Railway Age magazine

Craig Richardson, who retired in March 2025 as Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer at Union Pacific, has rejoined global law firm Greenberg Traurig, LLP in its Denver office as an Of Counsel attorney. The return marks his third stint with the firm; he is assigned to Greenberg Traurig’s Energy & Natural Resources and Rail & Transit practices.

A retired Commander in the U.S. Navy Reserves, Richardson oversaw all aspects of UP’s legal affairs, including federal and multi-state litigation; economic, environmental and safety regulation at all levels of government; labor relations; international trade; and passenger rail. In his capacity as Corporate Secretary, Richardson provided support for the Board of Directors. Prior to UP, Richardson spent nearly a decade as the general counsel of El Paso Corporation’s Pipeline Group, the largest network of interstate natural gas pipelines in North America at the time.

Before joining the military, Richardson pursued a career in national security after obtaining his graduate degree from Princeton University. He began government service as a Presidential Management Fellow, serving at the White House, the State Department, the Pentagon, and the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo. In more than 20 years as a Navy intelligence officer, he provided intelligence analysis and support in operations throughout the globe. On six occasions, he received active-duty orders to the White House National Security Council in connection with presidential initiatives related to Haiti, Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Iraq. After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Richardson was recalled to active duty in Operations Enduring Freedom and Noble Eagle, where he provided space-based intelligence analysis in direct support of combat operations in Southwest Asia. Along the way, he received his J.D. at Stanford Law School. 

The post UP’s Richardson Rejoins Greenberg Traurig appeared first on Railway Age.

New Jersey Transit has launched two new programs, one designed to improve accessibility for customers with disabilities, the other to supplement revenue through real estate development.

Disability Assistance

NJT is piloting two new apps that it says “will help empower customers with disabilities.” Through a collaboration with the Transit Tech Lab, customers now have access to GoodMaps, which “provides innovative indoor navigation assistance” at Hoboken Terminal; and Convo, which provides on-demand American Sign Language (ASL) interpreting at Newark Penn Station Customer Service and Ticket Offices. A QR scan connects customers to a live ASL interpreter “for seamless communication.”

“GoodMaps is a cutting-edge station navigation platform now available at Hoboken Terminal,” NJT explained. “GoodMaps empowers all visitors—including the visually impaired or individuals with disabilities—with precise, real-time navigation throughout the terminal, making travel easier and more accessible. The Goodmaps app operates similarly to outdoor GPS systems like Google Maps. However, it specializes in indoor navigation, providing turn-by-turn directions via audio or on-screen text. With the GoodMaps app, customers can access real-time directions for trains and buses right from their mobile device. They can also benefit from features designed for users with low vision and mobility challenges, enhancing independence and comfort.

Convo “offers technology for those who use ASL to communicate,” NJT said. “Customers can scan a QR code and connect with a live interpreter who can convey the message between the customer and an NJT employee. This allows a full experience to all NJ customers and opens the door to building better relationships by making communication more seamless.”

“GoodMaps and Convo are innovative applications that deliver practical solutions tp help make our busiest facilities more accessible to all customers,” said NJT President and CEO Kris Kolluri,” who will speak about “Modernizing Public Transport” at Railway Age’s Next-Gen Rail Systems conference in Jersey City, N.J. Oct. 29-31. “Whether it’s navigating a terminal or communicating with staff, these technologies give people more control over their journey and reflect our ongoing commitment to creating a more welcoming transit system.”

“Our collaboration with the Transit Tech Lab shows how innovation and partnership can advance accessibility in public transit” said NJT Head of IT Innovation Luna Katbah. “By combining technology and inclusive design, this pilot empowers visually impaired and hard of hearing customers to travel with greater confidence and independence.”

The Transit Tech Lab is a program established by agencies in the New York City region “to bring private sector innovation to public transit by connecting tech companies with transit agencies to pilot new technologies and solve critical transit challenges. The Transit Tech Lab provides an accelerated pathway for early to growth-stage companies to solve public transportation challenges for the largest transit agencies in North America.”

Revenue Through Real Estate

NJT says the agency “could realize as much as $1.9 billion in non-farebox revenue over the next 30 years through a combination of opportunities designed to unlock value from its 8,000-acre real estate portfolio,” according to “The LAND Plan: Leveraging Assets for Non-farebox Dollars” study (download below). Additionally, the plan “could add up to $14 billion in economic impact to New Jersey, up to an additional $1.6 billion in municipal revenues, and create up to 50,000 jobs and up to 20,000 new housing units. From Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) to retail concessions to industrial hubs and advertising, the plan offers a unique opportunity to generate essential funding by leveraging its underutilized assets for development, as well as enhancing its customer experience with retail offerings and advertising. The plan presents a series of potential opportunities and suggested actions for consideration to maximize the associated potential revenue.”

