Feed aggregator

U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy in a statement “specifically mentioned the expansion of the Second Avenue subway line and the construction of new train tunnels under the Hudson River, a $16 billion project,” according to The Times. “He said that funds for those two projects would not be distributed while the Transportation Department reviewed what it described as New York State’s ‘discriminatory, unconstitutional contracting processes.’”

“The review was in response to [POTUS 47’s] executive orders earlier this year targeting diversity, equity and inclusion programs, Mr. Duffy said,” according to The Times. “‘The department is focusing on these projects because they are arguably the largest infrastructure initiatives in the Western Hemisphere,’ he said in a statement.”

The Times noted that “[i]t was not immediately clear whether the $18 billion involved just those two projects or others as well.”

CNBC reported that Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought announced the federal funding freeze in posts on social media platform X. “‘Roughly $18 billion in New York City infrastructure projects have been put on hold to ensure funding is not flowing based on unconstitutional DEI principles,’ Vought wrote,” CNBC reported. “The funding is earmarked for the Hudson River Tunnel Project and the Second Avenue Subway project, said … Vought.”

According to CNBC, “The DOT in a statement, said it had issued ‘an interim final rule (IFR) barring race- and sex-based contracting requirements from federal grants,’ and that it had sent ‘letters to New York to inform them that their two mega projects – the 2nd Avenue Subway and Hudson Tunnel – are under administrative review to determine whether any unconstitutional practices are occurring.’”

(Gateway Development Commission illustration)

The statement noted: “Until USDOT’s quick administrative review is complete, project reimbursements cannot be processed, including a $300 million disbursement for the 2nd Avenue Subway. The remaining federal funding for these projects totals nearly $18 billion,’” according to the CNBC report.

The media outlet reported that while the government shutdown, which began at 12:01 a.m. ET on Oct. 1, did not lead to the funding freeze, “the DOT said that its review of the projects will take longer than normal because of the shutdown.”

The Gateway Development Commission has oversight of the Gateway Program Hudson Tunnel Project, which is building nine miles of passenger rail track between New York and New Jersey, including a new, two-tube tunnel under the Hudson River, and will rehabilitate the existing North River Tunnel. 

In an Oct. 1 statement, Gateway Development Commission CEO Thomas Prendergast said: “GDC has received notification from FTA [USDOT’s Federal Transit Administration] regarding a pause in disbursements for the Hudson Tunnel Project. GDC complies with all federal laws and regulations, and will continue to do so throughout the project. We look forward to continuing our productive relationship with the Administration, FTA, FRA [Federal Railroad Administration], and the U.S. Department of Transportation. In the meantime, we remain focused on keeping the project on scope, schedule, and budget.” (The GDC Board of Commissioners on Sept. 30 authorized expanding the use of the delivery partner model for project construction.)

According to The New York Times report, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul “described the [funding freeze] announcement as the [POTUS 47] administration’s latest salvo in its war on the state and its values. Earlier this week, Ms. Hochul said that the administration had cut an additional $100 million in counterterrorism funding in New York, following an earlier reduction of $87 million.”

“‘They’ve decided to put their own interpretation of proper culture ahead of our needs, the needs of a nation,’ Ms. Hochul, a Democrat, said at a news conference to discuss another topic involving Washington, the federal government shutdown,’” according to The Times. “‘You can’t make this up, folks. Just keeps getting worse and worse.’”

The FRA in July announced that it would pull back approximately $4 billion in funding for the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) high-speed rail project. The FRA’s decision followed the release of its Compliance Review Report, which found the CHSRA project to be “in default” of the terms of two federal grants. CHSRA is now suing the POTUS 47 Administration.

Further Reading:

• NYMTA Approves Tunnel-Boring Contract For Second Avenue Subway Phase 2
• NYMTA Kicks Off Second Avenue Subway Phase 2 Project
• Now Advancing: New York’s Second Avenue Subway Phase 2
• Gateway: HTP Makes Concrete Progress
• GDC Awards Manhattan Tunnel Project Contract
• GDC Issues RFQ for New Jersey Surface Alignment Project
• For Hudson Tunnel Project, $2.7B in Federal Grants Now Available for Construction
• Hudson Tunnel Project Primed for FFGA
• GDC Submits FTA Documentation for Hudson Tunnel Project Funding

The post Reports: Feds to Pause $18B in NYC Infrastructure Project Funding appeared first on Railway Age.

On display at this years International N Gauge show were the very first test livery samples for Revolution Train's N Gauge Class 180 'Adelante' in First Great Western and Hull Trains dynamic lines livery.

“On a 55-to-45 vote, the G.O.P. plan, which would extend funding through Nov. 21, fell short of the 60 needed for passage,” The New York Times reported. “Republicans also blocked Democrats’ plan, which would extend funding through the end of October and add more than $1 trillion in health care spending, in a 47-to-53 vote.”

White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russel T. Vought after the votes directed leaders of executive branch departments and agencies to “execute their plans for an orderly shutdown,” a move “formally initiating the first closure of the federal government since [POTUS 47’s] first term,” Politico reported (download Vought’s memo below, courtesy of Politico).

M-25-35-Status-of-Agency-OperationsDownload

That shutdown, begun in December 2018, lasted 35 days. It was the longest shutdown in history; other federal government shutdowns have lasted for as little as one day.

“By the time the government reopened in January 2019, about $3 billion in U.S. economic activity evaporated, never to be recovered, according to the Congressional Budget Office,” ABC News reported.

The Senate on Oct. 1, 2025, is expected to vote again, “likely on the same two measures that failed Tuesday [Sept. 30],” according to ABC News.

Offices of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), National Mediation Board (NMB), National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and Surface Transportation Board (STB) will now be closed other than for safety and emergency situations. 

Amtrak, although government owned, will not shut down so long as there is cash on hand for payroll, fuel and other operating essentials. 

The Railroad Retirement Board will continue normal operations as it is funded by carrier and rail-employee payroll taxes. Railroad Retirement and Railroad Unemployment and Sickness benefits will continue to be paid on schedule.

FRA, NMB, NTSB and STB legal staff will be on call if their services are required in an emergency situation.

While websites of shutdown agencies may be accessible, they may not be updated. 

All political appointees will continue working as their compensation is tied to their official position and not annual congressional appropriations.

It is unlawful for any federal employee furloughed as a result of a government shutdown to volunteer their services. 

Furloughed federal employees typically receive backpay as part of the congressional resolution of a funding impasse that created the government shutdown. POTUS 47, however, has directed federal agencies to prepare reduction-in-force (job cut) plans that go beyond typical furloughs.  

FRA: Accident/incident safety inspectors will not be furloughed. The Office of Railroad Development will continue to function as it is separately funded through the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. 

NMB: Staff will be on call for emergency action or consultation should there be a violation of the Railway Labor Act.

NTSB: The Go-Team will be available for accident/incident response and investigation.

STB: “Due to a lapse in appropriations causing the federal government to partially shut down its operations, Surface Transportation Board (STB) functions will be suspended,” the STB reported in a online press release dated Oct. 1. “Accordingly, during any lapse in appropriations, the STB will not:

“• Accept or process any filings or submissions;
“• Process cases, issue decisions, or hold public hearings, oral arguments, or voting conferences, except to the extent work has been determined to be an excepted function (e.g., an emergency service order);
“• Litigate and appear in court, except to the extent work on a particular litigation matter has been determined to be an excepted function;
“• Conduct ex parte meetings in informal rulemaking proceedings; or
“• Respond to FOIA requests.

“All deadlines requiring the submission of material to the STB during the pendency of the shutdown will be tolled. The Board’s website and email accounts will be unattended for the duration of the government shutdown. If you believe you have an emergency that requires immediate Board action, please call 202-245-0245 and leave a message.” The Board also posted on its website a “Plan for Agency Operations in the Absence of Appropriations.”

How the shutdown affects the timeline of submissions and decisions in the proposed UP+NS merger proceeding depends on the length of the shutdown. If the government reopens prior to a timeline deadline, there is no effect. But should the shutdown go beyond a deadline already established, the STB would, upon government’s reopening, issue a supplementary order extending that deadline.

For FAQ and other resources on the government shutdown, click here and here.

The post U.S. Government Shuts Down; What Railroaders Need to Know appeared first on Railway Age.

Total U.S. weekly rail traffic for Week 39 (ending Sept. 27, 2025) came in at 512,642 carloads and intermodal units, up 1.0% from the prior-year period, according to the AAR. Total carloads were 228,903, up 0.9%, while intermodal volume was 283,739 containers and trailers, up 1.1% from last year.

In comparison, for the week ending Sept. 20, 2025, total U.S. rail traffic was 510,677 carloads and intermodal units, down 2.2% from the prior-year period. Total carloads for the week were 228,609, dipping 1.8%, and intermodal volume was 282,068 containers and trailers, dipping 2.5% from last year.

(UP Photograph)

For the week ending Sept. 27, 2025, five of the 10 carload commodity groups posted an increase compared with the same week in 2024. They included nonmetallic minerals, up 2,249 carloads, to 32,825; grain, up 1,710 carloads, to 22,609; and motor vehicles and parts, up 499 carloads, to 17,205. Commodity groups that posted declines included coal, down 1,330 carloads, to 59,499; petroleum and petroleum products, down 439 carloads, to 10,343; and metallic ores and metals, down 355 carloads, to 20,853.

For the first 39 weeks of this year, U.S. railroads reported cumulative volume of 8,652,275 carloads, up 2.1% from the same point in 2024; and 10,573,701 intermodal units, up 3.5% from 2024. Total combined U.S. traffic for the first 39 weeks of this year was 19,225,976 carloads and intermodal units, an increase of 2.9% from 2024.

North American rail volume for the week ending Sept. 27, 2025, on nine reporting U.S., Canadian, and Mexican railroads totaled 336,303 carloads, down 0.6% from the same week last year, and 371,988 intermodal units, up 2.2% from last year. Total combined weekly rail traffic in North America was 708,291 carloads and intermodal units, up 0.8%. North American rail volume for the first 39 weeks of this year was 26,457,452 carloads and intermodal units, up 2.3% from the prior-year period.

