DOCSLIB.ORG

Transitioning to a Zero Or Near-Zero Emission Line-Haul Freight Rail System in California: Operational and Economic Considerations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transitioning to a Zero Or Near-Zero Emission Line-Haul Freight Rail System in California: Operational and Economic Considerations Transitioning to a Zero or Near-Zero Emission Line-Haul Freight Rail System in California: Operational and Economic Considerations Final Report Prepared for: State of California Air Resources Board By University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Rail Transportation and Engineering Center (RailTEC) 1245 Newmark Civil Engineering Laboratory, MC-250 205 North Mathews Avenue Urbana, IL 61801 Spring 2016 Transitioning to a Zero or Near-Zero Emission Line-Haul Freight Rail System in California: Operational and Economic Considerations The statements and conclusions in this report are those of the contractor and not necessarily those of the California Air Resources Board. The mention of commercial products, their source, or their use in connection with material reported herein is not to be construed as actual or implied endorsement of such products. ii RailTEC Transitioning to a Zero or Near-Zero Emission Line-Haul Freight Rail System in California: Operational and Economic Considerations Table of Contents Summary................................................................................................................................ xi Locomotive Technology...................................................................................................... xi Line-Haul Freight Interoperability ....................................................................................... xii Line-Haul Freight Operations.............................................................................................xiii Emissions Benefits ............................................................................................................xiii Locomotive Costs .............................................................................................................. xv Exchange Point Operations and Capital Costs.................................................................. xv Exchange Point Delay and Mode Shift ............................................................................. xvi Fuel and Energy Supply Cost Reductions ........................................................................xvii Total Costs........................................................................................................................ xvii Overall Findings of the Captive Fleet Scenarios ............................................................... xix North American Deployment Scenarios ............................................................................ xix Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... xx 1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ...............................................................................................................1 1.2 Objective...................................................................................................................1 1.3 Scope........................................................................................................................2 1.4 Organization .............................................................................................................3 2 Zero and Near-Zero Locomotive Technology...................................................................4 2.1 Considerations for New Technologies ......................................................................4 2.2 Tier 4 Diesel-Electric with After-Treatment ...............................................................8 2.3 Liquefied Natural Gas .............................................................................................10 2.4 Battery Tenders ......................................................................................................14 2.5 Solid-Oxide Fuel Cell ..............................................................................................18 2.6 Electrification ..........................................................................................................19 2.7 Linear Synchronous Motor......................................................................................21 2.8 Summary ................................................................................................................22 3 Line-Haul Freight Rail Operations, Interoperability and Safety ......................................24 3.1 California Line-Haul Rail Network...........................................................................24 3.2 Line-Haul Rail Network in Southern California .......................................................26 3.3 Network Interoperability..........................................................................................28 3.4 Safety......................................................................................................................33 iii RailTEC Transitioning to a Zero or Near-Zero Emission Line-Haul Freight Rail System in California: Operational and Economic Considerations 4 Line-Haul Freight Rail Traffic and Energy Requirements ...............................................34 4.1 Statewide Rail Traffic Data .....................................................................................34 4.2 South Coast Basin Rail Traffic Data .......................................................................37 4.3 South Coast Train Traffic from Waybill Data ..........................................................39 4.4 Locomotive Requirements ......................................................................................44 4.5 Baseline Energy Requirements ..............................................................................47 