1. Merrill Lynch Global
Transportation Conference
June 2006
1
1

2. Forward Looking Disclosure
This presentation and other statements by the Company contain forward-looking statements within the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act with respect to, among other items: projections and
estimates of earnings, revenues, cost-savings, expenses, or other financial items; statements of
management’s plans, strategies and objectives for future operation, and management’s expectations as to
future performance and operations and the time by which objectives will be achieved; statements concerning
proposed new products and services; and statements regarding future economic, industry or market
conditions or performance. Forward-looking statements are typically identified by words or phrases such as
“believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “project,” and similar expressions. Forward-looking statements speak only as
of the date they are made, and the Company undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking
statement. If the Company does update any forward-looking statement, no inference should be drawn that the
Company will make additional updates with respect to that statement or any other forward-looking statements.
Forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, and actual performance or
results could differ materially from that anticipated by these forward-looking statements. Factors that may
cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by these forward-looking statements include,
among others: (i) the Company’s success in implementing its financial and operational initiatives, (ii) changes
in domestic or international economic or business conditions, including those affecting the rail industry (such
as the impact of industry competition, conditions, performance and consolidation); (iii) legislative or regulatory
changes; (iv) the inherent business risks associated with safety and security; and (v) the outcome of claims
and litigation involving or affecting the Company. Other important assumptions and factors that could cause
actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements are specified in the Company’s
SEC reports, accessible on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and the Company’s website at www.csx.com.
2
2

3. Our core strategies are gaining momentum
Revenue Operational Performance
Operational
Impact Discipline Culture
Discipline
Pricing momentum Safety leadership Drive to win
Customer focus Productivity discipline Personal accountability
Profitable growth Service execution Core values
Driving for reliability and growth
3
3

4. Focus on revenue impact is driving rates Revenue
Impact
Revenue Per Unit
Year-Over-Year Improvement
12%
11%
10% 9%
9%
8%
7%
Q3 2004 Q4 2004 Q1 2005 Q2 2005 Q3 2005 Q4 2005 Q1 2006
Note: The second quarter of 2005 excludes a $17 million coal rate case settlement
4
4

5. Profitability focus is improving returns Revenue
Impact
Percentage of Rail Cars
Above Reinvestment Hurdle Rates
2004 2006
24%
65%
35% 76%
Above Hurdle Below Hurdle
5
5

6. Economic environment remains strong Revenue
Impact
Transportation demand Transportation Index
still near record levels Indexed: 2000=100
120
Full-year outlook: 110
— GDP 3.3%
100
— IDP 3.9%
90
80
ISM Index stands at 55%
70
Continued strength in 60
imports and exports 90 93 96 99 02 05
Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics
6
6

7. Leadership, discipline, execution Operational
Discipline
Specific, clear roles and
responsibilities defined
Compliance process
developed
Reliable
Reliable
Exception handling Performance
Performance
process defined
Service Execution
Service Execution
Resources in place
Productivity Discipline
Productivity Discipline
— Crews
— Locomotives Safety Leadership
Safety Leadership
— Line capacity
7
7

8. Operational discipline is driving safety Operational
Discipline
Personal Injury Train Accidents
3.0 6.0
2.6 5.2
2.2 4.4
1.8 3.6
1.4 2.8
1.0 2.0
01 02 03 04 05 06 01 02 03 04 05 06
8
8

9. Discipline is driving on-time performance Operational
Discipline
On-time Originations On-time Arrivals
90 90
78 78
66 66
54 54
42 42
30 30
01 02 03 04 05 06 01 02 03 04 05 06
9
9

10. Discipline is driving asset utilization Operational
Discipline
Dwell Time (hours) Cars on Line (000)
33 250
30 243
27 236
24 229
21 222
18 215
01 02 03 04 05 06 01 02 03 04 05 06
10
10

11. Discipline is driving velocity and recrews Operational
Discipline
Train Velocity (mph) Recrews
26 90
24 74
22 58
20 42
18 26
16 10
01 02 03 04 05 06 01 02 03 04 05 06
11
11

12. Discipline is driving the operating ratio Performance
Culture
Operating Ratio
89%
87%
86%
85%
83% 83%
81%
81%
79%
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1
2004 2004 2004 2004 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006
Note: The first three quarters of 2004 exclude $71 million of management restructuring charges
12
12

13. Consistent, continuous improvement Performance
Culture
Surface Transportation
Operating Income in Millions
$487
$422 $415
$361
$351
$315
$295
$250
$204
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1
2004 2004 2004 2004 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006
Note: The first three quarters of 2004 exclude $71 million of management restructuring charges
13
13

14. Future growth leverages evolving trends
Transportation demand is increasing
Rail competitiveness is improving
Highest growth trends are in the South
14
14

15. Transportation demand – imports and IDP
U.S. Consumption Imports and IDP
2000 Dollars in Trillions 2000 Dollars in Trillions
IDP Imports
$10 $3.0
$9 $2.5
$8 $2.0
$7 $1.5
$6 $1.0
$5 $0.5
2000 2003 2006 2009 2000 2003 2006 2009
Source: Global Insight
15
15

16. Rail competitiveness – highway congestion
Highway Miles versus Transport Forecast
Miles Traveled Ton Miles in Trillions
7
250%
200% 6
150% 5
100% 4
50% 3
0% 2
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020
Miles Traveled Lane Miles
Source: Department of Transportation Source: American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials
16
16

17. Rail competitiveness – truck cost structure
Highway congestion Cost per Mile
24-28%
Driver shortages
New hours of service law
8-12%
Increasing fuel costs
Emission requirements
Rising insurance costs Q1 2003 Q1 2006
Trucks Rail
Source: Estimate based on CSX analysis
17
17

18. Rail competitiveness – CSX set for growth
CSX Intermodal
Volume Growth
4% 4%
$248
91%
89%
1%
$152 82%
(1%) (1%) $110
(2%)
(3%)
(4%)
(5%)
(8%)
2003 2004 2005
Q1 Q4 Q3 2QTD
2004 2004 2005 2006 Op Inc (millions) Op Ratio
Note: Fourth quarter volume growth for 2004 and 2005 reflects comparable periods
18
18

19. Southeast growth – industrial development
Merchandise
• Ethanol Facilities
• Feed Mills
• Aggregate Facilities
Boston
• Plastics Plants
Chicago
New York
Philadelphia
Coal
Baltimore
St Louis
• New Projects
Portsmouth
Memphis
Intermodal
• Port Development
Charleston
60% of • Logistics Centers
projects
Mobile
Jacksonville
Automotive
New Orleans
• Assembly Plant
• Supplier Facility
Miami
Income Growth
5-5.5%
LT 5%
5.6-6.0% GT 6%
19
19

20. Targeting strong long-term financial results
5 Year CAGR
Surface Transportation
Operating Income 10% – 12%
Earnings per Share 12% – 14%
Core Free Cash Flow 10% – 12%
Operating Ratio Mid-70%’s
20
20

21. Looking forward . . .
Core strategies are gaining solid momentum
Revenue Operational Performance
Impact Discipline Culture
Transportation environment remains strong
Capacity projects position CSX for the future
Volume growth will build momentum further
21
21

22. Merrill Lynch Global
Transportation Conference
June 2006
22
22