the	U.S.	and	in	Mississippi	

because:	

 Employees	 in	 manufacturing	 firms	 earn	 an	 average	 of	 $77,060	 annually	 in	 pay	 and	

benefits,	while	average	workers	in	all	industries	earn	$60,168.	This	means	manufacturing	

jobs	pay,	on	average,	19.9	percent	more	than	non‐manufacturing	jobs.	21

 Manufacturing	firms	account	for	nearly	two‐thirds	of	all	research	and	development	in	the	

U.S.	and	are	a	leading	user	of	new	technologies	and	processes.22			

 Manufactured	 goods	 account	 for	86	 percent	 of	 America’s	 exports,	 and	manufacturing	is	

important	to	the	reduction	of	our	national	trade	deficit.	

 Manufacturing	 has	 the	 highest	multiplier	effect	 of	any	economic	 sector;	 for	every	 dollar	

spent	 in	 manufacturing	 another	 $1.48	 is	 added	 to	 the	 economy,	 helping	 to	 stimulate	

economic	growth.	

 Mississippi’s	 economy	 is	 intrinsically	 linked	 to	 its	 ability	 to	 move	 people,	 materials,	

components,	 and	 finished	 goods	 within	 the	 state	 and	 to	 national	 and	 international	

destinations.			

Manufactured	goods	account	for	93.2	percent	of	Mississippi‘s	exports	and	support	over	317,900	

trade‐related	jobs	in	 the	 state.23	 	 Businesses	in	Mississippi	 exported	 $12.2	 billion	in	 goods	 and

services	 in	 2012.24	 	 The	 state’s	 largest	 export	 market	 is	 Panama,	 followed	 by	 Canada,	 Mexico,	

China,	 Honduras,	 Colombia,	 and	 Brazil.	 	 Primary	 exports	 include	 petroleum,	 coal,	 chemicals,	

computer	and	electronic	products,	transportation	equipment,	and	paper.	

Sixty‐four	 percent	 of	 the	 businesses	 in	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 are	 engaged	 in	

manufacturing	 and	 a	 number	 of	 agencies	 and	 contractors	 at	 the	 Stennis	 Space	 Center	 are	 also	

involved	 in	 ongoing	 manufacturing,	 re‐fabrication,	 or	 research	 and	 development	 activities	 that	

involve	moving	heavy,	over‐sized	equipment	and	engines.		PSL	North	America	is	an	international	

company	 headquartered	 in	 India.	 	 The	 Port	 Bienville	 facility	 is	 the	 firm’s	 only	 mill	 in	 North	

America.	 	 This	 high‐tech	 operation	 manufactures	 steel	 pipe	 from	 18	 inches	 to	 110	 inches	 in	

diameter	with	up	to	one	inch	thick	walls,	at	lengths	up	to	80	feet.		The	company	builds	piping	for	

																																																																		

19	U.S.	Department	of	Commerce,	Bureau	of	Economic	Analysis	

20	U.S.	Department	of	Commerce,	Economics	and	Statistics	Administration,	“The	Benefits	of	Manufacturing	

Jobs,”	May	2012.	

21	Bureau	of	Economic	Analysis,	Industry	Economic	Accounts,	2011	 22	Brookings	Institute,	Metropolitan	Policy	Program,	“Why	Does	Manufacturing	Matter?”	February	2012	 23	Data	from	Bureau	of	Economic	Analysis,	Bureau	of	Labor	Statistics,	and	USITC	 24	U.S.	Department	of	Commerce,		International	Trade	Administration,	Office	of	Trade	and	Industry	

Information,	February	2013	Report,	and	Mississippi	Business	Roundtable	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

17

oil	 and	 gas	 transmission,	 water	 transmission,	 construction	 piping,	 and	 miscellaneous	 tubular	

products.		They	have	a	rail	spur	on	site	and	ninety	percent	of	their	 transportation	is	via	 freight	

rail.	

Figure 2 ‐ Queen City Tower

Manufab	 Inc.	 fabricates	 a	 range	 of	 steel	 products	 including	 beams	

for	 building,	 bridges,	 floodgates,	 trusses	 and	 other	 structural

components.		They	built	 the	architectural	“tiara”	(shown	at	left)	on	

the	 top	 of	 the	 Queen	 City	 Tower	 in	 Cincinnati	 at	 their	 Hancock	

County	location	in	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park.	

Transportation Dependence and Hancock County’s Economy

Freight	 transportation	represents	a	key	competitiveness	 factor	for	Hancock	County.		Businesses	

today	 compete	 not	 only	 on	 the	 basis	 of	 product	 quality	and	 cost.	 	The	 transportation	 networks	

that	 serve	 their	 facilities	 must	 provide	 reliable	 connections	 to	 customers	 and	 access	 to	 a	

multitude	 of	 markets,	 ensure	 timely	 deliveries	 of	 goods	 and	 services,	 and	 provide	 access	 for	

employees	and	customers.		Some	business	sectors	use	transportation	facilities	and	services	more	

extensively	 than	 other	 sectors.	 	 An	 industry	 sector’s	 dependence	 on	 transportation	 can	 be	

measured	by	examining	the	amount	a	business	sector	spends	on	transportation	as	a	share	of	the	

total	 output	 of	 the	 sector.25	 	 Transportation Satellite Accounts	 provide	 national	 data	 about	 the	

amount	spent	on	transportation	per	dollar	of	output	for	various	sectors.	

To	 better	 understand	 the	 role	 freight	 and	 goods	 movement	 play	 in	 Hancock	 County	 and	 the	

contribution	 of	multimodal	 transportation	 to	 the	economic	 vitality	 of	 the	 county’s	 key	industry	

sectors,	the	consultant	team	evaluated	the	importance	of	these	key	industrial	sectors	based	upon	

the	non‐governmental	employment	concentrations	in	the	county.		Sixty‐three	percent	of	the	non‐

governmental	 employment	 is	 in	 five	 sectors:	 construction,	 manufacturing,	 wholesale	 and	 retail	

trade,	professional	and	technical	services,	and	arts,	 food	service,	and	entertainment.26			Figure	3	

shows	the	breakdown	of	these	employment	sectors	in	Hancock	County.	

																																																																		

25	“Transportation	Satellite	Accounts:	A	Look	at	Transportation’s	Role	in	the	Economy,”	U.S.	DOT	Research	

and	Innovative	Technology	Administration	

26	Bureau	of	Labor	Statistics	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

18

Figure 3    Employment by Sector in Hancock County

Source: U.S. Census, Bureau of Labor Statistics

The	importance	of	transportation	to	 these	key	industry	sectors	can	be	measured	by	the	amount	

spent	 on	 transportation	 by	 each	 sector	 as	 a	 share	 of	 its	 total	 output.	 	 Transportation Satellite

Accounts	 provide	 a	 valuable	 method	 of	 measuring	 the	 transportation	 dependence	 of	 various	

industry	 sectors.	 	 In	 Hancock	 and	 Pearl	 River	 Counties	 the	 consultant	 team	 evaluated	 the	

following	 primary	 industry	 sectors	 and	 identified	 the	 corresponding	 industrial	 classification	

codes	 for	 each	 key	 sector	 to	 allow	 for	 a	 comparison	 of	 the	 applicable	 transportation	 costs	 per	

dollar	of	product	output	calculated	from	the	Transportation Satellite Accounts	research.			

Table 2   North American Industrial Classification for Targeted Industrial Sectors in Hancock County

Hancock County Industrial Sectors North American Industrial Classification Sector

Aerospace and Aviation Manufacturing

Cargo‐Oriented Development Transportation and Warehousing

Polymers and Advanced Composite  

Materials Manufacturing

Geospatial Technology Professional and Technical/Manufacturing

Manufacturing Manufacturing

Retail and Wholesale Trade Retail and Wholesale Trade

Figure	4	shows	the	transportation	cost	per	dollar	of	product	output	for	several	important	existing	

industry	 sectors	 in	 Hancock	 County	 based	 on	 their	 North	 American	 Industrial	 Classification	 or	

NAICS	code.		Improvements	in	transportation	costs	and	services	would	have	a	significant	effect	on	

a	company’s	profitability.		Lower	transportation	costs	and	more	reliable	service	help	reduce	the	

cost	 of	materials,	 and	 thus	 overall	 production	 costs.	Reliable	delivery	 of	materials	 can	 enhance	

productivity,	 and	 reduced	 distribution	 costs	 to	 the	 consumer	 may	 also	 improve	 their	

competitiveness.			

Construction

Manufacturing

Wholesale and Retail Trade

Professional and technical

services

Arts, entertainment,

recreation

18%

17%

9.6%

11%

8.2%
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

19

Figure 4    Transportation Cost as a Share of Sector Output (Transport Cost per $ of Product Value)

Source: Transportation Satellite Accounts Database, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Research and Innovation Technology

Administration

The	 transportation	 satellite	 account	 data	 indicates	 that	 Hancock	 County	 industries	 most	

dependent	 on	 freight	 rail	 services	 include	 aerospace	 and	 aviation	 businesses;	 polymers,	

chemicals,	and	plastics;	manufacturing;	geospatial	 technology;	cargo‐oriented	development;	and	

retail	and	wholesale	trade,	as	shown	in	Table	3.	

Table 3    Transportation Dependence Rating of Hancock County’s Top Industries

Industry Sector: Highways Freight Rail Waterways/Ports Air Transportation cost

per dollar of output

Aerospace & Aviation High High High High 9%

Cargo‐Oriented

Development High High High Medium 9%

Polymers &  

Composite Materials High High Medium Low 9%

Geospatial Technology High Medium Low High 6.5%

Manufacturing High High High Medium 9%

Retail and

Wholesale Trade High High Medium Low 6.5%

The	 transportation	 dependence	 of	 an	 industrial	 sector	 is	 just	 part	 of	 the	 overall	 business‐

transportation	 connection.	 	 As	 competition	 world‐wide	 becomes	 more	 intense,	 businesses	 are	

exporting	a	diverse	range	of	products	 to	customers	in	more	countries	 than	ever	before.		Export

Nation,	a	recent	study	from	the	Brookings	Institute,	found	that:	

$0.00 $0.02 $0.04 $0.06 $0.08 $0.10 $0.12 $0.14 $0.16

Agriculture & Forestry

Transportation Equipment and Parts

Transportation and Warehousing

Wholesale & Retail Trade

Professional & Business Services

Manufacturing

Natural Resources & Mining

Cost per Dollar of Product Output
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

20

 In	2008	over	11.8	million	jobs	in	the	United	States	were	supported	by	the	chain	of	export	

production	including	inputs	and	transportation.27

 Export	intensive	industries	pay	higher	wages,	and	pay	1	to	2	percent	higher	wages	even	

for	workers	without	high	school	degrees.	

 Export	sectors	generate	multiplier	impacts	much	greater	 than	sectors	 that	only	produce	

for	 domestic	 markets.	 Gains	 from	 trade	 result	 in	 additional	 demand	 for	 products	 and	

services	from	outside	the	economic	impact	area.			

 High‐value‐added	 products	are	more	 time	 sensitive	and	 often	 higher	in	 value.	 	The	 cost	

for	 delays	 for	 these	 products	 is	 substantial,	 as	 one	 company	 in	 the	 Port	 Bienville	

Industrial	 Park	 knows.	 	 To	 avoid	 a	 $1.3	 million	 delivery	 delay	 penalty	 the	 company	

incurred	substantial	costs	to	truck	their	products	to	the	customer’s	dock	door.	

Reliability	and	speed	to	market	were	determined	to	be	critical	factors	of	competitiveness	 for	85	

percent	 of	 the	 businesses	 in	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park.	 Dual	 Class	 1	 rail	 service	 would	

improve	delivery	time	to	customers	and	reduce	potential	delays	to	certain	key	markets,	and	has	

the	 potential	 to	 reduce	 transportation	 costs	 from	 30	 to	 45	 percent.	 Additional	 freight	 and	

economic	data	can	be	found	in	Appendix	A.	

Industrial and Business Site Evaluation Factors  

Economic	 development	 is	 a	 very	 competitive	 business.	 	 Understanding	 the	 critical	 factors	 that	

influence	a	company’s	decision	to	locate	a	new	facility	or	expand	or	retain	an	existing	operation	is	

a	quintessential	economic	development	activity.		The	economic	prosperity	of	Hancock	County	and	

south	Mississippi	depends	upon	the	businesses	and	industries	within	the	region,	and	the	ability	to	

meet	their	unique	requirements	for	workforce,	land,	transportation,	utilities,	and	other	services.		

Industrial	site	evaluation	factors	have	evolved	to	reflect	the	changing	demands	of	businesses	and	

the	global	marketplace	in	which	they	compete.			

Understanding	the	corporate	site	location	process	and	the	critical	factors	that	businesses	evaluate	

when	making	their	decision	about	locating	or	expanding	a	facility	is	important	to	the	evaluation	

of	the	potential	economic	development	benefits	and	opportunities	resulting	from	dual	Class	1	rail	

services	 in	 Hancock	 County.	 	 Over	 the	 past	 26	 years	 a	 corporate	 site	 location	 study	 has	 been	

conducted	 to	identify	 the	most	important	 factors	 affecting	 the	location	 decisions	 of	 businesses,	

and	 to	 track	 these	 factors	 over	 time	 to	 assess	 evolving	 trends	 and	 conditions	 driving	 business	

location	decisions.28			

A	significant	percentage	of	 the	2012	study	participants	represented	manufacturing,	distribution	

and	logistics,	and	data	and	computer	related	services	similar	to	the	companies	found	in	Hancock	

County.		Eleven	of	the	26	site	selection	factors	were	ranked	most	important	by	businesses	when	

																																																																		

27	John	Tschetter,	“Exports	Support	American	Jobs,”	U.S.	Department	of	Commerce,	International	Trade	

Administration,	2010	

28 Area	Development	Site	and	Facility	Journal,	“Annual	Corporate	Site	Consultant	Survey,	2012”	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

21

considering	 a	 new	 or	 expanded	 facility	 location	 related	 to	 the	 movement	 and	 accessibility	 of	

goods	and	people.		The	transportation	and	freight	factors	considered	most	important	in	the	2012	

study	include:	

 Highway	accessibility	

 Availability	(accessibility)	of	skilled	labor	

 Proximity	(accessibility)	to	major	markets	

 Inbound/outbound	shipping	costs	

 Proximity	(accessibility)	to	suppliers	

 Availability	(accessibility)	of	unskilled	labor	

 Accessibility	to	major	airports	

 Raw	material	availability	(accessibility)	

 Proximity	(accessibility)	to	technical	college/training	

 Railroad	services	

 Waterway	or	ocean	port	accessibility	

These	transportation	factors,	along	with	other	competitive	conditions,	influence	the	site	decisions	

that	 businesses	make	when	locating,	expanding,	 or	 consolidating	 operations.	 	While	 freight	 rail	

transportation	alone	will	not	foster	economic	growth,	improved	freight	services	and	connectivity,	

multi‐modal	 transportation	 services,	 and	 competitive	 costs	 can	 significantly	 differentiate	 the	

region’s	economic	environment,	providing	opportunities	to	attract	and	retain	businesses	and	jobs	

for	Hancock	 County	and	 the	 region	in	 the	 future.		 For	some	major	industrial	projects,	access	 to	

two	Class	1	railroads	is	essential.			

Stennis Space Center and Port Bienville Industrial Park: Setting Hancock

County Apart

Stennis	Space	Center	and	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	represent	two	unique	and	important	

economic	development	assets	in	Hancock	County.		The	businesses	in	the	industrial	park	recognize	

the	economic	opportunities	they	could	realize	from	improved	access	to	customers,	raw	material	

sourcing,	and	lower	transportation	costs	by	taking	advantage	of	an	almost	unprecedented	array	

of	 modal	 assets	 in	 this	 park.	 	 The	 potential	 economic	 benefits	 and	 opportunities	 that	 could	 be	

realized	 from	 freight	 rail	 access	 to	 Stennis	 can	 best	 be	 evaluated	 by	 considering	 some	 of	 the	

research	and	manufacturing	facilities	currently	in	the	center.		As	the	military	presence	at	Stennis	

grows,	their	freight	rail	needs	should	be	considered	as	well.	

Stennis Space Center

Stennis	Space	 Center	 (SSC),	a	 premier	aerospace	and	 technology	facility,	is	located	 on	a	 13,800	

acre	site	within	a	125,000	acre	acoustical		buffer	zone	in	Hancock	County.		Stennis	is	home	to	our	

nation’s	primary	rocket	propulsion	testing	facility,	the	largest	concentration	of	oceanographers	in	

the	 U.S.,	 the	 National	 Date	 Buoy	 Center	 (NDBC),	 Lockheed	 Martin	 Mississippi	 Space	 and	

Technology	Center,	Rolls‐Royce	North	America	Outdoor	 Jet	Engine	Testing	 Facility,	SAIC,	NASA,	

Mississippi	Enterprise	 for	Technology	Center,	and	a	number	of	Department	of	Defense	 facilities.		
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

22

The	2011	Economic	Impact	Study	prepared	by	Mississippi	State	University	estimated	Stennis	had	

an	economic	impact	of	$122	million	on	local	government	tax	revenues.29			

The	original	Norfolk	Southern	rail	line	that	once	served	Stennis	Space	Center	was	built	to	support	

an	 ammunitions	 plant	 located	 on	 the	 site	 years	 ago	 and	 to	 facilitate	 the	 construction	 of	 the	

Stennis	facility.		Several	of	the	federal	installations	in	the	center	used	rail	when	it	was	available.		

No	 rail	 service	 exists	 within	 Stennis	 today,	 although	 some	 of	 the	 original	 rail	 bed	 is	 in	 fair	

condition.		Stennis	has	a	rail	cross‐dock	facility	near	Texas	Flat	Road	that	is	no	longer	in	use	but	is	

being	 maintained.	 	 Stennis	 has	 indicated	 a	 willingness	 to	 work	 with	 the	 region	 and	 the	 Port	

Bienville	Short	Line	if	the	rail	connector	line	is	constructed	to	make	this	facility	available	for	area	

business	and	industry.		Additional	information	on	Stennis	industries	can	be	found	in	Appendix	E.		

Port Bienville Industrial Park

The	 Hancock	 County	 Port	 and	 Harbor	 Commission	 began	 development	 of	 the	 Port	 Bienville	

Industrial	 Park	 and	 Port	 of	 Bienville	 in	 1967.	 	 The	 industrial	 park	 infrastructure	 provides	

comprehensive	 transportation	 services	 via	 port	 and	 barge,	 freight	 rail,	 highway,	 and	 aviation	

services	 through	 the	 Stennis	 International	 Airport.	 HCPHC	 has	 5,298	 acres	 of	 industrial	 land	

available,	one	of	the	most	substantial	industrial	land	inventories	in	the	state.	Stennis	Space	Center	

has	an	additional	3,600	available	acres.	

Table 4    Hancock County Port and Harbor Commission Industrial Land

   Developable Non‐

Developable

Acreage1

Total

Acreage Site Developed

Acreage

Undeveloped Acreage Subtotal Held or  

for Lease For Sale Subtotal

PB Industrial Park   

HCDC 25 1,165 620 1,785 1,810 164 1,974

Tenants 414 1,154 56 1,210 1,624 na 1,624

Subtotal 439 2,319 676 2,995 3,434 164 3,598

Other      

Airport 155   ‐‐  45 45 200  ‐‐   200

Hancock Co. na   ‐‐  1,500 1,500 1,500  ‐‐   1,500

Subtotal 155   ‐‐  1,545 1,545 1,700  ‐‐   1,700

Total 594 2,319 2,221 4,540 5,134 164 5,298

Source: HCDC, Stennis, MDA, and CDM Smith discussions with local business leaders 1

Includes  roadway, rail right‐of‐way, and unusable marsh land

Transportation Infrastructure

Freight Rail

Hancock	 County	 is	 currently	 served	 by	 CSX,	 a	 Class	 1	 railroad.	 	 	 The	 rail	 interchange	 in	 the	

industrial	park	was	recently	expanded	to	handle	up	to	165	rail	cars.		Rail	service	for	Port	Bienville	

moving	westbound	from	Mobile	travels	past	the	Port	Bienville	switch	to	the	Gentilly	Yard,	and	rail	

cars	are	then	hauled	back	to	Port	Bienville.		CSX	will	stop	at	Port	Bienville	on	the	east	bound	trip	

																																																																		

29	Dr.	Charles	A.	Campbell,	Professor	of	Economics,	Mississippi	State	University,	February	2011	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

23

from	Gentilly	to	Mobile,	but	there	is	a	significant	extra	charge	to	stop	at	Port	Bienville	on	the	west	

bound	run.	

The	Hancock	 County	 Port	 and	Harbor	 Commission	 operates	 a	 short	line	 railroad	 from	 the	 CSX	

main	line	that	runs	along	the	Gulf	Coast	into	the	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park.		The	Port	Bienville	

Short	Line	serves	the	rail	transportation	needs	of	the	businesses	in	the	industrial	park.						

Highway Access

Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	is	readily	accessible	to	I‐10,	providing	interstate	access	to	Houston,	

Mexico,	and	San	Diego	to	the	west,	I‐59	with	direct	access	to	New	Orleans	to	the	south,	and	I‐24	

and	I‐75	in	the	north	to	Chattanooga.				

Air Cargo

Stennis	 International	 Airport	 is	 owned	 and	 operated	 by	 the	 Hancock	 County	 Port	 and	 Harbor	

Commission.	 	 This	 facility	 includes	 a	 8,500	 foot	 lighted	 runway,	 air	 traffic	 control	 tower,	 and	

instrument	landing	system	within	a	1,680	acre	general	aviation	airport.		Currently	the	 facility	is	

used	 by	 the	 military	 under	 a	 joint	 use	 agreement	 with	 Kessler	 Air	 Force	 Base,	 Naval	 Special	

Operations,	 for	maintenance	repair	and	overhaul,	 for	corporate	planes,	and	 for	general	aviation	

users.	 	Sixty	 to	 seventy	 percent	 of	 tower	 operations	are	military	 operations,	and	 there	are	also	

non‐tower	military	operations	at	night.		Because	of	 the	buffer	zone,	night‐time	cargo	delivery	is	

possible.				

The	airport	is	a	full‐service	fixed	based	operation	with	a	new	passenger	terminal,	aircraft	fueling,	

hangar	and	tie‐down	space,	aircraft	maintenance,	charter	service,	and	other	amenities	provide	by	

Million	Air.		Aircraft	rescue	and	fire	fight	(ARFF)	coverage	is	available	on	the	field.			

Port and Barge

The	 Port	 Bienville	 port/barge	 facility	 in	 Hancock	 County	

provides	600	feet	of	dock	space	with	three	primary	berths,	a	

12‐foot	channel	depth,	300	 feet	of	additional	berth	and	 turn	

basin,	and	two	new	warehouses	with	a	combined	capacity	of	

110,000	 square	 feet.	 	 The	 port	 is	 equipped	 to	 handle	

container	 and	 bulk	 or	 break‐bulk	 shipments.	 	 The	 port	 is	

serviced	 by	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Short	 Line	 Railroad	 that	

interchanges	 with	 CSX	 near	 Ansley,	 Mississippi.	 	 SSA,	 a	

logistics	provider,	brings	coal	for	DuPont	through	the	port.	

Recommended Next Steps

The	Economic	Development	benefits	and	Opportunities	Analysis	contained	in	 the	Port	Bienville	

Rail	 Economic	 Feasibility	 Study,	 documents	 the	 demand	 for	 dual	 rail	 services	 that	 would	 be	

developed	as	a	result	of	the	proposal	rail	project.		The	businesses	that	could	be	served	by	the	rail	

line	proposed	to	connect	Norfolk	Southern	and	CSX	Railroad	are	projected	to	utilized	41,951	rail	

cars	annually.		The	largest	projected	rail	car	used	is	currently	 trucking	 fracking	sands	mined	in	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

24

Hancock	County	 to	a	drying	 facility	in	Pearl	River	County.		The	proposed	rail	line	would	enable	

this	 company	 to	 move	 a	 significant	 volume	 of	 their	 materials	 by	 rail	 rather	 than	 by	 truck	 and	

would	 facilitate	an	expansion	at	 this	 facility	creating	additional	jobs	and	investment	in	Hancock	

and	Pearl	River	Counties.		The	limited	availability	of	industrial	sites	providing	access	to	dual	Class	

I	 rail	 service	 and	 the	 growth	 within	 these	 transportation	 dependent	 business	 sectors	 further	

supports	the	demand	for	this	rail	project.	

The	 most	 significant	 benefits	 and	 opportunities	 generated	 from	 the	 proposal	 rail	 connectors	

would	 be	 derived	 from	 new	employment	and	additional	investment	in	 plant	and	equipment	 by	

existing	businesses	and	 from	 the	location	of	new	companies	 that	require	or	would	benefit	 from	

access	 to	dual	Class	 I	rail	services.		Hancock	County	currently	has	over	6,640	acres	of	industrial	

land	available	including	 3,600	acres	 of	land	available	within	 the	Stennis	Space	 Center	 complex.		

Pearl	 River	 County	 has	 an	 additional	 505	 acres	 of	 industrial	 land	 available.	 	 This	 substantial	

industrial	 land	 inventory	 coupled	 with	 the	 future	 access	 to	 dual	 Class	 I	 rail	 services	 and	 the	

existing	 multimodal	 transportation	 network	 servicing	 this	 area	 meet	 the	 site	 location	

requirements	of	a	number	of	significant	industrial	and	business	facilities	that	could		locate	in	this	

region.	

Given	 the	business	case	 for	dual	Class	 I	rail	services,	 the	demands	of	 the	existing	and	emerging	

business	 clusters	 in	 Hancock	 and	 Pearl	 River	 Counties,	 the	 future	 benefits	 to	 Stennis	 Space	

Center,	the	existing	industrial	land	inventory,	the	workforce	and	transportation	assets	supporting	

this	region,	the	construction	of	this	new	rail	line	is	strongly	supported.		Based	on	the	feasibility	of	

the	project	documented	herein,	it	is	recommended	to	proceed	to	Phase	II	of	this	study.	The	scope	

of	services	previously	developed	for	Phase	II	includes	environmental	studies	and	documentation	

(NEPA)	 as	 well	 as	 preliminary	 design	 and	 other	 supporting	 efforts	 for	 development	 of	 the	

proposed	railroad.	The	level	of	detail	 for	 the	environmental	studies	 to	be	undertaken	should	be	

determined	at	this	time	through	consultation	with	FRA,	MDOT	and	HCPHC.		Accordingly	the	scope	

of	services	for	Phase	II	should	be	revisited	and	revised	if	appropriate.	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

25

Appendix A:  Concentrations of Freight and Economic

Activity

This	 section	 of	 the	 report	 analyzes	 the	 concentrations	 of	 freight	 and	 economic	 activity	 in	 the	

counties	 and	 communities	 that	 would	 be	 served	 by	 the	 proposed	 connections	 from	 the	 Port	

Bienville	Short	Line	Railroad	 to	 the	NS	in	order	 to	determine	if	 these	counties	are	among	 those	

most	 likely	in	Mississippi	 to	 benefit	 from	 this	 type	 of	 rail	improvement.	 Two	 key	indices	 were	

utilized	to	compare	economic	activity	in	Hancock,	Harrison,	and	Pearl	River	County	to	that	of	an	

average	 county	 in	 Mississippi.	 	 The	 rail	 freight	 transportation	 intensity	 index	 compares	

concentrations	 of	 rail	 and	 rail	 dependent	 industry	 sectors	 in	 these	 key	 counties	 to	 an	 average	

Mississippi	county.		The	economic	preparedness	index	measures	how	economically	ready	an	area	

is	to	take	advantage	of	a	major	infrastructure	improvement	such	as	the	proposed	project.			

Hancock	 Counties	 will	 host	 the	 proposed	 rail	 connector	 project	 and	 industries	 located	 in	 this	

county	 will	 be	 a	 major	 beneficiary.	 	 However,	 this	 rail	 infrastructure	 will	 provide	 economic	

opportunities	that	are	most	likely	to	benefit	the	counties	adjoining	Hancock	County	which	include	

Pearl	 River	 and	 Harrison	 Counties.	 	 There	 are	 a	 number	 of	 studies	 that	 document	 the	 wider	

distribution	 of	 tangible	 economic	 development	 benefits	 for	 a	multi‐county	 region	 as	 a	 result	 of	

strategic	investments	in	key	infrastructure.30	This	analysis	evaluates	the	regional	benefits	of	this	

rail	connector	project.	Harrison	County	is	the	second	most	populous	county	in	Mississippi,	Pearl	

River	and	Hancock	Counties	rank	12th	and	18th	in	 terms	of	population.31		Each	of	 these	counties	

would	benefit	 from	 the	construction	of	 this	additional	Class	1	rail	access,	collectively	 the	region	

including	all	three	of	these	counties	would	realize	economic	benefits	as	the	analysis	that	follows	

will	show.		

What is the Purpose of the Indices Analysis?

The	purpose	of	the	indices	analysis	is	to	demonstrate	to	what	extent	the	counties	served	by	the	

proposed	 Port	 Bienville	 rail	 connector	 are	likely	 to	 be	 a	 better	location	 for	 this	 type	 of	 project	

than	 other	 counties	 in	 Mississippi.	 With	 limited	 transportation	 infrastructure	 funding,	 and	

particularly	limited	available	 funding	 for	rail	infrastructure,	it	is	important	that	investments	are	

made	 in	 locations	 that	 can	 best	 capitalize	 on	 such	 new	 infrastructure.	 	 This	 means	 locations	

where	there	is	a	strong	concentration	of	existing	rail	activities	and	where	businesses	are	present	

that	can	best	take	advantage	of	rail	improvements.		As	discussed	in	other	sections	of	this	report,	

access	 to	 two	 carriers	 may	 reduce	 shipment	 costs	 by	 30	 percent	 over	 time	 and	 significantly	

improve	 speed	 to	 market	 to	 meet	 customer	 delivery	 demands.	 In	 addition,	 the	 project	 will	

provide	enhanced	reliability	in	 the	overall	rail	network	serving	 the	Mississippi	Gulf	Coast	in	 the	

event	of	delays	or	disruption	on	the	lines	of	one	carrier.		Thus	it	is	important	to	consider	Harrison	

County	in	the	analysis.	

																																																																		

30	“Distribution	of	Benefits	from	Regional	Economic	Development”,	Michael	Danielson,	Woodrow	Wilson	School	of	

Public	and	international	Affairs,	Princeton	University	and	“Making	Sense	of	Clustering:	Regional	Competitiveness	and	

Economic	Development”,	Joseph	Cartright,		Brookings	institute	

31 2010	U.S.	Census		
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

26

Methodology

The	 rail	 freight	 transportation	intensity	index	and	 the	economic	preparedness	index	 rely	 on	an	

analysis	of	several	available	datasets	 that	measure	levels	of	 freight	usage	and	economic	activity.		

Comparative	datasets	are	needed	at	both	the	state	and	individual	county	level.		Both	indices	are	

composite	indices	making	use	of	multiple	data	sets	and	aggregating	results	into	one	index.		The	

following	sections	explain	the	methodology	and	components	of	each	index	in	greater	detail.	

Rail Freight Transportation Intensity Index

The	 rail	 freight	 transportation	 intensity	 index	 consists	 of	 two	 parts:	 a	 rail	 freight	 movement	

component	and	a	freight	related	employment	component.		The	rail	freight	movement	component	

takes	into	account	rail	tonnage,	value,	and	carloads	moving	in	and	out	of	the	counties	under	study	

as	well	as	the	same	data	for	Mississippi	as	a	whole.		The	freight	related	employment	component	

takes	 into	 account	 employment	 in	 freight	 dependent	 industry	 sectors	 for	 the	 counties	 under	

study	and	the	state	of	Mississippi.	

Rail Freight Movement Component:	 	 The	 data	 used	 to	 calculate	 the	 rail	 freight	 movement	

component	 was	 obtained	 from	 Mississippi	 Transearch	 data	 used	 in	 other	 components	 of	 the	

overall	project	analysis.		This	included	the	following	data:	

 Inbound	and	 outbound	 rail	 tonnage	 for	Hancock,	Harrison,	and	Pearl	River	counties	as	

well	as	Mississippi	as	a	whole	

 Inbound	and	outbound	rail	value	for	Hancock,	Harrison,	and	Pearl	River	counties	as	well	

as	Mississippi	as	a	whole	

 Inbound	and	outbound	rail	carloads	 for	Hancock,	Harrison,	and	Pearl	River	counties	as	

well	as	Mississippi	as	a	whole	

The	steps	taken	to	derive	the	rail	freight	movement	component	of	the	rail	freight	transportation	

intensity	index	are	as	follows:		

1. For	each	of	the	data	sets,	the	State	of	Mississippi	value	was	divided	by	82	(the	number	of	

counties	 in	 the	 state)	 in	 order	 to	 develop	 a	 county	 average	 for	 each	 of	 the	 Mississippi	

counties.			

2. Values	for	the	individual	counties	were	compared	to	the	statewide	average	county	values	

to	develop	ratios	for	total	rail	tonnage,	total	rail	value,	and	total	rail	carloads.		These	three	

sub‐index	 ratios	 for	 each	 county	 were	 compared	 to	 the	 county	 average	 for	Mississippi.		

For	 these	 ratios,	 a	 value	 of	 “1”	 indicates	 the	 county	 has	 the	 same	 value	 as	 an	 average	

county	in	Mississippi,	a	 value	less	 than	 “1”	means	 the	 county	 has	a	lower	 than	 average	

value,	and	a	value	greater	than	“1”	means	the	county	has	a	greater	than	average	value.		

3. 	The	individual	sub‐index	ratios	were	combined	with	equal	weighting	to	derive	an	overall	

rail	freight	movement	index	component	for	each	county.	

			
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

27

4. A	 three‐county	 average	 value	 for	Hancock,	Harrison,	 and	 Pearl	 River	 counties	was	 also	

calculated	and	compared	to	the	statewide	county	average.				

The	values	and	results	of	the	rail	freight	movement	component	are	discussed	below.	

Freight Related Employment Component:		The	consultant	team	utilized	data	from	the	2013	Woods	

and	Poole	CEDDS	data	set	for	the	freight	related	employment	component	calculations.		This	data	

best	captured	the	employment	in	the	project	area	based	on	the	study	team’s	interviews	and	other	

research.		To	complete	 the	analysis,	comparable	employment	statistics	were	needed	 for	each	of	

the	counties	in	the	analysis	and	the	State	of	Mississippi,	which	limited	the	potential	data	sources	

that	were	usable.	

The	 freight	 related	 employment	 component	 compares	 employment	 concentrations	 in	 key	

industry	sectors	that	are	most	reliant	on	freight	movements.		The	employment	sectors	considered	

were:	

 Construction	

 Manufacturing	

 Wholesale	Trade	

 Retail	Trade	

 Transportation	and	Warehousing	

This	 index	 compares	 the	 aggregate	 employment	 in	 these	 sectors	 in	 project	 counties	 to	 the	

aggregate	 employment	 in	 these	 sectors	 in	 an	 average	 Mississippi	 county.	 The	 following	 steps	

were	used	to	derive	the	freight	related	employment	component	of	the	rail	freight	transportation	

intensity	index:		

1. For	each	of	the	data	sets,	the	State	of	Mississippi	value	was	divided	by	82	(the	number	of	

counties	in	the	state)	to	develop	a	county	average	for	each	of	the	Mississippi	counties.		

		

2. The	values	for	individual	counties	were	compared	to	the	statewide	average	county	values	

to	develop	a	ratio.		This	was	completed	for	each	of	the	employment	sectors	and	for	total	

employment.		 For	 these	 ratios,	a	 value	 of	 “1”	indicates	 the	county	has	 the	 same	level	 of	

employment	in	 these	 sectors	 as	 an	 average	 county	in	Mississippi;	 a	 value	 less	 than	 “1”	

means	 the	 county	 has	 lower	 than	 average	 employment	 in	 these	 sectors,	 and	 a	 value	

greater	than	“1”	means	the	county	has		greater	than	average	employment	in	these	sectors.		

3. A	 three‐county	 average	 value	 for	Hancock,	Harrison,	 and	 Pearl	 River	 counties	was	 also	

calculated	and	compared	to	the	statewide	county	average.				

The	values	and	results	of	the	freight	related	employment	component	are	discussed	below.	

Rail Freight Transportation Intensity Index:	 	 As	 explained	 previously,	 the	 rail	 freight	

transportation	 intensity	 index	 combines	 the	 rail	 freight	 movement	 component	 and	 the	 freight	

related	employment	component.		For	the	base	index,	the	two	components	are	weighted	equally.		

A	value	higher	than	“1”	indicates	that	a	county	or	group	of	counties	is	more	dependent	on	freight	

rail	than	an	average	Mississippi	county	and	is	thus	a	better	location	for	potential	rail	investment.		
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

28

The	 higher	 the	 index	 value,	 the	 greater	 is	 the	 location’s	 potential	 dependence	 on	 rail	 freight	

compared	to	other	counties.	

Economic Preparedness Index

The	 economic	 preparedness	index	 uses	 tax	 collection	 values	 as	 a	measure	 of	 economic	 activity	

that	 would	 effectively	 support	 and	 benefit	 from	 new	 investments	 in	 infrastructure.	 	 There	 are	

three	 components	 to	 the	 economic	 preparedness	 index:	 sales	 tax	 component,	 income	 tax	

component,	 and	 property	 value	 component.	 	All	 three	 components	were	 calculated	in	a	 similar	

manner	using	data	from	the	2012 Mississippi Department of Revenue Annual Report.			