4.6 Summary ................................................................................................................48 5 Emissions Benefits in South Coast Basin.......................................................................49 5.1 Energy and Fuel Consumption of Alternative Technologies ...................................49 5.2 Local Emissions Factors .........................................................................................50 5.3 Annual Emissions Benefits in the South Coast Basin ............................................51 6 Locomotive Capital, Energy Supply Infrastructure and Maintenance Costs...................54 6.1 Locomotive Fleet Size with Locomotive Exchange.................................................54 6.2 Equipment Capital Cost..........................................................................................58 6.3 Energy Supply and Delivery Infrastructure .............................................................59 6.4 Heavy Locomotive Repair and Central Maintenance Shop ....................................61 6.5 Annual Locomotive Maintenance Expense ............................................................61 6.6 Summary ................................................................................................................63 7 Exchange Point Process, Infrastructure and Costs ........................................................64 7.1 Exchange Point Process and Time Requirements .................................................64 7.2 Design Train Flow Rates ........................................................................................69 7.3 Conceptual Design .................................................................................................72 7.4 Locomotive Exchange Point Yard Capital Cost ......................................................75 7.5 Exchange Point Servicing Infrastructure Capital Cost ............................................88 7.6 Exchange Point Operating Cost .............................................................................88 7.7 Summary ................................................................................................................88 8 Exchange Point Delay Cost and Modal Shift ..................................................................90 8.1 Methodology ...........................................................................................................90 8.2 Cost of Train Delay at Exchange Points.................................................................94 8.3 Mode Shift and Lost Revenue ................................................................................96 8.4 Emissions Considerations of Mode Shift ................................................................98 8.5 Summary ..............................................................................................................103 9 Benefits of Improved Efficiency and Alternative Sources on Energy Supply Costs .....104 9.1 Energy and Fuel Consumption of Alternative Technologies .................................104 9.2 Energy Cost Factors .............................................................................................105 iv RailTEC Transitioning to a Zero or Near-Zero Emission Line-Haul Freight Rail System in California: Operational and Economic Considerations 9.3 Annual Energy Supply Cost Benefits in South Coast Basin .................................105 10 Other Considerations ...............................................................................................108 10.1 Employment and Relocation of Servicing Personnel ............................................108 10.2 Shift of Diesel Fuel Supply ....................................................................................108 10.3 Run-Through
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Railroad (UP) BNSF Railway (BNSF)
    Union Pacific Railroad (UP) BNSF Railway (BNSF) September 3, 2014 Sacramento, California 1 Help inform planning for near, mid, and long-term planning horizons. ◦ Sustainable Freight Plan ◦ State Implementation Plan ◦ Scoping Plan, etc Identify current state of advanced technologies that provide opportunities for emission reductions. 2 3 Background on North American Freight Rail Operations Historical Evolution of Technology and Operations Framework for Technology Assessment Assessment of Technologies to Reduce Locomotive Emissions 4 5 Seven Class I (Major) Freight Railroads in US Operating on 160k miles of track with Chicago as a major hub. UP and BNSF National Fleet of ~15,000 locomotives. ◦ 10,000 interstate line-haul and 5,000 regional and switch locomotives 6 Courtesy of GE ~4,400 hp Diesel engine powers electric alternator which provides electricity to the locomotive traction motors/wheels. Two Domestic Manufacturers: General Electric (GE) and Electro-Motive Diesel (EMD) 7 Interstate Line Haul (4,400 hp) ◦ Pull long trains across the country (e.g., Chicago to Los Angeles) ◦ Consume ~330,000 gallons of diesel annually. ◦ Operate 5-10% of time within California Medium Horsepower (MHP) (2,301-4,000 hp) ◦ Regional, helper, and short haul service. ◦ Consume ~50,000-100,000 gallons of diesel annually. ◦ Most operations in California or western region. Switch (Yard) (1,006-2,300 hp) ◦ Local and rail yard service. ◦ Consume ~25,000-50,000 gallons of diesel annually. ◦ Most operations in and around railyards. 8 Cajon Junction Colton • UP Cajon / Palmdale (8 trains per day) BNSF Transcon (66 trains per day) UP Cajon / Cima (9 trains per day) UP Coastal (1 train per day) Northern UP, Metrolink Valley Sub (9 trains per day) Alameda Corridor (UP and BNSF: UP Sunset (40 trains per day) 45 trains per day) 10 50% improvement in efficiency since 1980 (~1.8%/year) ◦ Due to operational and technology improvements ◦ FRA and rail roads project continued fuel efficiencies of about 1% per year.
