CN merger conditions build on a July deal the STB record sets out
CN has named the Midwest locations where it wants new access if Union Pacific buys Norfolk Southern. The Canadian carrier filed a description of its anticipated responsive application on 9 September 2026, in Finance Docket No. 36873 at the Surface Transportation Board. It summarised the main points in a statement the following day.
The filing builds on a binding memorandum of understanding, which CN and Union Pacific announced on 22 July 2026. The July announcement already identified the main corridors, yards and terminal holdings. The CN merger conditions filed in September add affected shipper locations and set out the requested divestiture, trackage, haulage and yard arrangements in greater detail.
Which locations CN wants to reach
In its statement of 10 September, CN linked several places to 2-to-1 shipper facilities. They are Hillsboro, Carlinville, Bloomington, Mt. Vernon, Granite City, Momence, Federal, Alton, Danville and Des Moines. It separately identified Des Moines and Avon with 3-to-2 facilities. The formal filing also refers to Chicago, and it makes clear that the analysis applies to individual customer facilities rather than to entire towns.
Places CN linked to affected shipper facilities in its statement
| Place named | State | Category in the statement |
|---|---|---|
| Hillsboro | Illinois | 2-to-1 shipper facilities |
| Carlinville | Illinois | 2-to-1 shipper facilities |
| Bloomington | Illinois | 2-to-1 shipper facilities |
| Mt. Vernon | Illinois | 2-to-1 shipper facilities |
| Granite City | Illinois | 2-to-1 shipper facilities |
| Momence | Illinois | 2-to-1 shipper facilities |
| Federal | Illinois | 2-to-1 shipper facilities |
| Alton | Illinois | 2-to-1 shipper facilities |
| Danville | Illinois | 2-to-1 shipper facilities |
| Des Moines | Iowa | 2-to-1 and 3-to-2 shipper facilities |
| Avon | Iowa | 3-to-2 shipper facilities |
The table reproduces the grouping used in CN’s statement. The formal filing covers further places, among them Chicago, and works at the level of individual facilities, so the list above is not a closed set.
Source: CN, statement of 10 September 2026.
“The conditions we are proposing would preserve competitive access in key Midwest markets, expand CN’s reach and create additional opportunities to grow with our customers.”
Olivier Chouc, Senior Vice-President and Chief Legal Officer at CN, said in a statement.
Kansas City, Neff Yard and the St. Louis gateway
For the corridor between St. Louis and Kansas City, CN lists divestiture of the Union Pacific line as one requested remedy, with overhead trackage or haulage rights as the alternative. The filing says CN would acquire the line if the Board found those access rights insufficient and ordered divestiture, or if Union Pacific decided to sell it. CN also seeks local haulage rights to serve customers along the route. For Neff Yard, it requests a lease in whole or in part, with an option to purchase.
Around St. Louis, the filing goes beyond the Tuscola to East St. Louis rights named in the statement. It covers rights over the Alton & Southern between Lenox/Mitchell and Valley Junction. It also covers connecting rights through the Terminal Railroad Association, which CN intends to seek separately, and access to sites handling intermodal and automotive traffic.
In July the two railroads described the yard arrangement as use of the facility rather than a lease. Union Pacific also said then that CN would obtain its first foothold in central Kansas City.
What the regulator’s record already shows
The Board’s decision of 18 August 2026 records that the CN settlement agreement provides for CN to acquire Norfolk Southern’s interests in the Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis and the Kansas City Terminal Railway. It also records a proposed transfer of part of Union Pacific’s Peoria and Pekin Union Railway interest. That transfer would leave CN and the combined system with 50 per cent each.
The same decision spells out how the access would be triggered. Union Pacific would select CN to serve 2-to-1 and 3-to-2 facilities, where feasible. That applies where the Board orders the applicants to admit another Class I carrier. In other words, the trigger sits with the regulator rather than with the two companies.
The Board also denied the applicants’ request for expedited consideration of their proposed TRRA divestiture. It held that control of the terminal belongs inside the wider merger review.
How the remedy package reads in three documents
| Element | 22 July announcement | 18 August Board decision | 9 September CN filing |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-to-1 and 3-to-2 shipper facilities | Framework only, subject to commercial and operational feasibility | Union Pacific picks CN where the Board orders another Class I carrier in | Named places in Illinois and Iowa, at facility level |
| St. Louis to Kansas City corridor | Right to serve customers along the route | Not addressed in the decision | Line divestiture sought; trackage and haulage rights requested as alternatives |
| Neff Yard, Kansas City | Use of the yard | Not addressed in the decision | Lease in whole or in part, with an option to purchase |
| Tuscola to East St. Louis | Overhead rights | Not addressed in the decision | Overhead trackage rights, alongside further St. Louis area rights |
| Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis | CN would acquire Norfolk Southern’s holding | Records the proposed acquisition and denies expedited consideration of the divestiture | Referenced in the executive summary as a terminal-control issue under the CN MOU; no separate ownership condition detailed |
| Kansas City Terminal Railway | CN would acquire Norfolk Southern’s holding | Records the proposed acquisition | Referenced in the executive summary as a terminal-control issue under the CN MOU; no separate ownership condition detailed |
| Peoria and Pekin Union Railway | Not mentioned in the announcement | Records CN’s proposed acquisition of part of the Union Pacific interest, leaving a 50 per cent split | Referenced in the executive summary as a terminal-control issue under the CN MOU; no separate ownership condition detailed |
The July announcement and September filing describe the track and yard arrangements. Of the three documents compared here, the Board’s August decision gives the clearest account of the proposed ownership transfers, including the Peoria and Pekin Union stake.
Sources: Union Pacific, announcement of 22 July 2026; Surface Transportation Board, decision served 18 August 2026; CN, statement of 10 September 2026. “Not addressed” marks a document that does not deal with the element, not a change of position.
The 2-to-1 and 3-to-2 questions the Board raised first
These facilities are not a new subject in the case. When the Board accepted the revised application in May 2026, it ordered the applicants to supplement it on eight topics. The 2-to-1 and 3-to-2 category was one of them. Their supplement of 27 July then added four commitments. One of them would hold Class I access at those facilities at the pre-merger level.
What happens next
September 9 was the Board’s deadline for descriptions of anticipated responsive applications. BNSF used the same date to set out its own requests. CN’s formal request for conditions is due on 18 November 2026, together with comments, protests and responsive applications. Responses follow on 16 February 2027, and rebuttals on 29 March 2027. Final briefs are due on 28 May 2027.
A hearing date remains open. The Board has said it will aim to rule within 90 days after the evidentiary record closes, and it cannot do so before the required environmental review is complete. None of CN’s proposed conditions would take effect unless the Board approves the relevant measures and the UP-NS transaction closes.
