News & Reviews News Wire STB rules against CN in Chicago interchange dispute with CP

STB rules against CN in Chicago interchange dispute with CP

By Bill Stephens | January 30, 2024

Regulators say it’s unreasonable for CN to select Clearing Yard as an interchange while expecting CP to pay Belt Railway of Chicago switching costs

Email Newsletter

Get the newest photos, videos, stories, and more from Trains.com brands. Sign-up for email today!

Black, gray, and yellow locomotives lined up in yard
Belt Railway of Chicago locomotives await action at Clearing Yard. Belt Railway switching fees were an issue in a long-running interchange dispute between Canadian National and Canadian Pacific. David Lassen

WASHINGTON — In the latest twist in a long-running Chicago interchange dispute, federal regulators yesterday ruled that it’s unreasonable for Canadian National to unilaterally designate the Belt Railway of Chicago’s Clearing Yard as the location where it will exchange traffic with rival Canadian Pacific Kansas City.

It’s the second time that the Surface Transportation Board has ruled against CN’s selection of Clearing Yard as its interchange with CP. CN appealed the STB’s October 2020 ruling, however, and in 2021 a federal appeals court tossed the STB decision and sent the matter back to the board.

In a decision issued yesterday, the STB said it was not reasonable for CN to shift interchange from Spaulding, Ill., to Clearing Yard while expecting CPKC to pick up the tab for switching costs.

CN in 2019 had sought to shift the interchange from Spaulding to its Kirk Yard in Gary, Ind., but the railroads reached a temporary agreement designating Clearing as the interchange. In April 2020 CN asked the board to rule that CN could designate Clearing as the interchange and that CP as delivering carrier is responsible for paying BRC’s switching fees.

The board said it was not reasonable for CN to expect CP to pay switching fees when there’s a direct interchange location available at Spaulding.

“No party in this proceeding has pointed to, and the Board is not aware of, any prior instance of a receiving carrier unilaterally designating an interchange point on a third-party’s line and requiring the delivering carrier to exercise trackage rights and pay third-party fees where there is a viable free alternative available for direct interchange,” the board said. “Indeed, other Class I railroads indicate that CN’s proposed interchange arrangement is contrary to industry expectations regarding what qualifies as reasonable.”

“CN’s proposed designation would depart from the parties’ own past practice, industry practice, and CN’s prior claims regarding the benefits of removing traffic from Clearing,” the board said. “It also attempts unfairly to shift significant costs associated with interchange facilities — which, under [federal law] CN is obligated to provide — to obtain a benefit for CN, while also setting a precedent that is likely to have detrimental effects on the national network.”

The board said its decision “does not speak to the merits of any alternative arrangement for interchanging traffic at Clearing (e.g., one that involves a different percentage allocation of the BRC fees — a change that could affect the reasonableness of the proposed interchange location).”

4 thoughts on “STB rules against CN in Chicago interchange dispute with CP

  1. Now come the Court case. CN probably in short order will file a law suit to have the STB ruling voided and to allow them to do what they want.

  2. Just tell CN to put a rational siding in between Barrington and Stearns Road The yard at Spaulding Junction is too small for pass throughs to bypass. Seems simple to me unless you have an axe to grind with CPKC.

    1. CN has an axe to grind with CPKC, and they should just split the fees if CN really wants to use Clearing as an interchange point.

You must login to submit a comment