    [Show full text]
  • Case of High-Speed Ground Transportation Systems
    MANAGING PROJECTS WITH STRONG TECHNOLOGICAL RUPTURE Case of High-Speed Ground Transportation Systems THESIS N° 2568 (2002) PRESENTED AT THE CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - LAUSANNE BY GUILLAUME DE TILIÈRE Civil Engineer, EPFL French nationality Approved by the proposition of the jury: Prof. F.L. Perret, thesis director Prof. M. Hirt, jury director Prof. D. Foray Prof. J.Ph. Deschamps Prof. M. Finger Prof. M. Bassand Lausanne, EPFL 2002 MANAGING PROJECTS WITH STRONG TECHNOLOGICAL RUPTURE Case of High-Speed Ground Transportation Systems THÈSE N° 2568 (2002) PRÉSENTÉE AU DÉPARTEMENT DE GÉNIE CIVIL ÉCOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FÉDÉRALE DE LAUSANNE PAR GUILLAUME DE TILIÈRE Ingénieur Génie-Civil diplômé EPFL de nationalité française acceptée sur proposition du jury : Prof. F.L. Perret, directeur de thèse Prof. M. Hirt, rapporteur Prof. D. Foray, corapporteur Prof. J.Ph. Deschamps, corapporteur Prof. M. Finger, corapporteur Prof. M. Bassand, corapporteur Document approuvé lors de l’examen oral le 19.04.2002 Abstract 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to extend my deep gratitude to Prof. Francis-Luc Perret, my Supervisory Committee Chairman, as well as to Prof. Dominique Foray for their enthusiasm, encouragements and guidance. I also express my gratitude to the members of my Committee, Prof. Jean-Philippe Deschamps, Prof. Mathias Finger, Prof. Michel Bassand and Prof. Manfred Hirt for their comments and remarks. They have contributed to making this multidisciplinary approach more pertinent. I would also like to extend my gratitude to our Research Institute, the LEM, the support of which has been very helpful. Concerning the exchange program at ITS -Berkeley (2000-2001), I would like to acknowledge the support of the Swiss National Science Foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • Bewhuwcii U*& Osilt
    BEWHUWCIi U*& OSiLt REPORT NO. FRA/0R&D-76/275.I % „ LOCOMOTIVE CAB DESIGN DEVELOPMENT Volume I: Analysis of Locomotive Cab Environment & Development of Cab Design Alternatives Jl J. Robinson D. Piccione G. Lamers Boeing Vertol Company P.O. Box 16858 Philadelphia PA 19142 ^A .ususa&j S'A1H O* OCTOBER 1976 INTERIM REPORT DOCUMENT IS AVAILABLE TO THE U.S. PUBLIC THROUGH THE NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE. SPRiNOFIELO, VIRGINIA 22161 Prepared for U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION J Office of Research and Development Washington DC 20590 A NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Govern ment assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. 'C NOTICE The United States Government does not endorse pro ducts or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are con sidered essential to the object of this report. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient** Cafolog No. FRA/ORSD-76/275.I 4. Title and Subtitle S. Report Dole LOCOMOTIVE CAB DESIGN DEVELOPMENT October 1976 Volume I: Analysis of Locomotive Cab 6. Performing Orgonnotien Code Environment § Development of Cab Design Alternatives 8. Performing Orgonisotton Report No. Author's) Robinson, D. Piccione, G. Lamers DOT-TSC-FRA-76-22,I 9. Performing Orgcniiotion Nome and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Boeing Vertol Company* RR628T/R7341 11. Contract or Grant No. P.O. Box 16858 Philadelphia PA 19142 DOT-TSC-913-1 13. Type of Report ond Period Covered 12.
