Separating Fact from Fiction: TRRA and the Union Pacific–Norfolk Southern Merger
Author: Katie Novak, General Director-Interline Operations, Network Planning and Operations for Union Pacific Railroad | July 8, 2026
Key Takeaways:
● The Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern combination will not change how terminal railroads operate today. Terminal railroads provide neutral, coordinated operations that work for all railroads to connect and hand off freight to each other.
● Shared rail facilities operate with neutrality. Terminal railroads like the Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis (TRRA) are required to treat all users fairly, regardless of ownership stakes.
● Terminal railroads are designed to support competition, not limit it. Connecting East and West through a single network will expand market access, strengthen domestic supply chains and help rail compete more effectively across the broader freight transportation market.
● The Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern combination will not change how terminal railroads operate today. Terminal railroads provide neutral, coordinated operations that work for all railroads to connect and hand off freight to each other.
● Shared rail facilities operate with neutrality. Terminal railroads like the Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis (TRRA) are required to treat all users fairly, regardless of ownership stakes.
● Terminal railroads are designed to support competition, not limit it. Connecting East and West through a single network will expand market access, strengthen domestic supply chains and help rail compete more effectively across the broader freight transportation market.
Katie Novak
That neutrality isn’t just a good idea — it’s built into how these companies are set up and governed. Terminal railroads are required to treat all users fairly, regardless of ownership stakes. In fact, TRRA’s structure was specifically shaped by a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1912 to ensure it operates in a non-discriminatory, pro-competitive way.
You see the same principles at work in other shared rail operations, like the Kansas City Terminal Railway (KCT) and TTX Company, which manages rail car pooling. These organizations are designed — and closely overseen — to support competition, not limit it.
Real-world examples show this model works. In Portland, the Portland Terminal Railroad Company (PTRC) — majority-owned by Union Pacific, with BNSF as a partner — has supported BNSF’s independent operations for decades. BNSF has leased and expanded its intermodal ramp at PTRC’s Guilds Lake Yard multiple times since the late 1980s, growing its own competing service in the market even without majority ownership.
Similarly, in California, the Central California Traction Company (CCT), jointly owned by Union Pacific and BNSF, has operated successfully as a shared facility serving the Port of Stockton since the late 1990s. The two railroads have coordinated how traffic moves across the network — including routing all CCT traffic through BNSF’s Stockton terminal — while continuing to compete for customers. CCT acts as a neutral operator for switching and maintenance, showing how shared infrastructure can function efficiently over the long term.
Despite all of this, some competitors claim that if Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern combine, it will somehow change how these terminal railroads operate. Such a concern is not justified. These organizations are set up specifically to prevent that kind of outcome.
Still, we’ve gone a step further to address any possible concerns. We’ve committed to giving up ownership stakes and governance rights that could theoretically be seen as influencing these shared entities. These are practical, good-faith solutions. The fact critics continue to raise concerns despite these concessions suggests the real issue is opposition to the merger itself — not the operations of TRRA or similar organizations. In fact, a special meeting was called to discuss TRRA and the other owners refused to show up.
At the end of the day, terminal railroads like TRRA — and companies like TTX — have a long track record of operating fairly and supporting competition, even when ownership stakes vary. The safeguards built into their structures, combined with our additional concessions, ensure they will continue to serve as neutral, reliable connectors in the national rail network.
We’re looking forward to moving the conversation back to the bigger picture: the benefits of creating a more competitive, efficient transcontinental railroad network.
You see the same principles at work in other shared rail operations, like the Kansas City Terminal Railway (KCT) and TTX Company, which manages rail car pooling. These organizations are designed — and closely overseen — to support competition, not limit it.
Real-world examples show this model works. In Portland, the Portland Terminal Railroad Company (PTRC) — majority-owned by Union Pacific, with BNSF as a partner — has supported BNSF’s independent operations for decades. BNSF has leased and expanded its intermodal ramp at PTRC’s Guilds Lake Yard multiple times since the late 1980s, growing its own competing service in the market even without majority ownership.
Similarly, in California, the Central California Traction Company (CCT), jointly owned by Union Pacific and BNSF, has operated successfully as a shared facility serving the Port of Stockton since the late 1990s. The two railroads have coordinated how traffic moves across the network — including routing all CCT traffic through BNSF’s Stockton terminal — while continuing to compete for customers. CCT acts as a neutral operator for switching and maintenance, showing how shared infrastructure can function efficiently over the long term.
Despite all of this, some competitors claim that if Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern combine, it will somehow change how these terminal railroads operate. Such a concern is not justified. These organizations are set up specifically to prevent that kind of outcome.
Still, we’ve gone a step further to address any possible concerns. We’ve committed to giving up ownership stakes and governance rights that could theoretically be seen as influencing these shared entities. These are practical, good-faith solutions. The fact critics continue to raise concerns despite these concessions suggests the real issue is opposition to the merger itself — not the operations of TRRA or similar organizations. In fact, a special meeting was called to discuss TRRA and the other owners refused to show up.
At the end of the day, terminal railroads like TRRA — and companies like TTX — have a long track record of operating fairly and supporting competition, even when ownership stakes vary. The safeguards built into their structures, combined with our additional concessions, ensure they will continue to serve as neutral, reliable connectors in the national rail network.
We’re looking forward to moving the conversation back to the bigger picture: the benefits of creating a more competitive, efficient transcontinental railroad network.