For the week ending Sept. 27, 2025, Canadian railroads reported 93,860 carloads, a drop-off of 3.2%, and 72,540 intermodal units, a gain of 3.2% compared with the same week last year. For the first 39 weeks this year, they reported cumulative rail traffic volume of 6,307,357 carloads, containers, and trailers, up 2.1%.

Mexican railroads reported 13,540 carloads for the week ending Sept. 27, 2025, falling 7.6% from the same week last year, and 15,709 intermodal units, increasing 21.2%. Their cumulative volume for the first 39 weeks of this year was 924,119 carloads and intermodal containers and trailers, down 7.1% from the same point in 2024.

The post AAR: U.S. Rail Traffic Up Slightly Overall appeared first on Railway Age.

NYMTA

The MTA Board on Sept. 30 approved toll and fare increases, along with a series of fare and ticket policy changes “designed to simplify the array of offerings to prioritize affordability” on New York City Transit’s (NYCT) subways and buses, the Long Island Rail Road (LIRR), and the Metro-North Railroad. The vote was 11-0, with two abstentions. Most of these changes will take effect in January 2026 to align with the full systemwide rollout of the tap-and-ride technology.

If today’s fare increase were adjusted to match the pace of inflation since the last increase in 2023, the base subway and bus fare would cost $3.14. While the cost of the fare remains below inflation and has remained so over the last few years, the MTA heard the concerns about citywide affordability during the public comment period. “The recent adjustments to some of the proposals further prioritize affordability and value for customers,” the agency noted. For information on these revisions, see here.

These modifications followed an extensive six-week public comment period—featuring three hybrid public hearings, 22 public comment sessions at remote locations across the system, online comment portal, and other channels provided. The MTA received a total of 1,378 of comments—four times greater than in 2023.

“Because the transit fare is a fraction of the cost of owning a car, New Yorkers spend less on transportation than people in the rest of the country, and we’re determined to keep it that way,” said MTA Chair and CEO Janno Lieber. “The modest fare increases approved today—which are below the rate of inflation—prioritize value for frequent riders and families while maintaining the MTA’s bottom line.”

NYCT

The base fare for subways, local buses, and Access-A-Ride is increasing 10 cents, from $2.90 to $3. The reduced fare is increasing from $1.45 to $1.50, and the express bus base fare is increasing from $7 to $7.25. Below are the fare policy updates that will take effect next year:

• OMNY seven-day fare-capping becomes permanent. The 7-day rolling fare cap, which allows customers to pay for 12 rides in a 7-day period and automatically ride free for the rest of the week with no pre-payment required, is becoming permanent. At the adjusted and approved base fare, no customer will pay more than $35 for subway and local bus rides in a week; reduced-fare customers will pay no more than $17.50 in a week. The prepaid MetroCard 7-Day, 30-Day, and Express Bus Plus unlimited passes will retire and be replaced with the automatic fare cap for all riders.
• Fare-capping extended to express bus network. Express bus customers will pay no more than $67 a week for unlimited express bus, local bus, and subway rides in any 7-day period.
• Tap-and-ride will be required for fare payment on subway, local and express bus. Beginning later in 2026, coins will no longer be accepted on buses but will continue to be accepted at card vending machines in subway stations and at one of the 2,700 local businesses that sell OMNY cards.
• OMNY charge and trip history available on OMNY. info. Customers are now able to track their trips and associated charges on OMNY.info. The page shows tap-and-ride customers their fare progress to unlimited rides. By mid-2026, the MTA app will include all self-service tools available on OMNY.info.
• Promotional $1 OMNY card fee ends by mid-2026. The fee for a new OMNY card will be $2 when the MTA no longer accepts MetroCard for fare payments. This is still lower than the original $5 fee. OMNY cards are more durable and last for up to 5 years, more than twice as long as the MetroCard.

LIRR and Metro-North Railroad

For the commuter railroads, an average increase of up to 4.5% will apply to monthlies, weeklies, and one-way peak tickets (excluding City Tickets). There will be no increase to Metro-North’s Port Jervis and Pascack Valley lines. To view the full Metro-North fare table, see here. To view the full LIRR fare table approved today, see here.

Given a 10% discount applied to monthly tickets in 2022 and suspension of the fare increase in 2021, the current cost of a monthly ticket is about the same price of a monthly ticket in 2019 when adjusted for inflation. Monthly ticket fares will not exceed $500.

Below is a recap of the upcoming ticketing policy changes for the commuter railroads:

• Universal reduced-fare ticket valid for travel at all times. There will be a universal reduced-fare ticket for seniors, people with disabilities, and people on Medicare that will be valid 24/7, including on morning peak trips.
• More affordable trips for families. The eligibility age for a Family Fare ticket will be raised from 11 to 17 years old. Children aged 5-17 will be able ride for $1 when accompanied by a fare-paying adult, including during the morning rush hour.
• One-way tickets will be valid until 4:00 a.m. the next day. All one-way tickets, both paper and mobile, will expire at 4:00 a.m. the day after purchase. Current one-way tickets are valid for 60 days. The new validity period allows riders to plan ahead and purchase tickets before upcoming trips, while limiting the opportunity to reuse an un-scanned ticket for a later trip. Customers still need to activate tickets before boarding.
• New unlimited Day Pass. A Day Pass will be available to purchase for unlimited daily travel, replacing the round-trip ticket, and will be valid until 4:00 a.m. the next day. On weekdays, the Day Pass would cost 10% less than two one-way peak tickets; on weekends, it would cost the same as two one-way off-peak tickets.
• “Pay-as-you-go” mobile discount replaces 10-trip ticket. A new “pay-as-you-go” discount will be available for mobile customers. After 10 peak or off-peak trips in 14 days, mobile customers would get an 11th peak or off-peak one-way trip for free in the same 14-day period. Unlike today’s 10-Trip, which will be discontinued, this new fare product does not require customers to pre-pay upfront to receive a discount.
• Onboard surcharges for late mobile ticket purchases and activations. Customers who repeatedly purchase or activate mobile tickets on board would be subject to an onboard surcharge after an escalating series of warnings. This change is aimed at speeding up fare collection by encouraging customers to have their tickets activated and ready for inspection.

LA Metro

LA Metro on Sept. 30 announced that it has expanded cellular service to the K Line underground sections.

Through a public-private partnership agreement with American Tower, customers of major wireless providers AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon will now have full cellular service coverage at the Expo/Crenshaw, Martin Luther King and Leimert Park stations and in the tunnels that connect them.

“Our customers deserve a safe, convenient, and connected ride—and we’re pleased that cell service is now fully operational in the underground stations on the K Line,” said LA Metro Board Chair and Whittier City Council Member Fernando Dutra.

The expanded cell service provides riders and frontline workers with added convenience and safety at no cost to LA Metro, making it easier to stay connected while at stations and onboard Metro trains, the agency noted.

“Now, the tens of thousands of people who use the K Line, including the many connecting to the airport through our new LAX/Metro Transit Center, can have confidence that they won’t lose connectivity underground, and they can use the full range of apps available to our riders, including our upgraded Transit Watch App,” said LA Metro CEO Stephanie Wiggins. “Thank you to our wireless operators for their work to ensure that our riders are connected and thank you to all the Metro teams who made this improvement possible for all our customers.”

The capital investment is being made by LA Metro’s private partner, American Tower, in collaboration with the major wireless providers, “underscoring a shared commitment to enhance connectivity and infrastructure.”

This latest expansion joins the growing list of LA Metro locations that already have access to service from the three major wireless providers, including the underground stations and tunnels on the B and D Lines, A Line 7th/Metro Station and adjacent track section toward Pico Station, as well as E Line Mariachi Plaza and Soto Stations along with adjacent track sections.

In addition, AT&T customers began receiving cellular service on the Regional Connector (Little Tokyo, Historic Broadway, Grand Ave Arts/Bunker Hill Stations) in May. Metro expects T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless customers to have service on the Regional Connector as early as this fall.

The post Transit Briefs: NYMTA, LA Metro appeared first on Railway Age.

In September, GPA officially started its new fast-track routing process for container vessels entering the Port of Savannah, optimizing the Savannah River transit for inbound vessels to Garden City Terminal. According to GPA, inbound vessels will temporarily dock at Georgia Ports’ Ocean Terminal “lay berth” until a berth at Garden City Terminal opens. The first vessel to experience this process saved 12-15 hours.

“This lay berth, combined with our eight start times for ship labor, creates exciting new possibilities for ships to stay on schedule or make up time. This is a gamechanger for GPA and our customers,” said GPA President and CEO Griff Lynch. The key point of the lay berth is the reduction in berth idle time from 12-15 hours down to three hours which translates into better supply chain velocity and competitiveness. “Our mission is to make it easy to do business. “We’re really focusing on high productivity at the berth, the container yard, the truck gates and the rail—and the numbers show it.” 

In the Port of Brunswick, autos and machinery through Colonels Island Terminal decreased (-14.3%) year-over-year to 63,926 units in August and (-11.8%) to 132,918 units in fiscal YTD 2026.

Port activity in Georgia now supports nearly 651,000 full- and part-time jobs across the state, according to an economic impact study by the University of Georgia’s Terry College of Business. The statewide number has grown by 41,770 jobs or 7% compared to fiscal year 2023, the period covered by the previous study. GPA now helps sustain 12% of total state employment, according to the study.

According to the new findings, the statewide economic impact of Georgia’s ports in fiscal year 2024 (July 1, 2023-June 30, 2024) includes:

• “$174 billion in sales, accounting for 11% of Georgia’s total sales, an increase of 2 percent or $3 billion compared to FY2023.
• “$77 billion in state GDP, or 9% of Georgia’s total GDP, up 7% or $5 billion compared to FY2023.
• “$43 billion in personal income, amounting to 7% of Georgia’s total personal income, an increase of 7.5% or $3 billion compared to FY2023.”

GPA’s Board approved approximately $614 million in infrastructure improvements for Ocean Terminal civil works in the container yard, terminal and maintenance and operations building.