    [Show full text]
  • CRO 0209.Pdf
    www.canadianrailwayobservations.com Updated 04/02/2009 CANADIAN NATIONAL CN Locomotives retired since last issue: (Previous retirement October 30th) GTW GP9r 4635 on January 28th (*Sold to MNNR January 19th … see below) On January 2nd 2009, Walter Pfefferle caught GODERICH-EXETER (GEXR) GP40 4019 pulling out of the EMCC plant in London, Ontario with these fully painted and brand new CN SD70M-2’s: 8852, 8854, 8856 and 8858. As well CN 8850-8867 were released in early January 2009. http://railfan.thegrebs.com/CN/GEXR_4019_EMD_London_Ont_1_2_09 (GEXR GP40) http://railfan.thegrebs.com/CN/CN_8854_London_1_2_09 3/4 http://railfan.thegrebs.com/CN/CN_8858_London_1_2_09 3/4 http://railfan.thegrebs.com/CN/CN_8856_London_1_2_09 3/4 http://railfan.thegrebs.com/CN/CN_8852_London_1_2_09 3/4 http://railfan.thegrebs.com/CN/CN_8852a_London_1_2_08 Rear shot. New CN Power: The following new SD70M-2 sightings came from several CRO readers this month: On January 14th, CN Intermodal 194 (which is a very lucrative UPS contracted train and operates between Chicago-Memphis-Jackson-New Orleans), departed Markham with brand new CN 8853, CN 5513, CN 9543, 150 cars, 7141 tons and 9845-feet of train. On January 13th at Chappel Jct, (near Saskatoon, SK), CN 104 had CN 8865 leading. On January 13th, CN 198 had CN 8855-2643 for power at Chappel Jct. January 11th, CN train Q120 with 2525-5698 and new CN SD70M-2 8863 with 9823-feet of train at 8767 tons enroute to Halifax, NS and arrived on the 12th. While on the Montmagny Subdivision, SD70M-2 8863 reportedly had a minor mechanical issue that was resolved while in transit.
    [Show full text]
  • Railway Power Supply System Models for Static Calculations in a Modular Design Implementation
    Railway power supply system models for static calculations in a modular design implementation Usability illustrated by case-studies of northern Malmbanan RONNY SKOGBERG Master’s Degree Project Stockholm, Sweden 2013 XR-EE-ES 2013:006 Railway power supply system models for static calculations in a modular design implementation Usability illustrated by case-studies of northern Malmbanan RONNY SKOGBERG Master of Science Thesis Royal Institute of Technology School of Electrical Engineering Electric Power Systems Stockholm, Sweden, 2013 Supervisors: Lars Abrahamsson, KTH Mario Lagos, Transrail AB Examiner: Lennart Söder XR-EE-ES 2013:006 Abstract Several previous theses and reports have shown that voltage variations, and other types of supply changes, can influence the performance and movements of trains. As part of a modular software package for railway focused calculations, the need to take into account for the electrical behavior of the system was needed, to be used for both planning and operational uses. In this thesis, different static models are presented and used for train related power flow calculations. A previous model used for converter stations is also extended to handle different configurations of multiple converters. A special interest in the train type IORE, which is used for iron ore transports along Malmbanan, and the power systems influence to its performance, as available modules, for mechanical calculations, in the software uses the same train type. A part of this project was to examine changes in the power systems performance if the control of the train converters were changed, both during motoring and regenerative braking. A proposed node model, for the static parts of a railway power system, has been used to simplify the building of the power system model and implementation of the simulation environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Stronger Ties: a Shared Commitment to Railway Safety
    STRONGER TIES: A S H A R E D C O M M I T M E N T TO RAILWAY SAFETY Review of the Railway Safety Act November 2007 Published by Railway Safety Act Review Secretariat Ottawa, Canada K1A 0N5 This report is available at: www.tc.gc.ca/tcss/RSA_Review-Examen_LSF Funding for this publication was provided by Transport Canada. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department. ISBN 978-0-662-05408-5 Catalogue No. T33-16/2008 © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of Transport, 2007 This material may be freely reproduced for non-commercial purposes provided that the source is acknowledged. Photo Credits: Chapters 1-10: Transport Canada; Appendix B: CP Images TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................1 1.1 Rationale for the 2006 Railway Safety Act Review . .2 1.2 Scope . 2 1.3 Process ....................................................................................3 1.3.1 Stakeholder Consultations . .4 1.3.2 Research . 6 1.3.3 Development of Recommendations .......................................6 1.4 Key Challenges for the Railway Industry and the Regulator.................7 1.5 A Word of Thanks .................................................................... 10 2. STATE OF RAIL SAFETY IN CANADA ...................................11 2.1 Accidents 1989-2006 ................................................................. 12 2.2 Categories of Accidents . 13 2.2.1 Main Track Accidents...................................................... 14 2.2.2 Non-Main Track Accidents ............................................... 15 2.2.3 Crossing and Trespasser Accidents . 15 2.2.4 Transportation of Dangerous Goods Accidents and Incidents . 17 2.3 Normalizing Accidents . 18 2.4 Comparing Rail Safety in Canada and the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Trains Galore