Among the study’s key findings for potential non-farebox revenue over the next 30 years are estimates derived from internal NJT analysis.:

• Transit-Oriented Development—Walkable, mixed-use communities centered around transit hubs boost ridership and generate revenue through land leases or sales. Additional revenue potential: $780 million-$1.1 billion.
• Industrial Hubs—Certain properties are ideal for warehousing and industrial uses, requiring large, flat parcels with good road access and utilities. Additional revenue potential: $150 million-$300 million
• Temporary Uses—Short-term activities such as events, filming and pop-ups use land, structures and vehicles. Additional revenue potential: $15 million-$30 million
• Retail Concessions—Rental income is generated from retail tenants occupying concession spaces in NJ TRANSIT facilities, providing desirable customer amenities. Additional revenue potential: $80 million-$100 million.
• Advertising—Revenue streams include advertising on digital displays, within station facilities, on vehicles and through naming rights arrangements. Additional revenue potential: $40 million-$130 million
• Parking Optimization—Parking fees collected at station lots, sometimes shared with municipalities or private operators, provide additional revenue. Additional revenue potential: $170 million-$230 million.
• Wetland Banking—Restoring or preserving wetlands on suitable vacant land earns ecological credits, with the highest value in contiguous conservation areas and watershed management areas otherwise impacted by service development. Restored/Preserved land: 150-170 acres
• Solar Power—NJT can provide opportunities for development of solar power generation projects across multiple redevelopment sites, including surface parking canopies and rooftop installations. Power generation potential: 5 megawatts.

“The revenue generated from these developments—whether residential, commercial, or industrial—will empower NJT to continue delivering lasting, reliable, and high-quality service, and further enrich the communities it serves across New Jersey,” the agency noted.

“This first-of-its-kind plan delivers a roadmap for the next Administration that maximizes non-farebox revenue opportunities for NJT, the State of New Jersey and the municipalities we serve,” said Kolluri, cautioning that the proposed actions “are presented merely as options for consideration—not mandates—to support the plan’s full revenue potential. I have a deep respect for home rule in New Jersey and the legislative process, and look forward to working collaboratively with the legislature, municipalities, and elected officials across the state.”

REAL_ESTATE_OPPORTUNITY_REPORTDownload

The post NJT Launches Accessibility, Real Estate Initiatives appeared first on Railway Age.

Transit industry veteran Ronald Swerdon has returned to Urban Engineers, Inc. as a senior project manager for transit. He will lead major infrastructure initiatives across the firm’s public transit portfolio, overseeing quality and cost management programs and supporting strategic growth initiatives.

“Ron’s work will build on Urban’s longstanding success in providing Program Management Oversight services for the Federal Transit Administration, reinforcing the firm’s reputation as a trusted partner in delivering federally funded, complex transit programs nationwide,” said President and CEO Jim Biella, P.E. “Ron brings unquestioned expertise in transit project management and quality assurance, with a track record of delivering projects across North America. His leadership in cost management, quality programs and program delivery strengthens our firm’s ability to provide safe, reliable and efficient transportation solutions to our clients.”

Swerdon has more than 20 years of experience in the transportation industry, including serving as project manager for the Maryland Transit Administration’s Light Rail Vehicle Overhaul Project, and as Project Management Consultant deputy program manager for the Baltimore Red Line transit megaproject. He previously led Gannett Fleming’s International Transit Quality Group, managing a team of 10 responsible for quality and project management support on numerous projects throughout the U.S. and Canada. His background also includes serving as a Project Management Oversight Contractor for the FTA, where he authored revisions to the FTA’s Quality Management System Guidelines.

Swerdon spent nearly 12 years at Urban from 2005 to 2017, serving in various roles, including quality control specialist and quality manager. During that time, “he was recognized for his expertise and insight into critical aspects of transportation project delivery,” the company said. .

“I’m excited to return to Urban and help advance meaningful transportation initiatives that directly benefit communities,” Swerdon said. “I look forward to working with Urban’s talented teams to deliver projects that improve mobility, enhance safety, and elevate quality of life across the regions we serve.”

Swerdon holds a Bachelor of Science in Industrial Engineering from The Pennsylvania State University and maintains professional certifications as a Project Management Professional (PMP) and an ASQ Certified Quality Process Analyst (CQPA). He is an active member of the Project Management Institute and previously served as treasurer of ASQ’s Design and Construction Division.

The post Swerdon Rejoins Urban Engineers appeared first on Railway Age.

STV, Inc. is providing engineering and procurement support for 13 BE (battery-electric) dual-power locomotives MTA Metro-North Railroad is acquiring from Siemens Mobility. STV is performing design reviews, test coverage and vehicle inspection services for this program. 

The 13 BE locomotives are an add-on to Metro-North’s existing contract with STV to procure 33 dual-mode (third-rail/diesel-electric) SC42-DM locomotives from Siemens and are modeled after those units. The dual-power BE version will be able to draw traction power from overhead catenary and batteries. They will be employed in a planned new service in which some Metro-North New Haven Line trains on the Northeast Corridor will operate directly to Penn Station New York, as Amtrak trains now do, instead of into Grand Central Terminal.

Metro-North said these locomotives “will be among the first battery-electric passenger rail vehicles in the U.S. The initiative is part of a larger push in the transportation industry to provide more economical and environmentally friendly options to commuters, while advancing long-term operational goals.”

“Our intimate experience with MTA and Metro-North’s vehicle fleet, specifically the SC42-DM locomotives, has helped deliver this cutting-edge innovative solution for the agency,” said STV Vice President of Vehicle Engineering John Batey, P.E.  “In addition to providing more convenient access to New York City from Connecticut and Westchester County, these new locomotives will provide riders with a cleaner, greener option.”  