“Our port master plan is designed to deliver the capacity our customers need to grow their business in Georgia,” said GPA Board Chairman Alec Poitevint. “As part of that overall plan, Ocean Terminal will play an important role in growing our capabilities and providing the most competitive port operations in the nation.”

The first half of the Ocean Terminal container yard renovation will be completed in 2027, the second half in 2028. The $1.54 billion overall project, GPA says, will allow the 200-acre facility to serve two large container ships simultaneously. In addition to the yard improvements, the terminal’s two berths are being renovated to serve larger vessels. The project also includes expanded truck gates, and a new exit ramp for trucks. GPA funded the $29 million overpass to carry departing truck traffic directly onto U.S. 17/Interstate 16, avoiding neighborhood streets.

“I want to thank our Board for the outstanding investments they have approved for GPA’s future,” Lynch said. “With our plan to add new terminal space and big ship berths over the next 10 years, Georgia’s ability to take on new business is outpacing other U.S. ports to meet market demand in Georgia and the Southeast region.”

Over the next 10 years, GPA says it plans to invest $4.5 billion in infrastructure. In addition to the two renovated berths at Ocean Terminal, GPA will add three new big ship berths at the planned Savannah Container Terminal on Hutchinson Island, just across the Savannah River. By the mid-2030s, Savannah Container Terminal will add more than 3.5 million TEUs of annual capacity at the Port of Savannah, according to GPA.

The post Port of Savannah Container Volumes Up 9% in August appeared first on Railway Age.

The Gateway Development Commission (GDC) Board of Commissioners on Sept. 30 authorized expanding the use of the delivery partner model for construction of the Gateway Program Hudson Tunnel Project, which is building nine miles of passenger rail track between New York and New Jersey, including a new, two-tube tunnel under the Hudson River, and will rehabilitate the existing North River Tunnel. GDC in March 2024 awarded the delivery partner contract to MPA—a joint venture of Mace North America Limited, Parsons Corporation, and Arcadis of New York Inc.—with the initial term ending in 2030 and the option for three subsequent three-year renewals. Since then, GDC has executed a series of task orders for its initial work with MPA. The new Board action delegates authority to GDC to execute a package of task orders that will enable MPA to provide all services and staffing needed to support project delivery through the end of the initial contract term, according to GDC.

“The resolution allocates up to $665 million over the next five years for this new scope of work,” GDC reported Sept. 30. “This funding will support the existing and growing team of employees and subcontractors MPA has hired to work on the Hudson Tunnel Project, which is estimated at 350 to 400 full-time equivalents.”

GDC has oversight of the approximately $16 billion Hudson Tunnel Project, which is slated to “provide long-term reliability, resiliency, and redundancy to the regional and national rail network for the NJ Transit and Amtrak customers who rely on these rail services”; MPA Delivery Partners (MPA) acts as its “arms and legs.” This arrangement has allowed GDC to accelerate construction across five active sites, and since onboarding MPA in March 2024, GDC said it has: 

• “Secured full funding for the Hudson Tunnel Project.
• “Awarded contracts for three construction packages, including the first construction project that involves tunnel boring.
• “Advanced the first Hudson Tunnel Project construction package—the Tonnelle Avenue Bridge and Utility Relocation Project—toward on time completion in the coming weeks.
• “Procured and overseen manufacturing of the two tunnel boring machines that will be used to build the section of the new tunnel in New Jersey.
• “Managed the procurement process for four additional construction packages, including two that will be awarded in the next six months.”

Through the Board’s Sept. 30 action, GDC said it will be able to “retain the team that achieved these milestones and build on this success by adding engineers, project managers, planners, safety experts, and other key personnel, bringing MPA’s support to 350 to 400 full-time equivalents over the next five years.”

“Massive infrastructure projects like the Hudson Tunnel Project require huge teams of highly specialized experts,” GDC CEO Tom Prendergast said. “The delivery partner model enables GDC to bring in the right experts and resources for each aspect of this huge, multifaceted project while remaining a lean, efficient organization. As the past 18 months have shown, the model is working well. The MPA team has integrated seamlessly into our day-to-day operations, and the results speak for themselves. The GDC team looks forward to building on this successful partnership in the months and years to come.”

“This is a once-in-a-generation project and a true collaboration between the public and private sectors that will serve as a model for delivering future mega-infrastructure projects around the world,” said Joe Marie, Senior Vice President for MPA. “We are united in our goal of successfully completing this critical project, which will transform the Northeast Corridor and deliver billions of dollars of economic growth to the U.S. economy. GDC and MPA function as a fully integrated partnership, working closely together to ensure the Hudson Tunnel Project is completed on time and within budget.”

According to GDC, the delivery partner model has “a proven track record of enabling public agencies to deliver large, complex infrastructure projects.” It noted that the U.K.’s Olympic Delivery Authority used a delivery partner to build the infrastructure for the 2012 Olympics in London “ahead of schedule and under budget,” and in the United States, the Oregon Department of Transportation’s “award-winning” OTIA III State Bridge Delivery Program used a delivery partner model to replace or repair 271 bridges. 

Further Reading:

• Gateway: HTP Makes Concrete Progress
• GDC Awards Manhattan Tunnel Project Contract
• GDC Issues RFQ for New Jersey Surface Alignment Project
• For Hudson Tunnel Project, $2.7B in Federal Grants Now Available for Construction
• Hudson Tunnel Project Primed for FFGA
• GDC Submits FTA Documentation for Hudson Tunnel Project Funding

GDC CEO Tom Prendergast will serve as keynote speaker at Railway Age’s Next-Gen Rail Systems 2025 (formerly Next-Gen Train Control/NGTC), to be held Oct. 30-31 at the Hyatt Regency Jersey City in Jersey City, N.J.

The post MPA Contract Expanded for Hudson Tunnel Project appeared first on Railway Age.

Nelson’s extensive background includes leadership roles at CN where he served as Acting Director of Dangerous Goods for North America, and most recently as Director of Operations at Ambipar’s Advanced Rail Training Center.

“Lee taking the helm comes at a pivotal moment for emergency response training,” said Niki Toussaint, Senior AVP Marketing & Education at MxV Rail and SERTC. “We are well-positioned and poised to lead the transportation sector in training preparedness, even in the face of evolving and uncertain hazards. Our commitment is to stay closely aligned with the railroads and the broader industry to ensure we are training responders for tomorrow’s challenges while addressing today’s risks.”

Nelson began his career with SERTC from 2004 to 2006 as a Hazmat Instructor and Tank Car Specialist before advancing through various industry leadership positions. “His unique combination of field experience and operational management makes him ideally suited to guide SERTC’s continued evolution,” MxV Rail said.

“SERTC has always been recognized for its premier training programs that prepare responders for real-world emergencies,” said Nelson. “I’m excited to return to an organization that sets the gold standard for hazmat training and emergency response preparedness. Our commitment to providing immersive, realistic training scenarios ensures that responders have the skills and confidence needed to handle complex surface transportation emergencies safely and effectively.”

Nelson holds numerous certifications, including Hazardous Materials Technician, Advanced Tank Car Specialist, and Hazardous Materials Monitoring. He also serves (or has served) on several industry committees, including NFPA 472, AAR Tank Car, and BOE HAZMAT. Nelson earned his Bachelor of Arts in Business Administration with an emphasis in chemistry from Fort Lewis College in Durango, Colo.

“It’s hard to get railroading out of your blood, and SERTC is historically and foremost a railroading facility. So, getting back to that is exciting for me personally,” said Nelson.    

The post Nelson Returns to MxV Rail as Executive Director of SERTC appeared first on Railway Age.

While the Board reported that comments are due by Oct. 30, 2025, and replies are due by Nov. 13, 2025, it is not accepting or processing any filings or submissions as of 12:01 a.m. ET on Oct. 1, because of the government shutdown.

The STB proposes to terminate the Class I railroads supplemental reporting of certain Positive Train Control expenditures since PTC is now fully implemented, and to require Class I’s to report two service metrics on a weekly basis: an original estimated time of arrival (OETA) metric and an industry spot and pull (ISP) metric. “Reporting of these metrics would allow the Board to better monitor service reliability and address possible future regional and national service lapses,” according to the STB. “Further, Class I carriers largely track the requisite underlying information in the ordinary course of business and have recently reported similar metrics to the Board, so the proposed reporting would not be burdensome.”

The Board said that it expects the NPRM to be one initial component of a four-part effort “to enhance, focus, and automate the agency’s data collection”:

“1. Eliminating Unneeded Data Collections. The Board collects certain data that are outdated, rendered unnecessary by overlapping measures, or cited seldomly by shippers, railroads, and the broader public. For example, even though railroads implemented PTC years ago, the agency has maintained a requirement—adopted in the middle of nationwide PTC installation efforts—for carriers to supplement the R-1 financial and operating report by breaking out PTC-related expenditures. This detailed, time-consuming accounting process is now of limited utility. As such, today [Sept. 30] the Board is proposing to eliminate this supplemental reporting and therefore reduce paperwork burden. In the coming months, [STB] Chairman [Patrick] Fuchs expects the Board to consider eliminating additional collections.

“2. Strengthening Mission-Critical Data Collections. As the Board looks to focus its data collections, it will consider addressing as appropriate any metric that presents a misleading indication of network performance or health or that has underlying data quality failing to meet acceptable standards. This effort will also involve ensuring the Board’s collections include the highest-utility metrics. Two metrics that are widely cited and deployed by railroads, shippers, and the broader public, but that the Board does not currently collect, are (1) service as measured by compliance with the original estimated time of arrival (OETA) and (2) service at the first or last mile, as captured by industry spot and pull (ISP) measuring local placements and pick-ups. Today [Sept. 30], the Board is proposing to reinstitute these metrics (with targeted definitional changes to address past concerns), enabling the agency to better monitor rail service reliability, assess changes in service levels, and address possible future regional and national service lapses. Simultaneously, the Board is implementing enhanced internal procedures across data collections to strengthen the identification of outliers, missing data, and other indicators of data quality issues.