Sales Tax Component:	 	 The	 sales	 tax	 component	was	 calculated	 using	 fiscal	 year	 2012	 sales	 tax	

data	from	the	Mississippi	Department	of	Revenue.		It	compares	total	sales	tax	collected	in	each	of	

Hancock,	Harrison,	 and	 Pearl	 River	 counties	 to	 the	 average	 amount	 of	 sales	 tax	 collected	in	 an	

average	Mississippi	county.		A	ratio	was	calculated	comparing	the	individual	county	collections	to	

the	Mississippi	county	average,	with	a	value	of	“1”	indicating	that	the	county	collects	the	same	in	

sales	tax	as	an	average	Mississippi	county.		An	average	of	the	three	counties	under	study	was	also	

compared	and	indexed	against	the	value	of	an	average	Mississippi	county.		The	values	and	results	

of	the	sales	tax	component	are	discussed	below.	

Income Tax Component:	 	 The	income	 tax	 component	 was	 calculated	in	 a	manner	 similar	to	 the	

sales	 tax	 component	 using	 2011	 county	 income	 tax	 data	 from	 the	 Mississippi	 Department	 of	

Revenue.	 	 It	 compares	 total	income	 tax	 collected	in	each	 of	Hancock,	Harrison,	and	 Pearl	River	

counties	to	the	average	amount	of	income	tax	collected	in	an	average	Mississippi	county.		A	ratio	

was	 calculated	 comparing	 the	 individual	 county	 collections	 to	 the	 Mississippi	 county	 average,	

with	 a	 value	 of	 “1”	 indicating	 that	 the	 county	 collects	 the	 same	 in	 income	 tax	 as	 an	 average	

Mississippi	county.		An	average	of	the	three	counties	under	study	was	also	compared	and	indexed	

against	 the	 value	 of	 an	 average	 Mississippi	 county.	 	 The	 values	 and	 results	 of	 the	 income	 tax	

component	are	discussed	below.	

Property Value Component:		The	property	value	component	was	calculated	slightly	differently	as	

data	on	total	property	assessment	values	were	used	instead	of	total	property	tax	collected.		Using	

assessed	 property	 values	 provides	 a	 more	 accurate	 comparison	 between	 jurisdictions,	 as	

individual	 jurisdiction	 property	 tax	 rates	 may	 vary	 due	 to	 local	 factors.	 	 The	 total	 property	

assessed	 values	came	 from	 fiscal	 year	2012	data	in	 the	2012 Mississippi Department of Revenue

Annual Report.	 	 This	 index	 component	 compares	 total	 property	 assessment	 values	 in	 each	 of	

Hancock,	Harrison,	and	Pearl	River	counties	to	the	total	property	assessment	value	in	an	average	

Mississippi	 county.	 	 A	 ratio	 was	 calculated	 comparing	 the	 individual	 county	 values	 to	 the	

Mississippi	 county	 average,	 with	 a	 value	 of	 “1”	 indicating	 that	 the	 county	 has	 the	 same	 total	

property	values	as	an	average	Mississippi	county.		An	average	of	the	three	counties	under	study	

was	also	compared	and	indexed	against	 the	value	of	an	average	Mississippi	county.		The	 values	

and	results	of	the	property	value	component	are	discussed	below.	

Economic Preparedness Index:	 	 The	 economic	 preparedness	 index	then	 combines	 the	 sales	 tax,	

income	 tax,	 and	 property	 value	 components.	 	 For	 the	 base	 index,	 the	 three	 components	 were	

weighted	 equally.	 	 A	 value	 higher	 than	 “1”	 indicates	 that	 a	 county	 or	 group	 of	 counties	 has	 a	

stronger	 economic	 foundation	 than	 an	 average	 Mississippi	 county,	 and	 is	 thus	 a	 better	 than	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

29

average	location	to	build	upon	an	infrastructure	investment	such	as	the	proposed	Port	Bienville	

railroad	connector.		The	values	and	results	of	for	the	economic	preparedness	index	are	discussed	

below.	

Rail Freight Transportation Intensity Index – Analysis and Results

The	rail	freight	transportation	intensity	index	combines	a	rail	freight	movement	component	and	a	

freight	related	employment	component.		Table	A‐1	contains	the	values	used	in	calculating	the	rail	

freight	movement	component.	

Table A‐1    Rail Freight Movement Component Data

2006 Mississippi Rail Freight Inbound Outbound Total Index Value

Tonnage      

Hancock 11,190 227,384 238,574 0.70

Pearl River 199,886 104,380 304,266 0.89

Harrison 1,282,820 906,131 2,188,951 6.42

Three County Average 497,965 412,632 910,597 2.67

Other Counties 14,885,370 10,331,740 25,217,110

MS Average County 199,747 141,093 340,840 1.00

MS State 16,379,266 11,569,635 27,948,901    

Value ($Millions)       

Hancock $20.9 $533.8 $554.7 1.71

Pearl River $165.2 $228.8 $394.0 1.22

Harrison $424.1 $603.8 $1,027.9 3.18

Three County Average $203.4 $455.5 $658.9 2.04

Other Counties $10,334.8 $14,216.6 $24,551.4   

MS Average County $133.5 $190.0 $323.5 1.00

MS State $10,945.0 $15,583.0 $26,528.0    

Carloads       

Hancock 364 3,980 4,344 1.13

Pearl River 2,120 1,080 3,200 0.83

Harrison 14,615 10,332 24,947 6.50

Three County Average 5,700 5,131 10,830 2.82

Other Counties 17,099 15,392 32,491   

MS Average County 2249 1590 3839 1.00

MS State 184,427 130,375 314,802    

Source: Transearch Data.  Note:  The data for Harrison County outbound freight was not available.  Estimated values were

calculated by applying the ratio of state inbound to outbound freight to the Harrison County inbound freight values.
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

30

Table	A‐2	contains	the	summary	rail	freight	movement	component	index	values	based	on	the	data	

listed	above.	

Table A‐2     Rail Freight Component Index Values

Location Value

Hancock 1.18

Harrison 8.05

Pearl River 0.98

Three County Average 2.51

This	data	suggests	that	in	terms	of	total	rail	movements	Hancock	County	is	slightly	above	average,	

the	value	for	Harrison	County	is	eight	times	that	of	an	average	Mississippi	county,	and	Pearl	River	

County	is	about	average.	Based	on	these	indices,	in	addition	to	those	in	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	

counties,	 industries	 in	 Harrison	 County	 can	 benefit	 from	 the	 access	 to	 additional	 rail	 carriers	

provided	by	this	proposed	project.	

Table	 A‐3	 contains	 the	 aggregated	 employment	 in	 freight	 dependent	 sectors	 in	 each	 of	 the	

counties	under	study	along	with	the	index	values	for	the	freight	related	employment	component.	

Table A‐3     Freight Related Employment Component Data and Index Values

Location Total Employment in  

Freight Dependent Sectors

Index

Value

Hancock County 6,050 1.02

Harrison County 29,500 4.96

Pearl River County 6,300 1.06

Three County Average 13,950 2.35

Mississippi 487,240 NA

Mississippi County Average 5,942 1.00

Source: Woods and Poole 2013 CEDDS Data, Values from 2011

The	data	in	Table	A‐3	shows	that	Hancock	County	and	Pearl	River	County	are	relatively	average	

counties	 in	 terms	 of	 their	 freight	 dependent	 employment,	 while	 Harrison	 County	 has	

approximately	five	times	the	number	of	these	jobs	as	an	average	county.	

The	 rail	 freight	 movement	 component	 and	 the	 freight	 related	 employment	 component	 were	

averaged	to	produce	the	base	rail	freight	intensity	index.		Table	A‐4	contains	the	base	rail	freight	

intensity	index	values	along	with	sensitivity	text	values	weighting	one	of	the	two	components	at	

2/3	versus	1/3	for	the	other	component.	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

31

Table A‐4    Rail Freight Intensity Index Results

Location Base Index

Value

Sensitivity Analysis Index

Value with Rail Freight

Movement Component

Weighted at 2/3

Sensitivity Analysis Index

Value with Freight Related

Employment Component

Weighted at 2/3

Hancock 1.10 1.13 1.07

Harrison 6.51 7.02 5.99

Pearl River 1.02 1.01 1.03

Three County Average 2.43 2.46 2.40

The	 total	 rail	 freight	intensity	index	 values	indicate	 that	Hancock	 and	 Pearl	 River	 counties	 are	

above	average	in	terms	of	the	importance	of	rail	freight	services.		Harrison	County,	a	much	larger	

metropolitan	 county	 with	 a	 significantly	 larger	 population	 and	 number	 of	 businesses,	 is	

substantially	 above	 average.	 	 Although	 the	 proposed	 project	 would	 be	 located	 in	 Hancock	 and	

Pearl	 River	 County,	 the	 rail	 connection	 could	 provide	 access	 to	 Norfolk	 Southern	 Railroad	 to	

support	and	be	of	use	to	Harrison	County	businesses.		An	index	based	on	the	average	values	of	all	

of	the	components	for	the	three	counties	shows	more	than	two	times	the	rail	freight	dependency	

of	an	average	county.		The	sensitivity	analysis	shows	little	variation	in	the	results.	

Economic Preparedness Index – Analysis and Results

The	 economic	 preparedness	 index	 combines	 sales	 tax,	 income	 tax	 and	 property	 value	

components.		Table	A‐5	contains	a	summary	of	the	sales	tax	data	and	index	calculations.	

Table A‐5    Sales Tax Component Data and Results

Location Fiscal Year

2012 Sales

Fiscal Year

2012 Sales Tax

Component Index Value

Hancock County $561,301,465 $31,148,965 1.00

Harrison County $3,814,209,041 $239,086,333 7.70

Pearl River County $495,430,696 $31,026,558 1.00

3‐County Average   $1,623,647,067 $100,420,619 3.24

Mississippi $41,209,942,665 $2,545,271,996 NA

82‐County Mississippi Average $502,560,276   $31,039,902 1.00

Source: Mississippi Department of Revenue, Annual Report FY 2012

Table	A‐5	shows	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	County	are	right	at	the	state	county	average	in	sales	tax	

collections	 while	 Harrison	 County’s	 sales	 tax	 collections	 are	 seven	 times	 the	 average	 county’s	

sales	tax	collections.	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

32

Table	A‐6	contains	a	summary	of	the	income	tax	data	and	index	component	calculations.	

Table A‐6    Income Tax Component Data and Results

Location Fiscal Year 2012

Net Taxable Income

Fiscal Year 2012

Gross Income Tax

Component Index

Value

Hancock County $382,179,490 $17,439,097 1.06

Harrison County $2,052,008,709 $93,402,093 5.65

Pearl River County $481,421,310 $21,805,087 1.32

3‐County Average   $971,869,836   $44,215,426 2.68

Mississippi Counties $29,775,061,617 $1,355,180,432 NA

82‐County Mississippi Average   $363,110,508    $16,526,591 1.00

Source: Mississippi Department of Revenue, Annual Report FY 2012   

Table	 A‐6	 shows	 that	 Hancock	 County	 and	 Pearl	 River	 County	 are	 slightly	 above	 average	 in	

income	tax	collections,	while	Harrison	County	is	more	than	five	times	the	average.	

Table	A‐7	contains	a	summary	of	the	property	value	component	calculations	and	results.	It	shows	

that	 both	Hancock	 and	 Pearl	 River	 counties	 are	 well	 above	 average	in	 terms	 of	 property	 value	

base	and	Harrison	County	is	more	than	six	times	the	average	in	the	state.	

Table A‐7     Property Value Component Value and Results

Location Total Assessment Value Component  Index Value

Hancock County $549,041,797 1.75

Harrison County $2,006,691,249 6.40

Pearl River County $371,178,713 1.18

3‐County Average   $975,637,253 3.11

Mississippi Counties $25,699,535,798 NA

82‐County Mississippi Average   $313,408,973 1.00

Source: Mississippi Department of Revenue, Annual Report FY 2012

The	 sales	 tax,	 income	 tax,	 and	 property	 value	 components	 are	 averaged	 to	 produce	 the	 base	

economic	preparedness	index.		Table	A‐8	contains	the	base	economic	preparedness	index	values	

along	with	sensitivity	 text	 values	weighting	one	 of	 the	 three	components	at	50	percent	and	 the	

other	two	at	25	percent	each.	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

33

Table A‐8     Economic Preparedness Index Results

Location Value Sensitivity 1 Sensitivity 2 Sensitivity 3

Hancock County 1.27 1.20 1.22 1.39

Harrison County 6.59 6.86 6.35 6.54

Pearl River County 1.17 1.13 1.21 1.17

3‐County Average 3.01 3.06 2.92 3.03

1/3 Weight Each Sales Tax at 50% Income Tax at 50% Property Values

at 50%

The	economic	preparedness	index	results	show	that	Hancock	County	and	Pearl	River	County	are	

well	 above	 average	 in	 terms	 of	 having	 sufficient	 economic	 base	 to	 take	 advantage	 of	

infrastructure	investments	such	as	the	proposed	rail	improvements.		Harrison	County,	an	urban	

county,	is	more	than	six	times	the	statewide	average	in	terms	of	economic	preparedness	by	this	

index.		The	proposed	project	would	be	located	in	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	County	but	would	also	

benefit	 Harrison	 County	 businesses.	 	 An	 index	 based	 on	 the	 average	 values	 of	 all	 of	 the	

components	for	the	three	county	region	shows	more	than	three	times	the	rail	freight	dependency	

of	 an	 average	 county.	 	 The	 sensitivity	 analysis	 did	 not	 show	 much	 variation	 in	 the	 results,	

although	 Hancock	 County	 does	 substantially	 better	 when	 property	 values	 are	 more	 highly	

weighted.	

Conclusion

This	analysis	provides	a	series	of	indices	related	 to	the	concentrations	of	 freight	related	activity	

and	 economic	 activity	 in	 the	 counties	 that	 would	 be	 supported	 by	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 railroad	

connector.		The	overall	result	suggest	that	Hancock,	Pearl	River,	and	Harrison	counties	are	better	

prepared	in	the	near	term	than	average	Mississippi	counties	to	make	good	use	of	an	investment	

such	as	the	proposed	rail	connector.			

The	 freight	 rail	 transportation	 intensity	 index	 analysis	 shows	that	 Hancock	 County	 was	 above	

average	in	its	concentration	of	rail	freight	related	activities.		Harrison	County	was	well	above	the	

average	 while	 Pearl	 River	 County	 was	 about	 average.	 	 The	 regional	 average	 for	 the	 freight	 rail	

transportation	 intensity	 index	 indicates	 approximately	 2.5	 times	 the	 freight	 related	 activity	 in	

these	counties	compared	to	an	average	Mississippi	county.	

The	economic	preparedness	index	showed	above	average	values	for	all	three	counties.		Although	

the	 proposed	 project	 is	 located	 in	 Hancock	 County,	 Pearl	 River	 and	 Harrison	 Counties	 have	

available	industrial	sites	 that	could	benefit	 from	being	located	in	or	near	sites	with	dual	Class	1	

rail	 services.	 	 This	 indicates	 there	 is	 a	 strong	 level	 of	 economic	 activity,	 and	 businesses	 that	

generate	 taxable	 value	 and	jobs	 can	make	 use	 of	 this	 rail	infrastructure	investment	 to	 produce	

local,	 regional,	 and	 statewide	 benefits	 strengthen	 the	 business	 case	 for	 this	 rail	 line	 that	 will	

provide	dual	Class	1	rail	service	in	this	region.	 	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

34

Appendix B: Port Bienville Economic Impacts   Use	of	 the	Regional	Economic	Model,	 Inc.	(REMI)	offers	another	methodology	 for	evaluating	 the	

potential	economic	impacts	that	could	result	from	access	to	dual	Class	1	rail	services.		Economic	

impacts	associated	with	 the	development	of	a	rail	connection	 from	 the	Port	Bienville	 Industrial	

Park	(PBIP)	through	the	Stennis	Space	Center	(SSC)	to	the	Norfolk	Southern	(NS)	line	are	based	

on	detailed	surveys,	data	collection,	and	use	of	the	REMI	economic	impact	model.		This	section	of	

the	 report	 describes	 the	 approach,	 information,	 and	 models	 used,	 as	 well	 as	 base‐	 and	 build‐

scenarios.		Economic	model	inputs	are	developed	for	three	main	activities	associated	with	the	rail	

connection	 (e.g.,	 rail	 construction,	 existing	 firm	 expansion,	 and	 new	 firm	 attraction).	 	 The	

resulting	 economic	 impacts	 are	 presented	 by	 the	 various	 dimensions,	 including:	 impact	

component,	measure,	geography,	and	year.	

Approach and Overview

Economic	impact	estimates	are	based	on	how	the	proposed	rail	connection	would	affect	existing	

firms	and	attract	new	 firms.		The	 following	methodology	section	outlines	how	such	changes	are	

assessed	 by	 impact	 components	 and	 entered	 into	 the	 Regional	 Economic	 Model,	 Inc.	 (REMI)	

model.		Review	of	industry	surveys	provided	an	essential	understanding	of	the	importance	of	rail	

transportation	to	the	Study	Region’s	industrial	economy.32		A	brief	discussion	of	the	REMI	model	

used	 to	 forecast	 economic	 impacts	 highlights	 the	 unique	 dynamic	 nature	 of	 the	 model	 which	

enables	it	to	evaluate	the	economic	implications	of	changes	in	industry	production	costs,	output,	

employment,	etc.		

Methodology  

Access	to	dual	Class	1	railroad	service	by	the	Port	Bienville	Short	Line	Railroad	should	stimulate	

rail	development,	expansion	of	existing	firms,	and	attraction	of	new	firms.		Such	activities	would	

affect	 various	impact	 components	including	 rail	 construction,	 rail	 transport	 costs,	and	 new	 site	

development	 (both	 construction	 and	 ensuing	 tenant	 employment).	 	 This	 component	 analysis	

provides	input	into	the	REMI	model	used	to	estimate	the	resultant	economic	impacts	associated	

with	the	rail	development.	

Conceptually,	rail	construction	impacts	include	the	capital	investment	of	building	and	maintaining	

the	new	track.		Current	firm	impacts	include	potential	transport	cost‐savings	as	well	as	potential	

expansion.	 	 New	 firm	 impacts	 include	 site	 construction/development	 and	 on‐site	 related	

employment.		Combined,	these	various	activities	are	appropriately	entered	into	the	REMI	model	

to	 measure	 the	 resultant	 economic	 impacts	 over	 the	 2014	 to	 2040	 analysis	 period.	 	 Economic	

impacts	are	measured	in	terms	of	changes	in	population,	employment,	wages	and	salaries,	value‐

added,	 and	 output,	 as	 compared	 to	 the	 regional	 control	 forecasts	 from	 REMI	 (i.e.,	 the	 baseline	

conditions).		Interrelationships	between	the	various	activities,	impact	components,	REMI	inputs,	

and	resultant	economic	impact	estimates	are	diagrammed	in	Figure	B‐1.	

																																																																		

32	For	the	purposes	of	this	economic	impact	analysis,	the	Study	Area	is	defined	as	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	

counties.	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

35

Figure B‐1   Impact Approach of Access to a Second Class 1 Railroad

Surveys and Other Data

Detailed	 surveys	 of	 local	 transportation	 and	 manufacturing	 firms,	 businesses,	 and	 government	

agencies	in	the	Port	Bienville	area	were	performed	and	provide	a	foundational	understanding	of	

current	 freight	 rail	 dependence,	 use,	 and	 impacts.	 	 In	 general,	 the	 surveys	 indicate	 an	 overall	

satisfaction	with	 the	community,	workforce,	 taxes,	location,	etc.		Further,	Study	Area	companies	

anticipate	current	business	activity	to	continue	and/or	expand.			

More	 specifically,	 the	 surveys	helped	assess	 how	access	 to	 a	 second	 Class	 1	 rail	 service	 via	 the	

proposed	 extension	 of	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Short	 Line	 Railroad	 to	 Nicholson	 would	 affect	 future	

business	operations	and	industry	attraction.		Several	of	the	firms	indicated	significant	current	rail	

use	and	 dependence	 despite	access	 to	a	 single	 Class	 1	 carrier.	 	 Further,	 they	anticipate	 notable	

decreases	in	 rail	 transport	 costs,	 scheduled	 transit	 times,	 and	 unforeseen	 delays	with	 a	 second	

Class	1	connection.		The	specifics	of	 the	rail	business	surveys	were	provided	on	pages	7‐11.			A	

few	 firms	went	on	 to	specify	scenarios	in	which	 future	growth	could	well	be	enhanced	 through	

the	proposed	additional	rail	connection.		Lastly,	it	was	noted	that	the	secondary	rail	access	to	the	

north	would	effectively	mitigate	future	hurricane	disasters,	and	hence	would	further	improve	the	

region’s	attractiveness	to	existing	business	expansion	and/or	new	business	attraction.	

While	most	 of	 the	 survey	information	 was	 descriptive,	 some	 was	quantitative	 and	 provided	 an	

order‐of‐magnitude	basis	 for	estimating	site	development	and	employment	estimates	 for	inputs	

into	 the	 REMI	 model.	 	 Such	 qualitative	 information	 was	 substantiated	 through	 a	 review	 of	

TRANSEARCH	 rail	 freight	 flow	 data	 for	 Hancock	 and	 Pearl	 River	 Counties,	 obtained	 from	 the	

previous	Mississippi	State	Rail	Plan33.			Literature	review	was	conducted	regarding	rail	transport	

operating	costs	 for	both	a	captive	and	non‐captive	industrial	environment	and	can	be	 found	 on	

pages	6	and	7	in	the	report.				

																																																																		

33	Mississippi	State	Rail	Plan,	2011;	Wilbur	Smith	Associates	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

36

Impact Terminology

Economic	impacts	pertain	to	three	activities	(rail	development,	existing	firm	expansion,	and	new	

firm	 attraction)	 include	 two	 types:	 direct	 and	 multiplier;	 comprise	 four	 components	 (rail	

construction,	rail	transport	cost	savings,	site	development,	and	site	employment);	are	measured	

via	five	variables	(population,	jobs,	wage and salaries,	value‐added,	and	output);	and,	are	evaluated	

by	region.		These	impact	types,	components,	measures,	and	regions	are	defined	below.		

Impact Types

The three activity impacts consist of two types (and a combined total):

 Direct	 –	 Impacts	associated	directly	with	 rail	capital	investment	expenditures,	 transport	

cost‐savings,	 and/or	 other	 firm	 expansion/attraction.	 	 For	 example,	 the	 direct	 impacts	

from	rail	construction	pertain	to	the	labor	and	capital	employed	in	the	development	of	the	

rail	line	and	are	attributed	only	to	the	construction	industry;

 Multiplier –	Comprises	both	indirect	and	induced	impacts.		Indirect	impacts	are	associated	

with	the	suppliers	that	provide	intermediate	goods	and	services	to	the	directly	impacted	

industries;	 and,	 induced	 impacts	 reflect	 the	 re‐spending	 of	 earned	 income	 (from	 the	

directly	and	indirectly	impacted	industries	in	a	given	impact	region);	and	

 Total –	Aggregated	direct,	indirect,	and	induced components;	only	these	total	aggregative	

impacts	are	generated	by	the	REMI	model	and	presented	in	the	results	section.	

Impact Components

Four	impact	components	pertain	to	the	second	rail	line	development:	

 Rail Construction	 –	 Rail	 construction	 and	 additional	 operation	 and	 maintenance	

expenditures;	

 Rail Transport Cost Savings –	Operating	cost	savings	to	existing	rail	users	(primarily	Study	

Area	 outbound	 shipments	 of	 finished	 products	 and	 materials)	 from	 access	 to	 a	 second	

Class	1	rail	carrier;	

 Site Development –	New	facility	construction	resulting	from	access	to	a	second	Class	1	rail	

carrier.		Includes	both	existing	firm	expansion	and	new	firm	attraction;	and		

 Site Employment –	 Increased	 Study	 Area	 employment	 resulting	 from	 existing	 firm	

expansion	and	new	firm	attraction.		

Impact Measures

Impacts	are measured	by	five	economic	metrics:	

 Population	–	Resident	population	attracted;	

 Jobs/Employment	 –	 Employment	 measured	 in	 terms	 of	 full‐time‐equivalent	 (FTE)	 job‐

years;	

 Wages and Salaries	–	Wage/salary	earnings	paid	to	the	associated	jobs;	

 Value‐Added	–	Net	additional	economic	activity	 (i.e.,	 total	output	less	gross	intermediate	

inputs),	synonymous	with	GRP	(gross	regional	product)	or	GSP	(Gross	State	Product)			

 Output	–	Total	production	value	associated	with	all	levels	of	economic	activity	(comprised	

of	gross	intermediate	inputs	and	value	added,	combined).	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

37

OUTPUT

Final Demand

BY TYPE 

Output

BY INDUSTRY

POPULATION

Population and 

Labor Supply

BY AGE/GENDER/ 

ETHNICITY

EMPLOYMENT

Final Demand

BY INDUSTRY and

BY OCCUPATION

TRADE

Local and export 

market shares

BY INDUSTRY

COSTS

Compensation 

rates, prices and 

costs

BY INDUSTRY

Impact Regions

The	two	primary	geographic	regions	evaluated	include	the	Study	Area	and	the	State.	

 Study Area	–	Both	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties,	separately	and	combined;	and	

 Mississippi	–	Study	Area	impacts	are	compared	to	the	entire	State.			

Due	 to	 data	 availability	 and	 economic	 model	 results,	 only	 total	 impacts	 are	 presented	 in	 the	

Economic	 Impacts	 Results	 section	 beginning	 on	 page	 52.	 	 Of	 the	 measures,	 employment	 is	

evaluated	 in	 depth	 since	 it	 is	 the	 most	 widely	 understood	 measure	 by	 the	 broadest	 audience.		

Geographically,	emphasis	is	placed	on	presentation	of	Hancock	County,	due	to	its	central	location	

relative	to	the	rail	line	development	(i.e.,	Port	Bienville	Industrial	Park	and	Stennis	Space	Center).	

REMI Model Outline

The	 proposed	 rail	 connection	 would	 lower	 rail	 transport	 costs	 for	 existing	 users	 and	 attract	

additional	 business	 to	 the	 Study	 Area.	 	 The	 REMI	 model34	 is	 used	 to	 forecast	 the	 impacts	

associated	with	rail	development,	user‐cost	savings,	site	development,	and	new	site	employment.	

REMI Overview

The	REMI	model	is	a	dynamic	forecasting	tool	that	combines	input‐output	econometric	modeling	

with	economic	geography.		It	models	the	economic	impacts	of	industry	and/or	policy	changes	by	

identifying	the	interrelationships	and	ensuing	impacts	in	five	major	block	sectors	of	the	economy,	

through	 simultaneous	 equations	 reflecting	 the	 dynamic	 feedback	 effects	 of	 each	 sector	 on	 each	

other.	 	 The	 five‐sector	 inter‐linkages	 of	 the	

REMI	model	are	shown	in	Figure	B‐2.		

REMI enables	users	to	defensibly	evaluate	the	

effect	 of	 cost‐input changes,	 which	 non‐

dynamic	 (static	 Input‐Output)	 models	 cannot	

address.	 Moreover,	 REMI	 is	 not	 traditionally	

used	 to	 evaluate	 impacts	 associated	 with	

current	 industry.	 	 Rather,	 it	 evaluates	 future	

changes,	 and	 measures	 how	 an	 economy	

reacts.	 	Specifically,	it	measures	 how	multiple	

regions	 (two	 or	 more)	 respond	 to	 changes	

over	 time	 (e.g.,	 years).	 	 Substitution	 effects	

play	 a	 major	 driver	 in	 the	 multiple‐region	

model.		Such	effects,	for	example,	include	how	

displaced	 workers	 with	 certain	 skill	 sets	

migrate	to	other	regions,	or	how	they	transfer	

from	 one	 industry	 to	 another	 (often	 at	 lower	

pay	levels).		

REMI Regions   

																																																																		

34	REMI	TranSight	v3.3		

  Figure B‐2   REMI Model Sector Linkages
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

38

39	 regions	 are	 available	 in	 the	 Mississippi	 REMI	 model	 including	 metropolitan	 areas	 (New	

Orleans,	Memphis,	and	Mobile)	of	three	surrounding	states	as	shown	in	Figure	B‐3.		The	primary	

Study	Area	evaluated	in	this	impact	analysis	include	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties	(which	are	

stand‐alone	regions	in	the	model),	as	well	as	the	overall	State.	

Figure B‐3    REMI Regions  in Mississippi
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

39

Scenarios

An	economic	impact	evaluation	must	compare	at	least	two	scenarios:	a	reference	base	case	(no‐

build)	 with	 an	 improvement	 (build)	 scenario.	 	 Since	 the	 various	 considered	 alignment	

alternatives	 for	 the	 rail	 development	 have	 no	 discernible	 difference	 from	 an	 economic	

perspective	 (given	 the	 investment	 cost,	 length,	 connectivity	 effect,	 etc.	 would	 be	 relatively	 the	

same),	 a	 single	 improvement	 scenario	 is	 evaluated	 and	 compared	 to	 the	 baseline	 no‐build	

scenario.		

Base Case

In	 the	 baseline	 no‐build	 scenario,	 socioeconomic	 characteristics	 over	 the	 next	 30	 years	 are	

extracted	from	the	control	forecast	in	REMI,	which	provides	anticipated	population,	employment,	

and	 other	 socioeconomic	 variable	 changes	 from	 1990	 through	 2040,	 with	 a	 highlight	 on	 years	

2012	 and	 2040.	 	 Regarding	 the	 economy,	 employment,	 wages	 and	 salaries,	 value‐added,	 and	

output	 are	 detailed	 by	 industry	 for	 both	 Hancock	 and	 Pearl	 River	 Counties.	 	 Such	 base	 case	

socioeconomic	 variables	are	 outlined	below	and	provide	a	basis	by	which	 to	compare	potential	

development	impacts	in	the	ensuing	sections.	

Socioeconomic Summary

Hancock	and	Pearl	River	County	Study	Area	population	currently	totals	102,565,	or	about	3.4%	of	

the	 State	 population.	 	 By	 2040,	 population	 is	 forecast	 as	 118,779,	 an	 increase	 of	 15.8%.		

Employment	 is	 forecasted	 to	 grow	 at	 a	 more	 rapid	 pace	 of	 31.1%	 over	 the	 same	 period,	 from	

42,846	to	56,179.		Associated	wages	and	salaries	are	forecasted	to	grow	82.5%	from	$1.21	billion	

to	 $2.20	 billion	 (in	 2012$).	 	 Value‐added	 and	 output	 for	 the	 Study	 Area	 and	 Mississippi	 are	

summarized	in	Table	B‐1	for	2012	and	2040.	

Table B‐1    Baseline Socioeconomic Summary (2012, 2040)

Measure by Year Mississippi Study Area

Hancock Pearl River Subtotal % of MS

Year 2012               

Population 2,986,443 42,991 59,574 102,565 3.4%

Employment 1,500,881 23,951 18,895 42,846 2.9%

Wages and Salaries* $44,272.1 $798.9 $406.7 $1,205.6 2.7%

Value Added* $104,397.5 $1,651.5 $947.4 $2,598.9 2.5%

Output* $195,564.3 $2,986.0 $1,784.8 $4,770.8 2.4%

Year 2040               

Population 3,299,867 52,369 66,410 118,779 3.6%

Employment 1,944,190 30,152 26,028 56,179 2.9%

Wages and Salaries* $85,037.3 $1,335.0 $865.5 $2,200.5 2.6%

Value Added* $192,828.8 $2,906.8 $1,878.0 $4,784.8 2.5%

Output* $340,475.5 $5,051.4 $3,313.6 $8,364.9 2.5%

Growth (2012 to 2040)               

Population 10.5% 21.8% 11.5% 15.8% na

Employment 29.5% 25.9% 37.8% 31.1% na

Wages and Salaries 92.1% 67.1% 112.8% 82.5% na

Value Added 84.7% 76.0% 98.2% 84.1% na

Output 74.1% 69.2% 85.7% 75.3% na

Source: REMI; * in millions of fixed 2012 dollars
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

40

Sector Employment  

Total	 Study	 Area	 employment	 is	 forecast	 to	 grow	 from	 42,846	 jobs	 in	 2012	 to	 56,179	 jobs	 by	

2040.		Shown	by	sector	in	Table	B‐2,	manufacturing	employment	is	forecast	to	decline	nearly	20%	

from	2,267	to	1,820	jobs.		Conversely,	transportation/warehousing	employment	is	 forecasted	to	

grow	 30%	 over	 the	 same	 future	 horizon	 from	 975	 to	 1,265	 jobs.	 	 Past	 historical	 and	 future	

forecasts	 by	 sector	 are	 charted	 in	 Table	 B‐2;	 note	 that	 the	 manufacturing	 and	

transportation/warehousing	trend	lines	are	marked.	

Table B‐2   Baseline Employment by Sector (2012, 2040)

Sector Year 2012 Year 2040

Hancock Pearl River Total Hancock Pearl River Total

Forestry and Fishing 197 162 359 241 209 450

Utilities 174 89 263 103 89 192

Construction 2,466 2,503 4,968 4,053 4,785 8,838

Manufacturing 1,415 852 2,267 1,108 712 1,820

Wholesale Trade 190 289 478 180 293 473

Retail Trade 2,102 2,645 4,747 2,244 2,899 5,143

Transport and Warehousing 465 510 975 635 630 1,265

Information 110 170 280 97 159 257

Finance and Insurance 711 626 1,337 896 739 1,635

Real Est., Rental, Leasing 1,301 706 2,007 1,775 896 2,671

Professional and Tech. Srvs. 2,321 647 2,968 3,348 1,262 4,609

Mgmt. of Companies 29 39 67 30 40 70

Admin. and Waste Srvs. 2,054 973 3,027 2,332 983 3,316

Educational Services 246 95 341 344 131 476

Health Care & Social Assist. 1,073 1,245 2,319 1,904 2,518 4,422

Arts, Enter. and Recr. 1,058 212 1,270 1,474 291 1,765

Accomm. & Food Srvs. 1,868 1,201 3,070 2,485 1,551 4,035

Other Srvs., exc. Public Adm. 1,228 1,486 2,714 1,676 2,199 3,875

State and Local Gov't 1,923 3,074 4,997 2,629 4,546 7,176

Federal Civilian 1,930 144 2,074 1,746 131 1,876

Federal Military 743 351 1,094 625 295 920

Farm 252 801 1,053 179 570 750

Total 23,951 18,895 42,846 30,152 26,028 56,179

Source: REMI

 

Manufacturing Employment

Over	80%	of	current	Hancock	County	manufacturing	employment	is	in	Chemicals	 (328	jobs)	or	

Other	 Transportation	 Equipment	 (810	 jobs),	 combined.	 	 Including	 Pearl	 River,	 a	 total	 of	 1,424	

people	are	currently	employed	in	the	Chemical	and	Other	Transportation	Equipment	industries.		

By	2040,	such	Chemical	and	Other	Transportation	Equipment	industry	employment	is	forecasted	

to	decline	16%	 to	1,197.		Year	2012	and	2040	manufacturing	industry	employment	is	shown	in	

Table	B‐3.	 	Historical	 and	 forecast	 data	by	manufacturing	 sub‐sector	 are	 charted	in	 Figure	 B‐5;	

note	that	both	the	chemical	and	other	transportation	equipment	trendlines	are	marked.		

Manufacturing Productivity Trends

The	 manufacturing	 employment	 decline	 over	 the	 2012	 to	 2040	 time	 period	 does	 not	 imply	 a	

corresponding	decline	in	Hancock	County	manufacturing	production.		Rather,	it	reflects	regional	

productivity	gains	resulting	from	automation	efficiency	increases.		Simply,	more	is	produced	with	
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

41

fewer	 employees,	 as	 illustrated	 in	 Figure	 B‐6,	 which	 shows	 the	 chemical	 and	 transportation	

equipment	manufacturing	output	increasing	through	2040.	

Transportation Employment

While	Study	Area	 trucking	employment	is	 forecasted	 to	grow	23%	from	614	 to	753	employees,	

rail	employment	is	not	expected	to	change.		Comparatively,	warehousing/storage	employment	is	

forecasted	to	grow	47%	from	57	to	84	jobs,	as	shown	in	Table	B‐4.	

Table B‐3   Baseline Manufacturing Employment Detail (2012, 2040)

Sector

Year 2012 Year 2040

Hancock Pearl River Total Hancock Pearl

River Total

Apparel   0 47 47 0 38 38

Beverage and Tobacco 8 12 21 11 16 26

Chemical   328 105 433 212 101 313

Computer and Electronics 7 0 7 4 0 4

Electrical and Appliance   63 0 63 34 0 34

Fabricated Metal Product   62 98 159 63 100 163

Food   0 43 43 0 43 43

Furniture and Related 5 10 15 2 4 6

Leather and Allied 0 0 0 0 0 0

Machinery   28 115 143 20 85 105

Miscellaneous   18 4 23 19 4 23

Motor Vehicles, etc. 47 12 59 32 5 37

Nonmetallic Mineral 4 2 7 6 3 9

Other Transportation Equip. 810 181 991 684 200 884

Paper   0 108 108 0 48 48

Petroleum and Coal 0 17 17 0 11 11

Plastics and Rubber 7 23 30 5 12 17

Primary Metal   20 0 20 10 0 10

Printing And Related 8 61 69 5 34 38

Textile Mills 0 0 0 0 0 0

Textile Product Mills 0 12 12 0 11 11

Wood Product   0 1 1 0 1 1

Total 1,415 852 2,267 1,108 712 1,820

Source: REMI

Table B‐4    Baseline Transportation Employment Detail (2012, 2040)

Sector Year 2012 Year 2040

Hancock Pearl River Total Hancock Pearl River Total

Air   0 0 0 0 0 0

Pipeline   2 11 13 1 7 9

Rail   33 43 75 33 42 75

Scenic And Sightseeing   121 49 170 203 79 282

Transit And Ground Passenger   2 26 28 3 39 42

Truck   234 380 614 291 462 753

Warehousing And Storage 57 0 57 84 0 84

Water   17 0 17 20 0 20

Total 465 510 975 635 630 1,265

Source: REMI
Port Bienville  Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis         

    

42

Base‐Case Socioeconomic Conclusion

Under	the	no‐build	base	case,	the	Hancock‐Pearl	River	Study	Area	economy	is	forecasted	to	grow	

over	the	29‐year	analysis	period	(2012	to	2040).		Population	is	forecast	to	grow	15.8%	and	total	

employment	 31.1%.	 	However,	 employment	 growth	is	 not	 uniform	 over	 the	 various	industries.			