In other STV news, the company acquired Cypress Construction Management, LLC, a program, project and construction management firm headquartered in the Sacramento region. Cypress will now be known as Cypress Construction Management, an STV Company. “Cypress offers comprehensive program and construction management services to public clients throughout California,” STV said. “The firm is recognized for its expertise in design-build delivery and for leading transformative projects in education, healthcare, justice and public facilities.

“Acquisition of Cypress Construction Management not only expands our capabilities in Northern California, it also advances the goals set in our Strategic Plan,” said STV CEO Greg Kelly. “We’re excited to welcome Cypress to STV during this time of tremendous growth and momentum.”

The post STV Managing Metro-North BE Locomotive Procurement appeared first on Railway Age.

POTUS 47 on Oct. 15 said that $16 billion in federal funding for the project to build the New York/New Jersey Hudson Tunnel under the Hudson River, a key component of the Gateway Program, has been “terminated.” His pronouncement, reported by The New York Times, came two weeks after its federal funding was suspended at the start of the government shutdown. Washington, D.C.-based Politico has debunked that pronouncement.

The Times reported that POTUS 47 “abruptly” announced this during a White House press conference that addressed a variety of issues. The Times went on to report that POTUS 47 took aim at Sen. Chuck Shumer (D-N.Y.) with the statement, “It’s billions and billions of dollars that Schumer has worked 20 years to get. Tell him it’s terminated.”

The Times also reported Schumer’s response to the news from POTUS 47. “Gateway is the most important infrastructure project in America—period. [POTUS 47] trying to kill it again is pure spite and stupidity. It’s petty revenge politics that would screw hundreds of thousands New York and New Jersey commuters, choke off our economy and kill good-paying jobs … [It’s] vindictive, reckless and foolish.”

“It was not immediately clear what [POTUS 47] meant and whether Gateway—as well as another major infrastructure project, [Phase 2] of the Second Avenue Subway—had been stripped of federal funding,” The Times noted. “Both projects depend heavily on federal grants and were both explicitly mentioned in the announcement of the funding pause two weeks ago … Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York said the Administration’s decision hurts roughly 15,000 construction jobs supported by both projects and threatens the broader region and beyond. ‘If this system of transportation collapses, the Northeastern economy and the economy of the country collapses, so why be so shortsighted?’ Governor Hochul said in an interview on MSNBC … The White House referred questions to the Office of Management and Budget, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.”

“Massive NY tunnel and subway projects still alive, despite [POTUS 47] claims,” Politico reported Oct. 16. “USDOT has no plans to end the multibillion-dollar Gateway tunnel and Second Avenue Subway projects, an Administration official told Politico a day after the President said they had been ‘terminated.’ [POTUS 47’s] remarks also appeared to contradict Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy’s comments last week that the projects are ‘important’ and should ‘move forward fast.’ The White House and DOT did not respond to a request for comment. Stephen Sigmund, a spokesperson for the Gateway Development Commission, and Lucas Bejarano, an MTA spokesperson, declined to comment. As of Thursday (Oct. 16) morning, the Gateway project team has not gotten new communication from the Administration, and construction work on the tunnel continues.”

POTUS 47 has also targeted Chicago’s mass transit systems, CTA and Metra, for funding termination.

Gateway Development Commission CEO Tom Prendergast is keynote speaker at Railway Age’s Next-Gen Rail Systems conference, Jersey City, N.J. Oct. 29-31. May 2025: The Hudson Tunnel Project team reached the halfway point of the HYCC-3 project on schedule. More than 400,000 tons of soil and one million gallons of water have been removed. GDC photo.

Railway Age Editor-in-Chief William C. Vantuono contributed to this story.

The post POTUS 47: Hudson Tunnel Project ‘Terminated.’ DOT Says Not True appeared first on Railway Age.

National Mediation Board member Deirdre E. Hamilton, a Democrat, was fired Oct. 14 by POTUS 47, making her one of many legally questionable independent regulatory agency terminations by the POTUS. Hamilton’s departure leaves the three-member NMB with one Republican (Chairperson Loren E. Sweatt) and one Democrat (Linda Puchala).

Hamilton told Railway Age by phone Oct. 16 that she is exploring her legal options, as the firing—much as with that of Surface Transportation Board (STB) member and Democrat Robert E. Primus and Democratic members of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)—are contrary to statute.

Although Hamilton’s term expired in June, the NMB’s statute provides that members may continue to serve beyond term expiration until a successor is Senate-confirmed. (Note that the STB statute provides STB members may serve a maximum of 12 months following term expiration. Primus was in the midst of second term.)

Primus, as well as the FTC and NLRB Democrats terminated by POTUS 47, have filed separate lawsuits challenging their terminations. The FTC and NLRB Democrats were granted injunctive relief by a federal district court, nullifying their terminations, but the Supreme Court delayed the effectiveness of the lower court ruling pending further litigation—the law not settled as to court authority to order reinstatement.