“3. Streamlining Filing and Automating Processing. The Board is also improving efficiency by replacing manually tabulated forms with templates that allow for automated reporting and data ingestion. For example, through new templates, the Board has cut the number of data points in its revenue, expenses, and income reporting by more than 75%. The agency has also eliminated more than 3,000 data points from annual freight commodity statistic reporting. New templates allow for direct processing of uniform reports and more expeditious release to the Board’s public website.

“4. Improving Data Visualization. The Board’s website presents agency data largely as spreadsheet attachments that require manual aggregation across time periods, railroads, and other variables. The Board has procured more advanced computing tools that will enable the agency and public, including shippers, to interact with the data more easily, facilitating fast and low-burden customized queries and outputs to help better understand network performance and health and drive decision-making. The Board expects to begin to roll out an enhanced mechanism for accessing data in the first half of 2026.”

The STB’s Sept. 30 action follows a request from the Association of American Railroads and comments from shippers in multiple dockets. “Last year, AAR petitioned the Board to reopen the 2013 docket, Docket No. EP 706, and eliminate the PTC supplement as no longer necessary,” the STB reported. Because the Board is issuing the NPRM in Docket No. EP 787, in a separate decision issued Sept. 30, the Board said it “denied as moot AAR’s petition in Docket No. EP 706” Download both dockets below below:

52744Download 52620Download

The post STB Seeks to Streamline, Improve Class I Data Collection appeared first on Railway Age.

The restoration of New Jersey’s “Merci Train” boxcar, an artifact rediscovered in a warehouse in 2024, started in Boonton, N.J., over the weekend. The kickoff coincided with the United Railroad Historical Society of New Jersey’s annual Railroad Museum [For a Day] event 

The “Merci Train” consisted of 49 boxcars from France, gifted to the United States as a thank-you for the country’s aid during World War II. These cars, built in the 1890s and previously used to transport troops in World War I, were filled with gifts from French citizens. The 49 boxcars—one for each state, plus the then-Territory of Hawaii—were shipped to New York Harbor in 1949 and unloaded at Weehawken, N.J., before being distributed across the country. New Jersey’s car was taken to Trenton, where it was officially presented to the state at a ceremony that drew over 20,000 attendees

After the car was unloaded, it was entrusted to the American Legion to serve as a monument and exhibit. However, by 1958, the car’s whereabouts were unknown, and historians believed it was lost forever. In 1993, a similar boxcar was found in a field in Tennessee by the National World War I Museum and Memorial. The owner planned to scrap it, but the WWI museum rescued it and stored it in Kansas City, where it stayed for the next 30 years. In 2024, the WWI museum curator, Dr. Chris Juergens, aimed to uncover the boxcar’s history with help from Merci Train historian David Knutson 

“Purely by accident, I saw pictures of an old boxcar posted on Facebook and was able to determine it was New Jersey’s missing boxcar,” Knutson said. “When I realized the Museum and Memorial actually had the car in their possession, I was thrilled. Now, thanks to URHS, it will return to New Jersey and be properly restored for future generations to appreciate.”

Earlier this year, URHS acquired the car and relocated it to New Jersey, where it is currently being restored. URHS Executive Director Kevin Phalon said a complete evaluation will need to be done, but early inspections show that about one-half to three-quarters of the car’s sideboards can be salvaged, as well as most of the metal. The roof and floor will need to be completely replaced. The car has road tires, something it received when it arrived in the United States, and Phalon said those will remain. 

“The Merci train is a unique symbol of international friendship, gratitude, and the enduring legacy of those who served in the World Wars,” Phalon said. “The story of how it got from France to America and then to New Jersey is nothing short of miraculous.”

For more information, visit URHS.org/MerciTrain.

—Railfan & Railroad Staff

The post ‘Merci Train’ Boxcar Restoration Underway appeared first on Railfan & Railroad Magazine.

UP

UP says it is “well prepared” for another successful harvest after having racked up “strong performance numbers for its grain customers, moving grain cars faster, farther and more efficiently.”

Over the past 2.5 years, UP says it has maintained a consistent minimum of 290 miles traveled per day for its shuttle fleet—a service record unmatched in the Class I’s recorded history for grain shipments and “a good barometer of the railroad’s fluidity and ability to meet customers’ needs.”

“We have a strong, resilient and well-sourced network that is positioned to support our customers’ harvest needs this year and into the future,” said UP General Director of Marketing and Sales Ryan Raess.

Union Pacific transports about 1.3 billion bushels of grain a year, connecting the Midwest and Western production areas to export terminals in the Pacific Northwest and Gulf Coast, as well as Mexico. The railroad also serves significant domestic markets, including grain processors, animal feeders and ethanol producers in the Midwest and West.

According to the Class I, UP spends months planning and preparing for the harvest. The team tracks global commodity markets and meets frequently with customers to gauge market demand and harvest outlooks. It also makes annual adjustments for supply-and-demand variables driven by weather, growing conditions and world grain production.

The railroad then readies its resources to handle the anticipated harvest season, with crews, locomotives and covered hoppers strategically placed to support forecasted demand.

In each of the past two years, due to its extensive preparations and coordination with customers, UP’s shuttle fleet achieved at least 310 miles per day in the critical fourth quarter during harvest season, according to the Class I.

The railroad is on target to do it again this year.

“We are in a great position to meet this year’s harvest demands, delivering service levels above and beyond what we sold our customers,” said Raess.

BNSF

BNSF Executive Vice President & Chief Marketing Officer Tom G. Williams recently reached out to stakeholders with a letter regarding the proposed UP-NS merger.

“This is a significant development in the freight rail industry, and as a valued customer and partner in America’s supply chain, your perspective is important,” wrote Williams.

“The UP-NS merger has the potential to reshape the competitive landscape that supports your business. The STB, which oversees rail mergers, is committed to a transparent and inclusive review process—and they want to hear directly from those who will be most impacted.

“At BNSF, we believe in collaboration, not consolidation. Our recent partnership with CSX is a reflection of that belief, offering new intermodal lanes and expanded service options that deliver immediate benefits. We’re also investing in infrastructure like the Barstow International Gateway to support long-term growth and innovation—rather than pursuing costly acquisitions,” wrote Williams.

Specifically, Willaims says stakeholder feedback can highlight:

• “Impacts to your industry and facilities: Whether through reduced routing options, increased rates, or stranded investments due to service changes—your supply chain will be impacted.
• “Concerns about service disruptions: Integration challenges have historically caused ripple effects across the national network, even for customers not directly served by the merging railroads. When UP was challenged during the supply chain crisis, they issued over 1,000 embargoes causing competitive and financial harm to many customers and invited STB intervention.
• “UP’s cost-cutting model: Past reductions in headcount and elimination of key service offerings, such as unit trains for bulk commodities, have had significant impacts—particularly for agricultural and coal shippers.
• “Skepticism about growth claims: UP has stated it will fund the merger through 10% volume growth, yet its last merger resulted in volume declines and increased pricing.
• “Traditional remedies not sufficient to overcome competitive harms: UP leadership has publicly stated they will not offer competitive fixes, nor have they consistently honored prior merger commitments, often requiring litigation and STB intervention.”

“The STB cannot assume the full impact of this merger—they need to hear directly from stakeholders like you. Your feedback will help ensure that the Board has a clear understanding of the practical implications for shippers, industries, and communities,” wrote Williams.

Comments to the STB can be submitted through multiple channels with step-by-step guidance available here.

“Thank you for your continued partnership and support. We appreciate your ongoing engagement as we prepare to participate in the STB process. Together, we can help protect the integrity of our supply chain and ensure a future built on choice, service, and resilience,” concluded Williams.

The post Class I Briefs: UP, BNSF appeared first on Railway Age.

Michael Baker International

Michael Baker International on Sept. 29 announced that the firm has welcomed Mike Salmon as Regional Practice Lead – Design-Build. In this role, Salmon will collaborate with the firm’s Operations teams to “promote Michael Baker’s Design-Build capabilities, build winning teams for project pursuits and engage with contractors and owners to position the firm for success.”

“Michael Baker has a long-standing commitment to innovation and collaboration in the Design-Build space, delivering tailored solutions that solve complex infrastructure challenges, accelerate project completion and drive cost savings,” said Eric Ostfeld, President, Design-Build Services at Michael Baker International. “Mike brings deep experience delivering mega projects for public and private clients to his new role, and his leadership will be key to advancing our Design-Build practice. I look forward to partnering with Mike as we position Michael Baker for continued growth and reinforce our reputation for excellence in alternative delivery methods.”

Salmon is a Design-Build leader with more than 30 years of experience managing $500M+ alternative delivery and infrastructure projects. He is an expert in RFQ/RFP strategy, risk management, project pricing and proposal development. Salmon joins Michael Baker after nearly 15 years with Graham Contracting, Ltd., where he was District Manager in Colorado. Earlier in his career, he was a Project Manager / Design-Build Construction Manager with Tri-State Construction in Washington.

Salmon holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Sciences from Washington State University.

G&W

G&W recently announced via LinkedIn that Philip Sylvester, General Manager of the company’s Georgia Southwestern Railroad (GSWR), Heart of Georgia Railroad (HOG), Valdosta Railway (VR), and Columbus & Chattahoochee Railroad (CCH), has been inducted into the 2025 FAMU Hall of Fame, “honoring his rise from HBCU student-athlete to leadership in the railroad industry.”

On Sept.26, 2025, Sylvester, who was a former running back for the FAMU football team, joined a distinguished class of 15 elite honorees recognized for their contributions and record-breaking performances.

As a civil engineering graduate, Sylvester became the General Manager of GSWR and several short line railroads throughout Georgia, “proving that with resilience, new paths can lead to exciting adventures,” stated FAMU-FSU College of Engineering, the joint college of Florida A&M University and Florida State University, in a LinkedIn post. “Just like in football, it’s all about teamwork. Our mission is to deliver safe, reliable service, which is important for our economy,” Sylvester said.

