USA: BNSF Railway has asked the Surface Transportation Board to deny the amended UP-NS merger application, arguing that it still fails the agency’s enhanced-competition test under the 2001 major-merger rules.

BNSF locomotive 8215 leading a freight train in San Diego, California
BNSF freight train passing in San Diego, California. Illustrative photo. Photo: Austin Ring, CC BY-SA 4.0.

The filing attacks the application at a different point from the STB’s earlier completeness review. On May 28, the Board accepted the revised filing as complete enough for consideration but held the proceeding in abeyance, saying enhanced competition and other issues still needed supplemental information before a procedural schedule could begin.

BNSF Says the Competition Showing Still Falls Short

The STB’s current major-merger framework places a higher public-interest burden on applicants than the pre-2001 rules, including explaining how a transaction and proposed conditions would enhance competition. BNSF’s argument is narrower than a full merits case: it says the amended application fails on its face to make the threshold, or prima facie, showing on enhanced competition.

BNSF’s motion centers on Committed Gateway Pricing (CGP). According to BNSF, the program does not give shippers access to a new rail competitor, covers less than 1% of rail traffic, runs only for a limited period and could leave some affected customers paying higher rates. Those are BNSF’s claims, not findings by the Board.

Don’t miss…Sydney Metro West Set to Lower 5,316 Tonnes of Rail

UP and NS Nearly Doubled CGP Eligibility in July

UP and NS did revise the mechanism in their July 27 supplemental filing. Union Pacific said eligible shipments would rise from about 134,000 to 258,000 a year and the program would, for the first time, include agricultural and other bulk unit-train customers.

CGP is designed to set guaranteed rates for qualifying cross-country movements that use part of the combined UP-NS system and interchange with BNSF or CSX at Chicago, St. Louis, Memphis or New Orleans. Union Pacific says the pre-set rate lets the competing carrier offer a customer a single confidential through rate without first negotiating with the merged railroad.

That revision is central to the dispute: UP presents CGP as a competition-enhancing commitment, while BNSF says the expanded version still does not satisfy the Board’s requirement. The disagreement is therefore not over whether CGP was expanded, but over whether the expansion is enough to support the merger’s competition case.

The STB Has Not Ruled on BNSF’s Motion

The STB’s case-status page continues to list docket FD 36873 as in abeyance. The Board’s May decision said a future ruling would establish the procedural schedule after it reviewed the supplemental material. BNSF is now asking the agency to stop before that step by denying the amended application.

The Board has not adopted BNSF’s arguments. Its May decision left the next procedural schedule for a future ruling after supplemental review, so the regulatory timetable remains unresolved while BNSF presses for denial at this stage.

News on railway transport, industry, and railway technologies from Railway Supply that you might have missed:

Don’t miss…Huntingdon Station Gets $3.5M Accessibility Upgrade