After Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern refiled their merger application with the Surface Transportation Board, rail competitors were quick to comment on the submission's bona fides.
Earlier this year, the agency initially rejected the application UP and NS filed on Dec. 19, 2025, citing it as incomplete. The two rail giants refiled their application on April 30, including data aiming to support the claim that the merger will enable cost savings for shippers and strengthen supply chains.
The potential merger is being met with plenty of opposition, including from other top rail carriers. BNSF Railway, Canadian Pacific Kansas City and CSX were some of the major railroads that participated in the STB’s comment period that ended on May 8.
Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern have responded to several comments they have received regarding the completeness of their refiled application. The two state that the amended proposal “is comprehensive and complete” and provides all the necessary information.
Other railroads disagree — here’s a look at what they had to say about the refiled merger application.
BNSF Railway
BNSF made several points on why they deemed the refiled application as incomplete. Among them was BNSF’s comment that UP and NS have “exaggerated” estimates for truck-to-rail diversions, according to a docket filed on behalf of BNSF by its lawyers from Kirkland & Ellis LLP.
Recently, there’s been an uptick in some shippers shifting to rail or intermodal services. Union Pacific, Norfolk Southern and CSX have reported that their rail and intermodal services are expected to see volume benefits due to higher trucking rates and fuel costs, executives said in earnings calls.
BNSF argues that nearly all of the public benefits mentioned by UP and NS rely on truck-to-rail conversions.
"UP and NS are careful not to promise to pass to customers any efficiency gains or cost reductions in the form of lower rates from UP," per BNSF.
Canadian Pacific Kansas City
The Canadian railway argues that the amended application doesn’t serve the interest of shippers and “puts our supply chains and economy at needless risk,” President and CEO Keith Creel said in a May 11 press release.
Creel said that UP and NS do not appear to have met the requirement of submitting a detailed market impact analysis of projected future shares of rail traffic for key commodities and corridors.
In a docket filing submitted to the STB, CPKC stated that for the application to be considered complete, UP and NS must include a market analysis containing revenues and traffic volumes for major interregional or corridor flows by commodity group. The market analysis is part of the STB’s regulation for “major and significant transactions,” per the agency’s code of regulations.
CSX
CSX stated that UP and NS have not provided sufficient evidence to make their case under STB rules established in 2001, such as proving the merger provides enhanced rail-to-rail competition, per CSX’s docket filed with the STB.
The Florida-based railroad said that UP and NS do not offer any proposal to enhance rail-to-rail competition. Instead, the two parties claim that the creation of the proposed transcontinental railroad will enhance competition “‘on its own.'"
UP and NS stated in their amended application that the merger’s efficiencies of being a single-line rail service alone would make it more competitive to trucking.
“UP/NS have not yet complied with the Board’s order to submit ordinary-course competition and efficiencies analyses of their proposed merger, which the Board directed them to submit before they re-filed their application,” CSX said.