    Neil Thomas Forrester Hugo Marsh Shuttleworth (Director) (Director) (Director) Trains Galore 15th & 16th December at 10:00 Special Auction Services Plenty Close Off Hambridge Road NEWBURY RG14 5RL Telephone: 01635 580595 Email: [email protected] Bob Leggett Graham Bilbe Dominic Foster www.specialauctionservices.com Toys, Trains & Trains Toys & Trains Figures Due to the nature of the items in this auction, buyers must satisfy themselves concerning their authenticity prior to bidding and returns will not be accepted, subject to our Terms and Conditions. Additional images are available on request. If you are happy with our service, please write a Google review Buyers Premium with SAS & SAS LIVE: 20% plus Value Added Tax making a total of 24% of the Hammer Price the-saleroom.com Premium: 25% plus Value Added Tax making a total of 30% of the Hammer Price 7. Graham Farish and Peco N Gauge 13. Fleischmann N Gauge Prussian Train N Gauge Goods Wagons and Coaches, three cased Sets, two boxed sets 7881 comprising 7377 T16 Graham Farish coaches in Southern Railway steam locomotive with five small coaches and Livery 0633/0623 (2) and a Graham Farish SR 7883 comprising G4 steam locomotive with brake van, together with Peco goods wagons tender and five freight wagons, both of the private owner wagons and SR all cased (24), KPEV, G-E, boxes G (2) Day 1 Tuesday 15th December at 10:00 G-E, Cases F (28) £60-80 Day 1 Tuesday 15th December at 10:00 £60-80 14. Fleischmann N Gauge Prussian Train Sets, two boxed sets 7882 comprising T9 8177 steam locomotive and five coaches and 7884 comprising G8 5353 steam locomotive with tender and six goods wagons, G-E, Boxes F (2) £60-80 1.
    [Show full text]
  • High-Speed Ground Transportation Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment
    High-Speed Ground Transportation U.S. Department of Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Transportation Federal Railroad Administration Office of Railroad Policy and Development Washington, DC 20590 Final Report DOT/FRA/ORD-12/15 September 2012 NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. Any opinions, findings and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the United States Government, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the United States Government. The United States Government assumes no liability for the content or use of the material contained in this document. NOTICE The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Corporate Profile + Fact Book
    2008 corporate profile + fact book 2008 corporate profile + fact book table of contents 4 Financial summary 44 Integrated Operating Plan (IOP) 6 Key metrics 45 Interline management 10 System map (density) 46 Co-production 11 Corporate history 48 Information technology 12 Recent acquisition: DM&E 49 Safety 13 Company overview 51 Environment 14 Network 55 Community relations 17 Markets 57 Human resources i. Bulk 58 Labour relations ii. Merchandise iii. Intermodal 61 Governance 36 Canadian Pacific Logistics Solutions (CPLS) 63 Executive profiles 37 Motive power 65 Board of Directors 38 Freight car fleet 66 Financial data 40 Rail yards and intermodal terminals 70 Glossary 42 Repair facilities TSX / NYSE | CP forward-looking information This Corporate Profile and Fact Book contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (United States) and other relevant securities legislation relating but not limited to Canadian Pacific’s (CP) operations, anticipated financial performance, business prospects and strategies. Forward-looking information typically contains statements with words such as “anticipate”, “believe”, “expect”, “plan” or similar words suggesting future outcomes. Readers are cautioned to not place undue reliance on forward-looking information because it is possible that we will not achieve predictions, forecasts, projections and other forms of forward-looking information. In addition, except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update publicly or otherwise
    [Show full text]
  • Best Practices and Strategies for Improving Rail Energy Efficiency
    U.S. Department of Transportation Best Practices and Strategies for Federal Railroad Improving Rail Energy Efficiency Administration Office of Research and Development Washington, DC 20590 DOT/FRA/ORD-14/02 Final Report January 2014 NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. Any opinions, findings and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the United States Government, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the United States Government. The United States Government assumes no liability for the content or use of the material contained in this document. NOTICE The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.