The NMB is an independent (from Executive Branch) federal regulatory agency that administers the 1926 Railway Labor Act (RLA), which governs labor relations in the airline and railroad industries. It was created in 1934 by amendment to the RLA and its members are nominated by the POTUS and confirmed by the Senate for three-year terms, with no limitation on the number that may be served. (STB, by contrast, limits members to two five-year terms.)

The NMB’s primary function is to minimize work stoppages through dispute resolution procedures such as mediation and arbitration. It also resolves union-representation disputes and maintains a list of qualified arbitrators from which a POTUS chooses for appointment to Presidential Emergency Boards that investigate and make non-binding recommendations for dispute resolution following a collective bargaining impasse.

Unlike the STB, where the POTUS designates the chairperson, the NMB chairperson rotates annually. When reached by phone Oct. 16, NMB Chairperson Loren Sweatt told Railway Age, “I have no comment [on Hamilton]. Have a good day.”

Hamilton was nominated by President Joe Biden and confirmed by the Senate in December 2021. She previously was a staff attorney with the Teamsters Union, working exclusively in its Airline Division, and earlier was a staff attorney with the Association of Flight Attendants. Hamilton earned an undergraduate degree from Oberlin College and a law degree from the University of Michigan.

Sweatt, with a long congressional staff career including at the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, was Senate-confirmed in 2024 following nomination by Biden.

Puchalla, previously an NMB mediator and president of the Association of Flight Attendants, was first nominated by President Barack Obama and Senate-confirmed in 2009. She is among the longest serving of NMB members. The longest serving was Republican Francis A. O’Neill Jr.—1947-1971—who was nominated by President Harry S. Truman and renominated by Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson.

The post Another POTUS 47 Firing—NMB This Time appeared first on Railway Age.

Given that the new North Star of growth I gave our rail industry is being used to justify an alteration to the course of its future, I must break my annual publication cadence to deal with this fork-in-the-road moment. Credit to Railway Age Editor-in-Chief William C. Vantuono for maintaining this publication’s place as the rail ideology octagon to have this necessary debate for the future of this industry among railroaders.

The stakes are higher now, and the pressure and failure consequences are real. So, it is time to change the status of rail egos, reputations, years of service, budgets, relationships and career legacies to interchanged-delivered. We must focus on fact, truth, honesty and intellectual depth: May the most meritorious rail track path win its future.

To deal properly with this situation and its complexity, we will use history, logic, reason, fact and real rail honesty. To start the growth our rail industry needs to prosper, we need to start a new fire in its firebox. As usual, please clean your intellectual rail palates before we proceed, ideally with a glass of water to bring with you, for this is a process, and the boiler will be very hot. When we turn on the steam to power the locomotive forward, we will have this new engine prepped for service with the answer to the question: how to get the American rail industry, and the North American rail system, to grow.

To begin, we must unfortunately deal with my least favorite rail acronym, “PSR,” for despite what I thought was my successful deletion of its use and ideas from our industry’s strategic lexicon, its spirit, like a ghost, continues to haunt and distort its future. We must correct its record for this industry to begin growing and dump the ash of this old fire into the ash pan to make space for the new tender and coal that will fuel our new fire.

How did PSR happen? Specifically, why is there a belief that it was a successful financial management strategy for Class I railroads to be admired? Even more specifically, what enabled railroads to generate and realize real higher cash flows and profits, and find themselves ranked as one of the most profitable U.S. industries in 2019? The rail industry’s future, spirit, structure, hiring decisions and reputation have all been altered by these financial results. Despite the sheer quantity of customer shutdowns, emergency situations, bad news stories and regulatory attention, it still did succeed in boosting rail profits to their highest levels in rail industry history at the time. How? And why?

The answer: The Common Carrier Obligation, and the liability protections its current definition provides railroads. Specifically, the vague word that currently helps define the standard for U.S. rail service quality: “reasonable.” The litigious nature of this U.S. rail policy issue is complex. But Canada has already dealt with this issue in the directionally correct way.

Canada’s Transportation Modernization Act of 2018 instructed its railroads to provide “the highest level of service” to fulfill their obligations, while taking into account railroad and shipper concerns.

Let’s focus on this idea of “highest level of service.” This is what railroads control. This is the realization and execution of our new North Star of growth: If railroads deliver the highest level of service they possibly can to their existing customers, those customers will entrust and pay railroads to move more of their freight. It is that simple of an idea, plan and strategy: maximize the happiness of our customers by earning their business with experiential satisfaction and merit. Time to load the tender for use in starting our new fire.

What is the current reputation of the rail industry as it exists in our society today? What did PSR truly do to this industry? What do non-railroaders, the general public, the venture community, the tech industry and even industry veterans themselves honestly think of our rail industry as it exists today? And most important, what does the youth of this industry think? The younger generation of railroaders are not counting down the days until retirement, but instead have been selected, groomed and positioned to be responsible for, execute and lead railroads into the next century. They are the railroaders whose responsibility it will be to execute the proposed Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern merger and actually do the work required to integrate two of the U.S.’s largest rail networks into one. The railroaders whose jobs it will be to help get that beast to function properly without an operational implosion. The railroaders whose professional futures, lives and families will be impacted because of this merger’s alteration of our rail industry forever, especially if it fails.

