UP × NS: What Houston Should Know STB DOCKET FD 36873 · UPDATED OCT 1, 2026
Comments are due Nov. 18, 2026. Add your signed statement to the record in a few minutes.Sign the statement →

Section: Timeline

How we got here

Fourteen months in, the deal has been announced, filed, rejected, refiled, accepted, and corrected more than once. Red markers show turning points. Dates come from STB decisions and docket filings unless noted.

  1. JUL 28, 2025 UP and NS announce an $85 billion merger agreement The deal would create the first single-owner, coast-to-coast U.S. railroad.
  2. JUL 30, 2025 STB receives the railroads' Notice of Intent to file
  3. AUG 28, 2025 STB classifies the deal as a "major" transaction That triggers the Board's strictest review rules, written after the 1990s merger meltdowns.
  4. OCT–NOV 2025 Houston officials file procedural comments Council Members Castillo (Oct 1) and Ramirez (Oct 7), Commissioner Adrian Garcia (Oct 10), Mayor Whitmire (Oct 13), Sen. Alvarado (Oct 16), and County Attorney Menefee (Nov 20) all write the Board. Most ask for a Houston public hearing and Houston-specific impact analysis. Read the breakdown.
  5. OCT 30, 2025 Senators Hoeven (R-ND) and Klobuchar (D-MN) write the STB A bipartisan Senate letter urging careful scrutiny of the merger's competitive effects.
  6. NOV 14, 2025 Shareholders approve the deal; nine Republican attorneys general raise alarms Both companies' shareholders approve with 99%+ support. The same day, AGs from Tennessee, Kansas, Florida, Mississippi, Iowa, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Ohio warn the STB about market concentration. More on the opposition.
  7. DEC 19, 2025 UP and NS file a 7,000-page application The filing includes roughly 2,000 support letters that a PR firm working for UP collected before the application existed. See how that happened.
  8. DEC 29, 2025 Completeness comments due; competing railroads object CPKC, CN, CSX, and others argue the application omits required market analysis and parts of the merger agreement itself. Bloomberg reports the same day on UP's pre-filing letter campaign and its quiet withdrawal of $750 million in previously touted concessions.
  9. JAN 14, 2026 Rep. Sylvia Garcia testifies on Houston's blocked crossings Her district, TX-29, led the nation in blocked-crossing reports every year from 2021 to 2025, with 3,134 incidents in 2025 alone.
  10. JAN 16, 2026 STB rejects the application as incomplete The Board finds the filing missing required market-share projections and the complete merger agreement, including a withheld Schedule 5.8. Federal law required rejection. The House Monopoly Busters Caucus writes the Board the same day.
  11. FEB 4, 2026 More than 40 Republican House members demand a rigorous review Signers include Texans Dan Crenshaw, Randy Weber, and Troy Nehls. The letter says the burden of proof rests squarely on the railroads.
  12. FEB 17, 2026 UP and NS notify the STB they will refile
  13. APR 30, 2026 The railroads file a revised application Several Houston projections shrink between versions. Settegast's added daily trucks drop from +516 to +360. See the changing numbers.
  14. MAY 28, 2026 STB accepts the revised application but asks for more information The Board treats the filing as complete and requires the railroads to supply additional data before the case moves forward.
  15. JUL 27, 2026 Errata filing trims Houston numbers again Settegast's added trucks drop to +353. The cover letter never mentions Houston; the change appears in a footnote.
  16. AUG 18–19, 2026 The Board sets the schedule; environmental review restarts The Board lifts its pause and adopts a procedural schedule. The next day its Office of Environmental Analysis (OEA) sends preliminary consultation letters to agencies, Tribes, and elected officials. OEA's own dataset puts Settegast's added trucks at +491 a day, back up from +353.
  17. AUG 28, 2026 Texas Attorney General files on the application's deficiencies The Texas AG's office frames the review under federal and Texas antitrust law. More on the opposition.
  18. AUG 31, 2026 Party-of-record deadline extended to September 30 The National League of Cities asked for more time so local governments could sign up. The Board agreed.
  19. SEP 4–9, 2026 A second errata and new data tables The railroads correct their application again. Their September 9 tables mark the Settegast yard as exceeding federal review thresholds with a 140.2% increase, while marking every Houston track segment that serves it as below threshold. Rival railroads count four versions of the application, three since the Board accepted it. See the contradiction.
  20. SEP 9, 2026 BNSF restates flat opposition and floats a Gulf Coast condition BNSF says it opposes the merger "period," and previews a request for a neutral terminal railroad serving shippers from Corpus Christi to the Mississippi, which includes Houston.
  21. SEP 18, 2026 STB denies motions to end the case early Several parties asked the Board to deny the merger without a full review. The Board said more evidence will help it decide, and stressed the ruling does not endorse the railroads' positions.
  22. SEP 21 & 30, 2026 Environmental consultation comments and party-of-record notices close Houston neighborhood groups filed comments with OEA asking it to study the East End crossings and the Settegast truck routes.
  23. NOV 18, 2026 Deadline for public comments, protests, and requests for conditions This is the main window for residents. Sign the resident statement or file your own.
  24. DEC 3, 2026 Preliminary comments from the Justice Department and U.S. DOT
  25. FEB 16, 2027 Responses to comments due
  26. AFTER MAR 29, 2027 Public hearing The Board will set the date and place in a later decision. Houston officials have asked for a hearing here.
  27. MAY 28, 2027 Final briefs, then a Board decision within 90 days of the record closing
  28. NOT YET SET Formal environmental scoping OEA has not yet published its Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. When it does, a scoping comment period and public meetings follow. Watch the EIS website.
STB Decisions and filings, Docket FD 36873 (incl. decision served Jan. 16, 2026; filings 310158, 310163, 310323, 310413, 310428, 310429, 310838; EI-34157, EI-34224, EI-34262–63, EI-34308–09, 312103, 312118, 312262, 312315); STB press releases PR 26-13, PR 26-21, PR 26-23; STB UP-NS Merger Resources page (accessed Oct. 1, 2026); Bloomberg, Dec. 29, 2025; Rep. Sylvia Garcia, House T&I Member Day remarks, Jan. 14, 2026; Not Another Houston community fact sheet, Mar. 2026.
Why did the STB reject the first application?

Two main reasons. First, the application lacked the market-share and competitive analysis the Board's rules require for a merger of this size. Second, it left out pieces of the merger agreement itself, including disclosure schedules the contract says are part of the agreement. The Board noted the railroads claimed privilege over one schedule without ever specifying which privilege applied. Under 49 U.S.C. § 11325(a), an incomplete application must be rejected.

STB Decision, Docket FD 36873, served Jan. 16, 2026, at 2, 9.
What happens next, and why are there two tracks?

Two tracks now run side by side. The merits track decides whether the deal serves the public interest: comments by November 18, responses in February, a hearing after March 29, final briefs in May 2027. The environmental track decides what impacts get studied and mitigated: OEA's preliminary consultation closed September 21, and formal scoping opens once OEA publishes its Notice of Intent. Filing on one track does not put you on the other. Communities can ask for binding mitigation on both: grade separations, quiet zones, train length and idling limits, and community benefit commitments.

STB procedural schedule decision, Aug. 18, 2026; OEA preliminary consultation letters EO-4115–4117 (Aug. 19, 2026); 49 C.F.R. Parts 1105 & 1180.
← Home Next: Before the Filing →