Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 28, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Insurance The Company maintains numerous insurance programs with substantial limits for property damage (which includes business interruption) and third-party liability. A certain amount of risk is retained by the Company on each of the property and liability programs. The Company has a $25 million retention per occurrence for the non-catastrophic property program (such as a derailment) and a $50 million retention per occurrence for the liability and catastrophic property programs (such as hurricanes and floods). While the Company believes its current insurance coverage is adequate, future claims could exceed existing insurance coverage or insurance may not continue to be available at commercially reasonable rates. NOTE 5. Commitments and Contingencies, continued Legal The Company is involved in litigation incidental to its business and is a party to a number of legal actions and claims, various governmental proceedings and private civil lawsuits, including, but not limited to, those related to fuel surcharge practices, environmental and hazardous material exposure matters, FELA claims by employees, other personal injury or property claims and disputes and complaints involving certain transportation rates and charges. Some of the legal proceedings include claims for compensatory as well as punitive damages and others are, or are purported to be, class actions. While the final outcome of these matters cannot be reasonably determined, considering, among other things, the legal defenses available and liabilities that have been recorded along with applicable insurance, it is currently the opinion of CSX management that none of these pending items will have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. An unexpected adverse resolution of one or more of these items, however, could have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or liquidity in that particular period. The Company is able to estimate a range of possible loss for certain legal proceedings for which a loss is reasonably possible in excess of reserves established. The Company has estimated this range to be $3 million to $14 million in aggregate at March 28, 2014. This estimated aggregate range is based upon currently available information and is subject to significant judgment and a variety of assumptions. Accordingly, the Company's estimate will change from time to time, and actual losses may vary significantly from the current estimate. Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation In May 2007, class action lawsuits were filed against CSXT and three other U.S.-based Class I railroads alleging that the defendants' fuel surcharge practices relating to contract and unregulated traffic resulted from an illegal conspiracy in violation of antitrust laws. In November 2007, the class action lawsuits were consolidated and are now pending in federal court in the District of Columbia. The suit seeks treble damages allegedly sustained by purported class members as well as attorneys' fees and other relief. Plaintiffs are expected to allege damages at least equal to the fuel surcharges at issue. In June 2012, the District Court certified the case as a class action. The decision was not a ruling on the merits of plaintiffs' claims, rather a decision to allow the plaintiffs to seek to prove the case as a class. The defendant railroads petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for permission to appeal the District Court's class certification decision. In August 2013, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision vacating the class certification decision and remanded the case to the District Court to reconsider its class certification decision. On October 15, 2013, the District Court held a case management conference to determine the scope and schedule of the remand proceedings. The District Court has ordered briefing on class certification to be completed by the end of May 2014, and in the interim, has deferred proceedings on the merits of the case. CSXT believes that its fuel surcharge practices were arrived at and applied lawfully and that the case is without merit. Accordingly, the Company intends to defend itself vigorously. However, penalties for violating antitrust laws can be severe, and an unexpected adverse decision on the merits could have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or liquidity in that particular period or for the full year. NOTE 5. Commitments and Contingencies, continued Environmental CSXT has certain indemnification requirements with respect to Pharmacia LLC (formerly known as Monsanto Company) for certain liabilities associated with real estate formerly owned by Pharmacia that is now owned by CSXT in Kearny, New Jersey (the “Property”). The indemnification and defense duties arise with respect to several matters. The State of New Jersey filed suit in 2005 against Occidental Chemical Corporation, Tierra Solutions Inc., Maxus Energy Corporation and five other companies seeking cleanup and removal costs and other damages associated with the presence of dioxin and other hazardous substances in the sediment of the Newark Bay Complex, which includes a 17-mile stretch of the Passaic River near the Property. In 2009, Pharmacia, along with hundreds of other companies, was served with a third-party complaint by Tierra Solutions Inc. and Maxus Energy Corporation seeking contribution towards the costs and damages claimed by the state of New Jersey or incurred by Tierra and Maxus related to the Newark Bay Complex. CSXT has been participating in the defense of this matter with and on behalf of Pharmacia. In 2013, Pharmacia, along with most of the other third-party defendants, entered into a settlement agreement with the state of New Jersey for an amount that is not material to CSXT. The settlement, approved by the Superior Court of New Jersey in December 2013, resolves certain claims or potential claims by the state of New Jersey for costs and damages arising from discharges to the Newark Bay Complex. CSXT, on behalf of Pharmacia, is also conducting a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study of the 17-mile Lower Passaic River Study Area with approximately 70 other parties pursuant to an Administrative Order on Consent with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"). The Company does not believe any remediation costs potentially allocable to CSXT would be material to the Company's financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. On April 11, 2014, the EPA announced its proposed plan to remediate the lower eight miles of the Lower Passaic River. The proposed plan, based on a Focused Feasibility Study, informs the public of EPA’s preferred remedial alternative and solicits public comment. After review of comments, EPA is expected to issue its final cleanup plan early next year.