The youth of this industry does not care about professional legacies. We do not care about corporate-speak. We do not care about a short-term activist investor’s pressure campaign. And we do not care about this industry’s ways of old. Our concern is its future, not its past, specifically, its results, its growth, its well-being, its prosperity and its return to operational, economic and reputational dominance. Elite railroading is what we want. Prideful railroading. A restoration of respect and admiration for what we do daily for our industry, our nation, our economy and our society. On the tracks, in the office, on the road, in the hotels, in the locomotive cabs, in the mechanical shops, in the boardrooms and on the rails, every day, every night, every week and every year, in all weather conditions. We want a hot fire burning for the boiler, at the heart of this industry, within its locomotive, powering it forward, with fresh coal. With the ash of our old fire now dumped, and our tender loaded, it is time to ignite it.

The Canadians are directionally correct: Policy that eliminates bad service as being an operational option is needed. This industry’s worst temptations and behavior, exemplified by the Class I-caused chaos during the PSR era, are enabled when these huge, bureaucratic and rigid entities, like runaway trains, cannot stop themselves from smashing what the railroader I most respect in my generation calls “the railroad easy button”: relying on rules, regulations, market power, a lack of accountability and complacency to grow instead of doing the hard and necessary work of fixing the core problems to earn as much of their customers’ business as possible by providing them with the highest quality operational service experience.

To be clear, it is not easy to run these railroads. Railroading is not easy. These are fundamentally complex operations and organizations spanning large geographic territories, with large machinery, tens of thousands of employees, operating in all weather conditions, with lots impacting their operational execution they do not control. This is not easy. Especially when the still-massive majority of rail vehicles moving along the tracks today lack the real-time GPS monitoring required for railroads to operate at an elite level. Time for the new coal.

The claim of this merger is that by eliminating the apparently poor inter-carrier coordination challenge of executing a smooth and fast interchange at gateways that have historically struggled with congestion (despite  CREATE, the Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency project under way to fix Chicago), this newly formed railroad will be able to provide a higher quality service product to a select customer base that allegedly needs that lane’s transit time reduced by one to two days i to justify allocating more of their existing freight, currently moving today by truck, onto this rail route. Doing this will apparently result in “$1.75 billion in revenue ‘synergies’ in year three primarily from the ‘watershed’ truck conversion, better service, more options for customers, and rail industry growth.” The belief in this plan is so deep that UP will spend $85 billion to bring it into reality. The confidence is also so high in this merger’s legality, regulatory approval and industry future track path merit that UP committed to a $2.5 billion dollar break-up fee if it fails. This merger also will apparently generate record-setting advisory deal fees for the banks that were retained to advise and assist in seeing this merger through. More coal.

In June 2025, RailPulse, a rail industry-owned tech startup of which Union Pacific is a part owner, testified before the U.S. House of Representatives T&I Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials stating that getting to full railcar fleet adoption required “additional investment” and therefore “urged Congress to provide financial incentives to help railcar owners equip railcars faster.” Put differently, RailPulse urged Congress to provide additional taxpayer dollars, via resources like CRISI grants, to help justify the cost of equipping all railcars on the rail network with GPS. Commercial-grade GPS devices can cost anywhere from $50 per sensor to a few hundred dollars. While not inherently wrong, this request seems contradictory and hypocritical, given the execution, justification claims, apparent urgency of and the price of this merger.

Why would we not finish equipping the railcar fleet with GPS to see if that helps fix interchange coordination (hint: it will) faster before spending $85 billion on a peer railroad? The only mode of commercial transportation that does not fully use, embrace or view real-time location information for all vehicles as an operating requirement, in 2025, is the rail industry. This is a fixed cost of doing business in our modern transportation economy now. It is not an “investment” decision.

This means that the Canadians again are correct, specifically Keith Creel. He, Joe Hinrichs and Katie Farmer are (and now unfortunately were given Joe’s disgraceful replacing) all right: There are other ways and options to improve interchange coordination and performance before needing to merge. While this merger may be an option, it is not the best, easiest, smartest or fastest immediate option available. More coal.

Why? Zoom out. Ignore the names, the people and the color schemes. Let’s look at the rail system in its entirety. Regardless of trackage rights, ownership and operating rules, there are bedrock facts that are true. First, the track network is one physically connected network. Second, like a stone thrown into a pond, there is a ripple effect on the global network when a disruption occurs anywhere on it. This concept is called schedule delay propagation: Like a wreck on a highway forcing cars to slow, when a disruption occurs on a rail network, regardless of the cause, the schedule delay causes “traffic,” i.e. other trains on the system, getting delayed.

For a railroad, unlike a city street network with alternate route options available to route around the delay by turning left or right on a side street, rail delay schedule propagation is more rapid and consequential. Like a glass cup is more prone to breaking and shattering when dropped than a plastic one, rail network delay propagation has a more disruptive impact on the traffic flows of a rail network than a car wreck does on the flows within a city. While a traffic jam may be caused by a wreck on a street, with advance knowledge a delivery driver can take a different route to avoid it. Doing so mitigates the impact of the blocked street and maintains on-time performance quality for the driver, and for the delivery service. A rail network does not have that physical luxury.