In	manufacturing,	productivity	gains	from	automation	efficiency	increases	are	forecast	to	result	in	

lower	 employment	 despite	increased	 output	 (see	 Figure	 B‐6).	 	 This	is	 especially	 evident	in	 the	

two	 leading	 manufacturing	 sub‐sectors:	 chemicals	 and	 transportation	 equipment.	 	 This	

manufacturing	 productivity	 trend	 in	 Hancock,	 Pearl	 River,	 and	 Mississippi,	 reflects	 national	

trends	over	the	preceding	decades	that	will	continue.	
Port Bienville Railroad  Economic Development Benefits a

Figure B‐4 Total Employment – Historical and Baseline Forecast (Hancock County)Source: REMINote:		Hurricane	Katrina	occurred	in	2005	

0

500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,500

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

Forestry, Fishing, Related AMiningUtilitiesConstructionManufacturingWholesale TradeRetail TradeTransportation and WarehoInformationFinance and InsuranceReal Estate and Rental and Professional and Technical Management of Companies Administrative and Waste SEducational ServicesHealth Care and Social AssArts, Entertainment, and ReAccommodation and Food SOther Services, except PubState and LocalFederal CivilianFederal MilitaryFarm
Port Bienville Railroad  Economic Development Benefits a

Figure B‐5 Manufacturing Employment – Historical and Baseline Forecast (Hancock County)Source: REMI

0

100200300400500600700800900

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

Apparel manufacturingBeverage and tobacco prChemical manufacturingComputer and electronic Electrical equipment and Fabricated metal product Food manufacturingFurniture and related prodLeather and allied producMachinery manufacturingMiscellaneous manufactuMotor vehicles, bodies & Nonmetallic mineral prodOther transportation equiPaper manufacturingPetroleum and coal produPlastics and rubber produPrimary metal manufactuPrinting and related suppTextile millsTextile product millsWood product manufactu
Port Bienville Railroad  Economic Development Benefits a

Figure B‐6 Manufacturing Output – Historical and Baseline Forecast (Hancock County)Source: REMI

$0

$50

$100$150$200$250$300$350$400$450$500

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

$ Millions

Apparel manufacturingBeverage and tobacco produChemical manufacturingComputer and electronic prodElectrical equipment and appFabricated metal product manFood manufacturingFurniture and related product Leather and allied product maMachinery manufacturingMiscellaneous manufacturingMotor vehicles, bodies & traileNonmetallic mineral product mOther transportation equipmePaper manufacturingPetroleum and coal product mPlastics and rubber product mPrimary metal manufacturingPrinting and related support aTextile millsTextile product millsWood product manufacturing
																				Port Bienville Railroad 		Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis

46  

Build Case

The	 proposed	 rail	 connection	 from	 Port	 Bienville	 to	 the	 NS	 line	 would	 span	 approximately	 24	

miles,	and	would	traverse	the	Stennis	Space	Center	buffer	area.		The	estimated	construction	cost	

to	plan	and	construct	the	rail	connection	is	$90.0	million.		These	along	with	other	operation	and	

maintenance	costs	(approximately	$11.0	million	over	twenty	years)	are	summarized	by	year	and	

costs	component	below.		Such	construction	and	operation	of	the	rail	connection	would	generate	

construction‐related	direct	and	multiplier	impacts,	as	presented	in	the	Economic	Impacts	Results	

section	beginning	on	page	52.	

REMI Model Inputs

Various	activities	associated	with	the	rail	improvement	are	estimated	by	impact	component	and	

entered	into	 the	REMI	model	 to	derive	dynamic	economic	impact	results	by	year,	measure,	and	

geographic	 region	 (this	 overall	 process	 was	 diagrammed	 previously	 in	 Figure	 B‐1).	 	 Rail	

construction	impacts	and	site	development	impacts	reflect	 the	short‐term	capital	infrastructure	

effect	 associated	 with	 implementing	 the	 project.	 	 Comparatively,	 the	 transport	 costs	 saving	

impacts	 and	 the	 site	 employment	 impacts	 represent	 the	 long‐term	 annual	 effect	 on	 economic	

activity.		The	following	discussion	explains	the	nature	and	magnitude	of	the	various	REMI	inputs.	

Rail Construction and Operation Costs

Development	and	operations	of	the	proposed	rail	line	would	generate	economic	impacts	over	the	

27‐year	period	(through	2040,	the	horizon	analyzed),	stemming	from	the	$101.0	million	in	total	

costs,	 which	 include	 $90.0	 in	 initial	 development	 and	 $11.0	 million	 in	 ongoing	 operation	 and	

maintenance.		Annual	costs	are	shown	by	type	in	Table	B‐5,	and	discussed	below.	

Infrastructure Development

Rail	development	costs	are	estimated	at	$90.0	million	over	six	years,	with	$6.6	million	in	planning	

and	engineering	(P&E)	costs,	comprising	7.1%	of	total	development	costs,	spanning	the	first	three	

years	(2014	through	2016).		In	addition,	$1.4	million	in	right	of	way	(ROW)	costs	(1.5%)	occur	in	

years	2016	and	2017.		Construction	is	assumed	to	begin	in	year	2017	and	span	slightly	more	than	

two	years	totaling	$82.0	million	(91.1%	of	total	costs).	

As	 right‐of‐way	 expenditures	 largely	 comprise	 property	 transfers	 (as	 opposed	 to	 value‐

added/productive	 economic	 activities)	 and	 the	 P&E	 would	 likely	 be	 conducted	 outside	 of	 the	

Study	 Area,	 only	 the	 construction	 expenditures	 occur	 on‐site	 and	 are	 applicable	 for	 the	 REMI	

model.	

Annual Operations  

Annual	 operation	 costs	 are	 estimated	 to	 start	 at	 $293,400	 in	 year	 2020,	 rising	 gradually	 over	

twenty	years	to	$800,800	by	year	2040.			
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

47

Table B‐5    Capital Infrastructure Investment Costs (in 2012 $)

Year

Development Operation &

Maintenance Annual Total

ROW Planning &

Engineering Construction Total

2014 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000

2015 $0 $3,600,000 $0 $3,600,000 $0 $3,600,000

2016 $400,000 $2,000,000 $0 $2,400,000 $0 $2,400,000

2017 $1,000,000 $0   $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $0 $6,000,000

2018 $0 $0 $40,000,000 $40,000,000 $0 $40,000,000

2019 $0 $0 $37,000,000 $37,000,000 $0 $37,000,000

2020 $0 $0 $0 $0 $293,400 $293,400

2021 $0 $0 $0 $0 $302,200 $302,200

2022 $0 $0 $0 $0 $311,300 $311,300

2023 $0 $0 $0 $0 $320,600 $320,600

2024 $0 $0 $0 $0 $330,200 $330,200

2025 $0 $0 $0 $0 $340,100 $340,100

2026 $0 $0 $0 $0 $350,300 $350,300

2027 $0 $0 $0 $0 $360,800 $360,800

2028 $0 $0 $0 $0 $371,700 $371,700

2029 $0 $0 $0 $0 $382,800 $382,800

2030 $0 $0 $0 $0 $595,900 $595,900

2031 $0 $0 $0 $0 $613,800 $613,800

2032 $0 $0 $0 $0 $632,200 $632,200

2033 $0 $0 $0 $0 $651,200 $651,200

2034 $0 $0 $0 $0 $670,700 $670,700

2035 $0 $0 $0 $0 $690,800 $690,800

2036 $0 $0 $0 $0 $711,500 $711,500

2037 $0 $0 $0 $0 $732,900 $732,900

2038 $0 $0 $0 $0 $754,900 $754,900

2039 $0 $0 $0 $0 $777,500 $777,500

2040 $0 $0 $0 $0 $800,800 $800,800

Total $1,400,000 $6,600,000 $82,000,000 $90,000,000 $10,995,600 $100,995,600

Source: CDM Smith / HDR Inc.

Transport Cost‐Savings  

While	each	circumstance	 varies,	literature	review	indicates	 that	 typical	prices	 for	single	Class	1	

rail	service	are	nearly	twice	that	of	a	competitive	environment	(e.g.	two	or	more	Class	1	carriers).		

Nonetheless,	even	monopolistic	Class	1	rail	service	is	less	expensive	 than	 trucking per‐mile	and	

much	 more	 practical	 for	 low‐value‐to‐weight	 cargoes,	 and	 non‐time‐sensitive	 movements.		

However,	 such	 monopolistic	 rail	 pricing	 deters	 further	 industry	 investment.	 	 This	 issue	 was	

raised	several	times	in	surveys	with	local	business	leaders	in	and	around	Port	Bienville.	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

48

Literature Review

To	 understand	 how	 rail	 rates	 vary	 between	 captive	 versus	 non‐captive	 rail	 carrier	 services,	

various	 sources	 were	 researched,	 including	 the	 Surface	 Transportation	 Board	 (STB),35	 the	

General	Accounting	Office	 (GAO),	 36	and	Consumers	United	 for	Rail	Equity	 (CURE).37		These	and	

other	informed	sources	detail	 the	various	issues	associated	with	 the	Railroad	Revitalization	Act	

(1976),	the	Staggers	Rail	Act	(1980),	and	revenue	(pricing)	per	rail	variable	costs,	etc.	

Overall,	a	general	concern	remains	about	competition	given	captive	(e.g.,	monopolistic)	markets	

and	 fewer	 railroads.	 	 Since	 2006,	 Consumers	 United	 for	 Rail	 Equity	 documents	 suggest	 that	

further	 railroad	 consolidation	 and	 other	 related	 factors	 have	 led	 to	 higher	 return	 margins	 for	

railroads	 and	 monopolistic	 pricing.	 	 A	 number	 of	 studies	 analyzing	 the	 economic	 impacts	 and	

benefits	 of	 non‐captive	 rail	 markets	 versus	 captive	 rail	 market	 have	 found	 that	 on‐captive	

industrial	facilities	(those	facilities	with	access	to	more	than	once	rail	provider)	realize	between	

30	to	45	percent	lower	rail	rate	than	those	paid	by	captive	rail	markets.		

Local Rail User Perspective

Such	findings	support	the	assertions	of	the	surveyed	firms.		Specifically,	two	firms	independently	

noted	their	relative	competitive	disadvantage	to	other	companies	served	by	two	Class	1	carriers.		

Such	 examples	 reflect	 typical	 costs	 and	 schedules	 and	 do	 not	 address	 the	 additional	 costs	 and	

penalties	borne	by	shippers	due	to	congested	transit	through	the	congested	Gentilly	Yard	in	New	

Orleans	or	other	delays.		Several	firms	also	stressed	that	such	cost	penalties	would	be	alleviated,	

at	least	partially,	with	second	Class	1	rail	access.	

Impact Modeling Assumptions

As	 such,	 for	 REMI	 modeling,	 the	 45%	 transport	 cost	 savings	 were	 applied	 to	 the	 relative	 local	

demand	for	rail	services,	and	a	weighted	transportation	cost	savings	percent	(product	of	the	45%	

rail	 price	 reduction	 and	 the	 percentage	 of	 local	 rail	 demand)	 was	 applied	 to	 the	 Hancock	 and	

Pearl	River	counties.		This	savings	was	input	into	the	REMI	TranSight	transportation	cost	savings	

matrix	between	origin	and	destination	regions	within	the	model	for	specified	years.		It	is	assumed	

that	 the	 savings	 will	 occur	 in	 each	 and	 every	 year	 following	 the	 completion	 of	 the	 rail	

development	(i.e.,	post‐2019).		Total	impact	results	of	such	REMI	model	inputs	are	summarized	in	

the	 section	 beginning	 on	 page	 52.	 	 It	is	 noted	 that	 the	 direct	 effect	 of	 such	 cost‐savings	 would	

generate	 an	 estimated	 300	 manufacturing	 jobs	 by	 the	 year	 2025.	 	 Such	 jobs	 could	 arise	 from	

existing	firm	expansion	and/or	new	firm	attraction.38

																																																																		

35 “An	Update	to	the	Study	of	Competition	in	the	U.S.	Freight	Railroad	Industry,”	The	Surface	Transportation	

Board;	January,	2010	

36	“FREIGHT	RAILROADS	‐	Industry	Health	Has	Improved,	but	Concerns	about	Competition	and	Capacity	

Should	Be	Addressed,”	GAO‐07‐94;	October	2006	

37	“How	Do	Captive	Rail	Rates	Compare	to	Competitive	Rail	Rates?”	Consumers	United	for	Rail	Equity;	

November,	2005	

38	As	addressed	in	Section	0,	total	impacts	comprise	direct	and	multiplier	types.	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

49

Table B‐6    Revenue per Ton ‐ Captive vs. Competitive Markets

   NS   CSX   BN   UP  

Farm Products        

Captive $21.37 $36.74 $45.28 $37.99

Competitive $11.88 $20.83 $26.09 $21.29

Savings 44% 43% 42% 44%

Coal        

Captive $17.56 $17.22 $16.77 $17.00

Competitive $9.76 $9.76 $9.66 $9.53

Savings 44% 43% 42% 44%

Chemicals      

Captive $36.98 $34.33 $42.57 $38.94

Competitive $20.56 $19.46 $24.52 $21.82

Savings 44% 43% 42% 44%

Lumber or Wood        

Captive $29.43 $36.13 $59.19 $59.49

Competitive $16.36 $20.48 $34.10 $33.34

Savings 44% 43% 42% 44%

Pulp, Paper        

Captive $39.48 $40.82 $62.14 $55.40

Competitive $21.95 $23.14 $35.80 $31.05

Savings 44% 43% 42% 44%

Source: Escalation Consultants, for Consumers United for Rail Equity

Site Construction and Employment

Site	development	associated	with	transportation	infrastructure	investment	is	difficult	to	estimate	

given	that	such	transportation	investment	is	one	of	many	factors	that	attract	new	industry	and/or	

induce	existing	industry	to	expand.		Other	factors	contributing	a	significant	role	in	such	decisions	

include	 the	 overall	economies	 (local,	 national,	and	even	international),	employment	levels	 (and	

unemployment	rates),	education	levels,	labor	 force	skills,	 tax	structure	and	rates,	quality	of	life,	

etc.	 	 While	 many	 such	 factors	 can	 be	 quantified,	 many	 are	 evaluated	 qualitatively.	 	 All	 such	

decisions	 are	multifaceted	 and	 situational,	 and	 are	 conducted	 with	interrelated	 considerations.		

For	such	reasons,	it	is	difficult	 to	accurately	estimate	 the	bottom‐line	development	effect	of	 the	

infrastructure	investment,	net	of	Study	Area	transfers	that	would	occur	regardless	of	any	isolated	

transportation	improvement.	

With	 this	in	mind,	 the	 various	 surveys	 conducted	with	 existing	 area	industry,	 freight	 transport	

providers,	 and	 local	 government	 officials	 were	 reviewed.	 	 Additionally,	 an	 inventory	 of	

developable	acreage	was	conducted	to:		generate	a	current	baseline	comparison	of	manufacturing	

employment	 and	 acreage;	 and,	 to	 provide	 an	 order‐of‐magnitude	 development	 ceiling.		

Ultimately,	 this	 information	 and	 perspective	 was	 used	 to	 estimate	 the	 resultant	 direct	 on‐site	

employment	 associated	 with	 the	 rail	 line	 infrastructure	 investment.	 	 Such	 site	 employment	

estimates	 are	 over‐and‐above	 the	 related	 manufacturing	 job	 estimates	 associated	 with	 the	

transport	cost	savings	addressed	previously.	

Surveys

General	 sentiments	 among	 the	 major	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 tenants	 anticipate	 some	

growth	at	the	park,	regardless	of	whether	or	not	the	secondary	rail	connection	occurs.		However,	

much	discussion	pointedly	identified	the	high	cost	and	reliability	issues	associated	with	a	single	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

50

Class	1	carrier.		Distillation	of	the	surveys	suggests	that	the secondary Class 1 carrier access would

make the location significantly more competitive for industrial development and would lead to

further growth above expected baseline growth.			

Specifically,	surveys	indicate	that	such	growth	would	first	entail	hiring	of	additional	employees	to	

work	 existing	 shifts.	 	 Secondly,	 additional	 shifts	 would	 be	 added	 to	 expand	 output	 of	 existing	

facilities.		Thirdly,	existing	undeveloped	land	(either	owned	privately	or	by	 the	Hancock	County	

Port	and	Harbor	Commission)	would	be	developed.		However,	limited	definitive	statements	were	

made	stating	specific	growth	that	would	occur	with	the	rail	expansion.39			

Site Acreage

A	 total	 of	 13,803	acres	were	identified	in	 the	Hancock‐Pearl	River	Study	Area.	 	Of	 this	acreage,	

164	 acres	 in	 the	 Port	 Bienville	 Industrial	 Park	 were	 identified	 as	 non‐developable.	 	 Of	 the	

remaining	total	13,639	acres,	4,994	acres	are	already	developed,	leaving	8,645	(63%)	as	available	

for	further	development.		The	following	discussion	summarizes	acreage	by	location.	

 Port Bienville Industrial Park	–	There	are	3494	developable	PBIP	acres,	1,210	are	owned	

by	existing	 tenants	 to	 facilitate	 future	expansion,	 the	 remaining	 1,785	acres	are	 held	 by	

the	 Hancock	 County	 Port	 and	 Harbor	 Commission	 (HCDC).	 	 439	 (13%)	 have	 been	

developed	 to‐date.			HCDC	data	suggests	 that	 these	439	developed	acres	are	home	 to	18	

firms	and	support	1,200	jobs,	yielding	a	job	per	acre	ratio	of	2.73.

 Stennis Space Center (Fee Area) –	There	is	a	 total	of	13,800	acres	within	 the	 fence	at	 the	

Stennis	Space	Center	and	125,000	acres	that	provide	an	acoustical	buffer	area	around	the	

facility.		There	are	8,000	acres	that	are	currently	undeveloped	in	the	fee	area	of	the	SCC,	

4,400	 (55%)	 have	 been	 developed	 and	 3,600	 acres	 (45%)	 are	 available	 for	lease.	 	 This	

does	not	include	any	other	acreage	in	the	buffer	area	outside	of	the	currently	designated	

fee	area.	

 Other –	Of	the	2,205	remaining	acres	identified	in	the	other	industrial	areas	in	Hancock	or	

Pearl	River	 counties,	 the	airport	industrial	 park	accounts	is	 155	acres.40	 	Available	 data	

suggests	 that	2,050	acres	are	available	 for	 further	industry	development.		Of	 this,	1,500	

acres	in	Hancock	County	currently	comprise	a	 tree‐farm	across	 the	street	 from	 the	PBIP	

slated	for	potential	development	when	needed.41

																																																																		

39	Such	reluctance	or	inability	to	accurately	divulge	speculative	development	prospects	without	a	specific	

business	plan	envisioning	probable	situations	is	the	nature	of	business	surveys.		This	is	especially	true	

when	the	private	sector	interviewee	speculates	business	growth	based	on	public	transportation	system	

infrastructure	investment.	

40	No	data	was	available	for	the	Other Developed Acres	in	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties.		However,	such	

acreage	is	not	considered	significant.	

41	Note	that	currently,	197	Hancock	County	jobs	are	in	the	Forestry	and	Fishing	sector.		Information	was	

not	obtained	regarding	the	share	that	is	forestry	or	how	many	forestry	jobs	are	linked	to	this	tract	of	1,500	

acres.	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

51

Table B‐7   Study Area Developable Acres  

   Developable

Non‐

Developable1 Total

Site Developed

Undeveloped

Held or Subtotal

For Lease For Sale Subtotal

PB Industrial Park                     

HCDC 25 1,165 620 1,785 1,810 164 1,974

Tenants 414 1,154 56 1,210 1,624 na 1,624

Subtotal 439 2,319 676 2,995 3,434 164 3,598

Stennis Space

Center (Fee  Area) 4,400 3,600   ‐‐  3,600 8,000   ‐‐   8,000

Other                     

Airport 155   ‐‐  45 45 200   ‐‐   200

Hancock Co. na   ‐‐  1,500 1,500 1,500   ‐‐   1,500

Pearl River Co. na  ‐‐  505 505 505   ‐‐   505

Subtotal 155   ‐‐  2,050 2,050 2,205   ‐‐   2,205

Total 4,994 5,919 2,726 8,645 13,639 164 13,803

Source: HCDC, Stennis, MDA, and CDM Smith discussions with local business leaders 1

Includes  roadway, rail right‐of‐way, and unusable marsh land

Site Development Ceiling

Applying	the	existing	2.73	job	per	acre	ratio	to	the	identified	8,645	undeveloped	acres	suggests	a	

ceiling	of	approximately	23,600	jobs.		Such	a	full	build‐out	scenario	would	be	extremely	unlikely	

even	 under	 the	 rail‐extension	 scenario	 and	 a	 robust	 economy.	 	 Additional	 development	 would	

depend	 on	 many	 factors,	 of	 which	 the	 rail	 connection	 would	 be	 a	 single,	 albeit	 notable,	

component.		Nonetheless,	the	key	point	is	that	the	Study	Area	has	sufficient	land	to	accommodate	

developmental	demand	and	does	not	appear	physically	constrained	from	expansion.	

While	it	is	unlikely	 that	 the	hypothetical	job	ceiling	of	23,600	will	occur	simply	because	 the	rail	

connection	is	built,	the	rail	construction	will	shift	the	probability	of	increased	job	creation	and	the	

associated	income,	output,	and	other	impacts.			

Site Employment Impacts

Existing	firm	expansion	and/or	new	firm	attraction	would	result	in	additional	direct	employment	

and	associated	economic	activity	in	the	Study	Area.		It	is	assumed	that	such	development	would	

follow	a	similar	composition	as	the	existing	area	businesses.		Such	development	is	often	referred	

to	 as	 clustering.	 	 Specifically,	 such	 Study	 Area	 industries	 include	 chemical	 manufacturing,	

fabricated	 metal	 products,	 transport	 equipment	 manufacturing,	 and	 plastic/rubber	 product	

manufacturing.		This	general	perspective	was	confirmed	through	the	various	business	surveys.			

Surveys	 and	 discussions	 with	 local	 firms	 and	 business	 leaders	 indicate	 several	 manufacturing	

firms	are	extremely	interested	in	investing	in	the	Study	Area.		It	is	estimated	that	such	firms	could	

employ	 an	 additional	 430	 people,	 perhaps	 more.	 	 This	 conservative	 employment	 estimate	 of	

manufacturing	 firm	 expansion	 and/or	 attraction	 is	 in	 addition	 to	 the	 impacts	 associated	 with	

transport	cost‐savings,	which	would	include	some	manufacturing	job	expansion.		Such	potential	

jobs	 would	 be	 anticipated	 to	 arise	 within	 five	 years	 of	 the	 new	 rail	 connection	 and	 generate	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

52

additional	multiplier	related	impacts.		These	350	direct	jobs	would	arise	between	2021	and	2024	

and	would	continue	throughout	the	study	analysis	period	(e.g.,	year	2040).	

Site Construction Impacts

In	 addition	 to	 the	 annual	 site	 employment	 impacts,	 site	 development	 impacts	 would	 arise	 as	

existing	 facilities	 expand	 and/or	 new	 facilities	 are	 constructed.	 	 Such	 impacts	 are	 assumed	 to	

occur	in	 the	 years	 prior	 to	 the	 site	 employment	impacts	 (e.g.,	2020	 to	 2023).	 	 To	 estimate	 the	

development	 costs	 entered	 into	 the	 REMI	 model,	 various	 sources	 were	 considered.	 	 The	

Organization	 for	 International	 Investment	(OFII)	 tracks	 total	site	construction	expenditures	and	

new	 site	 employment	 by	 state	 for	 manufacturing	 facilities.	 	 Such	 information	 for	 2011	 was	

evaluated	 for	 seven	 southern	 states	 ranging	 from	 Texas	 to	 South	 Carolina.	 	 The	 average	 site	

investment	cost	per	site	job	ranged	from	a	low	of	just	under	$230,000	in	Arkansas	and	Alabama	

to	a	high	of	nearly	$1.0	million	in	Texas.		To	ensure	relative	conservatism,	a	site‐development	cost	

of	$200,000/employee	was	multiplied	by	350	site	employment	jobs;	 this	generated	a	direct	site	

investment	of	$70.0	million	that	was	entered	into	the	REMI	model.	

Hurricane Mitigation Cost‐Saving Impacts

Lastly,	although	no	disaster	mitigation	impacts	are	estimated,	the	issue	was	raised	and	deserves	

airing	 given	 its	 inherent	 effect	 on	 the	 transport	 costs	 saving	 and	 site	 employment	 impacts	

previously	addressed.	

The	CSX	line	 from	Mobile,	Alabama	past	Port	Bienville	 to	 the	Gentilly	Yard	in	Louisiana	roughly	

parallels	 the	 Gulf	 Coast.	 	 Hurricanes	 Katrina	 and	 Isaac	 illustrate	 how	 storm	 damage	 can	 shut	

down	 rail	 movement	 along	 the	 coast.	 	 Discussions	 with	 various	 tenant	 and	 railroad	 operators	

indicate	 that	 the	 CSX	 line	 was	 down	 for	 approximately	 six	 months	 	 after	 Hurricane	 Katrina	 as	

derailed	 cars	 were	 collected	 and	 damaged	 rail	 lines	 repaired.	 	 Such	 closures	 inhibited	 freight	

transport	 through	 unshipped	 orders,	 higher	 transport	 cost	 via	 truck,	 and	 late	 delivery	 cost	

penalties.		After	Hurricane	Isaac	this	line	was	back	in	operation	in	just	over	30	days.			

Access	 to	a	 second	 rail	line	would	 provide	an	 outlet	 for	 both	 rail	 cars	and	local	 shipments	 that	

would	otherwise	be	in	jeopardy.		The	potential	benefits	of	a	second	Class	1	railroad	access	include	

cost	 savings	 and	 job	 retention	 impacts.	 	 While	 the	 Transport	 Cost‐Savings	 section	 addressed	

typical	cost	savings,	it	does	not	address	the	cost‐savings	associated	with	unique,	random	events	

that	 could	 be	 avoided,	 or	 at	 least	 notably	 mitigated,	 via	 a	 direct	 northern	 access.	 	 Further,	 the	

surveys	suggest	that	Hurricane	Katrina	played	a	major	role	in	the	closure	of	the	IKEA	facility,	and	

may	have	deterred	other	existing	firms	from	subsequent	expansion.	

In	 summary	 regarding	 hurricane	 mitigation,	 it	 is	 not	 easy	 to	 quantify	 the	 resultant	 economic	

impact.		However,	 the	additional	rail	access	would	affect	 transport	costs	 from	 time	 to	 time,	and	

would	increase	the	relative	attractiveness	of	the	area	to	existing	business	expansion	and/or	new	

business	attraction.		No	method	was	developed	of	how	such	disaster	mitigation	cost	savings	could	

be	estimated	and	appropriately	entered	into	the	REMI	model.		Further,	the	relative	magnitude	of	

such	 impacts	 was	 considered	 of	 secondary	 importance	 to	 the	 transport	 cost	 savings	 and	 site	

employment	 impacts	 already	 addressed.	 	 Hence,	 to	 ensure	 conservative	 and	 defensible	 impact	

estimates,	such	disaster	mitigation	impacts	were	not	specifically	quantified.	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

53

Economic Impacts Results

Rail	 development	 and	 firm	 expansion/attraction	 activities	 would	 stimulate	 construction,	

transport	cost‐savings,	and	new	site	employment	impact	components.		These	effects	were	input	

into	the	REMI	model	to	estimate	the	resultant	annual	impacts	by	impact	measure	and	geography.		

The	 results	 were	 evaluated	 from	 different	 perspectives	 and	 compared	 with	 existing	 base	

economic	data.	

Impact Findings

The	 estimated	 impacts	 comprise	 many	 aspects	 including	 years,	 regions,	 impact	 component,	

industry	 sector,	etc.		Presenting	all	 the	impact	measures	by	 year	 for	all	 the	impact	components	

and	 regions	 simultaneously	 would	 be	 excessive	 information	 to	 digest	 effectively.	 	 As	 such,	 the	

economic	 impacts	 are	 first	 presented	 in	 a	 disaggregated	 series	 of	 charts	 to	 illustrate	 how	 and	

where	 the	 Study	 Area	 job	 impacts	 arise	 and	 change	 over	 time	 and	 between	 regions.	 	 All	 the	

impact	 measures	 are	 then	 presented	 specifically	 for	 two	 benchmark	 years	 (2025	 and	 2040),	

providing	a	post‐rail	construction	and	site	development	business	operation	perspective.		Lastly,	

the	 analysis	 hones‐down	 direct	 manufacturing	 sector	 employment	 impacts.	 	 Resultant	 job	

impacts	are	presented	by	industry	and	compared	 to	 the	overall	base	 forecasted	employment	by	

year	through	2040.		

Annual Impacts  

Combined	 effects	 of	 rail	 construction,	 transportation	 cost	 savings,	 and	 site	 development	

(construction	 and	 employment)	 result	 in	 varying	 job	 impacts	 over	 the	 analysis	 period,	 as	

diagrammed	 in	 Figure	 B‐7).	 	 Initially,	 rail	 construction	 impacts	 would	 result	 in	 Study	 Area	 job	

impacts	of	701	in	2018	and	680	in	2019.		 Initial	opening	 year	2020	job	impacts	would	surpass	

1,000	(1,041)	as	a	function	of	the	increased	competitiveness	associated	with	the	45%	decline	in	

rail	transport	cost	savings	to	existing	firms,	but	is	also	contributed	to	by	site	construction‐related	

activities.	 	 Such	 site	 development	 impacts	 are	 forecast	 to	 continue	 through	 2023.	 	 Site	

employment	 would	 then	 arise	 subsequent	 to	 the	 new	 site	 development	 impacts;	 such	 impacts	

begin	in	year	2021	and	continue	through	2040.	

Regional Impact Distribution

A	notable	majority	of	 the	impacts	are	anticipated	 to	occur	in	Hancock	County,	as	seen	in	Figure			

B‐8.	Over	 90%	 of	 the	job	impacts	 during	 the	 rail	 construction	 period	 (years	 2017	 to	 2019)	are	

forecast	 to	 occur	 in	 Hancock	 county,	 1%	 in	 Pearl	 River,	 and	 the	 other	 6%	 elsewhere	 in	

Mississippi.	 	 After	 opening	 year	 2020,	 the	 transport	 cost‐savings	 impacts	 and	 the	 site	

development	impacts	result	in	a	majority	of	impacts	occurring	in	Hancock	County.	Nonetheless,	a	

notable	impact	share	occurs	in	Pearl	River	County.		By	2024,	 the	Hancock	County	impact	share	

levels‐off	at	66%.42				

Notably,	 the	 other	 Mississippi	 job	 impacts	 decline	 between	 2020	 and	 2022	 reflect	 economic	

restructuring	due	to	the	rail	development,	in	which	economic	activity	shifts	into	the	Hancock	and	

Pearl	 River	 counties	 from	 elsewhere	in	 the	 State.	 	 Such	 a	 shift	 reflects	 the	 relative	 competitive	

																																																																		

42	Annual	variances	between	2020	and	2025	reflect	how	such	impacts	were	entered	into	the	various	

industries	and	between	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	counties.	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

54

advantages	in	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties	 due	 to	 the	 rail	development,	in	comparison	 to	

the	 baseline	 scenario	 with	 only	 a	 monopoly	 rail	 service	 available.	 	 However,	 this	 short‐term	

restructuring	 is	 short‐lived	 (within	 three	 years),	 and	 the	 economic	 balancing	 evens	 over	 the	

remaining	analysis	horizon.		The	subsequent	year	2024	to	2040	impacts	reflect	the	result	of	the	

transport	costs	savings	and	new	site	employment.	

Business Operation Impacts

The	 resultant	 impacts	 associated	 with	 business	 transportation	 cost‐savings	 and	 new	 site	

employment	are	evaluated	from	the	 five	impact	measure	perspectives	in	Table	B‐8	for	the	years	

2025	and	2040	 (that	is,	 following	 the	rail	and	site	construction‐related	impacts).		 In	year	2025,	

for	 example,	 a	 total	 of	 1,762	 jobs	 would	 potentially	 arise	 in	 Mississippi	 because	 of	 the	 rail	

connection,	 of	 which	 a	 vast	 majority	 (98	 percent,	 1,762	 jobs)	 occur	 in	 the	 Study	 Area.		

Nonetheless,	the	findings	indicate	that	the	project	benefits	the	State	overall.	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

55

     Figure B‐7    Job Impacts by Region and Component

            Source: CDM Smith use of REMI
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

56

Figure  B‐8     Regional Job Impact Distribution

Source: CDM Smith use of REMI

Table B‐8    Business Operation – Related Economic Impacts (2025, 2040)

Measure

Absolute Change Percent Change

Study Area Mississippi Study Area Mississippi Hancock Pearl River Total Hancock Pearl River Total

Year 2025                        

Population 656 644 1,300 1,450 1.3% 1.0% 1.1% 0.0%

Employment 1,166 563 1,728 1,762 4.1% 2.4% 3.3% 0.1%

Wages and

Salaries* $63.5 $20.7 $84.2 $86.9 5.9% 3.3% 4.9% 0.1%

Value Added* $153.0 $40.6 $193.6 $198.9 7.0% 3.0% 5.5% 0.1%

Output* $327.5 $80.7 $408.2 $417.4 8.4% 3.2% 6.4% 0.2%

Year 2040                        

Population 1,537 1,448 2,985 3,339 2.9% 2.2% 2.5% 0.1%

Employment 1,212 593 1,804 1,862 4.0% 2.3% 3.2% 0.1%

Wages and

Salaries* $80.2 $25.1 $105.3 $108.9 6.0% 2.9% 4.8% 0.1%

Value Added* $227.6 $54.0 $281.6 $291.5 7.8% 2.9% 5.9% 0.2%

Output* $482.0 $105.1 $587.1 $603.4 9.5% 3.2% 7.0% 0.2%

Source: CDM Smith use of REMI

^ Reflects post rail and site construction impacts. Includes the business transport cost‐savings, existing firm expansion, and

new firm attraction, as well as the associated multiplier impacts.

* in millions  of fixed 2012 dollars

Direct Manufacturing Employment Impacts

Base	 case	 and	 new	 direct	manufacturing	 sector	employment	impacts	associated	with	 transport	

cost	savings	and	new	firm	attractions	are	shown	in	Figure	B‐9,	which	expands	upon	the	base‐case	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

57

manufacturing	employment	 shown	 previously	in	 Figure	B‐4	 (depicted	in	 the	light	 blue	 color).43		

Per	se,	 the	chart	depicts	 the	baseline	manufacturing	jobs	(i.e.,	1,925	in	year	2025)	with	 the	net‐	

direct	manufacturing	job	impacts	stacked	on	top.		Such	direct	manufacturing	job	impacts	begin	at	

273	jobs	in	year	2020	and	rise	to	650	jobs	by	2025.		Resulting	manufacturing	jobs	total	2,262	in	

2020,	 rising	 to	 2,575	 by	 2025.	 	 The	 relative	 change	 in	 Study	 Area	 manufacturing	 employment	

because	of	the	rail	connection	starts	at	13.7%	in	2020	and	rises	to	33.8%	by	2025.	

Figure B‐9    Direct Manufacturing Employment Impacts – Baseline and Build Impacts

  Source:  CDM Smith use of REMI

Economic Impact Conclusions

High Rail Transport Costs

Such	high	rail	costs	reportedly	constrain	existing	firm	expansion,	and	impose	escalated	operating	

costs	from	monopolistic	rail	pricing.		Further	concerns	inhibit	the	attraction	of	new	firms	drawn	

to	the	region’s	overall	transport	infrastructure,	abundant	industrial	acreage,	and	other	amenities.		

Clearly,	 there	 is	 potential	 for	 the	 secondary	 rail	 connection	 to	 lower	 transport	 costs	 and	 help	

induce	Study	Area	economic	growth.	

The	magnitude	of	such	growth	is	a	challenging	issue	to	forecast.		In	addition	to	the	many	positive	

factors	that	local	business	leaders	have	worked	hard	to	bestow	upon	the	region,	there	are	many	

other	factors	beyond	local	control.		Gas	prices,	inflation,	trade	patterns,	natural	disasters,	market	

changes,	etc.	can	thwart	the	best	laid‐out	development	plans.	

																																																																		

43	Note	that	the	figure	reflects	the	same	base‐case	productivity	gains	(resulting	in	base‐case	manufacturing	

employment	declines)	as	discussed	in	Section	1.2.1.		This	explains	why	the	blue‐bars	decrease	over	the	

analysis	period.	