“His success story exemplifies the value of HBCU engineering education and the career pathways available to graduates who leverage both their technical training and leadership experience gained through athletics,” the college said.

The post People News: Michael Baker International, G&W appeared first on Railway Age.

The draft report (download below) also “examines the challenges that are impacting the project’s full completion, highlights potential new funding sources, and points to statewide collaboration focused on intercity passenger rail,” according to RTD.

Legislation passed earlier this year required RTD to compile a report demonstrating how the agency will complete the four unfinished rail corridors by 2034. Senate Bill 25-161, titled “Transit Reform,” also outlines engagement strategies the agency must do before submitting the final 2025 Finishing FasTracks Report to the Governor of Colorado and General Assembly on Dec. 1.

“RTD recognizes that this report is the first step in bringing the 20-year-old FasTracks plan to fruition,” said RTD General Manager and CEO Debra A. Johnson. “The agency welcomes the opportunity to build upon the current momentum of joint rail service planning by working with the Governor’s Office, Colorado General Assembly, and other stakeholders across the Denver metro area to advance discussions about how best to optimize the sustainable expansion of public transport in the region.”

The recently released draft report, RTD says, provides a common set of facts outlining what is needed to complete the program. The original FasTracks budget was $4.7 billion in 2004 and, to date, RTD has expended more than $5.5 billion on the program. “Significant challenges exist related to completing the Northwest, North Metro, Southwest, and Central corridors, including very low growth in sales and use tax revenues that started during the Great Recession, escalating construction costs, increases in raw materials costs, and supply chain and labor market challenges,” the agency noted.

RTD estimates $145 million would be available for FasTracks completion from the FasTracks Internal Savings Account by 2030, based on the agency’s proposed 2026-2030 Five-Year Financial Forecast. This projection, RTD says, “is a best-case scenario under the condition that a larger share of statewide funds would also be allocated towards the program.” Were the four remaining FasTracks corridors scaled back to include only the Northwest Rail Peak Service and North Metro corridor—excluding the Southwest and Central extensions—the total projected construction costs would be closer to $1 billion, according to RTD. “Bringing the two corridors to fruition would also substantially exceed the projected $441 million available in funding. It also excludes the resources needed to operate and maintain services once constructed, as well as asset renewal.”

According to RTD, state funding from programs authorized by Senate Bill 21-260, Senate Bill 24-230, and Senate Bill 24-184 “could potentially contribute toward a limited completion of FasTracks projects.” These additional revenue sources, the agency says, “could potentially fund up to $296 million towards FasTracks projects between 2026 and 2034. Additionally, ongoing funding would still be required for operation and maintenance of the rail corridors, as well as asset renewal.”

Since 2004, RTD says it has completed approximately 75% of the FasTracks projects, including 25 miles of light rail track, 53 miles of commuter rail track, and the implementation of bus rapid transit service, the Flatiron Flyer, along US 36. Establishing Denver Union Station in downtown Denver as an intermodal transit hub in 2014, with commuter rail and light rail platforms and an underground bus concourse, were also part of the FasTracks program.

Community and stakeholders are invited to review the draft report, learn more about the FasTracks projects, and provide feedback by visiting www.rtd-denver.com/FasTracks. The webpage has overview information about each remaining corridor, the eight completed FasTracks corridors, maps, and cost projections to complete the project. Customers, community, and stakeholders are encouraged to provide feedback about the draft report via RTD’s FasTracks webpage through Nov. 14.

RTD will present an introductory overview of the draft report during the Tuesday, Sept. 30, Board meeting.

Finishing-FasTracks-Report_2025_Appendix_09-26-2025_A_xebiofDownload

In related news, RTD recently reported that its on-time performance for light rail service exceeded 90% in July 2025, compared with 59.9% in August 2024.

Completing both the Coping Panels Project and first phase of the Downtown Rail Reconstruction Project, along with expedited operator hiring, “positively affected service reliability for light rail customers,” the agency noted.

(RTD)

“Having asked our customers for patience and understanding while these critical light rail infrastructure projects were underway, it is incredibly gratifying to now see such a substantial improvement in on-time performance,” said Johnson. “RTD is committed to providing reliable service, and the schedule we keep amplifies that pledge to our customers. The team takes this charge seriously and approaches every aspect of our transit service delivery with this top of mind.”

On-time performance is a measurement of how frequently buses and trains arrive at stop or stations according to the posted schedule, with “on-time” being defined as a vehicle arriving no more than one minute early or five minutes late. On-time performance, RTD says, can be impacted by several factors, including maintenance work, inclement weather, mechanical issues, accidents, customer boarding times and traffic conditions relating to agency bus service. “The results of RTD’s 2025 Customer Excellence Survey reflect the agency’s commitment to reliability, with year-over-year improvements in customers noting that bus or train services usually run on time,” the agency noted.

In addition, light rail service availability averaged 96.8% through August 2025, reflecting the fact that RTD delivered 21,160 light rail trips out of the 21,848 scheduled. Year-to-date service availability for bus is 99.5% and nearly 99% across all commuter rail lines. Service availability is a measurement of the percentage of trips that operate as scheduled.

More information is available here.

The post Denver RTD Releases Draft 2025 Finishing FasTracks Report appeared first on Railway Age.

(Courtesy of CN)

The Plan (download below) is produced annually and mandated by Transport Canada.

winter-plan-2025-2026Download

Following are highlights of the 32-page 2025-26 Winter Plan: 

• “Resilience Focused: CN embeds winter readiness into its operating model by planning and preparing throughout the year. This includes leveraging predictive analytics and automated inspection technologies to prevent disruptions and reinforcing its workforce to reduce delays and maintain network fluidity.” 

(Courtesy of CN)

• “Strategic Investment: With a capital program of more than C$3 billion in 2025, including approximately C$1.5 billion in Western Canada, CN is expanding key corridors, adding double-tracked sections, and upgrading major yards to boost capacity. [Among these projects: Two new sections of double track on CN’s Edson Subdivision west of Edmonton will increase capacity in that part of the network by 25%, and upgrades to Thornton Yard in Vancouver will help improve train flow to this key port.] Recent fleet renewal, with modernized locomotives and expanded rolling stock, ensures CN has the flexibility and resources to respond effectively to extreme weather.”  According to the railroad, 170 locomotives have been converted from direct current (DC) to alternating current (AC) traction since 2023, “improving performance, and reducing failures in extreme cold.” Thirty-two more are expected in the final months of 2025. “This will push the proportion of our high‑horsepower locomotive fleet using AC‑traction motors to about 60% and allow us to deploy 50 more locomotives in Western Canada this winter,” CN said. The railroad in 2024 added 750 new high‑efficiency hopper cars, 600 ore cars, and 300 bi‑level autoracks to the fleet, “supporting capacity and operational resilience.” Additionally, more than 2,800 wayside detectors, seven automated inspection portals, and 10 ATIP railcars generate millions of data points daily for predictive maintenance and safety, the railroad noted in the Plan.

(Courtesy of CN)

• “Collaborative Solutions: CN works closely with ports, shippers, receivers, governments, and other railways to improve performance across the supply chain. Collaboration with the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority, for example, has already increased weekly train movements to and from North Vancouver by 10%. CN also partners directly with customers to enhance winter safety and preparedness at their facilities. This helps reduce service delays and optimize trade flows.”

(Courtesy of CN)

CN reported that its workforce is currently “sized to demand.” To further support operations during challenging conditions and periods of high demand, the railroad said it has “increased our pool of rail operating rules‑qualified managers. By insourcing some of our core engineering work, we have also been able to achieve greater productivity, quality, cost control and a 6% reduction in train delays caused by engineering work.”

CN President and CEO Tracy Robinson (Courtesy of CN)

“The government of Canada has a critical role in enabling safe and reliable winter operations by addressing issues that create uncertainty and limit the railway’s ability to innovate and remain agile,” CN pointed out in the Plan. “This requires a stable, practical regulatory framework that supports labor productivity, avoids unnecessary burdens, and does not reintroduce extended interswitching. Proposed training and qualification regulations must also be balanced to ensure safety while protecting crew availability, particularly when resources are already stretched during winter. A government‑led, balanced approach to reporting—with real‑time data across all parts of the supply chain—would further improve transparency and help identify the root causes of disruptions when they occur. Additional resiliency can also be unlocked through timely capital investments in innovative technologies, processes, and infrastructure. To accelerate these projects, supportive tax policies and permitting processes as well as accelerated depreciation measures are essential.”

“Preparing for winter is part of what we do every year,” CN President and CEO Tracy Robinson commented. “Our Winter Plan lays out how our teams, assets, and processes are in place so we can deliver safe, reliable service and support our customers through the season.” 

Further Reading:

• Winter Weather Warm-Up
• CN Issues 2024-25 Winter Plan
• CN Publishes 2022-23 Winter Plan

The post CN Releases 2025-26 Winter Plan appeared first on Railway Age.

The Surface Transportation Board (STB) is inviting public comment on its schedule for reviewing the proposed merger of Union Pacific (UP) and Norfolk Southern (NS), which would create the first U.S. transcontinental railroad, spanning more than 50,000 miles across 43 states. The deadline is Oct. 16, 2025.

The Class I railroads this past summer informed the STB of their intent to file an application seeking authority for UP to acquire NS.

Concurrent with the railroads’ notice of intent, they filed a petition to establish a procedural schedule. “Applicants’ proposed procedural schedule provides for a 390-day period between the date an application is filed and the date on which the Board would serve its final decision on the merits,” STB wrote in its Sept. 24 decision (download below). “Applicants’ proposed schedule includes a longer comment period than the one listed in 49 U.S.C. 11325, extending the due date for written comments to the date that responsive (including inconsistent) applications would be due. Applicants also propose a 90-day period for the filing of responses to comments on the primary application, rebuttals in support of the primary application, responses to protests, requests for conditions, and other opposition, and responses to responsive (including inconsistent) applications. Applicants state that the proposed procedural schedule ‘is in line with those in prior major merger proceedings,’** and provides ample time for comments and the Board’s review.”