The best way to grow a delivery service is to maximize and optimize for the only delivery service customer satisfaction quality metric that matters: on-time performance. Our rail system as it exists today does not and currently cannot do this. But it could and should. Why? Our final scoop of coal into the firebox. It is time to begin releasing the power and potential of U.S. rail.

Railroads have a reputation of being abrasive, unreliable, complacent, shortsighted, myopic, monopolistic and decaying companies dominated by old ideas, old ways and legacy technology they never want to change and therefore cannot grow. While harsh, I believe this industry has much greater potential. The rail system today is fragmented into isolated regional operating fiefdoms, like ancient castles, with closely guarded moats and gates. They seem to believe their castle moat, which is isolation and control, via a preference of ownership and self-sufficiency of almost all mission-critical systems, innovations, business processes and spending priorities, will not have to meaningfully change, despite the decade of decline, to ignite trajectory-changing growth. That belief is wrong. Many customers have already given up on rail. Some of the best minds in the industry have left or are leaving. Rail integrity has been seemingly lost, and its reputation has been damaged. No one really wants to work for railroads anymore. The PSR-caused non-financial costs and decay in morale, reputations, relationships, turnover, layoffs, experiential knowledge loss, perceptions, trust, and the spirit of this industry that made it so great when I joined it, have been priceless, is real. When leaders fail to or are not allowed to lead properly, the long-term consequences are severe. This is the rail industry right now. And this merger is the surrender, not securing, of our industry’s growth future. Our fire is ready. Time to start the air compressor and unleash the steam.

Drop the fight over the common carrier obligation. Support an updated and quantified common carrier obligation, with a reasonable but ambitious on-time performance target as the quantification metric used to define the standard for rail service quality in not only the U.S. but also Canada and Mexico. Unlike this $85 billion merger, the upfront cost of doing this, to all railroads, is basically $0. Yes, it will require investment to adapt, evolve and adjust to the new standard, but this investment is no longer an option if rail ever wants to meaningfully grow. The decision to support doing this can be made immediately and communicated accordingly within a week from reading this. Yes, the industry will also need to evolve technologically. But the down payment for this digital evolution has been made, and this evolution has been under way for years thanks to the rail tech ecosystem. And it will pay off.

That one signal to the entire market, and that one decisive action, by the employees who are largely and currently responsible for this industry’s future prosperity, will ignite the growth era, and secure our rail industry’s future forever.

Railroads, and specifically rail operational leadership, don’t want or like this kind of accountability. The railroads have fought this update litigiously with intensity for a long time. But growth must be earned. And accountability is not only needed but also required for growth. Without real action with conviction toward change and progress, rail customers will never be the advocates the railroads need in the marketplace to grow. This mindset must change. Why? Do you hear the steam?

Meritorious, transparent and accountable railroading is required to, and will, unleash rail growth. Elite railroading is required to grow. To a rail customer, or to anyone purchasing the services of any delivery service, the true thing you want is for it, whatever it may be, to arrive on time. Need to catch your flight? You plan how early you need to be there and plan your delivery service trip request from a service like Uber accordingly, to be there on time. The speed of the transport is not what matters above all else, nor will a reduction in a few days at a few interchanges spark massive growth for one railroad, much less the rail system, or its ecosystem, in its entirety. The rail industry’s most potent and exploitable marketplace advantage is not speed, it is reliability. It is on-time performance. But that is not possible without system-wide real-time location information, which exists today in every other modal transport option on Earth thanks to cellphones. Had UP leadership understood this, RailPulse would not be asking Congress for taxpayer dollars for GPS. It would be paying for it themselves.

The new rail tech industry formed because of and in the era of PSR. The constriction of spending left rail technological progress underserved and undeveloped. Barely any innovative and new technology was being built to help railroads grow with. No risk for progress was happening. Young railroaders like me saw this and filled the gap. Short lines enabled us to do so. We build and explain what railroads need to use to grow, not what they want to use to operate as they always have. We aren’t disrupting for disruption’s sake. We aren’t some of the most vocal railroaders in this industry for no reason. Our futures are already extremely attached to this industry’s prosperity. Until Class I railroads feel the same healthy pressure we do to improve, build and progress, they never will, and this industry’s growth future will be lost.

The PSR era, and the financial results of the PSR era, would never have happened if railroads were liable, at some reasonable level, for the many severe and expensive operational failures they caused. Until real accountability exists in the U.S. rail system, forcing railroads to identify and fix their hardest problems, the businesses will continue to exploit and at worst abuse their worst monopolistic market power temptations, like runaway trains.

To insert absolutely necessary rhetorical precision into this historical moment: UP will have more options; no one else will. UP will grow, the industry will not. This is not inherently wrong, for JimVena is doing his job. But words matter, just like the one in the Common Carrier obligation that holds this industry back: “reasonable.”

In July 2025, the 7th Circuit Court vacated the STB’s rulemaking attempt to enforce objective reliability standards via reciprocal switching. Quantifying the Common Carrier obligation with on-time performance, and holding U.S. railroads to a high-quality service standard, is the correct and only answer to the question: how to get the American rail industry, the North American rail system, and the entire rail ecosystem full of stakeholders who want it to prosper, to grow. Not a merger. Time to get rolling and blow the train horn.

