|
(Per Kaplan Kirsch LLP) In its August 31, 2026, decision in Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Surface Transportation Board, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied in principal part Union Pacific’s petition for review of the Surface Transportation Board’s decision granting terminal trackage rights to Metra. Metra, following UP’s decision to stop operating its service over three lines in the Chicago area, filed an application for terminal trackage rights over UP’s lines in March 2025. The STB denied UP’s motion to dismiss the application and granted the application. The STB asserted jurisdiction over Metra’s application based on the Interstate Commerce Commission’s (ICC) historical jurisdiction over Metra. It then held that the statutory provision allowing it to grant trackage rights over “terminal facilities, including main-line tracks for a reasonable distance outside of a terminal,” applied to the Chicago Freight Terminal and the current length of the UP lines used by Metra. The STB further concluded that the grant of trackage rights was in the public interest. But the Board declined to set interim compensation or other conditions, pending further negotiations by the parties. UP petitioned for review, and the Eighth Circuit granted the petition in part and denied the petition in part. UP first argued that the “public interest” standard under Section 11102(a) was not met, because that standard could only be met by a showing of adequate service. The Eighth Circuit agreed with the STB’s conclusion that, even if UP was correct, the standard was met because UP provides inadequate service to Chicago-area commuters, who were analogous to the “shipping public” such a standard would be designed to serve. The court rejected UP’s arguments that its provision of access to Metra was sufficient, given that UP argued it could revoke that access, and UP identified no precedent supporting its position. The court did, however, grant UP’s petition for review insofar as UP challenged the STB’s decision to confer terminal trackage rights without ensuring UP’s compensation was “paid or adequately secured,” as required by Section 11102(a). The court held that the STB had not satisfied that requirement through its “pledge” that UP would be compensated based on Metra’s status as a government entity and presumed financial responsibility was inadequate. Metra and the STB identified ICC and D.C. Circuit precedent accepting such pledges, but the court determined they were unreasoned and therefore departed from them. However, the court noted that the statute did not require the STB to set conditions before making the trackage rights effective. Significantly, UP did not challenge the Board’s assertion of jurisdiction over Metra.
|