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Direct Manufacturing Job Impacts

Base Case Manufacturing Jobs
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

58

Impact Approach

Beyond	 the	 short‐term	 impacts	 associated	 with	 rail	 construction,	 forecasts	 were	 made	 of	 the	

impacts	associated	with	 transportation	cost‐savings.		Further,	various	data	were	used	 to	derive	

new	site	employment	impacts	(as	well	as	the	associated	site	construction	impacts).		In	summary,	

the	projected	economic	impacts	are	 notable	and	 comparatively	 robust	 to	 the	existing	economy.		

Further,	 the	 forecasted	impacts	associated	with	such	access	would	 further	strengthen	 the	Study	

Region’s	ability	to	retain	existing	firms.	

Study Area Impact Findings

Economic	impact	 components	 evaluated	include	 the	 short‐term	 construction	impact	 associated	

with	 the	 rail	 connection	 as	 well	 as	 new	 site	 development	 impacts.	 	 Beyond	 these	 impacts,	 the	

facility	 will	 lower	 transportation	 costs	 for	 existing	 rail‐user	 firms,	 which	 will	 facilitate	 their	

expansion	as	well	as	help	attract	new	industries.			

 Construction Impacts	 –	 Rail	 construction	 impacts	 will	 attract	 approximately	 680‐700

Study	Area	jobs	in	years	2018	and	2019.		Subsequent	to	that	site	development	impacts	of	

expanding	and/or	newly	attracted	firms	will	range	between	150	to	425	jobs	in	years	2020	

to	2023.	

 Site Development –	The	new	rail	connection	will	lower	transport	costs	and	make	the	area	

more	attractive	to	existing	firm	expansion	and/or	new	firm	attraction.		Beginning	in	year	

2020,	it	is	estimated	that	273	additional	manufacturing	jobs	will	be	attracted	to	the	Study	

Area.		This	manufacturing	job	attraction	impact	is	 forecasted	 to	grow	quickly	 to	 650	by	

the	 year	 2025.	 	 The	 expansion	 of	Study	Area	manufacturing	will	generate	an	 additional	

1,154	multiplier	jobs	in	the	year	2025	for	a	total	job	impact	of	1,178.	Compared	to	Study	

Area	baseline	employment,	the	rail	connection	is	forecasted	to	result	in	a	33.8%	increase	

in	direct	manufacturing	employment	and	a	3.5%	in	overall	employment.	

State Impact Findings

While	 a	 vast	 majority	 of	 the	 impacts	 would	 arise	 in	 the	 Study	 Area,	 additional	 positive	 impact	

would	 occur	 elsewhere	 in	 Mississippi.	 	 Hence	 the	 project	 can	 be	 viewed	 as	 beneficial	 to	 the	

overall	State	in	addition	to	the	Study	Area.	

Based	 on	 the	 detailed	 survey	 effort,	 discussion	 with	 local	 officials,	 and	 REMI	 modeling,	 the	

proposed	 rail	 connection	 would	 benefit	 the	 overall	 Study	 Area	 economy.	 	 By	 dramatically	

reducing	rail	transport	costs	and	improving	rail	connectivity,	the	facility	would	help	attract	direct	

manufacturing	 investment.	 	 The	 objective	 economic	 evaluation	 presented	 herein	 also	

acknowledges	that	significant	developable	industrial	acreage	exists	in	the	Study	Area.		Hence	the	

Study	 Area	 possesses	 the	 capacity	 to	 accommodate	 additional	 potential	 development	 if/when	

other	 factors	 further	 increase	 the	 attractiveness	 of	 the	 Study	 Area	 for	 manufacturing‐related	

investment.	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

59

Appendix C:  Potential Funding Sources for Port Bienville

Rail Improvements

The	Port	Bienville	Short	Line	Railroad	connecting	 the	CSX	rail	line	in	Hancock	County	 to	 the	NS	

rail	line	in	Pearl	River	 County	will	most	likely	 require	 funding	 from	multiple	 sources.	 	 Funding	

options	for	this	project	may	include	grants	or	loans	from	public	sources,	private	capital	or	in‐kind	

contributions,	 or	 revenues	 from	 ongoing	 operations.		Grants	 from	 federal	 or	state	governments	

generally	do	not	require	repayment	except	under	specific	conditions	of	non‐performance.		Loans	

require	repayment	based	upon	the	terms	agreed	to	in	the	loan	document,	often	over	a	period	of	

up	 to	 thirty	 years.	 	 The	initial	 funding	 plan	 for	 this	 project	will	likely	 pursue	 federal	 and	 state	

resources;	 given	 the	 affect	 that	 current	 economic	 conditions	 are	 having	 on	 state	 and	

transportation	funding	these	resources	are	evolving	rapidly	and	availability	will	probably	change	

as	the	economic	environment	improves.	

Grants from Surface Transportation Programs

Grants	 funds	 can	 be	 targeted	 to	 specific	 projects	 that	 solve	 freight	 or	 passenger	 rail	 needs.	 	 In	

recent	years,	passenger	rail	has	received	greater	attention	and	 funding	compared	 to	 freight	rail	

projects.	However,	MAP‐21	includes	a	 renewed	 focus	 on	 the	 needs	 of	 freight	 rail	infrastructure	

and	services.	Federal	Railroad	Administration	(FRA)	supports	railroad	projects	through	a	variety	

of	 competitive	 grant,	 dedicated	 grant,	 and	 loan	 programs.	 The	 Transportation	 Investment	

Generating	 Economic	 Recovery	 (TIGER)	 competitive	 discretionary	 grant	 program,	 managed	 by	

USDOT’s	Office	of	 the	Secretary,	is	a	USDOT‐wide	program	 that	invests	in	rail,	road,	 transit,	and	

port	projects.		Freight	rail	projects	such	as	 the	proposed	Port	Bienville	Rail	improvements	may	

apply	for	TIGER	Discretionary	Grant	funding.		TIGER	grants	awarded	in	2012	totaled	nearly	$500	

million,	and	12	percent	of	these	grants	(approximately	$60	million)	went	to	freight	rail	projects.	

Other	 current	 FRA	 grant	 programs	 do	 not	 target	 the	 extension	 of	 rail	lines.	 	 Some	 of	 the	 grant	

programs	 outlined	below	 require	local	 or	 state	matching	 funds,	the	match	may	 vary	depending	

upon	a	variety	of	factors.			

Federal Grants and Loans

Transportation Loan and Credit Enhancement Programs

Transportation	 Infrastructure	 Finance	 and	 Innovation	 Act	 (TIFIA)	 and	 Railroad	 Rehabilitation	

and	Improvement	Financing	(RRIF)	are	existing	federal	transportation	loan	program.		The	TIFIA	

credit	program	offers	direct	loans,	loan	guarantees,	and	standby	lines	of	credit	for	projects	of	all	

modes.	 	 These	 instruments	 are	 designed	 to	 address	 the	 varying	 requirements	 of	 projects	

throughout	their	life	cycles.		The	amount	of	federal	credit	assistance	may	not	exceed	33	percent	of	

total	 eligible	 project	 costs.	 	 The	 program	 is	 designed	 to	 fill	 market	 gaps	 and	 leverage	 limited	

federal	 resources	 and	 substantial	 co‐investment	 by	 providing	 projects	 with	 supplemental	 or	

subordinate	debt	rather	than	grants.		The	project's	estimated	eligible	costs	must	be	at	least	$50	

million	or	50	percent	of	the	state's	annual	federal‐aid	highway	apportionments,	whichever	is	less.	

TIFIA	requires	an	investment	grade	rating	on	senior	debt	(or	on	the	TIFIA	debt,	if	no	debt	senior	

to	TIFIA	exists).		The	project	must	be	supported	in	whole	or	in	part	by	user	charges	or	other	non‐
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

60

federal	dedicated	funding	sources,	and	must	be	included	in	the	state's	transportation	plan.		TIFIA	

projects	must	appear	on	the	applicable	State	Transportation	Improvement	Program,	but	the	state	

DOT	does	not	have	to	be	the	borrower.		Public	freight‐rail	facilities	or	private	facilities	providing	

public	 benefit	 for	 highway	 users,	 intermodal	 freight‐transfer	 facilities,	 access	 to	 such	 freight	

facilities,	and	service	improvements	to	such	facilities	are	all	eligible	for	TIFIA	assistance.	

RRIF	provides	direct	loans	and	loan	guarantees	to	acquire,	improve,	or	rehabilitate	intermodal	or	

rail	 equipment	 or	 facilities	 including	 track,	components	 of	 track,	 bridges,	 yards,	 buildings	 and	

shops;	 to	 refinance	 outstanding	 debt	incurred	 for	 the	 purposes	listed	above;	and	 to	 develop	 or	

establish	 new	 intermodal	 or	 railroad	 facilities.	 	 Direct	 loans	 can	 fund	 up	 to	 100	 percent	 of	 a	

railroad	project	with	repayment	periods	of	up	to	35	years	and	interest	rates	equal	to	the	cost	of	

borrowing	to	the	government.	

State	 Infrastructure	 Banks	 (SIBs)	 are	 revolving	 infrastructure	 investment	 funds	 for	 surface	

transportation	that	are	established	and	administered	by	states.			SIBs	give	states	the	capacity	to	

significantly	leverage	 federal	resources	by	attracting	non‐federal	public	and	private	investment.		

SIBs	 are	 capitalized	 with	 federal‐aid	 surface	 transportation	 funds	 and	 matching	 state	 funds.	

Several	states	have	established	SIBs	or	separate	SIB	accounts	capitalized	solely	with	state	funds.		

As	loans	or	other	credit	assistance	forms	are	repaid	to	the	SIB,	its	initial	capital	is	replenished	and	

can	be	used	 to	support	a	new	cycle	of	projects.		Under	 the	current	MAP‐21	program	states	and	

territories	 are	 authorized	 to	 enter	 into	 cooperative	 agreements	 with	 the	 Secretary	 of	

Transportation	 to	establish	infrastructure	revolving	 funds	eligible	 to	be	capitalized	with	 federal	

transportation	 funds.		SIB	legislation	authorized	highway,	 transit,	and	rail	accounts.		Mississippi	

has	not	established	a	SIB,	but	reauthorization	of	SIB	legislation	may	open	opportunities	 for	 this	

funding	mechanism.	

Section	11143	of	Title	XI	of	SAFETEA‐LU	amended	Section	142	of	the	 Internal	Revenue	Code	 to	

add	 highway	 and	 freight	 transfer	 facilities	 to	 the	 types	 of	 privately	 developed	 and	 operated	

projects	 for	 which	 private	 activity	 bonds	 (PABs)	 may	 be	 issued.	 	 This	 change	 allows	 private	

activity	 on	 these	 types	 of	 projects,	 while	 maintaining	 the	 tax‐exempt	 status	 of	 the	 bonds.	 No	

substantive	 changes	 have	 been	 made	 to	 the	 PAB	 program	 by	 MAP‐21	 or	 any	 other	 legislation.		

Components	of	the	Port	Bienville	Short	Line	Railroad	could	be	eligible	for	this	program.		

Economic Development Administration Investment Programs (EDA)

The	U.	S.	Department	of	Commerce,	Economic	Development	Administration	(EDA)	provides	loans	

and	grants	for	counties	on	a	competitive	basis.		Investment	programs	for	the	counties	of	Hancock	

and	 Pearl	 River	 are	 coordinated	 through	 South	 Mississippi	 Planning	 and	 Development	 District	

(SMPDD).	 	 Through	 the	 Public	 Works	 program,	 EDA	 provides	 investments	 to	 help	 distressed	

communities	 build,	 design,	 or	 engineer	 critical	 infrastructure	 and	 facilities	 that	 will	 help	

implement	regional	development	strategies	and	advance	bottom‐up	economic	development	goals	

to	 promote	 regional	 prosperity.	 The	 Public	 Works	 program	 provides	 resources	 to	 meet	 the	

traditional	 infrastructure	 needs	 of	 communities,	 and	 offers	 resources	 to	 help	 distressed	

communities	become	more	economically	competitive	through	the	construction	or	design	of	21st	

century	infrastructure.	 	 Investments	made	 through	 the	 Public	Works	 program	must	 be	 aligned	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

61

with	a	current	regional	economic	development	strategy	and	must	clearly	lead	to	the	creation	or	

retention	of	long‐term	jobs.		

Through	 the	 Economic	 Adjustment	 Assistance	 program	 (EAA),	 EDA	 provides	 investments	 that	

support	 a	 wide	 range	 of	 construction	 and	 non‐construction	 activities,	 including	 infrastructure,	

design	and	engineering,	technical	assistance,	economic	recovery	strategies,	and	capitalization	or	

re‐capitalization	of	Revolving	Loan	Fund	(RLF)	projects,	in	regions	experiencing	severe	economic	

dislocations	 that	 may	 occur	 suddenly	 or	 over	 time.	 	 EDA	 utilizes	 EAA	 investments	 to	 provide	

resources	that	help	communities	experiencing	or	anticipating	economic	dislocations	to	plan	and	

implement	specific	solutions	to	leverage	their	existing	regional	economic	advantages	to	support	

economic	 development	 and	 job	 creation.	 Like	 Public	Works	 investments,	 EAA	 investments	 are	

designed	to	help	communities	catalyze	public‐private	partnerships	to	foster	collaboration,	attract	

investment,	create	jobs,	and	foster	economic	resiliency	and	prosperity.		

Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) Programs

The	 U.S.	 Department	 of	 Housing	 and	 Urban	 Development	 provides	 Community	 Development	

Block	Grant	program	(CDBG)	funds	to	entitlement	cities	and	counties	and	funds	states	to	support	

eligible	 projects	 in	 non‐entitlement	 communities.	 	 Eligible	 local	 governments	 compete	 on	 an	

annual	 basis	 for	 CDBG	 funds	 through	 the	 Mississippi	 Development	 Authority,	 Office	 of	

Community	Services.			

Mississippi’s	CDBG	program	provides	 funds	 to	eligible	local	governments	 that	 submit	a	 specific	

project	 that	meets	 the	 program's	 state	and	 federal	eligibility	 requirements.		 In	accordance	with	

the	Community	Development	Act	of	1974,	as	amended,	project	activities	must	meet	at	least	one	of	

the	following	national	objectives:	

 Benefit	low‐	and	moderate‐income	persons	

 Aid	in	the	prevention	or	elimination	of	slums	or	blight	

 Meet	urgent	needs	because	existing	conditions	pose	a	serious	and	immediate	threat	to	the	

health	 or	 welfare	 of	 the	 community	 and	 other	 financial	 resources	 are	 not	 available	 to	

meet	such	needs	

A	local	unit	of	government	may	apply	for	CDBG	funds	in	either	the	Public	Facilities	or	Economic	

Development	 category.	 	 The	 Public	 Facilities	 category	 makes	 available	 funding	 for	 public	

improvements	 such	 as	 water,	 wastewater,	 drainage,	 streets,	 and	 certain	 public	 buildings.	 	 This	

category	 includes	 a	 regular	 competition	 for	 funds	 as	 well	 as	 special	 small	 government	 and	

emergency	 competitions.	 	 Some	 public	 facilities	 projects	 may	 be	 funded	 under	 the	 stringent	

Urgent	 Needs/Emergencies	 national	 objective.	 	 Such	 projects	 must	 prove	 a	 particular	 urgency	

because	existing	conditions	pose	a	serious	and	immediate	 threat	 to	 the	health	or	welfare	of	 the	

community,	 and	 must	 meet	 other	 criteria	 such	 as	 the	 date	 of	 occurrence	 of	 the	 emergency	

condition.	 	 The	 Economic	 Development	 category	 provides	 funding	 to	 the	 local	 units	 of	

government	 for	eligible	infrastructure	improvements	such	as	drainage,	water	and	sewer,	roads,	

bridges,	and	rail	spurs	in	support	of	business	start‐ups	and	expansions.		Job	creation	is	the	key	to	

CDBG‐assisted	economic	development	efforts.		CDBG‐Disaster	funds	are	being	used	at	the	Port	of	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

62

Gulfport	 and	 the	 program	is	 being	 closely	monitored	 for	 compliance	with	job	 creation	 goals	 to	

benefit	low‐	and	moderate‐income	persons,	as	established	in	the	grant	authorization.	

State of Mississippi Grant and Loan Programs

RESTORE Act – BP Oil Settlement Funds

Although	the	final	allocation	of	funds	has	not	been	determined,	the	RESTORE	Act	will	provide	BP	

oil	 spill	 settlement	 funds	 to	 the	Gulf	 coast	 states	 of	Alabama,	Mississippi,	 Louisiana,	and	 Texas.		

Funds	 for	 Mississippi	 are	 expected	 to	 provide	 several	 hundred	 million	 dollars,	 primarily	 for	

projects	to	benefit	the	Gulf	coast	communities	impacted	by	the	oil	spill.	Funds	from	this	program	

could	provide	significant	resources	in	support	of	this	project.		

Mississippi Department of Transportation

In	addition	to	federal	funding,	many	states	provide	funding	for	freight	rail	projects.	In	most	cases,	

state	 programs	were	initiated	 by	 the	 federal	 rail	 service	assistance	 program	established	 by	 the	

Railroad	 Revitalization	 and	 Regulatory	 Reform	 Act	 (4R	 Act),	 and	 amended	 by	 the	 Local	 Rail	

Service	 Assistance	 Act	 of	 1978	 (LRSA).	 The	 LRSA	 program	 provided	 funding	 on	 a	 federal/local	

matching	 share	 basis	 for	 four	 types	 of	 projects:	 rehabilitation,	 new	 construction,	 substitute	

service,	and	acquisition.	The	LRSA	Program	permitted	states	to	provide	funds	on	a	grant	or	loan	

basis.	 LRSA	was	 updated	in	 1990	 to	 the	 Local	 Rail	 Freight	 Assistance	 program	 (LRFA)	 and	 the	

criteria	 for	 lines	 eligible	 to	 receive	 assistance	 were	 revised.	 	 Funds	 for	 the	 program	 were	

dramatically	reduced	in	the	1990s,	and	congressional	appropriations	ceased	in	1995.		Despite	the	

lack	of	 federal	 funds,	many	states	have	continued	 their	 freight	rail	assistance	programs	 through	

remaining	LRFA	funds	(repaid	loans)	or	through	apportionment	of	state	funds.	The	objectives	of	

most	 of	 these	 programs	 have	 been	 job	 retention,	 economic	 development,	 and	 safety.	 More	

recently,	benefits	accrued	to	highway	congestion	mitigation	and	avoided	highway	costs	are	being	

considered.			

Transportation	 finance	 at	 the	 state	level	in	Mississippi	 (via	MDOT)	is	 dominated	 by	 a	 series	 of	

user‐based	revenues.	The	most	prominent	of	these	revenues	are	the	state	motor	fuel	tax,	tag	fee,	

and	 privilege	 tax.	 Mississippi	 also	 receives	 contract	 authority	 in	 the	 form	 of	 federal‐aid	

apportionments	as	authorized	by	ISTEA	and	its	successor	legislation	(TEA‐21,	SAFETEA‐LU,	and	

MAP‐21).	 	 MDOT	 shares	 state‐generated	 user	 fees	 with	 local	 governments.	 Counties	 receive	 a	

significant	 portion	 of	 the	 state	 motor	 fuel	 tax	 and	 the	 state	 privilege	 tax,	 while	 municipalities	

receive	a	 small	 share	 of	 the	 state	motor	 fuel	 tax.	Counties	and	municipalities	also	 share	 federal	

funds	 (STP	and	HBP)	with	MDOT.	A	substantial	share	of	local	 transportation	 funding	is	derived	

from	portions	of	local	real	estate	property	taxes,	bonds,	and	the	personal	property	tax.			

In	addition	 to	MDOT	programs,	 the	Mississippi	Development	Authority	 (MDA)	manages	 several	

programs	 for	 job	 creation	 that	 can	 support	 infrastructure	 improvements.	 Several	 of	 these	

programs	receive	federal	funding,	so	caution	must	be	taken	in	ensuring	that	federal	funds	are	not	

treated	as	local	match	requirements.	

Mississippi Freight Rail Service Projects Revolving Loan/Grant Program (RAIL)

The	Mississippi	Freight	Rail	Service	Projects	Revolving	Loan/Grant	Program	(RAIL)	administered	

by	MDA	is	designed	to	make	loans	and	grants	to	municipalities	and	counties	to	finance	freight	rail	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

63

service	 projects	 in	 the	 State	 of	 Mississippi.	 Counties	 and	 municipalities	 are	 encouraged	 to	 use	

these	funds	in	connection	with	other	state	and	federal	programs.	Funding	for	loans	and	grants	to	

applicants	is	derived	from	the	issuance	of	state	bonds.	RAIL	was	enacted	by	the	state	legislature	

during	the	regular	1995	session.	The	governing	authority	of	a	municipality	or	county	is	eligible	to	

apply	 for	 this	 program.	 	 	 Under	 this	 program,	 a	 project	 which	 involves	 the	 acquisition,	

construction,	installation,	operation,	modification,	renovation,	or	rehabilitation	of	any	freight	rail	

service	facilities	is	eligible.		Also	eligible	are	projects	which	may	include	any	fixtures,	machinery,	

or	 equipment	 used	in	 conjunction	 with	 any	 freight	 rail	 service	facilities,	including	 construction	

costs	(including	reasonable	and	customary	site	work	for	buildings,	right	of	ways,	easements,	etc.).			

The	grant	program	permits	a	maximum	amount	of	$250,000	per	project.	Under	the	loan	program,	

the	cumulative	maximum	loan	amount	is	limited	to	$1	million	per	project	per	calendar	year.		Up	

to	eight	 percent	 of	 the	 principal	loan	amount	may	 be	 used	 for	 design	work	 (i.e.	engineering	 or	

architecture).	Engineering	and/or	architectural	costs	above	eight	percent	may	be	paid	from	other	

funding	sources.	Loans	made	under	the	Freight	Rail	Service	Revolving	Loan	Program	may	be	for	a	

maximum	of	fifteen	years,	in	amounts	not	to	exceed	$1	million	per	project	per	calendar	year.		The	

annual	interest	rate	on	 these	loans	is	1	percent	below	 the	Federal	Reserve	Discount	Rate	at	 the	

time	of	loan	approval.		Funding	is	derived	from	the	issuance	of	state	general	obligation	bonds.	

Mississippi Capital Improvements Revolving Loan Program (CAP)

The	Capital	Improvements	Revolving	Loan	Program	provides	loans	to	municipalities	and	counties	

for	 the	 improvement	 of	 public	 facilities	 and	 infrastructure	 to	 assist	 business	 locations	 and	

expansions	with	community	based	projects.		Rail	spurs,	roads,	and	bridges	are	included	as	eligible	

projects.	 	 County	 and	 municipal	 governmental	 authorities	 in	 Mississippi	 may	 apply	 for	 loans	

under	 this	 program.	 	 Industries	 that	 are	 eligible	 under	 this	 program	 include	 manufacturers,	

warehouses	 and	 distribution	 centers,	 research	 and	 development	 facilities,	 hospitals,	

telecommunications	and	data	processing	facilities,	and	national	or	regional	headquarters.		Loans	

made	under	the	Capital	Improvements	Revolving	Loan	Program	may	be	made	for	a	maximum	of	

twenty	years,	in	amounts	not	to	exceed	$1	million	per	project.		The	annual	interest	rate	on	these	

loans	is	3	percent	for	taxable	activities	and	2	percent	for	tax‐exempt	activities.	

Mississippi Rural Impact Fund Grant Program (RIF)

The	 Rural	 Impact	 Grant	 Fund	 (RIF)	 provides	 funding	 for	 publicly	 owned	 infrastructure	 needs.	

Funding	 from	 this	 program	 can	 be	 used	 by	 rural	 communities	 to	 assist	 with	 the	 location	 or	

expansion	of	businesses.	Use	of	the	funds	must	be	directly	related	to	the	construction,	renovation,	

or	expansion	of	industry.		Eligible	projects	include	 transportation	 facilities	directly	affecting	 the	

site,	including	roads,	bridges,	rail	lines,	or	pipelines.		Job	creation	is	the	goal	of	the	Rural	Impact	

Fund	Grant	Program.	Industries	eligible	under	this	program,	which	must	create	ten	new	full‐time	

jobs,	 include	 manufacturers,	 warehouses	 and	 distribution	 centers,	 research	 and	 development	

facilities,	 telecommunications	 and	 data	 processing	 facilities,	 and	 national	 or	 regional	

headquarters.	

A	 rural	 community	is	 defined	 as	 a	municipality	 with	 a	 population	 of	 ten	 thousand	 or	less,	 or	 a	

county	 with	 a	 population	 of	 thirty	 thousand	 or	 less,	 according	 to	 the	 most	 recent	 federal	

decennial	 census	 at	 the	 time	 the	 application	is	 submitted.	 The	 rural	 community	must	 apply	 on	

behalf	of	a	new	or	expanded	industry	based	on	the	public	infrastructure	needs	of	the	project.	The	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

64

Rural	 Impact	 Fund	 Grant	 Program	 provides	 for	 a	 maximum	 grant	 amount	 of	 $150,000	 per	

project.	 No	 funding	 was	 available	 in	 this	 program	 for	 2012.	 	 Although	 this	 program	 does	 not	

represent	 a	 viable	 funding	 source	 for	 project	 construction,	 these	 funds	 could	 support	

development	of	rail	improvements	 for	specific	businesses	that	would	access	the	dual	Class	I	rail	

services	proposed	in	this	study.	

Mississippi Development Infrastructure Grant Program (DIP)

The	 Development	 Infrastructure	 Grant	 Program	 (DIP)	 is	 available	 to	 fund	 publicly‐owned	

infrastructure.	 Funding	 from	 this	 program	 can	 be	 used	 by	municipalities	and	 counties	 to	assist	

with	 the	 location	 or	 expansion	 of	 businesses.	 Use	 of	 the	 funds	 must	 be	 directly	 related	 to	 the	

construction,	renovation,	or	expansion	of	industry.	Transportation	facilities	directly	affecting	the	

site,	including	roads,	bridges,	rail	lines,	or	pipelines	are	eligible	projects.		Job	creation	is	the	goal	

of	 the	 Development	 Infrastructure	 Grant	 Program.	 	 Municipalities	 and	 counties	 must	 apply	 on	

behalf	of	a	new	or	expanded	industry	based	on	the	public	infrastructure	needs	of	the	project.	The	

Development	Infrastructure	Grant	Program	provides	for	a	maximum	grant	amount	per	project	of	

$150,000.	 	 Although	 this	 program	 does	 not	 represent	 a	 viable	 funding	 source	 for	 project	

construction,	these	funds	could	support	development	of	rail	improvements	for	specific	businesses	

that	would	access	the	dual	Class	I	rail	services	proposed	in	this	study.	

Mississippi Port Revitalization Revolving Loan Program

The	Mississippi	Port	Revitalization	Revolving	Loan	Program	is	available	to	provide	loans	to	state,	

county,	or	municipal	port	authorities	to	assist	with	the	location	and	expansion	of	businesses	and	

for	 the	 improvement	 of	 port	 facilities.		 Rail	 spurs	 are	 eligible	 projects.	 	 Job	 creation	 and	 the	

improvements	 of	ports	are	 the	goals	 of	 the	Port	Revitalization	Revolving	 Loan	Program.			State,	

county,	and	municipal	ports	authorized	to	operate	in	Mississippi	may	apply	for	loans	for	the	port	

or	on	behalf	of	a	new	or	expanded	industry.		Loans	made	under	the	Port	Revitalization	Revolving	

Loan	Program	may	be	made	for	a	maximum	of	ten	years,	in	amounts	not	to	exceed	$750,000	per	

project.		The	annual	interest	rate	on	these	loans	is	3	percent.

Mississippi Business Investment Act Loan Program (MBIA)

The	 Mississippi	 Business	 Act	 Loan	 Program	 is	 available	 to	 provide	 loans	 for	 public	

infrastructure.		Funding	 from	 this	program	can	be	used	by	municipalities	and	counties	 to	assist	

with	the	location	or	expansion	of	businesses.		Job	creation	and	private	investment	are	the	goals	of	

the	 Mississippi	 Business	 Investment	 Act	 Program.		 Municipalities	 and	 counties	 may	 apply	 for	

loans	 on	 behalf	 a	 new	 or	 expanded	 industry	 based	 on	 the	 public	 infrastructure	 needs	 of	 the	

project.		Loans	made	under	the	Mississippi	Business	Investment	Act	Loan	Program	may	be	made	

for	a	maximum	of	ten	years.		The	amount	of	the	loan	is	negotiated	with	the	Executive	Director	of	

the	Mississippi	Development	Authority,	but	cannot	exceed	$15,000	per	job	created	by	the	eligible	

business	and	is	matched	by	one	dollar	of	state	money	for	each	three	dollars	of	private	investment	

by	 the	eligible	business.		The	annual	interest	 rate	 on	 these	loans	is	negotiated	by	 the	Executive	

Director	of	the	Mississippi	Development	Authority.	

Mississippi Development Authority Development Infrastructure Grants
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

65

MDA	provides	grants	to	publicly‐owned	infrastructure	used	to	facilitate	the	location	or	expansion	

of	businesses.		There	must	be	a	direct	relationship	to	the	construction,	renovation,	or	expansion	

of	 industry	 for	 these	 funds	 to	 be	 allocated.	 	 Funding	 under	 this	 program	 can	 be	 used	 for	

transportation	facilities	including	rail	lines.			

Bond Financing

General Obligation Bonds (GO)

Local	political	entities	(cities	or	counties)	with	adequate	financial	liquidity	have	authority	to	issue	

general	obligation	bonds	for	the	development	of	public	infrastructure.		General	obligation	bonds	

carry	the	full	faith	and	credit	of	the	issuing	political	entity.		

Tax Increment Financing

A	number	of	Mississippi	communities	have	utilized	Tax	Increment	Financing	(TIF)	as	a	financing	

mechanism	for	infrastructure	and	other	community	improvement	projects.		TIF	financing	allows	

a	 government	 or	 non‐profit	 entity	 to	 capture	 the	 increase	 in	 tax	 revenues	 resulting	 from	 new	

businesses	and	use	it	to	finance	some	or	all	of	the	cost	of	the	improvements	needed	to	attract	the	

new	businesses	or	new	development	to	the	community.		Frequently	these	tax	revenues	are	used	

to	retire	the	debt	from	the	issuance	of	bonds	that	provide	the	funding	to	cover	the	current	cost	of	

the	 infrastructure	 or	 other	 improvements.	 	 TIF	 provides	 a	 means	 to	 fund	 needed	 public	

improvements	by	borrowing	against	the	future	increase	in	property	tax	or	sales	tax	revenues	that	

will	 result	 from	 new	 or	 additional	 businesses	 that	 locate	 in	 the	 area	 served	 by	 the	 TIF	

improvements.	

Public Improvement Districts – Special Assessment Districts

A	portion	of	the	funding	for	the	extension	of	the	rail	connector	could	be	generated	from	future	rail	

users.	 	 A	 fee	 for	 services	 and	 for	 use	 of	 the	 rail	 infrastructure	 could	 generate	 some	 of	 the	

necessary	revenues	to	support	maintenance	and	improvements	to	the	rail	infrastructure,	support	

the	 short	 line	 railroad’s	 operating	 expenses,	 and	 provide	 other	 funds	 required	 to	 facilitate	 the	

needed	 rail	 services	 and	 infrastructure	 in	 the	 park	 in	 the	 future.	 	 Structuring	 an	 improvement	

district	or	assessment	district	could	require	additional	review	of	existing	legislation,	as	well	as	a	

market	analysis	to	evaluate	reasonable	fees	that	support	reasonable	revenue	generation,	and	also	

attract	new	and	retain	existing	businesses	in	the	industrial	park	and	on	other	property	that	could	

be	served	by	the	dual	Class	1	rail	services	made	available	as	a	result	of	this	project.	

Public – Private Partnerships

Public‐private	 partnerships	 are	 contractual	 agreements	 formed	 between	 a	 public	 agency	 and	 a	

private	 sector	 entity	 that	 allow	 for	 greater	 private	 sector	 participation	 in	 the	 delivery	 and	

financing	 of	 transportation	 projects.	 	 Mississippi	 authorizes	 the	 Mississippi	 Transportation	

Commission,	 county	 boards	 of	 supervisors,	 and	 the	 governing	 authorities	 of	 municipalities	 to	

contract	 with	 other	 governmental	 agencies	 or	 private	 entities	 for	 the	 purpose	 of	 designing,	

financing,	constructing,	operating,	and	maintaining	one	or	more	new	toll	roads	or	toll	bridges	in	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

66

the	 state.	 	 The	 toll	 road	 legislation	 does	 not	 specifically	 address	 railroad	 projects,	 but	 it	

demonstrates	the	willingness	of	the	legislature	to	allow	public‐private	partnerships.	

Design‐build	 is	 a	 project	 delivery	 method	 that	 combines	 two,	 usually	 separate,	 services	 into	 a	

single	contract.		With	design‐build	procurements,	owners	execute	a	single,	fixed‐	fee	contract	for	

both	 architectural/engineering	 services	 and	 construction.	 	 The	 design‐build	 entity	 may	 be	 a	

single	firm,	a	consortium,	a	joint	venture,	or	other	organization	assembled	for	a	particular	project.		

Under	 the	 design‐build‐finance	 (DBF)	 procurement	 model,	 one	 contract	 is	 awarded	 for	 the	

design,	 construction,	 and	 full	 or	 partial	 financing	 of	 a	 facility.	 	 Responsibility	 for	 the	long‐term	

maintenance	and	operation	of	the	facility	remains	with	the	project	sponsor.		This	approach	takes	

advantage	 of	 the	 efficiencies	 of	 the	 design‐build	 (DB)	 approach	 and	 also	 allows	 the	 project	

sponsor	 to	 completely	 or	 partially	 defer	 financing	 during	 the	 construction	 phase	 of	 the	 project.		

Owner	cash	flow	constraints	and	a	desire	to	defer	payment	are	two	primary	reasons	that	project	

sponsors	use	DBF	procurements.	

In	cases	where	a	project	sponsor	has	cash	flow	constraints,	the	sponsor	will	identify	the	level	of	

funding	 that	 it	 has	 available	 for	 the	 project	 at	 the	 time	 the	 procurement	 is	 released	 and	 will	

require	the	design‐build	entity	to	finance	any	development	costs	in	excess	of	that	amount	over	a	

specified	period	of	time.		In	other	cases,	an	owner	may	specify	the	maximum	amount	that	it	can	

pay	a	design‐builder	each	year	for	a	project,	called	Availability	Payments.		That	specified	amount	

and	the	overall	cost	of	the	project	would,	in	turn,	drive	the	length	of	the	repayment	period.	

Other	 DBF	 procurements	 may	 be	 motivated	 by	 the	 sponsor’s	 desire	 to	 defer	 payment	 for	 the	

project.	This	motivation	could	be	due	to	lack	of	current	funding	or	the	desire	to	use	the	deferred	

payment	 to	 incentivize	 the	 design‐builder	 to	 accelerate	 the	 construction	 of	 the	 DBF	 project.		

Deferred	 payment	 DBF	 arrangements	 approximate	 design‐build‐finance‐operate‐maintain	

(DBFOM)	 P3	 procurements,	 but	 without	 the	 design‐builder	 assuming	 long‐term	 operations	 or	

revenue	risk.		In	this	case,	the	project	sponsor	issues	a	procurement	asking	bidders	to	provide	the	

cost	for	developing	the	project	today,	with	the	payment	of	that	amount	promised	at	a	later	time.		

The	advantages	 to	DBF	are	similar	 to	 those	of	 the	DB	approach,	in	 that	 the	project	sponsor	can	

capitalize	on	the	efficiencies	of	having	the	design‐builder	undertake	the	design	and	construction	

of	the	project	simultaneously.		With	the	DBF	approach,	the	short‐term	financing	of	all	or	a	portion	

of	 the	 project	 is	 also	 assumed	 by	 the	 private	 sector.	 	 This	 allows	 sponsors	 to	 advance	 the	

construction	 of	 the	 project	 prior	 to	assembling	 all	 of	 the	 funding	 required	 for	 the	 project.	 	 The	

DBF	model	is	 particularly	 beneficial	if	 short‐term	gap	 financing	 provided	 by	 the	 design‐builder	

allows	the	sponsor	to	expedite	project	implementation.	

A	DBF	arrangement	is	a	deferred	payment	and	is	not	considered	debt	under	usury	law.		Legally,	

the	project	sponsor	is	purchasing	construction	services	and	deferring	payment	for	them.		Rather	

than	 lending	 money,	 the	 practice	 involves	 accepting	 payment	 at	 a	 later	 date.	 	 The	 payments	

themselves	 can	 range	 from	 small	 deferred	 amounts	 to	 a	 schedule	 of	 payments	 over	 time	 or	

payment	 at	 the	 end	 of	 the	 project.	 	 For	 this	 reason,	 DB	 legislation	 does	 not	 usually	 address	

financing.	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

67

Private Resources

Norfolk Southern Railroad

Based	 on	 conversations	 with	 staff	 from	 Norfolk	 Southern	 Railroad	 (NS),	 the	 railroad	 may	 be	

willing	to	donate	the	right‐of‐way	owned	by	NS	that	is	associated	with	the	unused	rail	line	from	

Nicholson	 to	 the	 Stennis	 Space	 Center,	 or	 improve	 this	 rail	 line	 to	 an	 agreed‐	 upon	 point	 and	

donate	 the	 remaining	 right‐of‐way	 as	 an	in‐kind	 contribution	in	 support	 of	 the	 construction	 of	

this	rail	line.		Additional	negotiations	with	Norfolk	Southern	will	be	required;	however,	this	is	an	

important	contribution	in	support	of	this	rail	project.		
																				Port Bienville Railroad 		Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis

68  

Appendix D: Current Study Area Rail Movements and

Impacts

As	part	of	 the	2011	State	Rail	Plan	prepared	by	CDM	Smith	recent	Mississippi	rail	 freight	 flows	

were	 economically	 modeled	 using	 the	 Implan	 model	 to	 understand	 existing	 (e.g.,	 year	 2009)	

employment	and	economic	activity	associated	with	the	shipment	and/or	receipt	of	MS	rail	freight.		