Alex Luna is the Founder and CEO of AlphaRail, a 2020 Creative Destruction Lab Quantum Computing Stream graduate and the only rail-focused founding member of the United States Quantum Economic Development Consortium (QED-C). Alex started his rail career as an intern on Norfolk Southern’s Ag Marketing team. After modeling and renewing $1.6 billion in rail customer contracts as the Market Manager for Norfolk Southern’s sweeteners commodity franchise, the railroad’s’ most profitable agriculture franchise, Alex left to start AlphaRail to bring high performance algorithmic and computing technology into the rail industry to improve the quality of rail service that rail customers experience. Alex holds a BS in Supply Chain Management and Business Analytics from The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, an MBA from Vanderbilt University, and Venture Capital Executive Education from The University of California Berkeley. He also serves on the Use Case Technology Advisory Committee for the US QED-C.

The post Igniting Rail Growth in the Firebox appeared first on Railway Age.

Schaumburg, Ill.: Railway Age’s annual Women in Rail Conference has concluded its second day. At the Awards Luncheon Sponsored by CN, we recognized the outstanding honorees of Railway Age’s 2024 Women in Rail and RT&S’s 2025 Women in Railroad Engineering award programs. 

RT&S 2025 Women in Railroad Engineering honorees attending the conference.

The post Women in Rail Honorees Recognized at 2025 Conference appeared first on Railway Age.

Total U.S. weekly rail traffic was 498,462 carloads and intermodal units, down 1.3% compared with the same week last year, the Association of American Railroads (AAR) reported for Week 41, ending Oct. 11, 2025. However, U.S. railroads realized a 2.8% overall gain through 2025’s first 41 weeks.

Total carloads were 224,562, up 1.2% compared with the same week in 2024, while U.S. weekly intermodal volume was 273,900 containers and trailers, down 3.3% compared to 2024.

Five of the 10 carload commodity groups posted an increase compared with the same week in 2024. They included nonmetallic minerals, up 1,985 carloads, to 32,448; coal, up 605 carloads, to 58,858; and chemicals, up 548 carloads, to 31,048. Commodity groups that posted decreases compared with the same week in 2024 included metallic ores and metals, down 816 carloads, to 18,456; miscellaneous carloads, down 324 carloads, to 8,923; and grain, down 85 carloads, to 23,434.

For the first 41 weeks of 2025, U.S. railroads reported cumulative volume of 9,101,809 carloads, up 2.1% from the same point last year; and 11,126,167 intermodal units, up 3.4% from last year. Total combined U.S. traffic for the first 41 weeks of 2025 was 20,227,976 carloads and intermodal units, an increase of 2.8% compared to last year.

North American rail volume for the week ending Oct. 11, 2025, on 9 reporting U.S., Canadian and Mexican railroads totaled 333,005 carloads, up 1.5% compared with the same week last year, and 359,462 intermodal units, down 0.8% compared with last year. Total combined weekly rail traffic in North America was 692,467 carloads and intermodal units, up 0.3%. North American rail volume for the first 41 weeks of 2025 was 27,844,550 carloads and intermodal units, up 2.3% compared with 2024.

Canadian railroads reported 94,937 carloads for the week, down 3.2%, and 70,657 intermodal units, up 0.8% compared with the same week in 2024. For the first 41 weeks of 2025, Canadian railroads reported cumulative rail traffic volume of 6,639,159 carloads, containers and trailers, up 1.9%.

Mexican railroads reported 13,506 carloads for the week, up 70.7% compared with the same week last year, and 14,905 intermodal units, up 60.5%. Cumulative volume on Mexican railroads for the first 41 weeks of 2025 was 977,415 carloads and intermodal containers and trailers, down 5.0% from the same point last year.

The post AAR Week 41: Intermodal Losses Cancel Carload Gains appeared first on Railway Age.

Anacostia Rail Holdings subsidiary Pacific Harbor Line (PHL) has entered into a development agreement with Remora, a Michigan-based climate technology startup that is pioneering mobile carbon capture for freight rail and trucking. The partnership “aligns with PHL’s long-standing commitment to innovation, environmental stewardship and practical pathways toward decarbonization of freight rail operations.”

PHL, which provides rail transportation, maintenance and dispatching services to the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, is an investor in Remora. Anacostia President and CEO Peter A. Gilbertson, serves as an advisor.

“We’re building this technology not only to meet environmental goals, but to make it financially compelling for railroads,” said Remora Co-founder and CEO Paul Gross. “Pacific Harbor Line’s support and Anacostia’s leadership will be instrumental as we bring carbon capture to freight rail.”

Progress Rail EMD® Joule battery-electric locomotive testing at PHL. Anacostia Rail Holdings photo.