Commitments and Contingencies

Insurance

The Company maintains numerous insurance programs with substantial limits for property damage (which includes business interruption) and third-party liability. A certain amount of risk is retained by the Company on each of the property and liability programs. The Company has a $25 million retention per occurrence for the non-catastrophic property program (such as a derailment) and a $50 million retention per occurrence for the liability and catastrophic property programs (such as hurricanes and floods). While the Company believes its current insurance coverage is adequate, future claims could exceed existing insurance coverage or insurance may not continue to be available at commercially reasonable rates.

NOTE 5. Commitments and Contingencies, continued

Legal

The Company is involved in litigation incidental to its business and is a party to a number of legal actions and claims, various governmental proceedings and private civil lawsuits, including, but not limited to, those related to fuel surcharge practices, environmental and hazardous material exposure matters, FELA claims by employees, other personal injury or property claims and disputes and complaints involving certain transportation rates and charges. Some of the legal proceedings include claims for compensatory as well as punitive damages and others are, or are purported to be, class actions. While the final outcome of these matters cannot be reasonably determined, considering, among other things, the legal defenses available and liabilities that have been recorded along with applicable insurance, it is currently the opinion of CSX management that none of these pending items will have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. An unexpected adverse resolution of one or more of these items, however, could have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or liquidity in that particular period.

The Company is able to estimate a range of possible loss for certain legal proceedings for which a loss is reasonably possible in excess of reserves established. The Company has estimated this range to be $3 million to $14 million in aggregate at March 28, 2014. This estimated aggregate range is based upon currently available information and is subject to significant judgment and a variety of assumptions. Accordingly, the Company's estimate will change from time to time, and actual losses may vary significantly from the current estimate.

Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation

In May 2007, class action lawsuits were filed against CSXT and three other U.S.-based Class I railroads alleging that the defendants' fuel surcharge practices relating to contract and unregulated traffic resulted from an illegal conspiracy in violation of antitrust laws. In November 2007, the class action lawsuits were consolidated and are now pending in federal court in the District of Columbia. The suit seeks treble damages allegedly sustained by purported class members as well as attorneys' fees and other relief. Plaintiffs are expected to allege damages at least equal to the fuel surcharges at issue.

In June 2012, the District Court certified the case as a class action. The decision was not a ruling on the merits of plaintiffs' claims, rather a decision to allow the plaintiffs to seek to prove the case as a class. The defendant railroads petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for permission to appeal the District Court's class certification decision. In August 2013, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision vacating the class certification decision and remanded the case to the District Court to reconsider its class certification decision. On October 15, 2013, the District Court held a case management conference to determine the scope and schedule of the remand proceedings. The District Court has ordered briefing on class certification to be completed by the end of May 2014, and in the interim, has deferred proceedings on the merits of the case.

CSXT believes that its fuel surcharge practices were arrived at and applied lawfully and that the case is without merit. Accordingly, the Company intends to defend itself vigorously. However, penalties for violating antitrust laws can be severe, and an unexpected adverse decision on the merits could have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or liquidity in that particular period or for the full year.

NOTE 5. Commitments and Contingencies, continued

Environmental

CSXT has certain indemnification requirements with respect to Pharmacia LLC (formerly known as Monsanto Company) for certain liabilities associated with real estate formerly owned by Pharmacia that is now owned by CSXT in Kearny, New Jersey (the “Property”). The indemnification and defense duties arise with respect to several matters. The State of New Jersey filed suit in 2005 against Occidental Chemical Corporation, Tierra Solutions Inc., Maxus Energy Corporation and five other companies seeking cleanup and removal costs and other damages associated with the presence of dioxin and other hazardous substances in the sediment of the Newark Bay Complex, which includes a 17-mile stretch of the Passaic River near the Property. In 2009, Pharmacia, along with hundreds of other companies, was served with a third-party complaint by Tierra Solutions Inc. and Maxus Energy Corporation seeking contribution towards the costs and damages claimed by the state of New Jersey or incurred by Tierra and Maxus related to the Newark Bay Complex. CSXT has been participating in the defense of this matter with and on behalf of Pharmacia. In 2013, Pharmacia, along with most of the other third-party defendants, entered into a settlement agreement with the state of New Jersey for an amount that is not material to CSXT. The settlement, approved by the Superior Court of New Jersey in December 2013, resolves certain claims or potential claims by the state of New Jersey for costs and damages arising from discharges to the Newark Bay Complex. CSXT, on behalf of Pharmacia, is also conducting a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study of the 17-mile Lower Passaic River Study Area with approximately 70 other parties pursuant to an Administrative Order on Consent with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"). The Company does not believe any remediation costs potentially allocable to CSXT would be material to the Company's financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. On April 11, 2014, the EPA announced its proposed plan to remediate the lower eight miles of the Lower Passaic River. The proposed plan, based on a Focused Feasibility Study, informs the public of EPA’s preferred remedial alternative and solicits public comment. After review of comments, EPA is expected to issue its final cleanup plan early next year.