To	provide	additional	comparative	analysis	for	this	report,	the	economic	impact	forecasts	derived	

in	 this	 report	and	 the	Transearch	data	were	 reviewed	in	conjunction	with	 the	 Implan	model	 to	

ascertain	 year	 2009	 Study	 Area	 employment	 and	 economic	 activity.	 	 The	 underlying	 objective	

ensures	 that	 the	 economic	 impact	 forecasts	 of	 the	 proposed	 rail	 connection	 are	 relatively	

comparable	to	the	previously	estimated	impacts	when	parsed	for	the	Study	Area.	

Study Area Freight Flows

County	 rail	 movements	 observed	 from	 the	 Mississippi	 Rail	 Plan	 (2011)	 were	 reviewed	 to	

understand	recent	rail	commodity	flows	into/out	of	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	counties.		While	the	

data	reflect	year	2006	movements,	the	commodity	mix	and	overall	magnitude	of	movements	has	

not	changed	significantly.		Plastic	matter	is	the	predominate	commodity	currently	moved	by	rail	

in	the	Study	Area.	

Specifically,	nearly	$850	million	worth	of	plastic	matter	moved	into	or	out	of	 the	Study	Area	by	

rail	in	2006.		Plastic	matter	comprised	about	 two‐thirds	of	rail	 tonnage	movements	and	90%	of	

rail	value	 for	the	two	counties.		Of	the	362,798	tons	of	plastic	matter	shipped,	12%	are	inbound	

(to	Pearl	River)	and	88%	are	outbound	(from	both	Hancock	and	Pearl	River).		The	value	of	such	

movements	averages	$2,340	per	ton.		Study	Area	rail	tonnage,	carloads,	and	values	are	shown	by	

flow	direction	and	commodity	type	in	Table	D‐1.	

The	 State	 Rail	 Plan	 used	 the	 Transearch	 commodity	 flows	 to	 estimate	 the	 year	 2009	 economic	

impacts	 associated	 with	 rail	 freight	movements	 (based	 on	 the	 detailed	 year	 2006	 flows).	 	 This	

same	process	was	used	to	quantify	the	year	2009	impacts	associated	with	rail	freight	movements	

originating	or	terminating	in	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties.			Such	impact	estimates	provide	a	

context	of	the	current	value	of	rail	service	to	the	local	and	State	economies.		The	Implan	model	is	

outlined	below,	as	are	the	summary	economic	impact	findings	presented	in	the	Plan.		This	process	

is	 then	 applied	 to	 freight	 flows	 originating/terminating	 in	 Hancock	 and	 Pearl	 River	 Counties.		

Doing	so	provides	a	snapshot	of	the	year	2009	economic	impacts	associated	with	 firms	that	use	

rail	service	to	transport	goods	and	materials.	

State Rail Plan Findings

Rail	freight	activity	in	Mississippi	supported	an	estimated	150,950	total jobs	across	the	State.		A	

vast	majority	of	these	total	employment	impacts	arise	from	rail	users	who	trade	goods	via	the	rail	

system,	with	the	balance	attributable	to	rail	transport	services.	In	terms	of	jobs,	trade‐user	related	

employment	impacts	total	147,450	jobs	(97.7%	of	total	jobs),	versus	3,500	(2.3%)	rail transport‐

service	 related	 jobs.	 	 These	 summary	 rail‐operation	 and	 rail‐user	 impacts	 include	 the	 direct
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

69

impact	of	goods	and	services	provided,	and	the	multiplier	impacts	associated	with	suppliers	and	

income	re‐spending.	

Study Area User‐Firm Rail Impacts

In	 the	 year	 2009,	 an	 estimated	 1,470	 people,	 earning	 $92	 million,	 were	 employed	 by	 rail‐user	

firms	in	Hancock	and	Pearl	River	Counties.		The	indirect	supplier	effects	and	induced	re‐spending	

effects	 resulted	in	an	additional	multiplier	employment	impact	of	 2,340	jobs.	 	 Combined,	 3,820	

jobs,	earning	an	estimated	$184	million	in	income,	produced	$1.6	billion	in	output,	resulting	in	a	

net	contribution	of	$379	million	to	the	State’s	GSP.	

Table D‐1   Study Area Rail Freight Movements (2006)

Inbound

Hancock County

Locomotives Or Parts 4,000 40 $8.6 $2,150

Railroad Cars 7,190 324 $12.3 $1,710

Subtotal 11,190 364 $20.9 $1,870

Pearl River

Misc Indus Inorganic Chemicals 7,960 80 $2.6 $330

Plastic Mater Or Synth Fibres 44,432 520 $94.0 $2,120

Nonmetal Minerals, Processed 137,494 1,440 $47.0 $340

Railroad Cars 10,000 80 $21.6 $2,160

Subtotal 199,886 2,120 $165.2 $830

Total Inbound 211,076 2,484 $186.1 $880

Outbound

Hancock County

Plastic Mater Or Synth Fibres 221,924 2,320 $526.5 $2,370

Chemical Preparations, Nec 3,840 40 $3.8 $990

Railroad Cars 1,620 1,620 $3.5 $2,160

Subtotal 227,384 3,980 $533.8 $2,350

Pearl River

Gravel Or Sand 7,938 80 $0.0 $0

Plastic Mater Or Synth Fibres 96,442 1,000 $228.8 $2,370

Subtotal 104,380 1,080 $228.8 $2,190

Total Inbound 331,764 5,060 $762.6 $2,300

Total Movements

By County

Hancock County 238,574 4,344 $554.7 $2,330

Pearl River 304,266 3,200 $394.0 $1,290

Total Study Area 542,840 7,544 $948.7 $1,750

By Commodity

Plastic Mater Or Synth Fibres 362,798 3,840 $849.3 $2,340

Nonmetal Minerals, Processed 137,494 1,440 $47.0 $340

Other 42,548 2,264 $52.4 $1,230

Total Rail Movements 542,840 7,544 $948.7 $1,750

Source: MS State Rail Plan, Transearch data, Wilbur Smith Associates

Value per

Ton

Tons Railcars Value

$(Million) Commodity by Direction
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

70

Appendix E: Stennis Space Center

Stennis	 Space	 Center	 currently	 employees	 5,500	 people;	 thirty	 percent	 of	 those	 employees	 are	

scientific	 or	 technical	 personnel,	 	 twenty‐five	 percent	 are	 business	 or	 professional	 staff,	 and	

twenty‐five	 percent	 are	 classified	 as	 technical,	 crafts	 or	 production	 personnel.	 	 The	 technology	

and	 research	 being	 conducted	at	 the	 center	is	 cutting	edge.	An	example	 of	 that	expertise	is	 the	

ongoing	 research	 and	 development	 at	 the	 National	 Data	 Buoy	 Center	

(http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/rmd.shtml)	at	Stennis	Space	Center.		The	map	below	shows	a	small	

portion	 of	 the	NDBS’s	 weather	 and	 ocean	 platform	 network	 that	includes	 over	 150	 data	 buoys	

deployed	at	 coastal	 stations	and	 offshore	waters	 virtually	around	 the	world.		These	 data	 buoys	

are	 developed,	 designed,	 manufactured,	 calibrated,	 repaired,	 and	 monitored	 in	 real‐time	 at	

Stennis.	 	 The	 data	 buoys	 and	 over	 700	 platforms	 collect	 and	 disseminate	 information	 used	 by	

shippers,	 ocean	 vessels,	 and	 even	 communities	 connected	 to	 their	 tsunami	 detection	 system.		

These	buoys	are	heavy	and	oversized	(3,	6	and	12	meters).			Because	rail	is	no	longer	available	to	

Stennis	 these	 over‐sized	 loads	 are	 shipped	 by	 flatbed	 truck,	 and	 the	 time	 and	 cost	 factors	 for	

shipping	are	significant.		Currently	 thirty	 to	 fifty	buoys	are	deployed	annually	 through	strategic	

ports.		Inbound	shipments	for	manufacturing	the	buoys	include	steel	hauls,	steel	cable	and	chain,	

and	concrete.		

Click	on	 the	link	above,	 find	 the	map	below	on	 the	website,	click	on	buoy	42067,	and	watch	 the	

ocean	activity	off	the	Coast	of	Hancock	County.	

Figure E‐1    Louisiana/Mississippi Coastal Region Recent Marine Data NOAA National Data Buoy

Center

Source: National Marine Data Buoy System
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

71

At	the	close	of	the	space	shuttle	program,	NASA	and	Stennis	announced	they	would	partner	with	

commercial	 interests	 to	 provide	 space	 travel	 and	 transportation.	 	 In	 this	 role	 Stennis	 has	

leveraged	 their	 facilities,	 acoustical	 buffer	 zone,	 and	 transportation	 infrastructure	 to	 attract	 a	

number	 of	 technology‐based	businesses,	including	Orbital	Sciences	Corporation	and	Antares,	 to	

locate	at	the	space	center.		The	secure	facilities	at	Stennis	are	linked	to	7.5	miles	of	canals	used	to	

transport	material	from	the	space	center.		The	Stennis	Space	Center	canal	system	is	connected	to	

the	Pearl	River	through	a	canal	lock	system.44		The	center	is	also	located	north	of	I‐10	and	south	of	

I‐59	via	state	route	607.		However,	based	upon	information	provided	 to	 the	consultant	 team	by	

Stennis	officials,	a	number	of	prospective	businesses	have	chosen	not	to	locate	at	Stennis	due	to	

its	 present	lack	 of	 access	 to	 rail.	 	 Because	 of	 the	 confidentiality	 associated	 with	 these	 business	

prospects	Stennis	staff	was	unable	to	provide	detailed	information	regarding	these	opportunities.	

																																																																		

44	NASA	Stennis	Space	Center,	Environmental	Resources	Document	
Port Bienville   Economic Development Benefits and Opportunities Analysis                  

    

72

Appendix F: Hancock County Business Interview Guide
Hancock County 

 Business Interview Guide 

Purpose: 

This interview guide will be used to identify existing economic development assets, determine 

economic development issues and opportunities related to transportation develop an 

understanding of local economic conditions in the eyes of business stakeholders, and begin to 

understand existing supply chains in Hancock County and adjacent areas. A solid economic 

justification is needed to support the project moving forward to ensure wise investment of the 

funds involved. 

PART 1: BACKGROUND ON BUSINESSS AND OPERATING 

CONDITIONS 

1) Is this the company’s the only location in the Gulf Coast region? 

_____YES  Continue to Question 3 

_____NO  Please list any other locations in the region

2) How many full-time employees does your company employ in Hancock County? _____________ 

If unwilling to provide an exact or approximate number please provide a categorical answer using the 

table below. Please check the category applicable to your firm: 

A. ___ Over 1000 employees E. ___ 50 – 999 

C. ___ 500 - 999 employees F. ___ 25 – 49 

B.___ 250 - 499 employees G. ___ 10 – 24 

D. ___100 - 249 employees H. ___ Less than 10 

3) In the past 5 years has employment within your business at this location increased, decreased, 

or remained the same?_________same__________increased_____________decreased 

4) How many years has your business been in operation at this location? _____________________ 
  

    

5) How would you classify your business? 

Transportation and Warehousing 

Aerospace Related 

Manufacturing 

Construction 

Wholesale or Retail Trade 

Other (specify) 

6) What percentage of your products or services are sold: 

________% Locally or Regionally (Hancock County and Adjacent Counties) 

________% Mississippi (Other than Locally/Regionally) 

________% Other Gulf Coast States Outside the Region (AL, LA, FL, TX) 

________% Nationally (remaining states) 

________% Internationally 

7) How has your business changed in the past 5 years: (Circle all that apply) 

a. Developed new products or services 

b. Utilizing new technology and/or equipment 

c. New customer demands affecting operations 

d. Selling to new U.S. customers 

e. Selling to new International customers 

f. Declining demand for products or services 

g. No measurable change 

8) How do you anticipate your business will change in the future? (Circle all that apply) 

a. Develop new products or services 

b. Utilizing new technology and/or equipment 

c. New customer demands affecting operations 

d. Selling to new U.S. customers, if so where _____________________________ 

e. Selling to new International customers, if so where _______________________ 
  

    

f. Declining demand for products or services 

g. Invest in additional locations 

h. No measurable change anticipated 

9) Place for general notes on business operations and facilities including facility size, presence of 

 loading docks or other specific freight infrastructure, external versus internal space needs etc. 

_____________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________ 

PART 2: TRANSPORTATION ACTIVITIES AND SUPPLY CHAIN 

10) What are typical hours of operation of your Company’s transportation (freight) activities? 

a. Daytime only from a.m. to p.m. 

b. Day/Evening from a.m. to p.m. 

11) Does your firm own and/or operate any of its own transportation assets? If so, what types of 

equipment? (Please check all that apply)

Private Truck Fleet 

Private Truck Fleet – Special Equipment (e.g., flat-bed, refrigerated, etc.) 

Private Rail Cars 

Rail Containers 

Boat or Barge - Explain:

Other (specify) 

OUTBOUND TRANSPORTATION 

12) What are the primary products you ship from your location? 

Please list product type and provide STCC code if known: 

a b 

c d 
  

    

13) What are the primary markets/final destinations for these products? Please list the top states or 

countries; (if the market is within Mississippi, please list cities or counties). 

a b 

c d 

14) Please describe how your products typically get from your plant/facility to your customers 

(modes, key routes, etc). 

_____________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________

15) What markets / products do you anticipate will grow the fastest over the next 3-5 years? 

a b 

c d 

16) Who exercises primary control over out-bound transportation decisions? 

(If more than one answer applies please provide approximate percentage for each) 

a. Your company b. Customers c. A third party 

17) What percentage of your outbound freight tonnage moves by: (Equal to 100%)? 

a. Federal Express, UPS, other third party logistics firm _______ 

b. Truck/Road, other than drayage to a terminal _______ 

c. Truck to Train/Rail _______ 

d. Truck to Container Ship/Barge _______ 

e. Truck to Airplane _______ 

f. Direct to Rail Only _______ 

g. Rail to Container Ship/Barge _______ 

h. Other _______ 
  

    

INBOUND TRANSPORTATION 

18) What are the primary products you receive at your location? Please list product type and provide 

STCC code if known: 

a b 

c d 

19) What are the primary origins of these products? Please list the top states or countries; if the 

market is within Mississippi, please list cities or counties. 

a b 

c d 

20) What percentage of your outbound freight tonnage moves by: (Equal to 100%)? 

a. Federal Express, UPS, other third party logistics firm _______ 

b. Truck/Road, other than drayage to a terminal _______ 

c. Truck to Train/Rail _______ 

d. Truck to Container Ship/Barge _______ 

e. Truck to Airplane _______ 

f. Direct to Rail Only _______ 

g. Rail to Container Ship/Barge _______ 

PART 3: TRANSPORTATION NEEDS 

21) In general, how well does the current transportation infrastructure meet your needs? What regional 

transportation infrastructure is in the most need of improvement? 

22) Using a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being the most important, how would you rank the following 

factors in terms of how they influence your inbound transportation arrangements? Also indicated 

whether the factor is improving or declining (+ / -).
  

    

IMPORTANCE TO YOU 

a. Transit time 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / - 

b. On-time/just-in-time delivery 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / - 

c. Cost (rates) 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / - 

d. Loss and damage 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / -

e. Equipment availability 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / - 

f. Shipment visibility / traceability 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / - 

g. Safety of the carrier 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / - 

h. Other: 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / - 

 

23) If “On-time/just-in-time delivery” is one of the crucial factors influencing your inbound 

transportation, please indicate what defines on-time relative to the appointment time: 

 ____ minutes ___ hour(s) ___day(s) Other: _______________ 

Railroad Service Questions: 

24) Do you currently use any railroad services to ship or receive products? 

_______Yes ________No – If not, why not? 

25) If you use rail services, what type of railroad carrier do you currently receive service from?

a. Class 1 b. Short line 

c. Both Class 1 and SL d. : Other / Don't know 

Who is your primary rail carrier: ___________________________________________? 

26) What type of rail facilities do you use to for shipping or receiving products? Are any of these more 

important to your future business than others? 

a. Intermodal b. Bulk transload 

c. Break bulk transload d. Direct railcar service 
  

    

 27) What type of railroad equipment is used to move your products? 

a. Container b. Box Car 

c. Hopper Car d. Tanker Car 

e. Other 

28) How would you rate RAIL transportation based on the following performance factors? 

 Also indicate whether the service factor has been improving or declining (+ / -). 

 IMPORTANCE TO YOU 

a. Transit time 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / - 

b. On-time/just-in-time delivery 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / -

c. Cost (rates) 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / -

d. Loss and damage 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / -

e. Equipment availability 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / -

g. Shipment visibility / traceability 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / -

h. Other 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9....10 + / -

29) Are there any service or access improvements that would increase your current use of railroad 

transportation? 

a. No 

b. Yes, Please explain: 

30) Do you anticipate that your rail freight tonnage (inbound and outbound) will grow over the next 5 

years? 

a. Yes 

b. No 

31) Estimated growth in your (inbound + outbound) freight tonnage over the next 5 years? 

________ Percent 

32) How do you think having access to two class one railroads would improve your transportation of 

materials and goods/supply chain? 
  

    

 _____________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________ 

33) What would you consider to be the greatest transportation strength in the region? 

PART 4: REGIONAL BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT 

34) What three attributes contribute the most to the economic success of your business, please 

check three: 

________Skilled Workforce __________Reasonable business costs 

________Growing local population __________Quality public services 

________K-12 Schools __________Accessibility of my business 

 to my customers 

________Small town appeal __________Ability to retain quality 

 Workforce 

________Lower fuel costs __________Higher skilled workforce 

________Access to Airport __________Access to Highways 

________Other:_______________________________________________________________ 

 Please specify 

35) What are the three greatest challenges or threats to your business’s economic success? 

__________National economy ___________Local workforce 

__________Transportation ___________Limited availability 

 of skilled employees 

__________Utility issues ___________Decline in Industry 

 Sector nationally 

__________Access to Airports ___________Access to Rail 

__________Other:_____________________________________________________________ 

 Please specify 

36) Where are your major competitors located? __________________________________________ 

 ___________________________________________________________________________________
  

    

37) Are there any advantages that your competitors have due to their location? 

__________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________ 

38) What advantages do you have over your competitors because of your location in Hancock 

County? 

_____________________________________________________________________________ 

39) In your opinion, what are this area’s greatest strengths as a place to do business? ___________ 

 

PART 5: EFFECTS OF REGIONAL DISASTERS AND 

TRANSPORTATION REDUNDANCIES NEEDED 

The following questions are related to the effect of major disasters, particularly Hurricane Katrina on 

shipments and the transportation system. They are meant to help identify the need for back-up 

routes/redundancies in the system, particularly for rail access. 

40) Was your business operating at the time of Hurricane Katrina and are you able to discuss the 

effects on your business. If yes, continue with this section. If no, conclude the interview. ____ 

41)) Recall from prior questions the importance of rail shipments for your business (or lack of 

importance), at the time of Hurricane Katrina was your business ____ more, _____less, or the 

same ____ in terms of dependence on rail shipments at that time compared to today. 

42) Describe the level of damage to your business? _______________________________________ 

 _____________________________________________________________________________ 

 _____________________________________________________________________________ 

43) How many business days did you lose? ___________ Due to the Hurricane; __________Due to 

transportation damage making the shipment of materials and goods impossible. 

44) Describe the particular transportation infrastructure damage that affected your business: _______ 

 _____________________________________________________________________________ 

 _____________________________________________________________________________ 

 _____________________________________________________________________________ 
  

    

45) Did you find alternate ways to ship materials and goods? (Yes or No) _______. If yes, 

approximately how long did it take to get these alternative transportation plans in place? _______ 

46) Compared to your normal transportation services used to ship materials and goods, how much 

more did the alternative transportation plan cost on average? How much additional time was 

involved in the alternative plan for an average shipment? 

 Cost: (% more than normal): 

_____________________________________________________________________________ 

 Time (more than normal for an average shipment): 

_____________________________________ 

Thank you for your time and assistance! 

PORT BIENVILLE

Rail Alternatives Development

Technical Methodology Report 

Presented to:

Mississippi Department of Transportation

In collaboration with:

Federal Railroad Administration

Hancock County Port and Harbor Commission

in association with HDR

September 19, 2013
Port Bienville Rail Alternatives Development

Technical Methodology Report

	 	

1	

		

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction		.........................................................................................................................................................................	3	

Project	Approach	..........................................................................................................................................	3	

Study	Area	........................................................................................................................................................	3	

Data	Collection	.....................................................................................................................................................................	5	

Methodology	...................................................................................................................................................	5	

Data	Formats	...................................................................................................................................................	5	

Pre‐Processing	Techniques	......................................................................................................................	6	

Common	Coordinate	System	........................................................................................................	6	

Point	Buffering	....................................................................................................................................	6	

Grid	Cell	Size	........................................................................................................................................	8	

Evaluation	Criteria	for	Preliminary	Alternatives	.................................................................................................	8	

Review	and	Classification	of	Data	for	AART	.....................................................................................	8	

Avoids	......................................................................................................................................................	8	

Ranked	Resources	.............................................................................................................................	8	

Rail	Corridor	.........................................................................................................................................	9	

Scenarios	.............................................................................................................................................	11	

Identification	of	Layers	to	Quantify	........................................................................................	12	

Identification	of	Start,	End,	and	Way	Points	.......................................................................	15	

Corridor	Parameters	.....................................................................................................................	16	

Generation	of	Conceptual	Alternatives	..................................................................................................................	16	

Initial	AART	Results	..................................................................................................................................	16	

Refinement	of	the	Alternative	Corridors	.........................................................................................	29	

Engineered	Alignments	...........................................................................................................................	30	

Reasonable	Alternatives	.........................................................................................................................	34	

Figures

Figure	1	–	Port	Bienville	Study	Area	..........................................................................................................................	4	

Figure	2	‐	Pre‐processing	for	AART	............................................................................................................................	7	

Figure	3	–	Existing	rail	corridor	used	as	part	of	all	output	corridors	.......................................................	10	

Figure	4	‐	Base	Scenario	showing	rankings	and	avoids		.................................................................................	11	

Figure	5	‐	Start,	End,	and	Way	Points	......................................................................................................................	15	

Figure	6	‐	Scenario	20		...................................................................................................................................................	17	

Figure	7	‐	Scenario	21		...................................................................................................................................................	18	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

2

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure	8	‐	Scenario	22		...................................................................................................................................................	19	

Figure	9	‐	Scenario	23	....................................................................................................................................................	20	

Figure	10	‐	Scenario	24	.................................................................................................................................................	21	

Figure	11	‐	Scenario	25	.................................................................................................................................................	22	

Figure	12	‐	Scenario	26	.................................................................................................................................................	23	

Figure	13	‐	US	Army	Corps	of	Engineers	Scenario	1	........................................................................................	24	

Figure	14	‐	US	Army	Corps	of	Engineers	Scenario	2	........................................................................................	25	

Figure	15	‐	Environmental	Protection	Agency	Scenario	3	............................................................................	26	

Figure	16	‐	Environmental	Protection	Agency	Scenario	4	............................................................................	27	

Figure	17	‐	Environmental	Protection	Agency	Scenario	5	............................................................................	28	

Figure	18	‐	Other	potential	corridors	for	run	S5	to	N1.		These	corridors	depict	“next‐best”			

																			areas	..................................................................................................................................................................	32	

Figure	19	–	Engineered	alignments	and	section	numbers	............................................................................	35	

Appendices

Appendix	A:	Glossary	of	Terms	.........................................................................................................	A‐1	

Appendix	B:	The	Alignment	Alternatives	Research	Tool	(AART)	......................................	B‐1	

Appendix	C:	National	Wetlands	Inventory	Code	Groupings	..................................................	C‐1	

Appendix	D:	Data	Sources	....................................................................................................................	D‐1	

Appendix	E:	Data	Used	in	AART	Analyses	.....................................................................................	E‐1	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

3

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Introduction

Project Approach

The	alternative	selection	process	for	any	transportation	facility	begins	with	the	identification	and	

quantification	of	a	“universe”	of	preliminary	alternatives	and	selection	of	reasonable	alternatives	that	

address	the	project	objectives.		To	achieve	the	identification	and	evaluation	of	preliminary	alternatives,	

selection	of	reasonable	alternatives,	and	the	recommendation	of	a	preferred	alternative	in	this	project’s	

aggressive	schedule,	a	streamlined	selection	process	was	developed	in	regard	to	the	NEPA	process.		The	

streamlined	screening	and	selection	process	for	this	project	incorporates	geographic	information	systems	

(GIS),	an	automated	corridor	analysis	tool	called	the	Alignment	Alternatives	Research	Tool	(AART),	limited	

field	reconnaissance	and	data	validation,	engineering	design	criteria,	and	review	and	evaluation	by	the	

project	team	that	consists	of	planners	and	engineers.	The	process	also	takes	into	account	and	incorporates	

client	input,	public	and	other	stakeholder	comments	and	concerns,	as	well	as	consideration	of	previous	

studies.		The	process	is	iterative	in	nature,	providing	a	continuous	quantification	and	comparison	of	

impacts	to	an	equal	level	of	detail	at	each	stage	associated	with	the	various	alternatives,	as	they	are	

modified	based	on	design	criteria,	cost,	and	other	considerations	during	project	development.	The	

remainder	of	this	report	provides	a	detailed	explanation	of	the	process	that	was	utilized	to	determine	

reasonable	corridor	alternatives.	

Study Area

The	project	study	area	is	located	in	southern	Mississippi	near	Louisiana.		It	extends	from	Nicholson	on	the	

northern	end	to	the	area	between	Pearlington	and	the	Gulf	of	Mexico	on	the	southern	end.		The	Mississippi	

River	forms	the	western	boundary,	and	the	eastern	boundary	extends	between	the	Stennis	International	

Airport	and	the	town	of	Kiln.	It	has	an	area	of	231	square	miles.	

The	majority	of	the	study	area	lies	in	Hancock	County,	but	a	portion	surrounding	Nicholson	lies	in	Pearl	

River	County.		The	predominant	feature	of	the	study	area	is	NASA’s	Stennis	Space	Center,	located	near	the	

center	of	the	study	area	with	a	fenced‐in	area	known	as	the	“Fee	Area”	which	encompasses	approximately	

22	square	miles.		Additionally,	NASA’s	Stennis	Space	Center	controls	development	rights	on	another	154.75	

square	miles	surrounding	the	“Fee	Area”.		This	surrounding	land	is	known	as	the	“Buffer	Area.”		Interstate	

10	is	the	major	highway	in	the	study	area.		Interstate	59	passes	through	a	small	portion	in	the	north.		Other	

significant	features	are	wetlands,	forests,	and	open	pit	mines.		The	majority	of	the	study	area	is	very	

sparsely	populated.	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

4

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 1 – Port Bienville Study Area.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

5

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Data Collection

Methodology

In	order	to	create	a	complete	picture	of	the	project	area,	generate	the	best	corridors	and	calculate	accurate	

impacts,	it	was	necessary	to	compile	GIS	data	for	the	study	area	in	the	following	categories:		environmental,	

cultural,	historical,	and	infrastructure.		The	majority	of	data	were	downloaded	from	the	Mississippi	

Automated	Resource	Information	System	(MARIS)	website	(http://www.maris.state.ms.us/).	

Historical	data	were	obtained	from	the	Mississippi	Department	of	Archives	and	History	(MDAH)	through	

the	Department’s	website.	

Because	the	study	area	contains	the	NASA	Stennis	Space	Center,	it	was	necessary	to	submit	a	Freedom	of	

Information	Act	(FOIA)	request	to	obtain	GIS	data	for	areas	inside	the	Center	boundaries.		Current	aerial	

photography	for	the	study	area	was	provided	by	the	Mississippi	Department	of	Transportation	(MDOT)	via	

external	USB	drive.	

Data	for	source	water	protection	areas	(SWPAs)	were	obtained	through	a	direct	request	from	the	

Mississippi	Department	of	Environmental	Quality	(MDEQ).		This	data	was	deemed	more	accurate	and	

current	than	the	source	water	data	available	from	the	MARIS	website.	

As	there	was	not	a	single	comprehensive	source	for	wetland	information,	the	data	for	this	layer	was	

compiled	from	three	sources:		the	US	Army	Corps	of	Engineers	(USACE),	MARIS,	and	Wetlands	Solutions	

LLC.		The	USACE	and	Wetland	Solutions	LLC	also	provided	data	for	proposed	wetland	mitigation	banks.		

No	new	GIS	data	were	collected	in	the	field	for	this	feasibility	study.		With	the	exception	of	the	mines	layer,	

all	of	the	GIS	data	were	preexisting.		Although	there	are	a	significant	number	of	mines	in	the	study	area,	

there	was	no	readily	available	GIS	data	layer	showing	their	locations.		The	only	available	mine	information	

was	a	list	of	mine	locations	containing	township	and	range	information	obtained	from	the	MDEQ.		By	using	

the	list	of	mines,	a	township	and	range	layer,	a	parcel	layer	and	aerial	photography,	a	new	mines	layer	was	

created.			

It	is	important	to	note	that	efforts	were	made	to	locate	data	for	threatened	and	endangered	(T&E)	species	

within	the	study	area.			Fish	and	Wildlife	was	contacted	regarding	T&E	species	data	and	it	was	decided	that	

the	information	was	not	in	a	format	conducive	to	this	study	and	the	data	was	not	provided	to	the	project	

team.	Therefore	these	data	were	not	available	for	use	in	this	Phase	of	the	study.		Fish	and	Wildlife	did	offer	

to	check	potential	impacts	to	T&E	species	once	the	alternatives	were	identified.	It	was	decided	by	the	

project	team	that	this	effort	would	be	undertaken	during	Phase	II	after	the	reasonable	alternatives	have	

been	identified.	

Appendix	D	lists	the	data	collected	for	this	study	and	their	sources.	

Data Formats

Existing	GIS	data	were	obtained	in	shapefile,	geodatabase	and	spreadsheet	formats.		Data	in	spreadsheets	

(MDAH	historical	data)	were	converted	to	GIS	point	layers.	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

6

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Pre‐Processing Techniques

Common Coordinate System

To	facilitate	the	geoprocessing	operations	of	the	AART,	all	GIS	data	layers	must	be	converted	to	a	common	

coordinate	system.		The	Port	Bienville	study	area	(Hancock	and	Pearl	River	counties)	falls	within	the	

Mississippi	State	Plane	Coordinate	System	–	East,	as	described	below:			

Coordinate System:   Mississippi State Plane – East (FIPS 2301)

Projection:     Transverse Mercator

Datum:       NAD83

Unit:       US Foot

As	the	data	were	received,	they	were	converted	to	this	coordinate	system.		

Point Buffering

Some	data	that	might	represent	large	areas	in	the	real	world	were	available	only	as	points.		In	instances	

where	it	was	determined	that	it	would	create	more	meaningful	AART	output,	point	data	were	buffered	by	

reasonable	and	defensible	distances	to	convert	them	to	polygonal	data,	thus	giving	them	some	dimension.		

These	buffers	provided	additional	protection	to	a	certain	resource	or	the	creation	of	an	extension	of	a	site	

or	resource	to	insure	that	it	was	identified	during	inventory	of	the	alignments.				

The	features	were	combined	into	a	GIS	database	as	the	next	step	to	pre‐processing	in	GIS.		See	Figure	2	for	a	

diagram	illustrating	typical	data	preparation	during	this	process.	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

7

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 2	‐	Pre‐processing for AART.

	 	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

8

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

The	first	step	in	processing	the	data	was	to	clip	the	GIS	data	using	the	study	area	boundary	so	that	only	

features	falling	inside	the	study	area	are	used.		This	helps	to	reduce	processing	time	while	running	AART.	

Next,	to	the	extent	possible	a	quality	review	of	the	data	was	conducted.	Individual	data	layers	were	checked	

for	locational	accuracy	against	aerial	photography.		Because	of	the	limitations	inherent	in	this	process,	it	is	

often	only	possible	to	detect	gross	errors	and	discrepancies	in	data	layers.		Data	layers	that	did	not	contain	

features	within	the	study	area	boundaries	were	not	used	in	the	analyses.			

National	Wetlands	Inventory	(NWI)	GIS	data	are	categorized	into	numerous	codes	which	describe	in	detail	

the	characteristics	of	each	wetland	polygon.		In	order	to	simplify	the	data,	these	codes	were	grouped	into	

general	categories	based	on	wetland	types.		In	addition,	the	original	NWI	codes	were	used	to	distinguish	

wetlands	that	have	not	been	disturbed	by	man	(non‐disturbed)	from	those	that	have	(disturbed).		A	

summary	of	these	groupings	is	shown	in	Appendix	C.		These	groupings	were	applied	to	the	NWI	feature	

class	in	the	geodatabase	and	used	during	the	ranking	process.	

Grid Cell Size

Because	AART	conducts	its	analyses	via	raster	processing,	a	grid	(raster)	cell	size	must	be	specified.		This	

cell	size	determines	the	resolution	of	the	grids	when	the	input	data	layers	are	rasterized	(converted	to	

grids).		Cell	sizes	that	are	too	large	will	result	in	loss	of	detail	and	data;	very	small	features	may	be	lost	in	

the	rasterization	process.		On	the	other	hand,	cells	sizes	that	are	too	small	can	severely	impact	processing	

times,	strain	computing	resources	and	potentially	exceed	available	disk	space.		For	this	project,	a	cell	size	of	

20x20	feet	was	determined	to	be	a	reasonable	compromise	between	detail	and	processing	speed.	

Evaluation Criteria for Preliminary Alternatives  

Review and Classification of Data for AART

Avoids

As	the	term	implies,	areas	designated	as	“Avoids”	are	avoided	by	the	AART	to	the	extent	possible	when	

determining	the	best	alignments,	allowing	complete	protection	of	the	resources.		However,	in	practice	it	is	

possible	that	some	encroachment	of	these	areas	may	occur	during	the	smoothing	process	(when	horizontal	

curvature	criteria	are	applied)	and	when	building	corridors	(for	example,	the	wider	the	corridor,	the	

greater	the	chance	that	an	Avoid	will	be	encountered).		To	minimize	this	possibility,	a	specified	buffer	width	

can	be	applied	to	the	Avoid	areas,	thereby	expanding	its	footprint.	

During	the	GIS	data	evaluation	process,	the	project	Team	and	agencies	identified	some	features	as	

particularly	sensitive	and	designated	them	as	Avoids.		These	consisted	of	certain	wetland,	environmental,	

cultural	and	historical	features	as	shown	in	Appendix	E.		

Ranked Resources

In	contrast	to	Avoids,	the	assignment	of	a	ranking	does	not	guarantee	that	the	area	will	not	be	impacted.		

Rather,	the	AART	attempts	to	utilize	the	lower‐ranked	areas	as	much	as	possible	while	minimizing	the	

overall	length	of	the	path/corridor.		In	some	cases,	AART	may	impact	a	few	acres	of	highly‐ranked	areas	if	

the	overall	impacts	of	the	path	are	less	than	if	those	areas	are	avoided.	

Once	all	of	the	layers	have	been	ranked,	the	AART	processes	all	of	the	layers	and	generates	a	single,	

composite	“suitability”	layer	comprised	of	the	highest	rankings	from	all	input	layers.		In	other	words,	for	

each	grid	cell	in	the	study	area,	the	AART	reviews	each	input	layer,	selects	the	highest	value	for	that	cell	and	

assigns	that	value	to	the	corresponding	cell	in	the	suitability	layer	(see	Appendix	B,	Figure	4a).	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

9

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

In	this	study,	rankings	were	developed	by	consensus	among	the	various	stakeholders,	planners,	engineers	

and	domain	experts.	The	initial	step	was	to	decide	which	layers	should	be	included	in	the	analysis.		Next,	

each	layer	to	be	used	was	reviewed	and	rankings	were	assigned.		See	Appendix	E	for	a	detailed	listing	of	all		

the	rankings	used	in	the	study.	Below	is	a	summary	of	the	GIS	layers	utilized	and	their	rankings.	

 Bays	were	programmed	to	be	avoided.	

 Estuarine	and	Marine	Wetlands	–	tidal	wetlands	were	programmed	for	avoidance	and	others	were	

assigned	rankings	of	6	or	9	depending	on	their	type	and	quality.		

 Wetland	Mitigation	Banks	were	evaluated	both	as	avoidance	areas	and	with	a	ranking	of	9.	The	

results	were	almost	identical	for	both	scenarios.	

 Freshwater	Forested/Shrub	Wetlands	were	initially	assigned	rankings	between	4	and	9	depending	

on	type.	Later	in	the	study	these	rankings	were	refined	and	were	increased	based	on	input	from	

the	Agencies	to	vary	between	7	and	9.	

 Bottomland	Hardwoods	were	assigned	a	ranking	of	6	or	7	depending	on	type.	

 Freshwater	Marshes	were	assigned	a	ranking	of	6	or	9	depending	on	type.	

 Savannahs	were	assigned	a	ranking	of	6	or	9	depending	on	type.	

 Rivers	were	programmed	for	avoidance	for	those	with	tidal	influence.	All	other	freshwater	rivers	

were	given	rankings	between	7	and	9.	

 Lakes	were	assigned	a	ranking	of	9.	

 Water	Bodies,	(Linear	and	Areal)	were	assigned	rankings	of	6	and	9	respectively.	