52742Download

According to the STB, “[g]iven the high level of interest in this proceeding, and the potential for numerous and highly complex issues to arise, the Board proposes extending the period to file written comments and providing a corresponding 90-day period to file responses, as Applicants have proposed.” The Board also proposes modifications to Applicants’ proposed schedule: “Specifically, for preliminary comments from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), the Board proposes to conform to the time frame set forth in 49 U.S.C. 11325.” Additionally, the STB said its proposed schedule “provides that any necessary public hearing or oral argument would be held on a date to be determined later in the proceeding.”

The STB proposes the following procedural schedule, with “F” designating the filing date of the application, and “F+n” meaning “n” days following that date:  

• F: Primary application and any related application(s) filed.
• F+30: STB notice of acceptance of the primary application and any related application(s) to be published in the Federal Register. The Board noted that should it “reject the primary application as incomplete,” it would serve a decision rejecting the application by this date and the remainder of the procedural schedule would be nullified.
• F+45: Notices of intent to participate due.
• F+60: Proposed Safety Integration Plan (SIP) due. Preparation of a SIP is required under 49 CFR 1106.4, according to the STB.
• F+75: Descriptions of anticipated responsive, including inconsistent, applications due. Petitions for waiver or clarification with respect to such applications due.
• F+115: Responsive environmental information and environmental verified statements for responsive, including inconsistent, applicants due.
• F+120: Comments, protests, requests for conditions, and any other evidence and argument in opposition to the primary application or any related application(s) due (except filings from the DOJ and DOT). Responsive, including inconsistent, applications due. F+135 Preliminary comments from DOJ and DOT, if any, due.
• F+150: Notice of acceptance of responsive, including inconsistent, applications, if any, published in the Federal Register.
• F+210: Responses to comments (including those of DOJ and DOT, if any), protests, requests for conditions, and other opposition due. Rebuttal in support of the primary application and any related application(s) due. Responses to responsive, including inconsistent, applications due.
• F+240: Rebuttals in support of responsive, including inconsistent, applications due.
• F+270 Final briefs due. The STB said that it will “provide page limits for final briefs in a later decision after the record has been more fully developed.”
• To Be Determined: Public hearing (if necessary). (Close of the record.)
• To Be Determined: Service date of final decision. The UP-NS proposed schedule includes dates for the issuance of the STB’s final decision and the effectiveness of that decision, according to the Board, which noted that it will “issue its final decision in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 11325(b)(3),” requiring a final decision to be issued within 90 days of the close of the evidentiary record.

** New Merger Rules: Railway Age Capitol Hill Contributing Editor Frank N. Wilner has reported that “Should the now announced UP-NS merger intent advance to a formal merger application before the STB, it will be the first decided under New Merger Rules adopted by the agency in 2001. The CPKC transaction was decided under an exception to those rules owing to KCS’s small size relative to other Class I railroads—the STB in 2001 saying a KCS transaction would ‘not necessarily raise the same concerns and risks as other potential mergers between Class I railroads.’ The New Merger Rules increase applicant burdens to demonstrate the transaction is in the public interest and enhance—not simply preserve—competition. Said the STB in 2001: ‘While further consolidation of the few remaining Class I carriers could result in efficiency gains and improved service, the Board believes additional consolidation in the industry is also likely to result in a number of anticompetitive effects, such as loss of geographic competition, that are increasingly difficult to remedy directly or proportionately. Offering some new or enhanced rail-to-rail competition or other competitive benefits is likely to be necessary to resolve substantial difficulties to tip the balance in favor of the public interest.’ CSX and NS, which in 1998 gained STB approval for joint acquisition of Conrail, later termed the 2001 New Merger Rules ‘apparent antagonism toward mergers.’ Competition enhancements might include constructing choke point bypass routes around Chicago and St. Louis; allowing segment rates where bottlenecks exist; offering reciprocal switching and trackage and traffic rights (the latter permitting freight solicitation); and demonstrating how train speeds will increase and terminal dwell times will improve. Advances in driverless trucks make cost savings and efficiencies from merger-created single-line service essential to improving the railroads’ competitive position, as intermodal growth increasingly is essential to railroad financial health. The New Merger Rules also require an assessment of ‘downstream effects.’ Most obvious are responsive mergers creating an east-west transcontinental duopoly, although such already exists regionally (and in Canada). Also to be provided is a ‘service assurance plan’ to cure unexpected hiccups during the merger transition.” Wilner was a White House appointed chief of staff to Republican STB member Gus Owen when the 1996 UP-Southern Pacific merger was approved. He is author of Railroads & Economic Regulation,” available from Simmons-Boardman Books, 800-228-9670.

Further Reading:

• SMART-TD Supports Proposed UP-NS Merger
• Mr. Vena Goes to Washington
• Kloster, Schultz Chosen for STB by POTUS 47
• Merger Dialogue: Shades of ‘Pride and Prejudice’
• Deal Vs. No Deal
• Mixed Views on Mergers
• NEARS: Consolidation, Weak Economic Backdrop Highlighted
• Transcon Merger Discussion with a Former Class I CEO
• UP+NS: An ‘Absolute Monster of a Railroad’
• UP + NS: What Comes Next?
• Union Pacific + Norfolk Southern: It’s Official

(Composite Photograph Courtesy Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern)

The post STB: Feedback Welcome on Review Schedule for Proposed UP+NS Merger appeared first on Railway Age.

The debut in late August 2025 of Amtrak’s long-awaited NextGen Acela trainsets for the Northeast Corridor captured media and rail industry attention at a time when Amtrak’s much larger—geographically speaking—Long-Distance (LD) network is suffering mechanical, personnel, and performance setbacks on an almost daily basis. Locomotives malfunctioning en route or before they even leave the station. Reduced speeds due to weather conditions or freight train congestion. Departures delayed on account of no rested crews. Coaches and sleeping cars having inoperable climate control or toilets. Dining cars unable to serve meals. Late trains getting later or being annulled altogether.

When Railway Age last examined service setbacks affecting Amtrak’s Empire Builder, bitter winter cold and Amtrak’s new ALC-42 locomotives were among the key causes of delays or cancellations. Trains arriving many hours behind schedule at their final destinations of Chicago, Seattle, or Portland resulted in the next departures from those cities being late, as well. In extreme cases, Amtrak chose to halt the Empire Builder at intermediate points like Spokane, Wash., and place passengers on buses for the remainder of their trip, allowing the train to be reversed, serviced, and ready to receive its next passengers (arriving by bus) in an effort to get back on schedule.

BNSF high-priority intermodal passes Amtrak’s Empire Builder on doubletrack on the west slope of Marias Pass near Blacktail, Mont. (Bruce E. Kelly)

Throughout all of 2024 and most of 2025, the same circumstances have frequently plagued other trains in the LD fleet, as well. Not all of the time. Many days go by where Amtrak’s LD trains perform reasonably on-time. But all too often there are delays, some setting trains back 10 or more hours off their schedule. If the summer of 2025 proved anything, it’s that Amtrak’s ALC-42s and older P-42DCs are vulnerable to breakdowns any time of year, not just in winter.

A BNSF freight unit led two ALC-42s on the eastbound Empire Builder at Rathdrum, Idaho, on July 26, 2025. The train was more than five hours late due to engine failure on the Portland-Spokane section, which joined the Seattle section at Spokane. (Bruce E. Kelly) Interference From Freight Traffic, Weather

Not all delays to Amtrak trains over the past year have been directly attributed to weather or equipment malfunctions. Long-Distance trains like the Empire Builder travel thousands of miles over routes owned and operated by freight railroads, often referred to as “host” railroads by Amtrak. For the Empire Builder, that means having passenger trains that are authorized for speeds up to 79 mph in some places on a route—mostly BNSF—that also carries a high volume of manifest/mixed-freights, intermodals handling domestic and international containers, and unit trains carrying grain, oil, ethanol, or other bulk commodities, all of which are limited to 60 mph or possibly 55 mph depending on their tons per operative brake (TOB). West of Sandpoint, Idaho, the Empire Builder route is joined by additional traffic—much of it grain and coal—coming off the former Montana Rail Link. From Spokane westward, loaded unit trains share the same route as the Empire Builder section that splits off toward Portland, but not the section that heads toward Seattle.

Empire Builder Train 28 out of Portland follows the Columbia River eastward on August 3, 2025, only a few minutes behind schedule on its approach to Bingen, Wash. (Bruce E. Kelly)

In most cases, BNSF dispatching, whether it involves live input from actual dispatchers in Fort Worth or automation via Wabtec’s Movement Planner system, does an adequate job of keeping heavy, slower trains out of the way of the Empire Builder, assuming the Builder is running on-time, within its scheduled “slot.”

Extreme winter cold across BNSF’s Northern Corridor typically slows train brake air flow on longer trains and can trigger speed restrictions due to the potential for broken rails or pull-aparts. Summer heat can also trigger speed restrictions because of the potential for warped, kinked rails. In certain areas, when temperatures exceed 90 degrees Fahrenheit, the Empire Builder is restricted to 70 or even 60 mph, while freights are restricted to speeds between 55 and 40 mph depending on their TOB and temperature severity. Summer 2025 saw an abundance of days with heat-induced speed restrictions across the Amtrak network.

Freight trains experience their share of mechanical breakdowns or mishaps that can interfere with Amtrak’s on-time performance. One example was the September 6, 2025, derailment of several cars in a BNSF train on the west slope of Marias Pass east of Essex, Mont. Amtrak’s westbound Empire Builder, Train 7, was held at Shelby, Mont., and ultimately fell 11 hours behind schedule by the time BNSF cleared a way for it past the derailment site.

Amtrak and freights suffered equally during early August 2025 when high winds, downed trees, and heavy flooding impacted rail lines in the Upper Midwest. That same month, a CPKC derailment in Wisconsin forced the westbound Empire Builder to detour onto an alternate route to reach BNSF’s Northern Corridor, falling nine hours behind schedule in the process.

