Ground Rules Set for Responsive Applications

Published: November 5, 2026

WASHINGTON — The Surface Transportation Board on November 4 set the paperwork rules for railroads that want conditions on the Union Pacific proposal to control Norfolk Southern. Decision No. 46, in Finance Docket No. FD 36873, was decided on November 3. It denies a request to add one Colorado interchange to an earlier list, grants most of what Canadian Pacific Kansas City and Canadian National asked to leave out of their responsive applications, and refuses to call four of the Canadian Pacific Kansas City proposals minor before those applications are filed.

Norfolk Southern C40-8W 8383 leads an intermodal freight at Altoona PA in October 2004

Norfolk Southern C40-8W #8383, Union Pacific SD70M #3780, BNSF C44-9W #5497, and a final BNSF C44-9W lead an intermodal freight through Altoona, Pennsylvania on October 6, 2004. Warren Calloway photo.

Walsenburg stays off the list

On November 19, 2025, Colorado Pacific Rio Grande Railroad LLC asked the Board to make Union Pacific supplement an answer to Decision No. 3. That earlier order had required a list of interchange commitments, meaning agreements that limit or may limit interchange with a connecting carrier. The short line said both a “steel” barrier and a “paper” barrier keep it from interchanging with BNSF at Walsenburg, Colorado, and that the location belonged on the list.

Union Pacific replied on December 10, 2025, that there is no interchange commitment. It said the short line cannot reach BNSF at Walsenburg because five miles of Union Pacific track separate the two. That mileage is the railroad account, not a finding by the Board. Union Pacific also called the request moot.

The Board will not order a supplement. It said the point of Decision No. 3 was to identify agreements that limit interchange. The petition and the Union Pacific filing already name the place, the carriers, and the restriction, and more paper would not materially help the review now. Leaving Walsenburg off the list does not stop any party from arguing, in comments, about interchange limits and the proposed transaction.

What Canadian Pacific Kansas City may omit

Petitions for waiver or clarification on responsive applications were due October 5. Canadian Pacific Kansas City, for itself and its U.S. rail subsidiaries, asked the Board to narrow who counts as an applicant. The Board agreed that a non-carrier parent, and a rail affiliate that is not involved in the responsive application, need not be treated as an applicant for that filing. Information from companies that are not involved would not help the review. The same approach was used in the Canadian Pacific control of Kansas City Southern.

The Board also agreed that these categories are outside the definition of applicant carrier for the responsive applications: the primary applicants and their rail affiliates; rail carriers that are not subject to Board jurisdiction, including carriers located wholly outside the United States; subsidiaries in which the responsive applicant holds a non-controlling common-stock interest of 50 percent or less; and motor-carrier or water-carrier affiliates.

Canadian Pacific Kansas City may file the required corporate information for its U.S. rail affiliates on a consolidated basis where that is less work than a report for each affiliate. The waiver does not relax the duty to explain competitive and operational effects. The Board also waived, for these applications, the usual items on a change in control, a statement of issues, a corporate chart, non-carrier information, and intercorporate relationships. It said those items are not needed to judge the conditions the railroad intends to seek.

Four proposals are not minor in advance

Canadian Pacific Kansas City asked the Board to decide now that four anticipated transactions are minor under the merger rules. The four are:

Keeping trackage rights on Union Pacific between Kansas City and Polo, Missouri, the Polo Line, and confirming or granting trackage rights on Union Pacific in the Kansas City Terminal.
Keeping trackage rights on the Techny line between Bryn Mawr, Illinois, and Tower A20.
Trackage rights on the Lufkin Subdivision between Shreveport, Louisiana, and Houston, Texas.
A reconveyance of assets at the Wylie Intermodal Terminal, if those assets are conveyed to Norfolk Southern before the merger is consummated.

The railroad said each one is limited in geography, would not be anticompetitive, and would not open a source of traffic it cannot reach today. Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern opposed that request. They said the summaries were not enough to support a finding that the transactions are not of regional or national significance.

The Board denied the request to label the four minor in advance. On the information in the petition and in the September 9 description of anticipated applications, it cannot find that the transactions clearly would have no anticompetitive effects, or that any such effects would clearly be outweighed by a contribution to significant transportation needs. It wants more on the operational and service effects of access to the Kansas City Terminal, the Polo Line, the Techny line, and the Lufkin Subdivision, and of continued ownership of the Wylie terminal. The decision stops at that denial. It does not assign the four a final class.

Canadian National, an idle mine, and St. Louis

Grand Trunk Corporation, for itself and its U.S. rail subsidiaries, collectively Canadian National, asked three things.

First, it may cover several assigned sub-dockets in fewer responsive applications. Nothing in the rules forbids one application from covering more than one sub-docket. Any combined filing has to make each transaction plain enough that the Board can see the effect on the primary case and on the network. That matters here because some conditions may overlap requests another railroad may file. A muddy filing can be rejected, or the condition denied. A responsive application may incorporate other material by reference where the rule allows it.

Second, Canadian National asked to be excused from filing now for trackage rights to the Macoupin Energy LLC Shay Mine No. 1 near Carlinville, Illinois. It said the mine is idle, so the request is not ripe, and that it should be able to seek rights later over the Union Pacific line between Springfield and Carlinville if the mine reopens. The Board declined to say whether a responsive application for that mine is required now. Whether to ask for the condition is a choice for Canadian National.

Third, trackage rights over the Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis need not be inside the responsive applications. The association is not an applicant. Canadian National is not asking that those rights be imposed as a condition of the merger. It expects a voluntary agreement that would be available whether or not the merger is approved, and it plans to seek authority in a separate case. The Board agreed that path is appropriate. Canadian National may still discuss, in its comments, how those rights would affect the primary transaction.

For every responsive application, not only these two, the Board waived the requirement to file paper copies. The decision is effective on the day it was served, November 4. The recording order served the same day is a separate decision.

Sources

Surface Transportation Board, Decision No. 46, Union Pacific Corporation and Union Pacific Railroad Company—Control—Norfolk Southern Corporation and Norfolk Southern Railway Company, Docket No. FD 36873, decided November 3, 2026, served November 4, 2026. Colorado Pacific Rio Grande Railroad LLC petition of November 19, 2025, is denied. The five-mile separation at Walsenburg is the Union Pacific reply of December 10, 2025. Canadian Pacific Kansas City and Grand Trunk Corporation petitions for waiver or clarification, filed October 5, 2026, are granted in part and denied in part as stated in the decision. The four listed transactions are not designated minor in advance. The Board declined to decide whether a Shay Mine No. 1 responsive application is required now. Trackage rights over the Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis may be sought outside this proceeding. Paper copies are waived for all responsive applications under 49 C.F.R. 1180.4(a)(1). Effective on the service date. By the Board, Board Members Fuchs, Hedlund, Kloster, and Schultz.
The applicants reply of October 13, 2026, opposed the request to classify the four Canadian Pacific Kansas City transactions as minor. That opposition is their argument. The holding is the denial described above.

Facebook X Pinterest Tumblr Reddit WhatsApp Messenger