 Freshwater	Ponds	were	assigned	rankings	between	4	and	7	depending	on	type.	

 Prime	Farmlands	were	assigned	a	ranking	of	4.	

 Landfills	were	assigned	a	ranking	of	9.	

 Surface	Impoundment	Areas	were	assigned	a	ranking	of	9	along	with	a	500’	buffer	area.	

 	The	following	GIS	features	were	all	programmed	as	avoidance	areas:	Hazardous	Waste	Sites,	

RCRA,	EPA,	Tanks,	Toxic	Release	Inventory,	UST’s,	CERCLA	2008,	CERCLA	Site	Areas,	and	Mines.	

Rail Corridor

During	initial	discussions	with	project	stakeholders,	it	was	decided	that	the	existing	rail	line	from	I‐59	near	

Nicholson,	MS	to	Texas	Flat	Road	should	be	considered	as	the	northern	segment	of	the	alternatives.		This	is	

an	existing	rail	line	that	is	no	longer	in	service.	The	right‐of‐way	and	track	is	owned	by	Norfolk	Southern	

and	was	originally	constructed	to	serve	Stennis.	This	rail	line	is	an	established	corridor/roadbed	and	

connects	to	the	NS	lead	track	in	Nicholson.	Utilizing	this	rail	alignment	would	minimize	impact	to	the	

environment	and	the	cost	would	be	less	compared	to	constructing	a	new	track.		Since	the	track	hasn’t	been	

used	in	over	a	decade	it	will	have	to	be	reconditioned	since	there	has	been	no	apparent	maintenance	in	

recent	years.	In	order	to	encourage	the	AART	to	follow	this	path,	a	GIS	layer	consisting	of	a	1,000‐foot	

corridor	was	created	centered	along	this	rail	line.		The	corridor	was	assigned	a	ranking	of	“1”	and	

superimposed	on	the	final	suitability	layers	so	that	the	rail	corridor	would	be	the	most	suitable	land	in	the	

vicinity.		This	process	was	performed	to	simply	encourage	the	AART	to	identify	this	section	of	track	as	a	

possible	alternative	and	to	quantify	the	impacts	associated	with	the	initial	wide	corridor.	In	reality	the	

impacts	would	be	negligible	since	the	rail	bed	is	already	established.	Figure	3	shows	the	location	of	this	

corridor	which	is	highlighted	in	yellow.		The	rail	line	is	shown	extending	down	into	the	Stennis	“Fee	Area”	

but	portions	of	this	track	have	been	removed.		
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

10

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 3 – Existing rail corridor used as part of all output corridors.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

11

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Scenarios

A	“Scenario”	is	a	specific	combination	of	rankings	and	avoids.		An	initial,	or	“base”,	scenario	was	developed	

by	the	project	Team.		Variations	of	this	base	scenario	were	created	which	included	or	excluded	certain	

avoids	such	as	the	Stennis	Space	Center	Fee	area	and	existing	and	proposed	mitigation	banks.		These	initial	

scenarios	were	used	to	generate	an	initial	set	of	corridors	(“runs”)	which	were	presented	to	the	resource	

and	regulatory	agencies.		Following	further	review	and	discussion,	the	agencies	were	given	the	opportunity	

to	modify	the	rankings	to	create	new	scenarios	based	on	their	input.	

Overall,	seven	scenarios	were	created	from	the	Team’s	initial	settings,	four	from	EPA	modifications	and	

three	from	USACE	modifications.		Each	scenario	is	used	to	create	a	suitability	surface,	which	is	in	turn	used	

by	the	AART	to	determine	the	best	or	least	impacting	corridors.		The	suitability	surface	resulting	from	the	

base	scenario	is	shown	in	Figure	4.	

Figure 4	‐	Base Scenario showing rankings and avoids.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

12

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Identification of Layers to Quantify

Once	the	AART	generates	a	corridor,	it	quantifies	the	occurrences	of	resources,	or	“impacts,”	along	that	

corridor	(for	example,	the	total	acreages	of	each	wetland	occurring	in	a	corridor).	These	corridor	impacts	

are	generated	for	each	corridor	and	used	in	comparing,	evaluating	and	selecting	preferred	corridors.		Any	

available	GIS	layer	may	be	quantified,	whether	or	not	it	was	ranked	or	used	as	an	Avoid.		The	layers	used	in	

impacts	quantifications	are	listed	below.	

Point Feature Counts

Layer Description    Layer Name

Archaeological Sites (Stennis)    ArchSites

Archaeological Sites       ArchSites_MDAH

Cemeteries       Cemetery

CERCLA Wells       Cercla_2008

CERCLA Wells (Stennis)     CERCLA_Wells

Churches       Churches

Dams         dams

Detailed Archaeological Sites    DetArchSites

Dept of Health Wells     DoHWells

EPA Regulated Facilities     epa

Historic Properties     HistProps_MDAH

CERCLA Sites       MDEQ_CERCLA

Landfills         MDEQ_Landfills

Protected Water Sources     MDEQ_PWS_Wells

Underground Storage Tanks    MDEQ_UST

Recreational Facilities     mri

National Registry of Historic Places   natreg

NPDES Sites       npdes

Oil and Gas Wells       oilngas

RCRA Sites       rcra

Impoundment Sites     sia

Tanks, Petroleum       Tanks

Toxic Release Inventory Sites    tri

USGS Wells       USGS_Wells09

Underground Storage Tanks    UST_Dec08
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

13

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Linear Feature Crossings

Layer Description    Layer Name

Hydrography       HydroLine

Major Transmission Lines     majr_transm10

Gas Lines       msgas

Natural Gas Pipelines     NatGasPipelines

Nat’l Hydrography Dataset,  

Named Streams     nhd_named_streams

Nat’l Hydrography Dataset,  

Other Flow Lines     nhd_othFL

Power Lines       PowerLines

Rail Lines       rail_lines

Roads         RoadsTIGER

Streams, 303d       Streams_303d

Wastewater Utility Lines     WasteWaterUtility

Water Utility Lines     WaterUtility   

Streams         HydroLine

Linear Feature Mileage Calculations

Layer Description    Layer Name

Streams         HydroLine

Nat’l Hydrography Dataset,  

Named Streams     nhd_named_streams

Nat’l Hydrography Dataset,  

Other Flow Lines     nhd_othFL

Streams, 303d       treams_303d
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

14

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Polygon Acreage Calculations

Layer Description    Layer Name

Archaeological Probability (Stennis)  ArchProb

Archaeological Sites (Stennis)    ArchSites_buff

Archaeological Sites       ArchSites_MDAH_buff

Cemeteries       Cemetery_buff

CERCLA Sites (Stennis)     CERCLA_Site_Areas

CERCLA Sites       CERCLA2008_buff

Dams         dams_buff

Dept. of Health Wells     DoHWells_buff

EPA Regulated Facilities       epa_buff

Hazardous Waste Sites     hazardous_waste_sites

Historic Properties     HistPropsMDAH_buff

Landfills (Stennis)      landfill_cells

Water Wells,  

Primary Protection Areas    MDEQ_PPA

Water Wells,  

Source Water Prot. Areas    MDEQ_SWPA

Mines         Mines

Recreational Facilities     MRI_buff

National Registry Sites     Natreg_buff

National Hydrography Dataset,

Other Areas     nhd_othareas

National Hydrogrpahy Dataset,

Water Bodies     nhd_waterb

Land Cover       NLCD_MS_UTM16

Oil and Gas Wells       oilngas_buff

Prime Farmland       PrimeFarmland

RCRA Sites       RCRA_buff

Tanks, Petroleum       Tanks_buff

Toxic Release Inventory Sites    TRI_buff

USGS Wells       USGS_Wells_buff

Underground Storage Tanks    UST_buff

Wetland Mitigation Banks, Existing   wetland_mit_exist

Wetland Mitigation Banks, Proposed wetland_mit_prop

NWI Wetlands       Wetlands
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

15

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Identification of Start, End, and Way Points

In	order	for	the	AART	to	identify	the	conceptual	alternatives,	it	is	necessary	to	provide	it	with	start	and	end	

points.		These	points	mark	the	beginning	and	ending	of	the	corridors.		The	AART	connects	these	points	by	

finding	the	least‐impact	path	through	the	suitability	layer	from	one	point	to	the	other.		In	order	to	generate	

additional	alternatives	with	the	same	set	of	criteria,	waypoints	may	be	used	in	between	the	start	and	end	

points	to	guide	corridors	through	specific	areas	of	interest.	

Among	the	issues	considered	for	potential	points	are	logical	“tie‐ins”	to	the	existing	rail	network,	potential	

for	economic	development,	avoidance	of	sensitive	areas,	etc.		For	this	study,	a	total	of	three	start/end	points	

and	two	waypoints	were	used,	as	shown	in	Figure	5.		Points	S4	and	S5	were	chosen	along	the	existing	Port	

Bienville	rail	line	in	the	southern	portion	of	the	study	area.		The	northern	endpoint	is	located	near	

Nicholson,	MS	at	the	junction	of	the	existing	rail	line	and	Norfolk	Southern	mainline.		In	order	to	investigate	

additional	possibilities	two	waypoints	were	used	for	some	of	the	initial	runs.		Point	W1	was	located	near	

Stennis	International	Airport	to	explore	a	possible	connection	to	the	airport	for	potential	economic	

development	opportunities.		Point	W2	was	placed	at	the	interchange	of	I‐10	and	MS	607	to	investigate	

possibly	crossing	I‐10	at	that	specific	location.					

Figure 5	‐	Start, End, and Way Points.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

16

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Corridor Parameters

The	AART	calculates	impacts	based	on	a	corridor	width	which	is	specified	by	the	user.		For	this	study	a	

corridor	width	of	1,000	feet	was	used.		In	order	to	meet	engineering	requirements	for	minimum	rail	

curvature,	a	horizontal	curve	radius	of	1,500	feet	was	used	for	“smoothing”	the	corridors.	

Generation of Conceptual Alternatives

Once	the	data	were	compiled,	the	rankings	determined,	and	the	endpoints	chosen,	the	AART	was	ready	to	

begin	generating	conceptual	corridors.		Various	combinations	of	start,	end	and	waypoints	were	developed	

in	order	to	generate	a	number	of	corridor	alternatives	to	evaluate.		The	point	combinations	that	were	used	

are	as	follows:	

 S4	to	N1	

 S5	to	N1	

 S4	to	W1	to	N1	

 S5	to	W1	to	N1	

 S4	to	W2	to	N1	

 S5	to	W2	to	N1	

As	the	conceptual	corridors	were	generated,	their	locations	and	impacts	were	reviewed.		In	cases	where	the	

corridors	would	veer	into	unexpected	areas,	explanations	were	sought	by	investigating	the	data	layers	and	

their	assigned	rankings.	

The	AART	generated	an	impacts	report	for	each	corridor	detailing	the	cultural	and	environmental	impacts	

for	that	corridor.		The	corridor	locations	and	the	impacts	reports	were	used	by	the	project	Team	in	the	

corridor	evaluation	process,	along	with	factors	such	as	future	development	and	other	intangibles.		Staff	

experience	and	expertise	in	conducting	corridor	studies	played	an	important	part	in	the	corridor	review	

and	evaluation	process.	

Initial AART Results

Figures	6	through	12	show	the	various	ranking	and	avoids	combinations	(scenarios)	and	the	resulting	

corridors	that	were	generated	from	the	base	settings.		Due	to	some	preliminary	and	test	scenarios,	the	

scenario	numbering	begins	at	“20”.	Note	that	after	Scenario	23,	the	waypoint	alternatives	were	deemed	

unreasonable	and	were	not	utilized	for	subsequent	scenarios.	This	is	explained	in	greater	detail	in	the	

section	titled	“Refinement	of	the	Alternative	Corridors”.	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

17

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 6	‐	Scenario 20.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

18

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 7	‐	Scenario 21.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

19

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 8	‐	Scenario 22.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

20

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 9	‐	Scenario 23.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

21

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 10	‐	Scenario 24.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

22

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 11	‐	Scenario 25.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

23

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 12	‐	Scenario 26.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

24

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figures	13	and	14	show	the	results	obtained	after	incorporating	the	modifications	to	the	base	scenario	that	

were	requested	by	the	US	Army	Corps	of	Engineers	(USACE).	

Figure 13	‐	US Army Corps of Engineers Scenario 1.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

25

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 14	‐	US Army Corps of Engineers Scenario 2.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

26

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Finally,	figures	15	‐	17	show	the	results	obtained	after	incorporating	the	modifications	to	the	base	scenario	

that	were	requested	by	the	Environmental	Protection	Agency	(EPA).	

Figure 15	‐	Environmental Protection Agency Scenario 3
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

27

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 16	‐	Environmental Protection Agency Scenario 4.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

28

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 17	‐	Environmental Protection Agency Scenario 5.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

29

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Refinement of the Alternative Corridors

Once	the	initial	AART	developed	alternative	corridors	were	identified	the	refinement	process	began.	Early	

on,	quite	a	few	corridors	were	eliminated	from	further	study	for	various	reasons.	As	documented	below,	

Scenarios	20,	21,	22,	23	and	24	were	eliminated	as	a	first	step	in	the	process	towards	identification	of	the	

Reasonable	Alternatives.

Scenario 20

As	shown	on	page	17,	Scenario	20	identified	6	possible	corridors.	These	corridors	were	the	initial	corridors	

developed	incorporating	the	base	AART	criteria.	For	this	scenario	restrictions	were	not	placed	on	the	

Stennis	Fee	Area	or	the	existing	or	proposed	wetland	mitigation	banks	within	the	study	area.	These	

alternative	corridors	were	eliminated	for	the	following	reasons:	

1. Each	corridor	traversed	through	the	Stennis	Fee	Area	which	is	a	secure	area	of	property,	contained	

by	high	security	fencing	and	is	owned	and	maintained	by	the	Federal	Government.	This	property	is	

solely	dedicated	to	operations	related	to	NASA’s	Stennis	Space	Facility.	

2. Two	(2)	of	the	alternative	corridors	severed	the	wetland	mitigation	bank	known	as	Devil’s	Swamp	

Mitigation	Bank.	Additionally	these	corridors	also	cut	through	the	proposed	wetland	mitigation	

bank	known	as	the	Texas	Flat	Mitigation	Bank.		Extensive	impacts	to	the	existing	and	proposed	

banks	would	result	from	these	corridors.		(the	boundaries	of	the	banks	are	not	shown	on	the	map	

on	page	20	but	are	shown	on	other	maps	beginning	with	Scenario	22)	

3. Four	(4)	of	the	alternative	corridors	utilized	waypoints	W1	and	W2	which	were	initially	identified	

by	the	study	team	as	potential	strategic	locations	for	the	rail	corridor.	Waypoint	1	was	established	

to	consider	the	economic	benefits	of	the	rail	line	in	close	proximity	to	the	Stennis	International	

Airport.		It	was	determined	that	currently	there	are	no	strong	economic	drivers	to	support	

diverting	the	rail	line	over	to	the	airport.	If	the	need	develops	in	the	future	a	rail	spur	off	the	

proposed	project	could	be	considered.	Waypoint	2	was	established	as	a	possible	I‐10	crossing	

location	for	the	rail	line.	This	interstate	crossing	location	proved	to	not	be	a	good	location.	Impacts	

to	the	Devil’s	Swamp	Mitigation	Bank	and	required	modifications	to	the	I‐10/SR	607	interchange	

were	determined	to	be	too	extensive.		

Scenario 21

As	shown	on	page	18,	Scenario	21	identified	6	possible	corridors.	These	corridors	incorporated	the	base	

AART	criteria	in	addition	to	restrictions	placed	on	the	Stennis	Fee	Area.	No	restrictions	were	placed	on	the	

existing	or	proposed	wetland	mitigation	banks.	These	alternative	corridors	were	eliminated	for	the	

following	reasons:	

1. Four	(4)	of	the	alternative	corridors	severed	the	wetland	mitigation	bank	known	as	Devil’s	Swamp	

Mitigation	Bank	and	also	impacted	the	proposed	Texas	Flat		mitigation	bank	

2. Four	(4)	of	the	alternative	corridors	utilized	waypoints	W1	and	W2.		The	corridors	associated	with	

W1	were	considered	not	economically	beneficial.	The	corridors	associated	with	W2	required	

extensive	modifications	to	the	I‐10/SR	607	interchange	and	paralleled	and	impacted	I‐10	for	

several	miles	and	were	determined	not	feasible.	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

30

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Scenario 22

As	shown	on	page	19,	Scenario	22	identified	6	possible	corridors.	These	corridors	incorporated	the	base	

AART	criteria	in	addition	to	restrictions	placed	on	the	existing	and	proposed	wetland	mitigation	banks.	No	

restrictions	were	placed	on	the	Stennis	Fee	Area.	These	alternative	corridors	were	eliminated	for	the	

following	reasons:	

1. Each	corridor	dipped	down	into	the	Stennis	Fee	Area	on	the	very	north	boundary	of	the	property.	

2. Four	(4)	of	the	alternative	corridors	severed	the	wetland	mitigation	bank	known	as	Devil’s	Swamp	

Mitigation	Bank	and	also	impacted	the	proposed	Texas	Flat		mitigation	bank	

3. Four	(4)	of	the	alternative	corridors	utilized	waypoints	W1	and	W2.		The	corridors	associated	with	

W1	were	considered	not	economically	beneficial.	The	corridors	associated	with	W2	required	

extensive	modifications	to	the	I‐10/SR	607	interchange	and	paralleled	and	impacted	I‐10	for	

several	miles	and	were	determined	not	feasible.			

Scenario 23

As	shown	on	page	20,	Scenario	23	identified	6	possible	corridors.	These	corridors	incorporated	the	base	

AART	criteria	in	addition	to	restrictions	placed	on	the	Stennis	Fee	Area	and	the	existing	and	proposed	

wetland	mitigation	banks.	These	alternative	corridors	were	eliminated	for	the	following	reasons:	

1. Each	corridor	crossed	Texas	Flat	Road	several	times.	Texas	Flat	road	is	one	of	the	main	2‐lane	

highways	in	the	northern	half	of	the	study	area	that	is	accessible	to	the	general	public.	Crossing	the	

road	multiple	times	with	the	rail	alignment	would	be	detrimental	to	the	highways	operation.		

2. Four	(4)	of	the	alternative	corridors	utilized	waypoints	W1	and	W2.		The	corridors	associated	with	

W1	were	considered	not	economically	beneficial.	The	corridors	associated	with	W2	required	

extensive	modifications	to	the	I‐10/SR	607	interchange	and	paralleled	and	impacted	I‐10	for	

several	miles	and	were	determined	not	feasible.		Waypoints	W1	and	W2	we	eliminated	from	

further	consideration.	

Scenario 24

As	shown	on	page	21,	Scenario	24	identified	2	possible	corridors.	These	corridors	incorporated	the	base	

AART	criteria	in	addition	to	restrictions	placed	on	the	Stennis	Fee	Area	and	the	existing	wetland	mitigation	

bank.	The	proposed	Texas	Flat	mitigation	bank	was	given	a	priority	ranking	value	of	9.	These	alternative	

corridors	were	eliminated	for	the	following	reason:	

1. Both	corridors	crossed	Texas	Flat	Road	several	times.	

Engineered Alignments

After	the	initial	round	of	cuts	the	remaining	Alternative	Corridors	identified	in	Scenarios	25,	26,	USACE01,	

USACE02	,	EPA03,	EPA04	and	EPA05	were	further	refined.	By	using	the	standard	fixed‐width	corridors	and	

the	irregular	corridors	generated	by	AART,	the	study	team	was	able	to	make	slight	adjustments	to	the	

alignments	in	order	to	meet	the	engineering	design	criteria	for	the	proposed	rail	line.		The	AART	also	

generates	irregular	corridors	which	depict	the	percentage	impact	variance	from	the	absolute	“best	fit”	line	

(in	other	words,	the	“next‐best”	corridors).		These	are	areas	that,	while	not	as	good	as	the	least‐impact	

corridor,	are	also	worth	considering.		An	example	of	these	corridors	is	shown	in	Figure	18.	

Additionally,	Team	engineers	also	identified	several	new	segments	for	consideration.		These	new	manually‐

developed	segments	were	derived	taking	into	account	the	irregular	corridors	as	shown	in	Figure	18.		These	

new	alignments	were	developed	with	the	intent	to	maintain	minimal	impacts	to	the	environment	where	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

31

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

practical	while	meeting	the	design	criteria.	These	engineered	alignments	were	then	used	to	generate	new	

1,000‐foot	corridors	centered	about	theses	alignments.	A	new	set	of	corridor	impact	reports	were	

generated	and	initial	cost	estimates	for	each	corridor	were	prepared.	This	information	was	compiled	in	a	

matrix	format.	Impacts	were	summarized	based	on	the	refined	1,000	foot	wide	corridors.	However,	the	

actual	impacts	for	the	proposed	railroad	would	be	considerably	less,	probably	90%	less,	since	the	final	

constructed	footprint	of	the	rail	bed	is	expected	to	be	typically	less	than	100	feet	in	width.	Detailed	field	

investigations	have	not	been	performed	yet	and	the	1,000	foot	wide	corridors	will	allow	flexibility	to	adjust	

the	alignment	in	the	future	to	further	minimize	impacts	once	the	detail	field	work	has	been	completed.		

The	impacts	within	these	wide	corridors	and	the	initial	cost	estimates	for	the	engineered	alignments	were	

used	for	comparing	one	alternative	to	another.			

A	matrix	was	developed	for	comparing	the	refined	corridors	to	one	another.	The	refined	alternative	

corridors	are	identified	in	the	matrix	by	their	initial	Scenario	run	and	by	their	respective	beginning	and	end	

points.	The	matrix	on	page	33	includes	the	impacts	for	both	the	original	AART	generated	corridors	as	well	

as	the	manually	developed	alignments	and	corridors	and	the	initial	cost	estimate	for	the	manually	

developed	alignments.	The	cost	estimates	provided	in	the	initial	matrix	do	not	take	into	account	potential	

wetland	bridging.	This	initial	matrix	was	developed	for	comparing	the	1,000’	wide	corridors.	Once	the	

corridors	were	refined	and	the	reasonable	alternatives	identified	a	more	detailed	cost	estimate	of	each	was	

prepared.	These	refined	cost	estimates	include	potential	bridging	of	wetlands	and	is	discussed	in	more	

detail	in	the	following	section.	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

32

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 18	‐	Other potential corridors for run S5 to N1.		These corridors depict “next‐best” areas.
S4N1

Manual 

S4N1 S5N1

Manual 

S5N1 S4N1

Manual 

S4N1 S5N1

Manual 

S5N1

Manual 

S4N1

Manual 

S5N1 S4N1

Manual 

S4N1 S5N1

Manual 

S5N1 

Length Miles 23.69 23.53 23.73 23.62 23.75 23.53 23.78 23.62 23.76 23.85 23.96 23.69 23.85 23.65 Construction Cost $ Millions $61.9 $62.1 $61.9 $62.1 $58.7 $58.3 $62.2 $62.1 Threatened and Endangered Species Yes (#) / No INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA Wetlands Acreage 435 461 421 436 446 461 432 436 493 467 426 436 425 428 Wetland Quality Value 2,917 3,117 2,846 2,946 2,935 3,117 2,864 2,946 3,319 3,148 3,569 2,954 3,570 2,891 Wetland Mitigation Bank Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Proposed Wetland Mitigation Bank Acreage 86 66 86 66 33 66 33 66 66 66 33 66 33 66 Stream Crossings # of Crossings 19 18 18 17 20 18 19 17 16 15 19 18 18 17 CERCLA Acreage 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 Parks and Wildlife Refuges Yes (#) / No 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Historical Structures Yes (#) / No 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Archaeological Sites Acreage 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 0.0 4.5 0.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 0.0 4.5 0.0 4.5 Farmland

Prime Acreage 988 1,039 996 1,062 999 1,039 1,007 1,062 1,081 1,104 1,037 1,057 1,043 1,077 Prime if Drained Acreage 498 481 492 481 498 481 491 481 565 565 478 488 460 469 Statewide Important Acreage 16 5 16 5 16 5 16 5 8 8 18 8 18 8 

Relocations # 00000000 0 0 000 0 Mines Acreage 48 47 31 42 48 47 31 42 50 44 34 44 31 42 Recreational Facilities Acreage 00000000 0 0 000 0 Native American Tribe Impacts # (Acreage) INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA INA Water Wells Acreage 10.3 10.6 10.2 10.6 10.6 10.6 10.5 10.6 11.2 11.2 10.5 10.8 10.5 10.6 Cemeteries # 00000000 0 0 000 0 Transmission Line Crossings # 22222222 2 2 323 2 Gas Line Crossings # 44444444 4 4 444 4 INA - Information Not Available at this time(1) Scenarios EPA03 and EPA05 produced the same results

ALTERNATIVES MATRIX

PORT BIENVILLE FEASIBILITY STUDY - PORT BIENVILLE TO NICHOLSO

INFRASTRUCTURE

ENGINEERING 

CRITERIA NATURAL FEATURES MAN-MADE FEATURES

Scenario 25 Scenario 26 Manual Scenario 27 Scenario EPA03 & EPA05 (1) 
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

34

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Reasonable Alternatives

Once	the	corridor	Matrix	was	completed	and	the	comparison	performed	several	corridors	centrally	located	

within	the	study	area	emerged	as	the	least	costly	and	least	impacting.	Every	one	of	these	“Reasonable	

Alternatives”	shared	a	common	central	corridor.	However,	two	distinct	corridors	on	the	north	end	of	the	

project	were	identified	and	several	corridors	on	the	southern	end	were	identified.	To	further	define	the	

“Reasonable	Alternatives”	the	study	team	divided	the	advanced	corridors	into	segments	as	identified	in	

Figure	19	on	page	35.	These	17	segments	represent	a	possible	combination	of	40	potential	corridors.	

Following	the	development	of	the	segments,	the	study	team	re‐quantified	impacts	and	cost	by	segment.		

Additionally,	the	costs	estimates	were	further	refined	by	taking	into	account	anticipated	bridging	of	high	

value	wetlands	and	stream	mitigation.		These	costs	estimates	are	considered	all	inclusive	and	represent	

potential	“implementation	costs”	which	includes	final	design,	right‐of‐way	acquisition,	construction	and	

inspection	services.	The	estimates	are	based	on	the	true	engineered	alignments	within	each	refined	

corridor	and	are	representative	of	2013	unit	cost	data	derived	from	other	rail	projects	and	from	cost	

experience	on	other	similar	projects.	At	this	stage	in	the	project	development	the	alignments	are	

considered	conceptual,	therefore	20%	contingencies	have	been	included	in	the	cost	estimates.	Following	

Figure	19	is	the	Segment	Matrix	for	the	Reasonable	Alternatives.		
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

35

Project	No.	FRA‐0023‐00(003)/105494	101000‐102000	

Figure 19 – Engineered alignments and section numbers
CATEGORY Unit of Measure Segment 1a Segment 1b Segment 2a Segment 2b Segment 2c Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5 Segment 6a Segm

Length Miles 1.02 0.89 1.95 2.47 1.95 0.64 1.54 0.05 0.92 0

Total Estimated Implementation Cost $ Millions 2.10 1.60 3.80 9.20 3.90 5.50 7.10 2.90 7.90 2

Wetland Impacts Acreage 5 0 8 39 9 12 13 6 55 

Wetland Quality Value 33 0 56 262 64 82 90 44 387 3

Cost of Impacts to Wetlands $60K per acre @ 10% $12,600 $9,600 $22,800 $55,200 $23,400 $33,000 $42,600 $17,400 $47,400 $1

Devil's Swamp Mitigation Bank Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Proposed Texas Flat Mitigation Bank Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Cost of Impacts to Mitigation Banks $120K per acre @ 10% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

Length of Wetland Bridging LF 0 0 0 430 430 430 283 587 

Stream Crossings # of Crossings 3 2 7 5 5 1 3 0 0 

HydroLine‐Connector Miles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

HydroLine‐ Ditch Miles 0.90 0.71 0.87 0.66 1.00 0.09 0.72 0.00 0.00 0

HydroLine‐ Stream Miles 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Stream/River ‐ named Miles 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.20 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Stream/River ‐ other Miles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Streams 303(d) # 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Artificial Path Miles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Total Stream Impacts Miles 0.90 0.71 1.60 1.26 1.27 0.09 0.72 0.00 0.00 0

Total Stream Impacts Feet 4,752 3,744 8,437 6,653 6,706 465 3,802 0 0 

Cost of Impacts to Streams $200 per linear feet @ 10% $95,040 $74,870 $168,749 $133,056 $134,112 $9,293 $76,032 $0 $0 

CERCLA Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Archaeological Sites Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Farmland (Prime) Acreage 14.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Farmland (Prime if Drained) Acreage 0.00 42.04 63.42 94.70 60.81 49.23 94.93 0.04 64.04 6

Farmland (Statewide Importance0 Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Mines Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.78 2.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Recreational Facilities Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Water Wells Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.20 1.02 0.67 0.78 0.72 0

Transmission Line Crossings # 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Gas Line Crossings # 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

MAN-MADE FEATURES INFRASTRUCTURE

SEGMENT MATRIX FOR THE REASONABLE ALTERMATIVES

PORT BIENVILLE FEASIBILITY STUDY - PORT BIENVILLE TO NICHO

ENGINEERING 

CRITERIA NATURAL FEATURES
Port Bienville Rail Alternatives Development

Technical Methodology Report

	 	

A‐1	

		

APPENDIX A

GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

A‐2	

AART (Alternatives Analysis Research Tool)	–	A	CDM	Smith	proprietary,	automated	GIS‐based	tool	that	

identifies	and	quantifies	the	corridor	and/or	alignments	with	the	least	amount	of	impacts.	

Alignment	‐	The	horizontal	and	vertical	route	or	direction	of	a	transportation	railway	or	highway.	

Avoids	–	Constraint	or	buffered	areas	that	are	to	be	bypassed	or	avoided	by	the	AART.	

Buffer	‐	Is	an	area	or	zone	around	a	point,	line,	or	polygon	that	creates	an	extension	that	would	provide	

protection	or	inclusion	while	using	the	AART.	

Coordinate System	‐	A	reference	framework	consisting	of	a	set	of	points,	lines,	and/or	surfaces,	and	a	set	

of	rules,	used	to	define	the	positions	of	points	in	space	in	either	two	or	three	dimensions.	The	Cartesian	

coordinate	system	and	the	geographic	coordinate	system	used	on	the	earth's	surface	are	common	examples	

of	coordinate	systems.1

Corridor	‐	Is	a	pathway	consisting	of	a	long	wide	strip	of	land	that	would	be	studied	for	a	planned	

transportations	facility	such	as	a	railway.	The	corridor	defines	a	study	area	that	would	be	furthered	studied	

to	develop	a	reasonable	number	of	alternative	alignments.		

Geodata	‐	Information	in	a	geographic	format	that	can	be	used	by	various	computer	programs	and	

applications	for	planning	and	environmental	analysis.		

Geodatabase	‐	A	database	used	for	storing,	querying,	and	manipulating	geodata.		

Grid ‐ The	division	of	a	map	into	smaller	uniform	squares	(or	cells)	providing	a	horizontal	and	vertical	

system	used	to	located	fixed	positions	within	a	geographical	area.	The	number	of	squares	can	be	changed	to	

accommodate	the	size	of	a	geographical	area.		

Qualitative	–	An	analysis	of	information	that	cannot	be	quantified	by	numbers.		

Quantitative	–	A	numerically‐based	analysis	of	data	by	size	or	amount.		

Raster	‐	Is	a	format	used	as	a	GIS	data	model	and	is	made	up	of	a	grid/cells	system.	Each	cell	contains	a	

single	value.	

Shapefile	‐	A	GIS	file	format	that	contains	a	set	of	points,	lines,	and/or	polygons	that	provide	attributes	and	

geographical	information.	This	file	format	can	also	be	linked	to	tabular	data	and	is	used	by	GIS	software	for	

mapping	and	analysis.		

Spatial Analysis	‐	The	process	of	studying	and	comparing	spatial	data,	their	attributes	and	locations	and	

how	they	interrelate.		

Spatial Data	‐	Data	that	includes	points,	lines,	polygons,	and	pixels	that	define	a	certain	specific	

geographical	location	that	define	specific	location.	

Waypoints	–	are	additional	beginning	and	end	points	that	can	be	placed	in	order	to	allow	the	user	to	assist	

and	guide	the	AART	to	a	specific	location	or	reference	point.		

																																																																		

1	ESRI.	GIS	Dictionary.	11	April	2006	

<http://support.esri.com/index.cfm?fa=knowledgebase.gisDictionary.gateway>	
Port Bienville Rail Alternatives Development

Technical Methodology Report

	 	

B‐1	

		

APPENDIX B

THE ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES RESEARCH

TOOL (AART)
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

B‐2	

The	Alignment	Alternatives	Research	Tool	(AART)	has	been	proven	effective	in	helping	to	streamline	the	

NEPA	process	by	providing	planners	and	engineers	with	critical	information	from	a	standardized,	inclusive,	

and	defensible	process	with	a	turnaround	time	not	possible	when	using	conventional	methods.		This	cost‐

effective	tool	processes	large	amounts	of	data	quickly	and	results	in	corridors	best	suited	to	project	and	

stakeholder	specifications.		Since	the	AART	allows	users	to	interactively	weight	geographic	features	and	

attributes,	they	can	be	assured	that	corridors	are	developed	with	minimized	impacts	on	the	natural	and	

human	environment.	

The	AART	is	a	desktop	application	consisting	of	a	series	of	GIS‐based	functions	designed	to	route	

conceptual	corridor	“footprints”	among	the	identified	community	and	environmental	resources	available	

from	both	public	databases	and	project	derived	databases	(see	Figure	B‐1).		These	“footprints”	are	

developed	through	a	simple	“opportunities	and	constraints”	approach.		In	this	approach	values	are	assigned	

to	site‐specific	resources	by	experts	in	the	field.		The	computer	model	routes	preferred	paths	between	user‐

selected	endpoints	through	an	artificial	“terrain”	created	by	the	weighting	of	natural	resources,	

socioeconomic,	infrastructure	and	other	values	that	have	been	assigned	in	the	study	area.		Additionally,	

“avoid”	areas	can	be	included	to	effectively	'mask	out'	any	areas	where	development	should	not	be	

considered.		The	system	uses	a	grid‐	(or	cell‐)	based	format	for	improved	model	efficiency.		The	resolution	

or	grid	cell	size	may	be	further	refined	as	viable	corridor	alternatives	are	identified	and	higher	resolution	

field	data	is	incorporated	into	the	system.		The	AART	will	find	the	least‐cost	(least	impact)	path	between	

endpoints	and	summarize	the	impacts	for	each	corridor	selection.		Additionally,	AART	will	also	display	

potential	alternative	corridor	regions	for	each	model	run.			

Figure B‐1	‐	AART main interface.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

B‐3	

The	tool	incorporates	the	functions	of	ArcGIS,	ArcGIS	Spatial	Analyst,	and	geodatabases	to	maintain	

information	and	perform	the	complex	spatial	calculations	needed	to	effectively	analyze	each	model	run.	

How AART Works

AART	is	used	to	identify	potential	corridors	based	on	user‐provided	points	and	user‐ranked	GIS	data	layers.		

The	Tool	finds	a	least‐impact	path	between	the	points	by	attempting	to	stay	away	from	high‐ranked	areas	

while	maintaining	as	short	a	path	as	possible	between	points.		The	desired	corridor	width	is	applied	and	the	

environmental	and	cultural	impacts	of	the	corridor	are	calculated.			

Endpoints	‐	In	order	to	generate	corridors,	AART	requires	at	least	two	endpoints	indicating	the	start	and	

end	of	the	corridor.		These	points	are	supplied	by	the	user	and	are	based	on	project	requirements.	

Input Data	‐	AART	will	accept	nearly	any	type	of	GIS	vector	data	as	inputs.		Some	examples	of	the	types	of	

data	that	are	commonly	used	are	shown	in	Figure	B‐2.		A	special	data	layer	outlining	the	project	study	area	

is	also	required.		All	analyses	conducted	by	the	Tool	will	be	constrained	by	the	boundaries	of	this	study	

area.	

Figure B‐2	‐	Examples of GIS data layers

When	the	AART	is	run,	the	input	vector	data	layers	are	converted	to	raster	layers	using	a	user‐specified	cell	

size	(Figures	B‐3a	and	B‐3b).	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

B‐4	

Figure B‐3a	‐	GIS data with grid cell overlay.

Figure B‐3b	‐	GIS data after conversion to raster (cell) data.

Ranking	‐	The	GIS	layers	typically	contain	various	features.		For	example,	a	wetlands	layer	contains	

polygons	for	the	various	types	of	wetlands.		In	order	for	AART	to	generate	least‐impact	paths,	these	

features	must	be	ranked	according	to	their	suitability	for	locating	an	alignment.		This	ranking	is	based	on	a	

scale	of	1‐9,	where	low	values	indicate	high	suitability	and	high	values	indicate	low	suitability.		In	addition,	

there	is	a	designation	of	“Avoid”,	which	indicates	features	that	are	completely	“off	limits”.		Examples	are	

shown	in	the	table	below.	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

B‐5	

Category Layer Ranking

Land Cover

Freshwater Marshes 9

Bottomland Hardwoods 9

Pasture Land 2

Cultural Features

Hospitals 9

Cemeteries Avoid

Schools 9

Input Parameters	‐	The	user	may	specify	values	for	horizontal	alignment	curvature,	corridor	width,	and	

layers	to	be	evaluated	for	impacts.	

Data Processing –	Once	the	layer	features	have	been	ranked,	the	AART	creates	a	single	“suitability”	layer.		