Amtrak rates the handling of its trains by freight railroads using two reporting methods. One is Amtrak’s “Host Railroad Report Card.” As Amtrak Senior Public Relations Manager Marc Magliari explains, “Host Railroad grades are evaluated by ‘host responsible delay minutes’, which is the method for grading (A-F).” U.S. Class I carriers and CN earned grades between B+ and B- during 2024. CPKC was the only major carrier to earn an A. However, CN and CPKC represent a very small percentage of Amtrak’s route mileage, especially in comparison to BNSF or Union Pacific (UP).

The other method Amtrak uses to gauge its treatment on freight railroads is a percentage-based On-Time Performance (OTP) standard. As Amtrak states in its online OTP reporting, “The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) ‘Metrics and Standards’ rule sets the OTP standard: 80% of customers must arrive on time. Miss the standard, and the Surface Transportation Board (STB) can investigate the causes, and if Amtrak’s right to preference was violated, the freight railroad may face penalties.”

Magliari offered a more precise definition for Railway Age. “OTP percentage is calculated based upon how many passengers arrive at their detraining station no later than 15 minutes beyond their scheduled arrival time.” In 2024, all 14 of Amtrak’s Long-Distance trains failed to achieve 80% OTP. The Empire Builder ranked 55% OTP, while the Southwest Chief (Chicago-Los Angeles) had the lowest OTP of all, 33%.

Normally passing here at night, the eastbound Empire Builder crossed Sand Creek departing Sandpoint, Idaho, on August 10, 2025, with its two ALC-42s performing as intended. The train was nearly 12 hours behind schedule due to late arrivals of Train 7 (Seattle) and 27 (Portland) the previous day due to weather delays and speed restrictions in the Midwest, compounded by freight train interference from being out of the normal Amtrak time slot. (Bruce E. Kelly) Amtrak Equipment, Operations Partly to Blame

Upon closer scrutiny, not all of those OTP percentages were caused by host railroads. Amtrak’s Magliari says, “The 55% OTP for the Empire Builder would include ALL delays: host, Amtrak, and third party.” According to figures posted by the FRA for FY 2025 Q2, of the 1,967 delay minutes per 10,000 train miles in Amtrak LD service overall, 1,043 delay minutes were caused by host railroads, 424 were caused by third party circumstances (weather, debris on track, trespassers, etc.), and 500 were caused by Amtrak’s own equipment, personnel, system, or servicing problems. In other words, Amtrak was responsible for roughly half as many delays to its Long-Distance trains as freight/host railroads were.

During that same quarter (FY 2025 Q2), records show the Empire Builder alone experienced 210 separate delay factors (meaning: multiple delay factors on some trains), 89 of which were Amtrak’s responsibility. Among those, there were 10 instances of locomotive mechanical failure, 10 instances of switching or servicing delay, seven instances of car malfunction, four cases of initial terminal delay, and 14 cases of crew unavailability or shortage. All of that in a single 90-day period for just one Amtrak service route.

The westbound Empire Builder was on final approach into Spokane, Wash., at 5:22 p.m. on August 12, 2025. It’s scheduled to arrive at 2:44 a.m. It started more than two hours late leaving Chicago due to “late equipment adjustments and repairs,” and fell further behind due to flooding in Wisconsin and speed restrictions and freight congestion further west. The train was turned and serviced in Spokane while passengers were bused between there and Seattle or Portland. (Bruce E. Kelly)

Often lost in the discussion of Amtrak delays or service disruptions is the impact on freight railroads. During February 2025, in single-digit temperatures, a locomotive failure brought westbound Empire Builder Train 7 to a halt in North Dakota. A BNSF freight locomotive was eventually added, and Train 7 was five hours late into Montana. It continued to lose time, including a four-hour delay east of Whitefish, Mont., waiting for a relief crew, ultimately reaching Seattle more than 20 hours behind schedule. Likewise for Train 27, the Empire Builder section that splits off at Spokane to Portland.

Similar events play out across BNSF and other freight railroads with surprising regularity. Magliari says, “We sometimes use host railroad units, just as we sometimes provide transportation to their freight crews. Those arrangements are in accordance with our operating agreements with those carriers, which are proprietary.” When freight traffic comes to a standstill due to clogged terminals, crew shortages, or other conditions, and shuttle drivers are unavailable or roads are impassable, it’s indeed common to see Amtrak trains—whether running late or on-time—picking up and dropping off crews for freight trains along the way.

Time lost for a freight crew that has to hand off a freight locomotive to Amtrak, and the ripple effect on freight trains stopped for miles behind and ahead of a disabled passenger train, are bad enough. But an hours-late Amtrak continuing across hundreds or thousands of miles of freight railway, where departures and crew starts had been scheduled well in advance, can cause widespread havoc. Having a freight locomotive on the point also reduces an Amtrak train’s maximum speed to 70 mph on some route segments, 60 mph or less on others.

Locomotive failures have been a common factor in Amtrak Long-Distance delays or cancellations. The majority of Amtrak’s LD diesel fleet is currently comprised of roughly 150 “Genesis” P42DCs, manufactured by General Electric during 1996-2001. These machines have been crisscrossing America for a quarter century or more. The first 75 of Amtrak’s newest LD locomotives, ALC-42 “Chargers” built by Siemens Mobility, began arriving in 2021 and debuted in LD service on the Empire Builder in February 2022. Another 50 are on order.

During their first year or two of operation, the ALC-42s encountered technical and mechanical problems, especially during winter conditions. One issue centered around PTC connectivity, while the other was said to involve outside moisture making its way into the dynamic brake system, causing a ground fault that brought trains to a standstill and could potentially cut power to passenger car heating. On-scene repairs, rearranging the Amtrak locomotives, or adding a freight locomotive to the front got idled trains moving again.

Siemens Mobility, said in early 2023, that a “hardware improvement” was being developed for the ALC-42s. In September 2025, Magliari tells Railway Age, “Hardware and software modifications were applied to the entire ALC-42 fleet, and we have had two winters of successful operation.”

Siemens Mobility declined multiple requests for comment from both Railway Age and from Amtrak for this story.

In late September 2025, an FRA spokesperson tells Railway Age that the PTC issue with the ALC-42s “has been resolved.” The FRA also says, “The snow ingestion of the dynamic brake system was indeed a problem. The light-dry snow of the mid-west was not anticipated by Siemens. Siemens has redesigned the air filtering for the dynamic brakes, and it appears to have resolved the snow ingestion issue that caused the electrical short circuits of the energy dissipating grids.”

Over the past two years, a new issue with various models of the Charger fleet has been discovered. Their Cummins QSK95 diesel prime movers have reportedly developed signs of internal wear. At least four SC-44s, released by Siemens Mobility in 2017 and assigned to the Pacific Surfliner in southern California, were pulled from service due to engine breakdowns during 2023-24. And in early September 2025, Amtrak and Caltrans announced that four trains in northern California’s Capitol Corridor service, powered mainly by SC-44s, would be suspended for approximately a month “due to locomotive repair work.”

ALC-42s in LD service have begun facing prime mover issues, as well. The FRA says, “Amtrak has had a series of diesel motor failures of the Cummins motors and have been working with Siemens/Cummins to resolve them. There were, for example, cases where the injector nozzle fractured and was ejected from the motor into the engine room. Amtrak has aggressively worked with Siemens to resolve all the failures and implement field modifications to prevent a repeat of the failures.”

The Chargers are based on what the FRA describes as a European locomotive design but with a diesel motor built in the U.S. The FRA says, “The distances traveled in Europe are not as far as the Amtrak Long-Distance service, and the locomotives see far more mileage in the U.S. as they do in Europe.”

As for any federal oversight of Amtrak rolling stock, the FRA says it “continues to conduct periodic inspections of all Amtrak’s Long-Distance locomotives, regardless of the model, as well as the passenger cars. Amtrak has a policy of using a minimum of two locomotives on their Long-Distance trains to minimize the potential for loss of HEP [Head End Power to passenger cars] during the trip.” The FRA goes on to say that it holds Amtrak to the requirements set under Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, parts 229 and 238. “They are held to the same regulatory standards as commuter or freight railroads.” While the FRA says it “does not have a regulatory ability to write civil penalties against suppliers,” it does hold the railroad “accountable for any noncompliant conditions.”  

Siemens Mobility has provided technicians to occasionally monitor and correct Chargers in the field, but the general servicing and repair of these locomotives is Amtrak’s responsibility. When asked if Amtrak maintenance personnel received adequate training from Siemens, Magliari said, “Yes, and continuous improvements are under way as we gain operating experience with these units.”

Having arrived Spokane, Wash., more than 15 hours late, passengers off the Empire Builder transferred to buses on August 12, 2025, for the remainder of their trip west. The train would turn and service here, and passengers from Seattle or Portland would be bussed to Spokane for its next departure eastward. (Bruce E. Kelly) Funding Needed to Improve the Fleet

Most passenger cars in Amtrak’s Long-Distance fleet predate even the quarter-century old P42DC locomotives. The 284 bilevel Superliner I cars that began entering service in the late 1970s and 195 Superliner II’s built during the early 1990s have become prone to all manner of mechanical deficiencies, and some have been lost to wreck damage or otherwise removed from service. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) of 2021 was said to include $22 billion for Amtrak, nearly $583 million of which was intended for “Long-Distance re-fleeting investments (including facilities).” An additional $7 billion is proposed through Amtrak’s IIJA supplemental funding request for replacements to the LD passenger car fleet. Manufacturing of new LD cars is expected to be announced in 2026.

In its General and Legislative Annual Report and Fiscal Year 2026 Grant Request, Amtrak says, “While IIJA provides enough supplemental funding to replace a significant portion of our existing fleet, it does not provide sufficient resources for all replacements needed to maintain current service, nor does it include sufficient resources to procure additional fleet (and supporting facilities) needed for growth.”