    [Show full text]
  • The Need for Freight Rail Electrification in Southern California
    The Need for Freight Rail Electrification in Southern California Brian Yanity Californians for Electric Rail [email protected] May 13, 2018 Executive Summary Full electrification of freight trains is the only proven zero-emissions freight railroad technology. Electric rail propulsion can take several different forms, including locomotives powered by overhead catenary wire, on-board batteries, or more advanced concepts such as battery tender cars and linear synchronous motors. This white paper is largely a literature review of previous studies on electric freight rail in the Southern California region, with information compiled about existing electric freight rail locomotives and systems from around the world. The two main benefits of freight rail electrification in the region would be reduced air pollution, and reduced consumption of diesel fuel for transportation. Electrification of freight rail in Southern California would reduce the public health impacts to local communities affected by diesel-powered freight transportation, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions of freight movement. The main challenge for electric freight rail is the high capital costs of electric rail infrastructure, especially the overhead catenary wire over tracks. A variety of options for public and/or private financing of freight rail electrification need to be explored. Electrification of the proposed short-haul rail service between the ports and the Inland Empire, currently under study, is an opportunity for using electric locomotives though the Alameda
    [Show full text]
  • 50764 Service Date – May 17, 2021 Eb Surface
    50764 SERVICE DATE – MAY 17, 2021 EB SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD DECISION Docket No. FD 36514 CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY COMPANY, GRAND TRUNK CORPORATION, AND CN’S RAIL OPERATING SUBSIDIARIES —CONTROL— KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN, THE KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, GATEWAY EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY, AND THE TEXAS MEXICAN RAILWAY COMPANY Digest:1 The Board determines that this proposed transaction will be subject to the agency’s current merger regulations and denies a motion to approve a proposed voting trust agreement, without prejudice, as incomplete. Decision No. 3 Decided: May 17, 2021 Canadian National Railway Company (CNR), Grand Trunk Corporation (GTC), and their rail operating subsidiaries (collectively, with CNR and GTC, CN)2 have notified the Surface Transportation Board (Board) of their intent to file an application seeking authority for the acquisition of control by CNR, through its wholly owned subsidiary Brooklyn Merger Sub, Inc. (Brooklyn Merger Sub), of Kansas City Southern, and through it, of The Kansas City Southern Railway Company (KCSR), Gateway Eastern Railway Company, and The Texas Mexican Railway Company (collectively, KCS), in the event that Kansas City Southern accepts 1 The digest constitutes no part of the decision of the Board but has been prepared for the convenience of the reader. It may not be cited to or relied upon as precedent. See Pol’y Statement on Plain Language Digs. in Decisions, EP 696 (STB served Sept. 2, 2010). 2 CN’s rail operating subsidiaries in the United States include Illinois Central Railroad Company; Wisconsin Central Ltd.; Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company; Bessemer and Lake Erie Railroad Company; Chicago, Central & Pacific Railroad Company; Cedar River Railroad Company; The Pittsburgh & Conneaut Dock Company; Sault.
    [Show full text]