This	layer	is	created	by	selecting	the	highest	ranking	for	each	corresponding	cell	in	each	layer.		Figure	B‐4a	

depicts	this	process	while	Figure	B‐4b	shows	an	example	of	a	real‐world	suitability	layer.	

Figure B‐4a	‐	Suitability layer creation process
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

B‐6	

Figure B‐4b	‐	Sample suitability layer.		The most suitable areas are in light green, the least suitable

are dark green, and avoids are black.

Outputs	‐	Once	the	Suitability	layer	has	been	created,	AART	finds	the	best	path	along	the	Suitability	layer	

between	the	user‐provided	start	and	end	points	(Figure	B‐5).		The	user‐defined	corridor	width	is	then	

applied	to	the	path	to	create	the	corridor	for	impacts	calculations.	

Figure B‐5	‐	AART finds the best path between endpoints by minimizing the crossing of highly‐

ranked areas.
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

B‐7	

The	AART	output	also	generates	a	layer	showing	other	potential	corridors	of	interest	that	may	be	worth	

investigating	(Figure	B‐6).	

Figure B‐6	‐	Other potential corridors.

The	AART	also	generates	a	table	showing	the	impacts	of	the	output	corridor	on	polygon,	linear,	and	point	

features	(cultural	and	environmental).		A	sample	is	shown	in	Figure	B‐7.	
Port Bienville    Rail Alternatives Development Technical Methodology Report

    

B‐8	

Figure B‐7	‐	Excerpt from impacts table.
Port Bienville Rail Alternatives Development

Technical Methodology Report

APPENDIX C

National Wetlands Inventory Code Groupings
Port Bienville  Rail Alternatives Development Tech

Identification of Wetlands and Deepwater HabitatsI. Estuarine Ecological System (E) ‐ The Estuarine System consists of deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands that are usu

land but have open, partly obstructed, or sporadic access to the open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted 

from the land.

A. Bays ‐ Open water between the Barrier Island and the mainland to a point upstream at which salinities are less than 0.5 parts pe

water periods.

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

E1UBLx Estuarine Sub‐Tidal Unconsolidated Bottom N/A Sub‐Tida

E2USNs Estuarine Intertidal Unconsolidated Shore N/A Regularly Flo

E2USNx Estuarine Intertidal Unconsolidated Shore N/A Regularly Flo

E2USMx Estuarine Intertidal Unconsolidated Shore N/A Irregularly Flo

E2USPx Estuarine Intertidal Unconsolidated Shore N/A Irregularly Flo

2. Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

E1UBL Estuarine Sub‐Tidal Unconsolidated Bottom N/A Sub‐Tida

E1AB3L Estuarine Sub‐Tidal Aquatic Bed Rooted Vascular Sub‐Tida

E2USM Estuarine Intertidal Unconsolidated Shore N/A Irregularly Exp
Port Bienville  Rail Alternatives Development Tech

B. Tidal Flats ‐ Unconsolidated material with less than 30% cover by vegetation and which is exposed by tides.

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

E2USPs Estuarine Inter‐Tidal Unconsolidated Shore Spoil Irregularly Flo

2. Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

E2USN Estuarine Inter‐Tidal Unconsolidated Shore N/A Regularly Flo

E2USP Estuarine Inter‐Tidal Unconsolidated Shore N/A Irregularly Flo

C. Estuarine Intertidal Marsh (Tidal Marsh) ‐ Any salt marsh or other marsh subject to regular or occasional flooding by tides, inclu

or not the tide waters reach the marshland areas through natural or artificial watercourses), as long as this flooding does not includ

storm waters. Coastal wetland plant species include: smooth cordgrass; black needlerush; glasswort; salt grass; sea lavender; salt m

cattail; salt meadow cordgrass; and big/giant cordgrass.

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

E2SS1Pd

2. Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

E2SS1P Estuarine
Port Bienville  Rail Alternatives Development Tech

C. Scrub Marsh ‐ A salt marsh subject to regular or occasional flooding by tides, characterized by scrub‐shrub vegetation

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

E2EM1Ps Estuarine Sub‐Tidal Emergent Persistent Irregularly Flo

2. Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

E2EM1N Estuarine Sub‐Tidal Emergent Persistent Regularly Flo

E2EM1P Estuarine Sub‐Tidal Emergent Persistent Irregularly Flo

II. Lacustrine Ecological System (Lakes) ‐ The Lacustrine System includes wetlands and deepwater habitats with all of the following ch

in a topographic depression or a dammed river channel; (2) lacking trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, emergent mosses or lichens w

areal coverage; and (3) total area exceeds 8 ha (20 acres).

A. Freshwater Lakes & Impoundments ‐ Open water areas found within a basin or dammed channel which exceed 20 acres in size 

0.5 parts per thousand.

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

L1UBHx Lacustrine Limnetic Unconsolidated Bottom N/A Permanently F

L1UBKh Lacustrine Limnetic Unconsolidated Bottom N/A Artificially Flo

L1UBKx Lacustrine Limnetic Unconsolidated Bottom N/A Artificially Flo

L2UBFx Lacustrine Littoral Unconsolidated Bottom N/A Semi perman

Flooded 
Port Bienville  Rail Alternatives Development Tech

L2UBKh Lacustrine Littoral Unconsolidated Bottom N/A Artificially Flo

L2USKh Lacustrine Littoral Unconsolidated Shore N/A Artificially Flo

L1ABHx Lacustrine

L1UBHx Lacustrine

2. Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

L2UBF Lacustrine Littoral Unconsolidated Bottom N/A Semi perman

Flooded 

III. Riverine Ecological System (R) ‐ The Riverine System includes all wetlands and deepwater habitats contained within a channel, wit

wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, emergent mosses, or lichens, and (2) habitats with water containing ocea

of 0.5 ‰.

A. Rivers & Canals ‐ Channels which at least periodically carry water with salinities less than 0.5 parts per thousand.

2. Non‐Disturbed/Naturally Occurring

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

R1UBV Riverine Tidal Unconsolidated Bottom NA Permanent‐T

R2UBF Riverine Lower Perennial Unconsolidated Bottom NA Semi perman

Flooded 

R2UBH Riverine Lower Perennial Unconsolidated Bottom NA Permanently F
Port Bienville  Rail Alternatives Development Tech

IV. Palustrine Ecological System (P) ‐ The Palustrine System (Fig. 6) includes all nontidal wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persist

mosses or lichens, and all such wetlands that occur in tidal areas where salinity due to ocean‐derived salts is below 0.5 ‰. It also inclu

such vegetation, but with all of the following four characteristics: (1) area less than 8 ha (20 acres); (2) active wave‐formed or bedrock 

lacking; (3) water depth in the deepest part of basin less than 2 m at low water; and (4) salinity due to ocean‐derived salts less than 0

A. Ponds & Borrow Pits ‐ Small fresh water bodies less than 20 acres in size.

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PUBFh Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Bottom None Semi perman

Flooded 

PUBHh Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Bottom None Permanently F

PUBHx Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Bottom None Permanently F

PUBKx Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Bottom None Artificially Flo

PUBFX Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Bottom None Semi perman

Flooded 

2. Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PUBF Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Bottom None Semi perman

Flooded 

PUBH Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Bottom None Permanently F
Port Bienville  Rail Alternatives Development Tech

B. Unvegetated Flats ‐ Areas with less than 30% vegetative cover which are periodically flooded by fresh water.

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PUSAd Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Shore None Temporary Flo

Push Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Shore None Temporary Flo

PUSAx Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Shore None Temporary Flo

PUSCh Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Shore None Seasonally Flo

PUSCx Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Shore None Seasonally Flo

PUSKx Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Shore None Artificially Flo

2. Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PUSA Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Shore None Temporary Flo

PUSC Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Shore None Seasonally Flo

PUSR Palustrine N/A Unconsolidated Shore None Seasonal‐Ti

C. Savannahs & Wet Meadows ‐ Herbaceous areas which are flooded only briefly but which may be saturated for long periods dur

Species include pitcher plants, sundews, pogonias, pipeworts, meadow beauties, orchids, yellow‐eyed grasses, asters, and goldenr

concern ‐ Canby's Dropwort (Oxypolis canbyi).

1. Disturbed
Port Bienville  Rail Alternatives Development Tech

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PEM1Ad Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Temporar

PEM1Cd Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Seasonally FloPEM1Ch Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Seasonally Flo

PEM1Cx Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Seasonally Flo

2. Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PEM1A Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Temporar

PEM1C Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Seasonally Flo

D. Freshwater Marshes ‐ Herbaceous areas that are flooded for extended periods during the growing season. Included are marshe

systems, managed impoundments, some Carolina bays and other non‐tidal marshes (i.e. marshes that do not fall into the Salt/Brac

tremendous variety of species may occur. Typical communities include species of sedges, millets, rushes and grasses that are not s

wetland regulations. Also included are maidencane, giant cane, arrowhead, pickeralweed, arrow arum, smartweed and cattail.

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PEM1Fh Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Semi‐perma

PEM1Fx Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Semi‐perma

PEM1Kx Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Artificial ‐ T

PEM1/SS1Ax Palustrine N/A Emergent/ Scrub‐ Shrub Persistent/Broad‐ Leaved Deciduous Temporary Flo
Port Bienville  Rail Alternatives Development Tech

PEM1/SS1Cx Palustrine N/A Emergent/ Scrub‐ Shrub Persistent/Broad‐ Leaved Deciduous Seasonally Flo

PEM1Ah Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Temporary Flo

PEM1Ax Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Temporary Flo

2. Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PEM1F Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Semi‐perma

PEM1R Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Seasonally Flo

Tidal 

PEM1/SS1A Palustrine N/A Emergent/ Scrub‐ Shrub Persistent/Broad‐ Leaved Deciduous Temporary Flo

PEM1/SS1J Palustrine N/A Emergent/ Scrub‐ Shrub Persistent/ Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Intermitten

Flooded 

PEM1J Palustrine N/A Emergent Persistent Intermitten

Flooded 

PEM1/SS1C Palustrine N/A Emergent/ Scrub‐ Shrub Persistent/Broad‐ Leaved Deciduous Seasonally Flo

E. Aquatic Beds ‐ Areas vegetated by dense mats of vegetation which grow on or below the water surface. Water is permanent or 

include pondweeds, coontails, duckweeds, lotus, water‐lily, spatter‐dock and others.

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PAB4Fh Palustrine N/A Aquatic Bed Floating Vascular Semi‐perma

PAB4Fx Palustrine N/A Aquatic Bed Floating Vascular Semi‐perma
Port Bienville  Rail Alternatives Development Tech

PAB4Hh Palustrine Aquatic Bed

PAB4Hx Palustrine Aquatic Bed

PAB4Vx Palustrine Aquatic Bed

PABFx Palustrine Aquatic Bed

PABHh Palustrine Aquatic Bed

PABHx Palustrine Aquatic Bed

PABVx Palustrine Aquatic Bed

PAB/UBHx Palustrine Aquatic Bed

1.Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PAB4V Palustrine Aquatic BedPABF Palustrine Aquatic BedPABH Palustrine Aquatic Bed

G. Bottomland Hardwoods ‐ Riverine forested or occasionally shrub/scrub communities, usually occurring in floodplains, that are s

winter & spring). Typical species include oaks (overcup, water, laurel, swamp chestnut), sweet gum, hickories, cottonwoods, river b

cottonwoods, willows, river birch and occasionally pines (esp. loblolly).

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PFO1/SS1Cx Palustrine N/A Forested/ Scrub‐Shrub Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Seasonally Flo

PFO1Ax Palustrine N/A Forested Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Temporarily Fl

PSS1Ah Palustrine N/A Scrub‐Shrub Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Temporarily Fl

2. Non‐Disturbed
Port Bienville  Rail Alternatives Development Tech

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PFO1A Palustrine N/A Forested Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Temporarily Fl

PSS1A Palustrine N/A Scrub‐Shrub Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Temporarily Fl

PFO1/SS1A Palustrine N/A Forested/ Scrub‐Shrub Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Temporarily Fl

PFO1/SS1C Palustrine N/A Forested/ Scrub‐Shrub Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Seasonally Flo

H. Hardwood Swamp  ‐ Very poorly drained riverine or non‐riverine forested or occasionally shrub/scrub communities that are sem

including temporarily flooded depressional systems. Typical species include cypress, black gum, water tupelo, green ash and red m

Headwater Swamp as separate category denoting a wooded, riverine system occurring along first order streams. These include ha

communities with soil that is moist most of the year. Channels receive their water from overland flow and rarely overflow their ow

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PFO1S Palustrine N/A Forested Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Temporary T

PFO1Fx Palustrine N/A Forested Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Semi perman

Flooded 

2. Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PFO1C Palustrine N/A Forested Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Seasonally Flo
Port Bienville  Rail Alternatives Development Tech

L. Deciduous Shrub Swamps ‐ Usually an early successional stage of the wooded swamp community. These habitats are often the r

beaver ponds, or other disturbance. Plant species may include button bush, alder, red maple, sweet gum, or willow.

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PSS1Ch Palustrine N/A Scrub‐Shrub Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Seasonally Flo

PSS1Cx Palustrine N/A Scrub‐Shrub Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Seasonally Flo

PSS1Fx Palustrine N/A Scrub‐Shrub Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Semi perman

Flooded 

2. Non‐Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

PSS1C Palustrine N/A Scrub‐Shrub Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Seasonally Flo

PSS1F Palustrine N/A Scrub‐Shrub Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Semi perman

Flooded 

PSS1J Palustrine N/A Scrub‐Shrub Broad‐Leaved Deciduous Intermitten

Flooded 

V. Other ‐ Farmed Wetlands

1. Disturbed

NWI Code Ecological System Sub‐System Class Subclass Water‐Regi

Pf Palustrine 
Port Bienville Rail Alternatives Development

Technical Methodology Report

APPENDIX D

Data Sources
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

Category: EnvironmentalLayer Description Layer Name Feature Type Source ComThreatened & Endangered Species Not availableCritical Habitat Line, Polygon USFWS Not in Study AreaWetlands (NWI) Wetlands Polygon MARISWetlands Mitigation Sites wetland_mitig Polygon

NASA (Stennis), USACE

RIBITS, Wetlands SolutionsLLC

Prime Farmlands PrimeFarmland Polygon Geospatial Data Gateway (NRCS/USDA) Derived from soilsWater Bodies, Linear nhd_named_streams Line MARISWater Bodies, Linear nhd_othFL Line MARIS Other flow linesWater Bodies, Areal nhd_waterb Polygon MARISWater Bodies, Areal nhd_othareas Polygon MARIS Other areasFloodplain Floodplain Polygon NASA (Stennis Space Center)Landfills Landfill_cells Polygon NASA (Stennis Space Center) FOIA; only for SPCSurface Impoundment Areas SIA Point MARISHazardous Waste Sites hazardous_waste_sites Polygon NASA (Stennis Space Center) FOIARCRA Rcra Point MARISEPA Regulated Facilities Epa Point MARISTanks, Petroleum tanks_buff Point MARISToxic Release Inventory Sites TRI Point MARISUnderground Storage Tanks UST Point MARISCERCLA 2008 CERCLA2008 Point MARISCERCLA Site Areas CERCLA_Site_Areas Polygon NASA (Stennis Space Center) Covers all CERCLA Mines Mines Polygon MDEQ (provided list) Created polygons Source Water Protection Areas SWPA Polygon MDEQ
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

Category: Cultural and HistoricalLayer Description Layer Name Feature Type Source ComArchaeological Sites ArchSites Point NASA (Stennis Space Center) FOIA; only for SPCArchaeological Sites ArchSites_MDAH Point MDAHHistoric Properties HistProps_MDAH Point MDAHNational Registry Sites natreg Point MARISArchaeological Site Probability Arch_Prob Polygon NASA (Stennis Space Center) FOIA; only for SPCCemeteries Cemetery Polygon MARISChurches Churches Polygon MARISRecreation Sites mri Polygon MARISLand Use LandUse Polygon Geospatial Data Gateway (NRCS/USDA)INFRASTRUCTURE Layer Name Type Source ComRoads Roads_TIGER Line TIGERRailroads rail_lines Line NTAD 2012Dams Dams Point MARISAirports AirportStennis Polygon NTAD 2012 Polygons created 

photography

Wells, Oil & Gas oilngas Point MARISWells, Water (USGS) USGS_Wells Point MARISWells, Water (Dept of Health) DoHWells Point MARISPipelines, Natural Gas NatGasPipelines Line Stennis Space Center FOIA; only for SPCGas msgas Line MARISTransmission Lines, major majr_transm10 Line MARISPower Lines PowerLines Line NASA (Stennis Space Center) FOIA; only for SPCWater Utility Lines WaterUtility Line NASA (Stennis Space Center)Wastewater Utility Lines WastewaterUtility Line NASA (Stennis Space Center)JURISDICTIONS Layer Name Type Source ComStennis Fee Area Boundary Stennis Space Center Polygon Stennis Space Center FOIA requestStennis Buffer Zone Stennis Space Center Polygon Stennis Space Center FOIA request
Port Bienville Rail Alternatives Development

Technical Methodology Report

APPENDIX E

Data Used in AART Analyses
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

Base Rankings 

ENVIRONMENTAL Feature Class Name Feature Type Category Include? Ranking Buffer (ft) 

Wetlands (NWI) Wetlands A Yes

Estuarine and Marine

Deepwater

Bay (N) E1UBL Yes AvoidBay (D) E1UBLx Yes Avoid

Estuarine and Marine Wetland

Scrub Marsh (N) E2EM1/SS1P Yes 9

E2SS1/EM1P Yes 9E2SS1P Yes 9

Scrub Marsh (D) E2EM1/SS1Pd Yes 6

E2SS1Pd Yes 6

Tidal Marsh (N) E2EM1N Yes Avoid

E2EM1P Yes Avoid

Tidal Marsh (D) E2EM1Nd Yes Avoid

E2EM1Pd Yes Avoid

Tidal Flat (N) E2USN Yes Avoid

E2USP Yes Avoid

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

Bottomland Hardwood (N) PEM1/FO1F Yes 7

PEM1/FO1S Yes 7PFO1/EM1B Yes 7PFO1/EM1C Yes 7PFO1/EM1F Yes 7PFO1/SS1A Yes 7PFO1/SS1B Yes 7PFO1/SS1C Yes 7PFO1/SS1F Yes 7

Base Rankings 
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

ENVIRONMENTAL Feature Class Name Feature Type Category Include? Ranking Buffer (ft) 

Bottomland Hardwood (N) PFO1/SS1T Yes 7

PFO1/SS3B Yes 7PFO1/SS3C Yes 7PFO1/SS4A Yes 7PFO1/SS4B Yes 7PFO1/SS4C Yes 7PFO1A Yes 7PFO1B Yes 7PFO1C Yes 7PFO1E Yes 7PFO1F Yes 7

PFO1R Yes 7PFO1S Yes 7PFO1T Yes 7

Bottomland Hardwood (D) PFO1/SS1Ad Yes 6

PFO1Ad Yes 6PFO1As Yes 6PFO1Bd Yes 6PFO1Cd Yes 6PFO1Fd Yes 6PFO1Fx Yes 6PFO1Sd Yes 6

Freshwater Marsh (N) PEM1/SS1B Yes 9

PEM1/SS1F Yes 9PEM1/SS1R Yes 9PEM1/SS1T Yes 9PEM1/SS3B Yes 9PEM1/SS4B Yes 9PEM1/SS4E Yes 9PEM1/SS4R Yes 9
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

Base Rankings 

ENVIRONMENTAL Feature Class Name Feature Type Category Include? Ranking Buffer (ft) 

Freshwater Marsh (N) PEM1B Yes 9

PEM1F Yes 9PEM1R Yes 9PEM1S Yes 9PEM1T Yes 9

Freshwater Marsh (D) PEM1/SS3Bd Yes 6

PEM1/SS3Fx Yes 6PEM1Ax Yes 6PEM1Bd Yes 6PEM1Fh Yes 6PEM1Fx Yes 6PEM1Kh Yes 6PEM1Sd Yes 6PEM1Td Yes 6

Savannah (N) PEM1/SS1A Yes 9

PEM1/SS1C Yes 9PEM1/SS3C Yes 9PEM1/SS4C Yes 9PEM1A Yes 9PEM1C Yes 9

Savannah (D) PEM1/SS1Cx Yes 6

PEM1/SS4Cd Yes 6PEM1Cd Yes 6PEM1Cx Yes 6

Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland

Forested Swamp (N) PFO1/2C Yes 7 

PFO1/2F Yes 7 PFO1/2R Yes 7 PFO1/2S Yes 7 PFO1/2T Yes 7 
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

PFO1/3A Yes 7 

Base Rankings 

ENVIRONMENTAL Feature Class Name Feature Type Category Include? Ranking Buffer (ft) 

Forested Swamp (N) PFO1/3B Yes 7 

PFO1/3C Yes 7 PFO1/3F Yes 7 PFO1/4A Yes 7 PFO1/4B Yes 7 PFO1/4C Yes 7 PFO1/4E Yes 7 PFO1/4F Yes 7 PFO1/4R Yes 7 PFO1/4S Yes 7 

PFO2/1C Yes 7 PFO2/1F Yes 7 PFO2/1R Yes 7 PFO2/4B Yes 7 PFO2/4C Yes 7 PFO2/EM1F Yes 7 PFO2B Yes 7 PFO2F Yes 7 PFO2R Yes 7 PFO3/1A Yes 7 PFO3/1B Yes 7 PFO3/1C Yes 7 PFO3/4B Yes 7 PFO3/EM1B Yes 7 PFO3B Yes 7 PFO3C Yes 7 PFO4/1A Yes 7 PFO4/1B Yes 7 PFO4/1C Yes 7 
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

PFO4/1R Yes 7 PFO4/1S Yes 7 

Base Rankings 

ENVIRONMENTAL Feature Class Name Feature Type Category Include? Ranking Buffer (ft) 

Forested Swamp (N) PFO4/3A Yes 7 

PFO4/3B Yes 7 PFO4/EM1B Yes 7 PFO4/EM1C Yes 7 PFO4/SS1B Yes 7 PFO4/SS1C Yes 7 PFO4/SS3B Yes 7 PFO4/SS4A Yes 7 PFO4/SS4B Yes 7 PFO4/SS4C Yes 7 PFO4/SS4R Yes 7 PFO4A Yes 7 PFO4B Yes 7 PFO4C Yes 7 PFO4F Yes 7 PFO4R Yes 7 PEM1/FO3B Yes 7 PEM1/FO4B Yes 7 PEM1/FO4C Yes 7 

Forested Swamp (D) PFO1/2Fb Yes 6 

PFO1/3Bd Yes 6 PFO1/3Cd Yes 6 PFO1/4Ad Yes 6 PFO1/4Bd Yes 6 PFO1/4Cd Yes 6 PFO2/1Fd Yes 6 PFO3/1Cd Yes 6 PFO4/1Ad Yes 6 PFO4/1Bd Yes 6 
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

PFO4/1Cd Yes 6 PFO4/3Bd Yes 6 

Base Rankings 

ENVIRONMENTAL Feature Class Name Feature Type Category Include? Ranking Buffer (ft) 

Forested Swamp (D) PFO4Ad Yes 6 

PFO4Bd Yes 6 PFO4Cd Yes 6 

Shrub Swamp (N) PSS1/2C Yes 5 

PSS1/2F Yes 5 PSS1/2R Yes 5 PSS1/2T Yes 5 PSS1/3B Yes 5 PSS1/3C Yes 5 PSS1/4A Yes 5 PSS1/4B Yes 5 PSS1/4C Yes 5 PSS1/4F Yes 5 PSS1/4R Yes 5 PSS1/4S Yes 5 PSS1/EM1A Yes 5 PSS1/EM1B Yes 5 PSS1/EM1C Yes 5 PSS1/EM1R Yes 5 PSS1/EM1S Yes 5 PSS1/EM1T Yes 5 PSS1/FO1R Yes 5 PSS1/FO1S Yes 5 PSS1/FO2F Yes 5 PSS1/FO4A Yes 5 PSS1/FO4B Yes 5 PSS1/FO4C Yes 5 PSS1/FO4R Yes 5 PSS1A Yes 5 
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

PSS1B Yes 5 PSS1C Yes 5 

Base Rankings 

ENVIRONMENTAL Feature Class Name Feature Type Category Include? Ranking Buffer (ft) 

Shrub Swamp (N) PSS1F Yes 5 

PSS1R Yes 5 PSS1S Yes 5 PSS1T Yes 5 PSS3/1B Yes 5 PSS3/1C Yes 5 PSS3/4B Yes 5 PSS3/EM1B Yes 5 PSS3/EM1C Yes 5 PSS3/FO1C Yes 5 PSS3/FO4B Yes 5 PSS3B Yes 5 PSS3C Yes 5 PSS4/1A Yes 5 PSS4/1B Yes 5 PSS4/1C Yes 5 PSS4/3B Yes 5 PSS4/EM1A Yes 5 PSS4/EM1C Yes 5 PSS4/FO4C Yes 5 PSS4A Yes 5 PSS4B Yes 5 PSS4C Yes 5 PSS4F Yes 5 PSS4R Yes 5 PSS4S Yes 5 PSS5F Yes 5 

Shrub Swamp (D) PSS1/3Bd Yes 4 

PSS1/4Bd Yes 4 
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

PSS1/4Cd Yes 4 PSS1/FO1Bd Yes 4 

Base Rankings 

ENVIRONMENTAL Feature Class Name Feature Type Category Include? Ranking Buffer (ft) 

Shrub Swamp (D) PSS1/FO1Cx Yes 4 

PSS1Cb Yes 4 PSS1Cd Yes 4 PSS1Ch Yes 4 PSS1Cx Yes 4 PSS1Fh Yes 4 PSS1Fx Yes 4 PSS1Td Yes 4 PSS3Cd Yes 4 PSS3Fx Yes 4 PSS4/1Bd Yes 4 PSS4/1Cd Yes 4 PSS4/1Cx Yes 4 PSS5Fx Yes 4 

Freshwater Pond

Aquatic Bed (N) PAB4V Yes 7

PABF Yes 7PABH Yes 7

Aquatic Bed (D) PAB/UBHx Yes 5

PAB4Hh Yes 5PAB4Hx Yes 5PAB4Vx Yes 5PABFx Yes 5PABHh Yes 5PABHx Yes 5PABVx Yes 5

Pond (N) PUBH Yes 5

PUBV Yes 5

Pond (D) PUBFx Yes 4
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

PUBHh Yes 4PUBHx Yes 4

Base Rankings 

ENVIRONMENTAL Feature Class Name Feature Type Category Include? Ranking Buffer (ft) 

Pond (D) PUBVh Yes 4

PUBVx Yes 4PUSAx Yes 4PUSCx Yes 4

PUBVh Yes 4PUBVx Yes 4PUSAx Yes 4PUSCx Yes 4

Lake

Lake (D) L1ABHx Yes 9

L1UBHx Yes 9

Riverine

Tidal River (N) R1UBV Yes AvoidTidal River (D) R1UBVx Yes AvoidRiver (N) R2UBH Yes 7 

R2US2C Yes 7 R2USA Yes 7 R2USC Yes 7 

River (D) R2UBHx Yes 7 

Other

Wetlands Mitigation Sites wetland_mitig A Yes 9Prime Farmlands PrimeFarmland A

Prime Farmland Yes 4Statewide Importance Yes 4Prime if drained No

Prime if drained &

protected No

Water Bodies, Linear

nhd_named_streams

L Quantify 
Feasibility Study Port Bienville Railroad  Alternatives Developme

Water Bodies, Linear nhd_othFL L Quantify Streams, 303d Streams_303d L QuantifyWater Bodies, Areal nhd_waterb A Yes 9 

Base Rankings 

ENVIRONMENTAL Feature Class Name Feature Type Category Include? Ranking Buffer (ft) 

Water Bodies, Areal nhd_othareas A Quantify Landfills Landfill_cells A Yes 9Surface Impoundment Areas SIA_buff P Yes 9 500Hazardous Waste Sites

hazardous_waste_sites A Yes Avoid

RCRA rcra_buff P Yes Avoid 100EPA epa_buff P Yes Avoid 100Tanks tanks_buff P Yes Avoid 100Toxic Release Inventory tri_buff P Yes Avoid 100Underground Storage Tanks UST_buff P Yes Avoid 100CERCLA 2008 CERCLA2008_buff P Yes Avoid 100CERCLA Site Areas CERCLA_Site_Areas A Yes AvoidMines Mines A Yes Avoid 300


P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | i

Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1

Project Description...................................................................................................................................................................1

Study Area ....................................................................................................................................................................................1

Alternatives Analysis ...............................................................................................................................................................1

Phase 1 – Feasibility Alternatives ............................................................................................ 2

Phase 2 - Initial Alternatives Screening.................................................................................... 4

Evaluation Measures............................................................................................................... 4

Similar/Competing Segment Analysis...................................................................................... 5

Segments 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 2c, 3 and 4...................................................................................................................................5

Summary ..........................................................................................................................................................................10

Segments 6a and 6b Analysis ............................................................................................................................................11

Summary ..........................................................................................................................................................................14

Segments 8a and 8b Analysis ............................................................................................................................................14

Summary ..........................................................................................................................................................................17

Segments 10a and 10b Analysis.......................................................................................................................................17

Summary ..........................................................................................................................................................................20

Conclusion (Reasonable Alternatives).................................................................................... 20

Addendum to the Port Bienville Phase 2 – Southern Segment Comparison ........................... 22

Concerns with the Reasonable Alternatives in the South .....................................................................................22

Segment Refinements...........................................................................................................................................................23

Evaluation of the Southern Segments............................................................................................................................27

Summary ..........................................................................................................................................................................29

Conclusion (Recommended Segments)........................................................................................................................30
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | ii

List of Tables

Table 1: Comparison Matrix for Combined Segments.............................................................................................. 9

Table 2: Comparison Matrix for Segments 6a and 6b ............................................................................................13

Table 3: Comparison Matrix for Segments 8a and 8b ............................................................................................16

Table 4: Comparison Matrix for Segments 10a and 10b .......................................................................................19

Table A- 1: Southern Refined Segments Comparison Matrix ..............................................................................27

List of Figures

Figure 1: Corridor Segments............................................................................................................................................... 3

Figure 2: Potential Route Combinations........................................................................................................................ 7

Figure 3: Segments 6a and 6b ..........................................................................................................................................12

Figure 4: Segments 8a and 8b ..........................................................................................................................................15

Figure 5: Segments 10a and 10 b....................................................................................................................................18

Figure 6: Reasonable Alternatives..................................................................................................................................21

Figure A- 1: Segment 1a and Segment d.......................................................................................................................25

Figure A- 2: Segment 2b and Segment c.......................................................................................................................26

Figure A- 3: Segments 1a, 2b, C and Segment d .......................................................................................................28

Figure A- 4: Reasonable Alternative..............................................................................................................................31
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 1

Introduction

Project Description

Mississippi Department of Transportation, in coordination with Federal Railroad Administration 

(FRA), conducted a Feasibility Study and is pursuing the appropriate Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) for the location of a new railroad line to connect the Port of Bienville Short Line 

Railroad, located at the Port Bienville Industrial Park (Port), Hancock County, with the Norfolk 

Southern Railroad in the vicinity of Nicholson in Pearl River County. 

The goal of this project is to identify feasible alternatives and to obtain an approved environmental 

document for the preferred location of this proposed rail line. This project includes two phases. The 

first phase, Phase 1, determined the feasibility of constructing and operating the rail line, 

reasonable alternative corridors for consideration, and the economic benefits including potential 

funding sources. The second phase, Phase 2, includes the preparation of an environmental impact 

statement based on the known existing conditions to determine potential human and natural 

environment impacts of the project.

Study Area

The study area, in general, encompasses a portion of Hancock and Pearl River Counties. The project 

study area is generally bounded by Nicholson to the north, Port Bienville Industrial Park to the 

south, the Pearl River to the west, and Stennis International Airport and Kiln to the east, 

representing a study area of approximately 180 square miles. The proposed railway corridor is 

expected to be approximately 24 miles in length.

Alternatives Analysis 

A key milestone in the EIS process is identification of a range of reasonable alternatives to be 

evaluated. The No Build Alternative, as required by NEPA, will serve as the basis for comparison of 

the environmental impacts of build or action alternatives in the EIS.

The purpose of this report is to detail the process by which the project team developed initial 

corridors for the proposed project through Phase 1, the Feasibility Study, refined the range 

alternatives from 1,000 foot corridors to 200 foot alternatives, and screened alternatives using GIS 

to determine the range of reasonable alternatives, as required by NEPA, that would be further 

evaluated in the EIS.

The complete alternatives development process will be summarized in the Alternatives chapter of 

the EIS and this report will be included as an Appendix of the EIS.
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 2

Phase 1 – Feasibility Alternatives

During Phase 1, Feasibility Study, the selection of alternatives included the use of an automated tool 

to assist and accelerate the identification and evaluation of the preliminary build alternatives. The 

Alignment Alternatives Research Tool (AART) is a series of GIS-based spatial analysis functions 

designed to route conceptual alignments among the various natural and human resources within a 

project study area. The tool is capable of running numerous alignment scenarios to produce 

alternatives that avoid and minimize impacts upon the natural and human environment. The AART 

is combined with limited field reconnaissance and data validation, engineering design criteria, and 

review by the project team to efficiently evaluate many preliminary alternatives within a large 

study area.

The alternatives are developed through a simple “avoidance and minimization” approach. This 

approach allows the project team, which includes experts in various fields, to efficiently assess 

resources within the project boundaries. Sensitive site-specific resources can be set as avoids, and 

weighted values (1-9) given for other various types of resources that have been mapped to the grid 

cells in the study area. The tool routes alignments between user-selected endpoints through an 

artificial “terrain” comprised of areas of value and unique site-specific resources. Areas that have 

been set as avoids are automatically avoided while locating a path that minimizes impacts to the 

remaining resources. 

The AART is designed to route conceptual alignments among the various natural and human 

resources within a study area. The program allows users to interactively weight geographic 

features and attributes collected from public and project‐derived databases. Individual data layers 

are assigned rankings to provide criteria for the AART to create a path of least impact. Areas that 

are ranked low, such as less sensitive resources, are used over a highly sensitive resource. The 

desired corridor width is then applied and the environmental and cultural impacts of the corridor 

are calculated. The AART is used to summarize the impacts for each alternative alignment and 

display a potential alignment for each model run. In summary, the “corridors” are developed 

through a simple “opportunities and constraints” approach. 

For the project, the AART was used to develop approximately 90 alignments through the study 

area. Impacts were summarized based on the refined 1,000‐foot wide corridors. The impacts within 

these 1,000‐foot wide corridors and the initial cost estimates for the engineered alignments were 

used for comparing one alternative to another and further refinement. 

To further define the Reasonable Alternatives, the study team divided these corridors into 

segments, as identified in Figure 1. At the conclusion of Phase 1, these 17 segments represent a 

possible combination of 40 potential alternatives. Please see further details about the development 

of alternatives in Phase 1, in the Port Bienville Rail Feasibility Study and Alternatives Development 

Technical Methodology, located online at www.gomdot.com. 
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 3

FIGURE 1: CORRIDOR SEGMENTS
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 4

Phase 2 - Initial Alternatives Screening

At the initiation of the Phase 2 Alternatives Analysis, there were 40 potential alternatives carried 

forward from Phase 1. To determine which alternatives would be further evaluated in the EIS, the 

alignments from the AART were refined as described below and the project team performed further 

screenings of the segments. 

The Phase 2 screenings began with initial field site investigations and review of color infrared aerial 

photography in order to update and refine wetland boundaries from the National Wetland 

Inventory (NWI) mapping, which was used during Phase 1. As a result, the NWI mapping file was 

updated within a 1,000-foot wide corridor along each segment. Based on these initial field efforts, 

most of the segments were found to contain more wetlands than what is shown on the NWI 

mapping.

A cultural resources predictive model study was performed to identify high, medium, and low 

probability areas for potential archaeological resources. The results of this study were mapped in a 

GIS file and added to the project database. Additionally, new GIS data files of the study area were 

obtained and added to the database of information. A re-quantification of impacts for each segment 

was prepared utilizing this updated and more detailed information. 

Following the update of all GIS data for the study area, the segment corridor widths were refined to 

200 feet centered about the centerline of each segment. It is anticipated that the right-of-way for 

the new rail bed would be less than a 100 feet; therefore, a 200-foot-wide corridor assessment was 

used to more accurately reflect potential impacts. Impacts for each segment were recalculated 

using the AART.

Although the available data are meaningful for planning purposes only, the quantities demonstrate 

a potential magnitude of impact. Each alternative has advantages and disadvantages in the areas of

engineering, environmental, operations, cost, and other associated factors.

Evaluation Measures

Evaluation measures were also identified and used to compare similar (competing) segments

located along parallel alignments. These measures were divided into 4 sections as follows: 

Engineering Criteria, Natural Features, Man-made Features and Infrastructure. To standardize the 

comparison, the segments were compared from common connection points. For some comparisons, 

segments were combined, but in all cases they were compared equally from a common beginning 

and ending point.

 Engineering Criteria - The engineering factors were calculated based upon the 

preliminary alignment geometry for each segment, and comparison to aerial 

photography and GIS data. The engineering factors considered for comparison include 

the following:

– Alignment Information - The alignment statistics include total length of the new 

alignment, length of existing Norfolk Southern (NS) spur line utilized, length of 
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 5

existing Port Bienville Railroad (PBVR) utilized east of beginning point of Segment 

2a, the number of new at-grade crossings on paved roadways and the estimated 

total length of bridges/trestles over wetlands.