The Empire Builder is a case study for insufficient resources. Decades ago, Amtrak had standby locomotives positioned at key intermediate points such as Spokane, Wash. It also had enough cars available to ensure timely departures from originating points no matter how late the previous inbound train arrived there. At Chicago, following Train 8’s scheduled arrival, there’s a nearly 22-hour turnaround time to get it serviced and ready to depart as the next Train 7. But at Seattle and Portland, the turnaround time is only about five hours. Westbound Empire Builders reaching those final destinations more than a few hours late will cause the next eastbound departures to be late, as well. Magliari tells Railway Age, “All carriers must weigh the need for ‘standby equipment’ to maintain service levels. However, at Amtrak, we do not have enough fleet to meet customer needs on many routes on a regular basis, aside from delayed arrivals or holiday peaks. We have been outspoken for several years about the need for fleet funding to replace our long-distance rolling stock.”

Some eight hours behind schedule, the westbound Empire Builder crossed the Spokane River near Irvin, Wash., on August 17, 2025, powered by an ALC-42 and P42DC. It was 2-1/2 hours late leaving Chicago due to a CPKC derailment ahead, lost additional time to what Amtrak called “rail congestion and operating through a detour,” and was annulled and turned at Spokane while passengers continued west from there via bus. (Bruce E. Kelly) Track Improvements for the Empire Builder

A little-known achievement in Amtrak’s efforts to improve Empire Builder service is the Malta, Montana, Corridor Operational Enhancement Project. When operating on time, Train 8 is scheduled to stop at Malta just 22 minutes after Train 7, so the two trains frequently meet there. Doing so requires one of the trains to make a reverse movement into or out of the siding (the west switch is just 400 feet from the depot) so it can clear the main track and allow the other train to make its stop. Even if an Amtrak train were to let passengers on and off at Malta from the siding—using the concrete walkway across the main track—it would not alleviate time lost while traversing the 1.6-mile siding at 35 mph.

Thanks to a $14.9 million federal/state partnership grant—with Amtrak and BNSF contributing 20% matching funds—a crossover between the siding and main line will be added just east of the Malta depot to facilitate quicker meets and passenger stops for Empire Builders traveling both directions. The grant will also improve meeting conditions 12 miles east of Malta at Bowdoin, where the existing 8,105-foot siding will be extended to 16,000 feet, allowing BNSF trains of modern length to fully clear the main line for Amtrak trains to pass.

Regarding the Malta crossover and Bowdoin siding extension, BNSF V.P. Corporate Relations Zak Andersen says, “The in-service date will be in 2026, and dependent on how much grading work can be accomplished yet in 2025. The short construction season in Montana will quickly draw to a close for this year. If we have to wait until spring 2026 to start, we are shooting for end-of-year 2026 to be in service.”

Further Reading:

• What’s Triggering Empire Builder Service Setbacks?
  

The post Multiple Factors Impacting Amtrak Long-Distance Trains appeared first on Railway Age.

On Sept. 23, we reported on the funds transfer to operations that gave the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) and its riders in and around Philadelphia a two-year reprieve. The agency came close to being forced to implement drastic service cuts, because its ridership and revenue have not recovered to its pre-COVID levels, and the federal relief appropriations that kept transit going in many places during and since the pandemic are running out everywhere.

While cities and their surrounding areas throughout the nation are facing transit catastrophes, there is one other place in Pennsylvania where a similar drama also played out recently. It’s Pittsburgh, the only other city in the Keystone State that has rail transit, and the place where many members of the Railway Age crew (including this writer) are going for this year’s upcoming Light Rail Conference.

Pittsburgh once had much more rail transit than it has today. with streetcars running downtown decades ago. There was also the Drake Shuttle, the remnant of a line, where PCC cars ran until 1999. Today there are three lines running full-service schedules, operated by Pittsburgh Regional Transit (PRT). The most traditional is the Beechview (Red) Line, much of which operates on historic street-running track. The Overbrook (Blue) Line has more of an interurban character and was rebuilt and modernized in 2004. The Library (Silver) Line is further from the city core and runs less frequently than the other two lines. Cars run from the downtown subway on the Overbrook Line before going on to the Library Line. Service was extended from downtown Pittsburgh to the North Side of the city in 2012.

There is other trackage that still exists, although it is not used in regular service. The Allentown Line, a steep and lengthy street-running bypass line in regular service until 2011, has been revived temporarily, due to a major project on the South Beach Line, but its return to service will end soon. There is also a spur to Penn Station, which was eliminated in 1989, but was recently placed back into service during another project. The city also has the Monongahela and Duquesne Inclines: funicular railroads going up and down Mount Washington; the sole survivors of a group of 17 such operations. The service reduction plan did not mention the Duquesne Incline, although it called for minor reductions on the Monongahela Incline. Both date back to the 1870s and are historic transit rarities today.

Drastic Cuts Threatened

The PRT website detailed the cuts that would be put into effect and why the agency planned to implement them if funding did not come through. Out of 100 routes, the Silver Line and 40 bus routes would be eliminated. The Red Line and 34 bus routes would suffer major service reductions, while the Monongahela Incline and 19 bus routes would see minor service reductions. Schedules on only two bus routes would remain unchanged. Only the Blue Line would see an increase in service, because some runs would replace a portion of the Silver Line. No bus route except the 53 would see an increase in service, but it would replace another route that would be eliminated. All routes that survive would end their service day no later than an 11:00 PM curfew.

The PRT site included a link to a map of the routes and the fates that would befall them. A comment with the map said: “This map shows the service cuts which are projected if the state does not provide additional funding for PRT. Almost every route will experience reductions in service, with some facing elimination. Other service impacts may include reduced hours, less frequent service, and shortening the length of routes.” PRT also urged riders to contact their state representatives about transit funding.

The site gave detailed information on remaining service for the lines that would not be eliminated entirely. It gave information about the proposed fare increase (about 9%, as opposed to Philadelphia’s 21.5%), and told riders in detail how they could contact their State representatives. There was a long list of FAQs and a report entitled: “Transit Cuts: What’s at Stake” that included detailed analyses on a number of topics concerning the cuts.

One section of the site concerned the question “How did we get here?” and a detailed answer. Part of that answer included background on how prior funding methods could no longer keep the system going as it was, and said: “Having exhausted federal pandemic relief funding in FY24, Pittsburgh Regional Transit is now facing a structural deficit, meaning expenses, year after year, are greater than the funding that’s brought in, and the difference becomes greater each year.” It also gave some numbers: “With a projected $100 million deficit in FY26, PRT would need a $117 million infusion of state funding – with compounding annual increases – to support current service levels for the next decade. This would allow PRT to cover expenses and account for rising costs.” Elsewhere on the site, PRT issued three warnings. The first was: “There is nothing left to cut from the budget but service.” The second was: “To avoid service cuts and drastic fare increases, the State must approve a budget that would enable PRT to maintain service while implementing modest fare increases. This would allow PRT to implement its Bus Line Redesign, provide the additional service required or the 2026 NFL Draft, and to ensure reliable service for all for the next decade.” The third was: “Without a permanent funding solution, PRT will be forced to take drastic steps to irreversibly shrink the system.”

There was also a report on the methodology used to determine which service would be cut and by how much (download below) and an interactive map showing all transit and paratransit service that would be eliminated or reduced.

Not a Surprise

Financial trouble was brewing for Pittsburgh’s transit as early as six months ago. On March 20, David C. Lester, Editor-in-Chief of our sibling publication Railway Track & Structures (RT&S) reported: “WESA, Pittsburgh’s National Public Radio station, reported this week that Pittsburgh Regional Transit is facing a severe financial crisis that will result in major service cuts to all of its services if it does not receive additional state funding. This includes complete elimination of 40 bus routes along with significant cuts on the agency’s light system (called the ‘T’), reductions in service on other bus routes and its paratransit service.”

The Philadelphia Story, Pittsburgh Style

The same political drama on which we recently reported played out in Pittsburgh, similarly to our description of the Philadelphia situation. The PRT Board approved a 35% service cut overall on June 27, to be implemented if the State did not step up to the plate. Harrisburg did not come up with transit funding, so Gov. Josh Shapiro later authorized PennDOT’s transfer of funds originally destined for the capital side of transit over to the operating side, to keep the state’s transit going for the next two years.

PRT reported the development on its website: “UPDATE: PennDOT has granted PRT approval to use up to $106.7 million in capital funding to support its operating budget. PRT will use this fudinng to plug a $100 million hole in its 2025-26 operating budget and use the remainder – plus a mix of state and local funding, and reserve funds – to stave off the proposed cuts for two years.”

Chris Porter reported that development for WESA on Sept. 16: “The approval came just one day after PRT requested the transfer. PRT’s board must amend its budget later this month accordingly, but the move makes it possible for the transit system to avoid a 35 percent service cut and a fare hike of 9%, both of which were slated to take place next February.” According to the report, PRT CEO Katherine Kellerman said in a statement: “I want to thank PennDOT for its quick review and acceptance of our request. This approval gives us the breathing room we need to protect our riders and keep our region moving.” Porter also explained why special approval was necessary: “Ordinarily, money in the capital fund is earmarked for investments in infrastructure projects. But state law does allow the state’s largest transit agencies to flex money to cover operating expenses. And PRT says that money – along with other local, federal, and reserve funds – would enable it to stave off cuts and fare increases for the agency’s 2026-27 fiscal year.”

Pittsburgh’s Faustian Bargain

Porter also reported: “PRT says the move might delay some capital projects – though not those needed to assure the system’s safety. And transit activists and local officials say it’s little more than a stopgap measure that wouldn’t be necessary if the state provided regular funding for transit.” So, the comments that applied to SEPTA in my previous report apply to Pittsburgh’s transit, too. As with SEPTA, it is difficult to see how PRT had a choice. Delaying capital projects is not good, but the riders suffering a severe loss of mobility would have had strong negative consequences for them and the local economy.

In one regard, Pittsburghers came out better than Philadelphians. They did not have to accept a large fare increase as part of the deal, as SEPTA’s riders did. In addition, when the Railway Age crew and other attendees gather in Pittsburgh, they will be able to concentrate on the intended topics of light rail and similar transit, without the distraction of an impending huge reduction in their host city’s transit.

PRT MethodologyDownload

The post PRT Also Gets Two-Year Reprieve appeared first on Railway Age.