Union Pacific 2007 Annual Report Download - page 19

15
We received notices from the EPA and state environmental agencies alleging that we are or may be liable
under federal or state environmental laws for remediation costs at various sites throughout the United States,
including sites on the Superfund National Priorities List or state superfund lists. We cannot predict the
ultimate impact of these proceedings and suits because of the number of potentially responsible parties
involved, the degree of contamination by various wastes, the scarcity and quality of volumetric data related to
many of the sites, and the speculative nature of remediation costs.
Information concerning environmental claims and contingencies and estimated remediation costs is set forth
in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Critical
Accounting Policies – Environmental, Item 7.
Other Matters
As we reported in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, 20 small rail
shippers (many of whom are represented by the same law firms) filed virtually identical antitrust lawsuits in
various federal district courts against us and four other Class I railroads in the U.S. The original plaintiff filed
the first of these claims in the U.S. District Court in New Jersey on May 14, 2007, and the additional plaintiffs
filed claims in district courts in various states, including Florida, Illinois, Alabama, Pennsylvania, and the
District of Columbia. These suits allege that the railroads engaged in price-fixing by establishing common fuel
surcharges for certain rail traffic.
We received additional complaints during the third and fourth quarters of 2007, increasing the total number
of complaints to 30. A few of these suits involve plaintiffs alleging that they are or were indirect purchasers of
rail transportation and seeking to represent the class of indirect purchasers of rail transportation that paid fuel
surcharges. These complaints have added allegations under state antitrust and consumer protection laws. All
of these “copycat” lawsuits (whether filed by direct or indirect purchasers of rail transportation) are being filed
by various groups of plaintiffs’ lawyers seeking to become lead counsel in a nationwide class action against the
railroads. Each of the plaintiffs requests certification of its complaint as a class-action. On November 6, 2007,
the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ordered that all of the rail fuel surcharge cases be transferred to
the U.S. District Court in D.C. for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.
Additionally, the Attorney General of a state outside our service area issued a grand jury subpoena to us
requesting documents pertaining to our fuel surcharge program. We met with representatives of this Attorney
General’s office, and we plan to have additional meetings in the future in an effort to resolve that office’s
interest in this matter.
We deny the allegations that our fuel surcharge program violates the antitrust laws or any other laws. We
believe that these lawsuits are without merit, and we will vigorously defend our actions. Therefore, we
currently believe that these matters will not have a material adverse effect on any of our results of operations,
financial condition, and liquidity.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of 2007.