– Implementation Cost - After the alignments were developed, preliminary cost 

estimates were prepared for the railroad design, right-of-way acquisition and 

construction. Unit costs were derived from average cost history for similar 

construction. Separate estimates were developed for upgrade of the existing rail bed 

between Stennis Space Center (SSC) and Nicholson for the segments that 

incorporate this section of NS rail line. 

 Natural Features - The Natural Features were summarized for each segment based 

upon the preliminary rail alignments and a corridor width of 200 feet centered along 

these alignments. The Natural Features were determined from GIS data.

– The Natural Features include the acres of wetlands, the acres of wetland Mitigation 

Bank, wetland shading associated with trestle bridges over wetlands, the number of 

stream crossings, the total length of crossings and the estimated mitigation cost for 

these crossings.

 Man-made Features – Most of the study area is undeveloped because of the building 

restrictions on the land within the SSC acoustical buffer zone. These restrictions 

prohibit the construction of any habitable buildings. However, other man-made features 

are allowed and were considered when comparing segments. Additionally, the very 

northern portion of the study area and the very southern portion of the study area lie 

outside of the acoustical buffer zone. The man-made features include acres of hazardous 

material sites, acres of farmland (prime, prime if drained, and statewide importance), 

acres of open pit mines and properties with mining permits, acres of former military 

bombing ranges, and acres of potential archaeological sites.

 Infrastructure – The final category of features taken into consideration when 

comparing segments included existing Infrastructure. The uniqueness of the SSC 

acoustical buffer zone greatly limits the type and number of infrastructure within the 

study area. This category includes numbers of major utilities such as power 

transmission lines and natural gas pipelines that may be crossed by segments and acres 

of water supply wells that may encounter proximity impacts. 

Similar/Competing Segment Analysis

Segments 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 2c, 3 and 4

South of US 90/Chef Menteur Highway are the 7 segments that represent the southernmost portion 

of the study area. The majority of these segments are located outside of the SSC acoustical buffer 

zone. These segments, when combined, represent 5 potential routes that would provide the first 

section of the new rail alignment to connect the PBVR, north through Hancock and Pearl River 

Counties to the NS railroad line in Nicholson, MS (See Figure 2). The segments were combined in 

order to create 5 alignments that could be compared equally. 
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 6

Three of these potential routes, each beginning with Segment 2, would connect with the PBVR 

approximately 1.64 miles east of the entrance to the Port Bienville Industrial Park. The other 2 

potential routes, each beginning with Segment 1a, would connect with the PBVR approximately 

2.64 miles east of the Port Bienville Industrial Park. The eastern route combinations would utilize 1 

additional mile of the existing PBVR rail line, making the total length longer than the routes that 

begin to the west. No cost or environmental impacts have been identified with this additional track

length since it is an existing track, in good working condition, which would not require upgrade or 

modification.

Segment 5 would be the common northern junction point for all five of these southernmost

potential routes. During the Phase 1 evaluation these routes were found to have similar potential 

environmental impacts and costs; therefore, as none of the possible routes stood out as a preferred

option, it was recommended that they all be carried forward to Phase 2 for further investigation. 

The five potential route combinations, which were created by combining the Phase 1 segments, are 

shown in Figure 2:

 1a + 1b + 3

 1a + 4

 2a + 3

 2b

 2c and+ 3

These potential route combinations are described below.

Segments 1a+ 1b+ 3 begin with what would become the southern terminus of the new location rail 

line, Segment 1a, which starts approximately 2.64 miles east of where Lower Bay Road crosses the 

PBVR tracks. Segment 1a extends north and crosses Old Lower Bay Road approximately 0.2 mile 

east of a mine/quarry site. Approximately 0.2 mile north of Old Lower Bay Road, Segment 1a meets 

Segment 1b, which extends in a northwesterly direction paralleling an unimproved roadway. 

Segment 1b then connects to Segment 3, which extends northwesterly until it curves to the 

northeast before connecting to Segment 5. Due to the location and type of wetland crossings, some 

trestle-bridging is anticipated along this potential route. The total length for the three segments is 

2.55 miles. The additional 1 mile of track usage along the existing PBVR totals 3.55 miles for this 

potential route. 

Segments 1a + 4 begin at the PBVR tracks extending north with what would become the southern 

terminus of the new location rail line. Segment 1a starts approximately 2.64 miles east of where 

Lower Bay Road crosses the PBVR tracks. Segment 1a extends north and crosses Old Lower Bay 

Road approximately 0.2 mile east of a mine/quarry site. Once it crosses Old Lower Bay Road, 

Segment 1a connects to Segment 4, which parallels Segments 1b and 3 to the west. Segment 4 then 

turns to the northeast to connect to Segment 5. Due to the location and type of wetlands being 

crossed, some trestle-bridging is anticipated along this potential route. The total length for the two 

segments is 2.56 miles. The additional 1 mile of track usage along the existing PBVR totals 3.56 

miles for this potential route.
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 7

FIGURE 2: POTENTIAL ROUTE COMBINATIONS
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 8

Segments 2a + 3 begin at the PBVR short line, but 1 mile closer to the Port Bienville Industrial 

Park. Segment 2a extends north for approximately 1 mile, then turns northeast and crosses Old 

Lower Bay Road, then turns northwest to connect to Segment 3. Segment 3 extends northwesterly 

until it curves to the northeast to connect to Segment 5. Due to the location and type of wetlands 

being crossed, some trestle-bridging is anticipated along this potential route. The total length for 

this potential route is 2.59 miles. 

Segment 2b also begins at the PBVR short line, closer to the Port Bienville Industrial Park. Segment 

2b extends north for approximately 1.5 miles. After crossing Old Lower Bay Road, the segment 

turns northeast for 0.5 mile before turning north again to connect to Segment 5. Due to the location 

and type of wetlands being crossed, some trestle-bridging is anticipated along this potential route. 

The total length of this potential route is 2.47 miles.

Segments 2c + 3 also begin at the PBVR short line, close to the Port Bienville Industrial Park. 

Segment 2c extends in a northeasterly direction, and crosses Old Lower Bay Road west of a 

mine/quarry site. Its alignment meanders in an "S" shape as it extends to connect to Segment 3. 

Segment 3 extends northwesterly until it curves to the northeast before connecting to Segment 5. 

Due to the location and type of wetlands being crossed, some trestle-bridging is anticipated along 

this potential route. The total length of this potential route is 2.59 miles.

Table 1 contains a side by side comparison of the alignments.
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 9

TABLE 1: COMPARISON MATRIX FOR COMBINED SEGMENTS

Description Unit of 

Measure

Segment(s)

1a+1b+3 1a+4 2a+3 2b 2c +3

ENGINEERING CRITERIA

Total Length Miles 2.55 2.56 2.59 2.47 2.59

Length Utilizing the Existing NS 

Rail Bed Miles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Length Utilizing the Existing 

PBVR east of 2a, 2b & 2c Miles 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

New At-Grade Rail Crossings 

(Paved Roads)

# of 

Crossings 1 1 1 1 1

Estimated Length of Wetland 

Bridging LF 430 430 430 430 430

Total Estimated 

Implementation Cost (1) $ Millions $10.87 $10.99 $11.58 $11.39 $11.44

NATURAL FEATURES

Wetland Impacts (2) Acreage 29.03 31.57 41.60 42.57 35.48

Shading Impacts Acreage 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15

Cost of Wetland Mitigation (3) $60K per 

acre @ 50% $870,900 $947,100 $1,248,000 $1,277,100 $1,064,400

Proposed Texas Flat Mitigation 

Bank Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Cost of Mitigating Impacts to 

Mitigation Bank

$120K per 

acre @ 50% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Streams 303(d)/TMDL's # of 

Crossings 0 0 0 0 0

Streams 303(d)/TMDL's Length 

(miles) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Stream Crossings # of 

Crossings 0 0 1 1 1

Total Stream Impacts Feet 0 0 265 250 290

Cost of Streams Mitigation (3)

$200 per 

linear feet @ 

50%

$0 $0 $26,500 $25,000 $29,000

MAN-MADE FEATURES

MDEQ CERCLA/Haz Mat sites Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Archaeological Sites

High Probability Acreage 28.21 27.75 17.66 13.87 15.59

Medium Probability Acreage 14.76 13.05 19.96 17.24 26.74

Farmland (Prime) Acreage 1.49 1.49 0.00 0.00 0.28

Farmland (Prime if Drained) Acreage 18.38 18.84 22.37 19.05 22.59

Farmland (Statewide 

Importance) Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mines Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.78 2.26

Bombing Ranges Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

INFRASTRUCTURE

Water Wells Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Transmission Line Crossings # 0 0 0 0 0

Gas Line Crossings # 0 0 0 0 0

(1) Cost Estimates updated in October 2015

(2) Wetland Impacts are based on NWI Mapping & Ground Truthing performed in the Spring 2015

(3) Cost assumes a 100 foot wide rail bed
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 10

Summary

During Phase 1, it was deemed prudent to consider two possible tie-in locations along the PBVR. 

Two tie-in locations would provide an alternative route in the event that constraints and/or 

significant concerns from an agency or tribal consultation were identified at one location. In moving 

forward with the Phase 2 analysis, this same philosophy carries through the comparison of 

segments. The first connection point with PBVR includes Segments 2a, 2b and 2c, which are located 

approximately 1.64 miles east of the entrance to the Port Bienville Industrial Park. The second

connection point with PBVR is located approximately 2.64 miles east of the entrance to the Port 

Bienville Industrial Park and begins as Segment 1a.

In keeping with the intent to evaluate two possible tie-in locations along the PBVR, the following 

summary provides the advantages and disadvantages of these combined southernmost segments.

This summary is provided for both an eastern tie-in location and a western tie-in location.

Segments beginning with 1a (eastern tie-in)

The following is a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of Segments 1a+1b+3 as 

compared to Segments 1a+4.

 Advantages of 1a+1b+3 are as follows:

 Less costly implementation ($0.12 million less )

 Has the least wetland impacts (2.54 acres less and $76,200 lower mitigation costs)

 Less potential impact to Farmland (Prime if Drained) (0.46-acre less)

 Slightly shorter overall length (0.01-mile shorter)

 Disadvantages of 1a+1b+3 are as follows:

 Higher potential of CR impacts (0.46-acre more “High Probability” impact and 1.71 

acres more “Medium Probability” impacts)

Segments beginning with 2a, 2b and 2c (western tie-in)

The following is a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of Segment 2b as compared to 

Segments 2a+3 and Segments 2c+3.

 Advantages of 2b are as follows:

 Slightly shorter overall length (0.12-mile shorter).

 Less costly implementation ($0.19 million less than Segments 2a+3 and $0.05 million 

less than Segments 2c+3)

 Lower stream impacts (15 linear feet less stream crossings than Segments 2a+3 and 40 

linear feet less stream crossings than Segments 2c+3)
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 11

 Less overall potential of CR impacts (3.79 acre less “High Probability” impact than 

Segments 2a+3 and 1.72 acres less than Segments 2c+3; 2.72 acres less “Medium 

Probability” impacts than Segments 2a+3 and 9.5 acres less than Segments 2c+3)

 Less potential impact to Farmland (0.28-acre less to Prime than 2c+3 and 3.32 acres less 

to Prime if Drained than Segments 2a+3 and 3.54 less than Segments 2c+3)

 Disadvantages of 2b are as follows:

 Higher impact to wetlands (0.97 acres more than Segments 2a+3 and $29,100 

additional mitigation costs; 7.09 acres more than Segments 2c+3 and $212,700 

additional mitigation costs)

 Higher potential to impact mines (3.52 acres more than Segments 2c+3 and 5.78 acres 

more than Segments 2a+3)

Based on the analysis above Segments 1a+4, Segments 2a+3, and Segments 2c+3 are eliminated 

from further study.

Segments 6a and 6b Analysis 

Segments 6a and 6b are in the southern portion of the study area, south of US 90/Chef Menteur 

Hwy. They are essentially parallel segments, with Segment 6a being located more easterly. Both 

segments begin at the northern end of Segment 5 and extend due north to meet the southern node 

of Segment 7. During the Phase I evaluation the segments were found to have similar potential 

impacts and costs; therefore, as neither segment stood out as a preferred option, it was 

recommended that they both be carried forward to Phase 2 for further investigation. 

Segment 6a begins at the northern terminus of Segment 5, extending north between Old Lower 

Bay Road and ending south of US 90/Chef Menteur Hwy, for approximately 0.92-mile before 

connecting to Segment 7. The segment parallels a utility corridor on the east for most of its length. 

Potential impacts include archaeological sites and water wells, farmland, and wetlands, which 

includes shading impacts. Due to the location and type of wetlands crossed, some trestle-bridging is 

anticipated.

Segment 6b also begins at the northern terminus of Segment 5, extending north between Old 

Lower Bay Road and ending south of US 90/Chef Menteur Hwy, for approximately 0.92-mile before 

connecting to Segment 7. Similar to Segment 6a, Segment 6b parallels the same utility corridor but 

on the west side for most of its length. The segment impacts potential archaeological sites and 

water wells, farmland, and wetlands, which includes shading impacts. Due to the location and type 

of wetlands crossed, some trestle-bridging is anticipated.

See Figure 3. 

Table 2 contains a side by side comparison of Segments 6a and 6b.
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 12

FIGURE 3: SEGMENTS 6A AND 6B
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 13

TABLE 2: COMPARISON MATRIX FOR SEGMENTS 6A AND 6B

Description Unit of Measure

Segment

6a 6b

ENGINEERING CRITERIA

Total Length Miles 0.92 0.92

Length Utilizing the Existing NS Rail Bed Miles 0.00 0.00

Length Utilizing the Existing PBVR 

east of 2a, 2b & 2c Miles 0.00 0.00

New At-Grade Rail Crossings (Paved Roads) # of Crossings 0 0

Est. Length of Wetland Bridging LF 587 1,500

Total Estimated Implementation Cost (1) $ Millions $7.25 $14.47

NATURAL FEATURES

Wetland Impacts (2) Acreage 11.02 16.51

Shading Impacts Acreage 0.20 0.52

Cost of Wetland Mitigation (3) $60K per acre @ 50% $330,600 $495,300

Proposed Texas Flat Mitigation Bank Acreage 0.00 0.00

Cost of Mitigating Impacts to Mitigation Bank $120K per acre @ 50% $0 $0

Streams 303(d)/TMDL's # of Crossings 0 0

Streams 303(d)/TMDL's Length (miles) 0.00 0.00

Stream Crossings # of Crossings 0 0

Total Stream Impacts Feet 0 0

Cost of Stream Mitigation (3) $200 per linear feet @ 50% $0 $0

MAN-MADE FEATURES

MDEQ CERCLA/Haz Mat sites Acreage 0.00 0.00

Potential Archaeological Sites

High Probability Acreage 0.03 0.61

Medium Probability Acreage 2.85 5.98

Farmland (Prime) Acreage 0.00 0.00

Farmland (Prime if Drained) Acreage 12.52 11.95

Farmland (Statewide Importance) Acreage 0.00 0.00

Mines Acreage 0.00 0.00

Bombing Ranges Acreage 0.00 0.00

INFRASTRUCTURE

Water Wells Acreage 0.72 0.72

Transmission Line Crossings # 0 0

Gas Line Crossings # 0 0

(1) Cost Estimates updated in October 2015

(2) Wetland Impacts are based on NWI Mapping & Ground Truthing performed in the Spring 2015

(3) Cost assumes a 100 foot wide rail bed
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 14

Summary

The following is a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of Segment 6a as compared to 6b.

 The advantages of 6a are as follows:

– Less costly implementation ($7.2 M less than 6b, approximately half the total 

implementation cost)

– Less wetland impacts (6.0 acres less)

– Less probability of overall CR impacts (0.58-acre less “High Probability” impact and 

3.31 acres less “Medium Probability” impact)

– Less wetland shading impacts (0.32-acre less)

– Less wetland mitigation cost ($164,700 less)

– Less length of wetland bridging (913 LF less of bridge)

 Disadvantages of 6a are as follows:

– Higher potential for “Farmland (Prime if Drained) impacts (0.57-acre more than 6b)

Based on the analysis above, Segment 6b is eliminated from further study.

Segments 8a and 8b Analysis

Segments 8a and 8b are in the central portion of the study area, to the east of the Texas Flat 

Mitigation Site. They are essentially parallel segments, with Segment 8a containing a curve and 

being located more easterly. Both segments begin at the northern end of Segment 7 and extend 

northwest to meet at the southern junction of Segment 9 (See Figure 4). During the Phase I 

evaluation these segments were found to have similar potential impacts and costs; therefore, as 

neither segment stood out as a preferred option, it was recommended that they both be carried 

forward to Phase 2 for further investigation. 

Segment 8a begins at the northern terminus of Segment 7, east of the proposed Texas Flat 

Mitigation Site, extending northwest for approximately 0.88-mile before tying into Segment 9. The 

segment extends northwest impacting potential archaeological sites, farmland, and pockets of 

wetlands. This segment extends through the central area of a former military bombing range with 

the potential for unexploded ordnance. Segment 8a contains a slight curve to the east that does not 

occur in Segment 8b, which was introduced to avoid a small wetland before it joins with Segment 9. 

Segment 9 continues northwesterly circumventing the Fee Area of Stennis Space Center (SSC) on its 

entire eastern side. 

Segment 8b also begins at the northern terminus of Segment 7, east of the proposed Texas Flat 

Mitigation Site. It extends northwest for approximately 0.83-mile before tying into Segment 9. 

Similar to Segment 8a, Segment 8b extends northwest through the former military bombing range 

with potential impacts to archaeological sites, farmland, and wetlands. 
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 15

FIGURE 4: SEGMENTS 8A AND 8B
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 16

Table 3 contains a side by side comparison of Segments 8a and 8b.

TABLE 3: COMPARISON MATRIX FOR SEGMENTS 8A AND 8B

Description Unit of Measure

Segment

8a 8b

ENGINEERING CRITERIA

Total Length Miles 0.88 0.83

Length Utilizing the Existing NS Rail Bed Miles 0.00 0.00

Length Utilizing the Existing PBVR 

east of 2a, 2b & 2c Miles 0.00 0.00

New At-Grade Rail Crossings (Paved Roads) # of Crossings 0 0

Estimated Length of Wetland Bridging LF 0 0

Total Estimated Implementation Cost (1) $ Millions $2.44 $2.42

NATURAL FEATURES

Wetland Impacts (2) Acreage 8.49 10.39

Wetland Shading Acreage 0.00 0.00

Cost of Wetland Mitigation (3) $60K per acre @ 50% $254,700 $311,700

Proposed Texas Flat Mitigation Bank Acreage 0.00 0.00

Cost of Mitigating Impacts to Mitigation Bank $120K per acre @ 50% $0 $0

Streams 303(d)/TMDL's # of Crossings 0 0

Streams 303(d)/TMDL's Length (miles) 0.00 0.00

Stream Crossings # of Crossings 0 0

Total Stream Impacts Feet 0 0

Cost of Stream Mitigation (3) $200 per linear feet @ 50% $0 $0

MAN-MADE FEATURES

MDEQ CERCLA/Haz Mat sites Acreage 0.00 0.00

Potential Archaeological Sites

High Probability Acreage 2.69 2.72

Medium Probability Acreage 12.85 10.23

Farmland (Prime) Acreage 7.05 4.05

Farmland (Prime if Drained) Acreage 6.61 8.98

Farmland (Statewide Importance) Acreage 1.39 1.99

Mines Acreage 0.00 0.00

Bombing Ranges Acreage 21.33 20.24

INFRASTRUCTURE

Water Wells Acreage 0.00 0.00

Transmission Line Crossings # 0 0

Gas Line Crossings # 0 0

(1) Cost Estimates updated in October 2015

(2) Wetland Impacts are based on NWI Mapping & Ground Truthing performed in the Spring 2015

(3) Cost assumes a 100 foot wide rail bed
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 17

Summary

The following is a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of Segment 8a as compared to 8b.

 The advantages of 8a are as follows:

– Less impacts to wetlands, which lowers costs (2.0 acres of fewer impacts = $57,000 

less in cost)

– Less potential for “High Probability” CR impacts (0.03-acre less)

– Less potential for Farmland impacts, (2.37 acres less “Prime if Drained, and 0.60-

acre less “Statewide Importance”)

 Disadvantages of 8a are as follows:

– Higher potential for “Medium Probability” CR impacts (2.62 acres more)

– Higher Farmland “Prime” impacts, (3.0 acres more)

– Higher overall impacts to former military bombing ranges (1.09 acres more)

– Slightly longer in overall length (0.05-mile longer than 8b, due to curve)

– Higher important cost ($20,000 more)

Based on the analysis above, Segment 8b is eliminated from further study.

Segments 10a and 10b Analysis

Segments 10a and 10b are in the northern portion of the study area approaching the town of 

Nicholson. These are competing segments and a comparison to each was performed during Phase 1. 

Both segments were found to have similar impacts and cost, based on the level of analysis

performed during Phase 1. Since a clear determination of which segment was best could not be 

determined at that time both segments were recommended to carry forward to Phase 2 for further 

investigation. Both of these segments have the same beginning and ending nodes, with both 

beginning at the northern end of Segment 9 and ending at the southern end or beginning of 

Segment 11. See Figure 5.

Segment 10a begins at the north termini of Segment 9 and extending north crossing Texas Flat 

Road at a new at-grade crossing approximately 2.5 miles east of the existing at-grade rail crossing. 

The segment continues to extend north and then west avoiding and/or minimizing impacts to 

isolated pockets of wetlands and open pit mines. Segment 10a eventually connects to Segment 11 

approximately 3 miles south of the Town of Nicholson. Segment 11 represents an existing NS rail 

line that extends from the Fee Area of SSC to the NS mainline in Nicholson. 

Segment 10b begins at the north termini of Segment 9 and extends west avoiding and/or 

minimizing impacts to isolated pockets of wetlands. For approximately 2 miles, Segment 10b 

parallels a utility corridor on the south before turning north. Shortly after turning north, the 

segment connects to the existing NS rail line between SSC and Nicholson, and continues along this 

rail line for a distance of approximately 2 miles to the beginning of Segment 11. Although the 

existing NS rail line is in place, it has not been used in over a decade and will require maintenance 

and upgrade before it can be put back in service. Segment 10b would utilize the existing at-grade 

crossing of Texas Flat Road.
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 18

FIGURE 5: SEGMENTS 10A AND 10 B
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 19

Table 4 contains a side by side comparison of Segments 10a and 10b.

TABLE 4: COMPARISON MATRIX FOR SEGMENTS 10A AND 10B

Description Unit of Measure

Segment

10a 10b

ENGINEERING CRITERIA

Total Length Miles 4.95 5.18

Length Utilizing the Existing NS 

Rail Bed Miles 0.00 1.95

Length Utilizing the Existing PBVR 

east of 2a, 2b & 2c Miles 0 0

New At-Grade Rail Crossings 

(Paved Roads) # of Crossings 1 0

Estimated Length of Wetland 

Bridging LF 1,469 1,482

Total Estimated Implementation 

Cost (1) $ Millions $25.91 $23.08

NATURAL FEATURES

Wetland Impacts (2) Acreage 55.53 25.71

Shading Impacts Acreage 0.51 0.51

Cost of Wetland Mitigation (3) $60K per acre @ 50% $1,665,900 $771,300

Proposed Texas Flat Mitigation 

Bank Acreage 0.00 0.00

Cost of Mitigating Impacts to 

Mitigation Banks $120K per acre @ 50% $0 $0

Streams 303(d)/TMDL's # of Crossings 1 1

Streams 303(d)/TMDL's Length (miles) 0.04 0.04

Stream Crossings # of Crossings 1 1

Total Stream Impacts Linear Feet 202 204

Cost of Stream Mitigation (3) $200 per linear feet @ 

50% $20,200 $20,400

MAN-MADE FEATURES

MDEQ CERCLA/Haz Mat sites Acreage 0.00 0.00

Potential Archaeological Sites

High Probability Acreage 20.72 29.77

Medium Probability Acreage 74.89 60.34

Farmland (Prime) Acreage 44.72 51.42

Farmland (Prime if Drained) Acreage 25.80 45.23

Farmland (Statewide Importance) Acreage 0.00 0.70

Mines Acreage 2.34 0.84

Bombing Ranges Acreage 23.18 24.09

INFRASTRUCTURE

Water Wells Acreage 0.23 1.28

Transmission Line Crossings # 0 0

Gas Line Crossings # 2 0

(1) Cost Estimates updated in October 2015

(2) Wetland Impacts are based on NWI Mapping & Ground Truthing performed in the Spring 2015

(3) Cost assumes a 100 foot wide rail bed
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 20

Summary

The following is a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of Segment 10a as compared to 

10b.

 The advantages of 10b are as follows:

– Has the least wetland impacts (30 acres less wetland impacts) 

– Less costly implementation ($2.83 m less)

– Utilizes 1.95 miles of the existing NS rail bed (10a is entirely on new location)

– Utilizes the existing at-grade rail crossing on Texas Flat Road

– Easier potential future rail connection for SSC 

– Less potential for mine impacts (1.5 acres less)

– Less probability of “Medium Probability” CR impacts, (14.55 acres less)

– Less Gas Line Crossings (2 less)

 Disadvantages of 10b are as follows:

– Slightly longer in overall length (0.23-mile longer)

– Higher probability of “High Probability” CR impacts (9.05 acres more)

– Higher “Farmland” impacts, (Prime - 6.7 acres more, Prime if Drained - 19.43 acres 

more, Statewide Importance - 0.70 acres more) 

– Slighter higher acreage in a former military bombing range (0.91 acres more)

– Slighter higher water supply well impacts (1.05 acres more)

Based on the above analysis, Segment 10a is eliminated from further study.

Conclusion (Reasonable Alternatives)

Based on these segment comparisons and the elimination of segments from further study, there are 

11 segments remaining, which were combined to create in two Reasonable Alternatives that will be 

further studied in the EIS. These two alternatives will be compared to a No-build Alternative. See 

Figure 6.

Detailed environmental, social, cultural, and physical investigations will be conducted based on the 

results from database searches, field investigations, and GIS analysis for the two reasonable 

alternatives. These investigations will be performed to identify a more detailed concept for each 

alternative. 
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 21

FIGURE 6: REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 22

Addendum to the Port Bienville Phase 2 – Southern Segment 

Comparison

During the months of March and April 2016, field work was completed for cultural and natural 

resources including wetland delineations for the majority of the proposed alignment north of I-10 

and south of Segment 11(existing NS rail line). Field observations revealed the study area south of 

I-10 was predominantly inundated with water, most of which would be considered wetlands. Small 

pockets of upland areas were identified within this area but were also where residential 

development occurred. 

Residential development in this area was observed to be sparce with the potential to be lower 

income properties. As stated in the Phase 1 Study Reports, the AART Tool used an avoidance and 

minimization approach providing the least impact corridors for consideration. However, this tool 

relied on existing GIS data to evaluate segments. Additionally, the ranking of the data layers was

uniformly applied throughout the study area for consistency. During Phase 2 of the project 

development, planners, scientist, and engineers continued the alternative refinement to avoid 

and/or minimize impacts as new data became available. In this case, as actual wetland data became 

available, opportunities arose for the project team to refine the two segment routes south of I-10 to 

help minimize impacts.

Concerns with the Reasonable Alternatives in the South

As stated above, several key factors were identified during the intensive field surveys for the 

segments south of I-10. These key factors include:

 The study area below I-10 was observed to contain 

more wetland areas than originally anticipated;

 Upland areas tend to have residential development 

associated with them;

 Residential areas appear to be lower-income;

 Colonial Pipeline, has an existing utility corridor 

approximately 100’ wide that begins near Segment 

6A and travels due south to the Port Bienville Rail 

Road (PBVR) and beyond. This is an already 

disturbed corridor through this generally remote 

and wooded area. The utility corridor is cleared 

and maintained. 

Using the updated information from the field surveys, the project team reassessed the two 

alternative options for the southern segments. These segments are identified as Segments 

1a+1b+3+5+6a (Segment 1a) and 2b+5+6a (Segment 2b). One of the deciding factors in the original 

segment selection was wetland impacts. Because it was determined that the majority of the area is 

considered wetland and impacts would be equitable between all segments in the area, other 

resources, such as proximity to residences, became more significant in the analysis and comparison 
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 23

of impacts. Additionally, the project team determined that by paralleling the existing disturbed 

utility corridor (Colonial Pipeline) and utilizing former rail beds in the area, that potential impacts 

to existing residences along Old Lower Bay Road could be avoided and/or minimized. 

With the intent of minimizing impacts on existing residences in the area, the project team assessed 

additional criteria to develop, refine and re-evaluate these southern segments. 

The additional criteria included:

 Number of residential homes within 1,000 foot of the railroad centerline;

 Number of residential homes 200-400 foot of railroad centerline;

 Length of the segments paralleling the existing utility corridor;

 Length of the segments utilizing former rail beds; and

 Total length from the PBVR’s switch point to the location the alignment ties into the 

PBVR.

Segment Refinements

Segment 1a was re-evaluated and determined that the curves in segments 3, 5, and 6a were not 

necessary to avoid and minimize impacts primarily to wetlands based solely on the NWI mapping. 

These segments were initially developed with the aid of the AART in Phase 1. Following our recent 

field work including the delineation of wetlands within segment 6a, 7, 8a, 9, and 10b, the NWI 

mapping was updated based on our field observations. It was determined that the design curves (in 

segments 3, 5, 6a) associated with Segment 1a are deemed unnecessary. Also, as segment 1a 

crosses over Old Bay Road, the alignment comes within 200 to 400 feet of four (4) single-family

homes. Segment 1b also utilizes an existing former rail bed for a portion of the segment. However, 

the former rail bed continues in a southeasterly direction then turns south to the PBVR. Since 1a is 

located near the existing petroleum pipeline corridor, it briefly parallels this feature.

The project team decided that instead of modifying Segment 1a that an additional segment could be 

created using various parts of the original segments to assist in minimizing and reducing impacts. 

This new segment is identified as “D” and begins at the southern terminus of Segment 7. Segment D 

travel south paralleling the Colonial pipeline right-of-way on the eastern side of the corridor. The 

segment would utilize the former rail bed in a southeasterly direction then turning south at a point 

farther away from the residential development, potentially reducing impacts. This segment would 

also provide the greatest distance to the PBVR’s switch point (See Figure A-1).

Segment 2b was also re-evaluated and determined that the curves in segments 3, 5, and 6a were 

also not necessary as stated above. Segment 2b was initially identified as having fewer wetlands. 

However, recent field efforts have revealed this to be inaccurate. It has a higher potential for 

wetland impacts. Segment 2b did parallel Colonial Pipeline corridor but did not utilize any of the 

former rail beds. Also the tie-in location to the PBVR was determined to be within 370’ of the 

existing switch point which is very undesirable from a train operational perspective.

The project team decided that instead of modifying segment 2b that an additional segment could be 

created to assist in minimizing and reducing impacts near 2b. This segment is identified as “C” and 

begins at the southern terminus of Segment 7. Segment C would travel south paralleling the 
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 24

Colonial pipeline right-of-way on the eastern side of the corridor. The segment would continue 

south until it approaches the sand mine located adjacent to Old Bay Road. The alignment crosses 

over the petroleum pipeline corridor in a southwestern direction and continues south paralleling 

the petroleum pipeline corridor on the western side to connect with the PBVR. This segment is the 

most direct route of the southern segments, and would provide a desirable tie-in distance of 0.4 

miles to the PBVR’s switch point which would better support their operations (See Figure A-2)
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 25

FIGURE A- 1: SEGMENT 1A AND SEGMENT D
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 26

FIGURE A- 2: SEGMENT 2B AND SEGMENT C
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 27

Evaluation of the Southern Segments

To be consistent with previous evaluations and segment comparisons, the two new segments were 

developed to the same standards as both segments 1a and 2b. Impact analysis was conducted on all 

four segments (1a, 2b, C, and D) beginning at the southern terminus of Segment 7 and ending at 

their individual termini along the PBVR (See Figure A-3). The project team using both old and new 

criteria developed an impact matrix to compare the four (4) segments as indicated below in Table 

A-1. 

TABLE A- 1: SOUTHERN REFINED SEGMENTS COMPARISON MATRIX 

Description Unit of 

Measure

Segment(s)

Segment 1a 

(1a+1b+3+5+6a)

Segment 2b 

(2b+5+6a) Alt C Alt D

ENGINEERING CRITERIA

Total Length Miles 3.56 3.50 3.45 3.66

Length to PBVR switch Miles 0.97 0.07 0.40 1.20

Length Utilizing Former Rail 

bed

Miles 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.95

Length Paralleling Existing 

Utility Corridor

Miles 0.61 0.61 3.04 1.23

New At-Grade Rail Crossings 

(Paved Roads)

# of 

Crossings 1 0 0 1

Estimated Length of Wetland 

Bridging

LF 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300

Total Estimated 

Implementation Cost (1)

$ Millions $21.61 $22.04 $21.79 $21.64

NATURAL FEATURES

Wetland Impacts (2) Acreage 66.85 80.80 79.27 63.46

Cost of Impacts to Wetlands (3) $ Millions $2.01 $2.42 $2.38 $1.90

Stream Crossings # of 

Crossings 1 2 1 0

Total Stream Impacts Feet 250 445 40 0

Cost of Impacts to Streams (3) $200 per 

linear feet @ 

50%

$25,000 $44,500 $4,000 $0

MAN-MADE FEATURES

MDEQ CERCLA/Haz Mat sites Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Archaeological Sites

High Probability Acreage 28.11 13.85 14.09 20.07

Medium Probability Acreage 17.89 20.45 28.08 28.77

Residential Homes within 

1,000ft of centerline 

Feet 6.00 0.00 0.00 2.00

Residential Homes within 200 -

400ft of centerline

Feet 4.00 0.00 0.00 1.00

16th Sections Land 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00

Farmland (Prime) Acreage 1.32 0.00 2.46 1.98

Farmland (Prime if Drained) Acreage 30.90 31.47 32.51 31.08

Mines Acreage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

(1) Cost Estimates updated in May 2016

(2) Wetland Impacts are based on NWI Mapping, Delineates and field observation performed in the Spring 2016

(3) Cost assumes a 100-foot wide rail bed
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 28

FIGURE A- 3: SEGMENTS 1A, 2B, C AND SEGMENT D
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 29

Segment 1a – Compared to the other three segments this was the least cost segment. Also from an 

operational standpoint, it tied into the PBVR switch at an optimal distance to the switch point. It 

also had lower wetland impacts than two of the other segments. Segment 1a paralleled the Colonial 

pipeline corridor for 0.61 miles and also followed the former rail bed for 0.66 miles. However, this 

segment had the highest impacts to the residences in the area. The project team recommended that 

this segment be eliminated due to potential residential impacts, (4 residents within several 

hundred feet of the centerline). MDOT, HCPHC, and FRA agreed to eliminate this segment from 

further study.

Segment 2b – Compared to the other three segments this segment did not impact any residential 

areas. However, this segment had the highest wetland impacts, highest estimated costs, and highest 

stream impacts. Also from an operational standpoint this segment tied into the PBVR a very short 

distance from the switch point (370 feet). Segment 2b paralleled the Colonial pipeline corridor 

briefly but did not utilize any of the former rail beds. The project team recommended to eliminate 

this segment due to cost, highest stream crossings, and highest wetland impacts. Also from a rail 

operational standpoint it was the least desirable. MDOT, HCPHC, and FRA agreed to eliminate this 

segment from further study.

Segment C (Recommended) – Compared to the other three segments this segment is the most 

direct route having the shortest distance between Segment 7 and the PBVR. This segment also did 

not impact any residential areas. This segment fell in the median range for wetland impacts and 

cost and had lower stream impacts. Also from a rail operational standpoint, this segment tied into 

the PBVR at the optimal distance from the switch point of 0.4 mile. Segment C paralleled the 

Colonial pipeline corridor for the entire length of the segment. 

Segment D – Compared to the other three segments this segment had the lowest estimated cost. 

Also from an operational standpoint tied into the PBVR’s switch at an optimal distance. It also had 

lower wetland impacts than the other three segments. Segment D paralleled the Colonial pipeline 

corridor and also followed the former rail bed for over half its length. However, this segment had 

the potential to impact 1 to 2 residences. The project team recommended that this segment be 

eliminated due to potential residential impacts. MDOT, HCPHC, and FRA agreed to eliminate this 

segment from further study.

Summary

The following is a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of Segment C as compared to 1a, 

2b, and D.

 The advantages of C are as follows:

– Shortest Route

– Follows an existing utility corridor (3.04 miles) 

– Lower cost for implementation then 2b ($0.25 m less)

– Optimal distance to the PBVR switch.

– No impacts to residences (Both 1a and D impact residences)

 Disadvantages of C are as follows:

– Higher wetland impacts (2b has the highest)

– Higher probability of “High Probability” CR impacts (D has the highest)
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 30

– Higher “Farmland” impacts, (Prime – 2.46 acres more, Prime if Drained – 32.51

acres more) 

Based on the above analysis, Segments 1a, 2b, and D are eliminated from further study.

Conclusion (Recommended Segments)

Based on these segment comparisons and the elimination of segments from further study, there are 

6 segments, which were combined to create the Recommended Reasonable Alternative that will be 

further studied in the EIS. This alternative will be compared to a No-build Alternative. See Figure A4.

Detailed environmental, social, cultural, and physical investigations will be conducted based on the 

results of database searches, field investigations, and GIS analysis for the reasonable alternative. 

These investigations will be performed to identify a more detailed concept for each alternative. 
P O R T B I E N V I L L E P H A S E 2 – S E G M E N T C O M P A R I S O N

P O R T B I E N V I L L E E I S - P O R T B I E N V I L L E T O N I C H O L S O N | 31

FIGURE A- 4: REASONABLE ALTERNATIVE
®

cdmsmith.com

in association with HDR