USA: The Natural Resources Defense Council has asked the Surface Transportation Board to strip the “highly confidential” label from UP-NS emission data, using the same argument that pried open the railroads’ employee numbers a month earlier.

Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific freight trains on parallel tracks
Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific freight trains run on parallel tracks. Photo: Union Pacific Railroad / Norfolk Southern Railway.

The group filed its motion on Aug. 25 in Docket FD 36873, as reported by Trains News Wire, in the proceeding on Union Pacific’s proposed acquisition of Norfolk Southern. It argues that because the Board has determined that an environmental impact statement is appropriate, a publicly verifiable assessment of air pollution impacts is necessary for an accurate evaluation of the proposal. The filing points to estimates of nitrogen oxides (NOx) reductions that changed from 2,810 tons in the original application to 5,660 tons in the revised application, as well as an error corrected afterward. NRDC says keeping the underlying data highly confidential prevents the public from helping to identify such problems through comments.

The revised estimate works out to roughly double the original, a difference of 2,850 tons.

Don’t miss… STB Orders UP-NS Employee Data Made Public by July 27

The Board pulled the same label off a different set of exhibits in July

On July 22 the Board ordered the applicants to redesignate their employee impact exhibits as public, finding that information of that type had been disclosed in earlier Board proceedings and did not appear commercially or competitively sensitive. Those exhibits covered positions that would be abolished, created or transferred, and the transfer locations for some of them. The railroads refiled them five days later, on July 27.

The NRDC filing runs along the same line, saying comparable emission data was public as part of the Canadian Pacific–Kansas City Southern merger application. The unions made the equivalent argument about job numbers and won it.

NRDC says the protective order was designed for different information

NRDC’s second argument concerns the scope of the protective order. The group says the emission inventory does not qualify as the traffic, shipper, contractual, financial, cost or other competitively sensitive business information covered by the order. The applicants requested the protective order on July 30, 2025, and the Board entered it on Aug. 5, 2025. It has governed confidentiality designations in the docket since then.

The Board has not ruled on the motion, and the filing itself does not set out a response from either railroad.

The environmental review could extend across 38 states

The Board lifted the abeyance on Aug. 18, restarting the environmental review along with the merits case, seven days before the motion landed. By the Board’s own count, rail segments, yards and intermodal facilities in 38 states could see operational changes exceeding its thresholds for environmental review.

Date Step Status
Aug. 18 Abeyance lifted, schedule adopted Done
Aug. 25 NRDC motion to redesignate emission workpaper as public Pending
Aug. 28 Applicants’ separate unfiltered-workpaper refiling deadline Due
Sept. 4 Notices of intent to participate due Due
Nov. 18 Comments and protests due Due
Feb. 16, 2027 Responses to comments due Due

Nov. 18 is the current deadline for comments, protests, requests for conditions and other arguments concerning the revised merger application. The environmental impact statement will have a separate public scoping process, whose comment deadline has not yet been announced.

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

Don’t miss… BNSF Asks STB to Deny UP-NS Merger Application