“We are proud of our progress toward zero emission operations, which started when we acquired Tier 2 (lower emission) locomotives some 16 years ago,” said PHL President Otis L. Cliatt II. “That initial success was followed by an evolution to Tier 3+ locomotives and then a conversion to renewable diesel fuel which cut CO₂ emissions by some 70%. PHL also operated a zero emission (ZE) EMD® Joule battery-electric locomotive from Progress Rail in test service, and we currently operate a Tier 4 locomotive. We plan to upgrade our entire fleet of Tier 3+ locomotives to Tier 4 using proven after-treatment technologies. This partnership with Remora gives PHL an opportunity to help shape a technology that could significantly reduce freight rail emissions while creating new economic value for operators. We’re proud to support innovations that have the potential to benefit the entire rail industry.”

“For PHL and Anacostia, carbon capture adds yet another option in our efforts to slash emissions,” said Gilbertson. “In addition to reducing CO₂ emissions, Remora’s technology elevates connected locomotives to EPA Tier 4 standards and also enables the reuse of carbon in other commercial applications. The U.S. is facing a CO₂ shortage, even as trains and trucks emit roughly 375 million tons of it every year. Remora’s solution captures that CO₂, converts it to liquid, and sells it to industries such as farming, food production, and manufacturing, sharing the revenue with its transportation partners.”

Founded five years ago, Remora designs and manufactures carbon capture technology for rail and trucking. Its technology transforms exhaust into beverage-grade carbon dioxide sold to breweries and greenhouses, generating revenue while reducing emissions. Founded in 2020, Remora has raised $117 million in venture capital and has partnered with major carriers including DHL, Ryder, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern. The company said its early truck-based pilots “informed a redesigned system that eliminates backpressure, increases efficiency and captures up to one ton of CO₂ per hour at locomotive scale.”

Remora illustration

For railroads, Remora places a tender car behind a locomotive “to scrub emissions, preventing them from entering the atmosphere,” NS reported in the Story Yard section of its website on April 28. “Locomotive exhaust enters a containment system allowing CO2 to be stored as liquid and is easily offloaded when the locomotive refuels. The carbon is transported to end-users like concrete, fuel, and chemical producers, for purchase. Remora, a carbon capture pioneer, is leading the work with us, and others like Union Pacific, and Pacific Harbor Line. Revenue from carbon sales is shared with the group.” Also partnering with Remora: Genesee & Wyoming Inc.’s Buffalo & Pittsburg Railroad and Indiana & Ohio Railway.

The post PHL, Remora Partner on Sustainability appeared first on Railway Age.

The Commuter Rail Coalition (CRC) has gotten behind HR 5697, the Passenger Rail Liability Adjustment Act of 2025, a bill that would modify current statute to allow passenger railroads 90 days to secure additional excess liability insurance coverage when the federal cap is next scheduled to be inflation-adjusted in 2026.

Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Tex.) a member and former Chairman of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Railroads Subcommittee, introduced the bipartisan bill, whose original cosponsors are House Railroads Subcommittee Ranking Member Dina Titus (D-Nev.) and Seth Moulton (D-Mass.). Nehls “has maintained his support of our efforts to find a solution to the problem posed by the current law, which gives commuter railroads just 30 days to obtain additional insurance coverage when the federal liability cap is inflation-adjusted every five years,” CRC noted. “Securing coverage is a complex process that requires much more than 30 days to complete. If commuter railroads are unable to secure coverage within the 30 days, then they will have to cease all operations. We estimate that the next increase will be in excess of $70 million when the U.S. Department of Transportation announces the newest cap sometime in early 2026. The cap is adjusted by applying the Consumer Price Index.”

The CRC has issued an action alert requesting all railroads engage their federal elected representatives in support of HR 5697. “It is imperative to demonstrate clear and widespread support for this legislation,” the organization noted. “It would be an even stronger endorsement if elected officials would become cosponsors of the legislation. CRC is also lining up support in the Senate. Expressions of support should be directed to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. We are pushing for the inclusion of a permanent solution to this problem in the upcoming reauthorization of the federal surface transportation programs. Reauthorizing legislation will be necessary when the current Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) expires Sept. 30, 2026. The CRC has expressed its support for a permanent solution with the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, as well as the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. We are advocating for a modification in the statute that would provide for the cap to be calculated every four years instead of the current five, while allowing a full 365 days for implementation of the new cap. This would allow all railroads to acquire additional coverage in the normal course of business when they complete their annual renewals.”

The commuter rail industry will convene in Washington, D.C. from November 3–5 for roundtable discussions with policymakers and technical tours at the 2025 Commuter Rail Summit.

The post CRC Pushing H.R. 5697 appeared first on Railway Age.

New ways to pay: New Jersey Transit says it working “to transform the customer experience through innovation and technology,” showcasing fare collection modernization efforts during an event at its Secaucus Junction Station:

• New, high-tech fare gates from Conduent Transportation equipped with advanced 3D sensors and imaging technology, to be installed at Secaucus Junction and Newark Liberty Airport stations. The nearly eight-foot-tall gates use advanced sensors and 3-D technology to enhance security and revenue protection.
• In September, NJT expanded its “FARE-PAY” card to customers traveling all NJT buses statewide as well as the Newark Light Rail, Hudson-Bergen Light Rail and River LINE systems. The reusable cards allow customers to purchase and store monthly passes, 10-trip bus tickets or cash value on them to enjoy the convenience of tap-and-go. The new, reusable FARE-PAY fare cards make it easier for customers to travel the system by allowing them to register their card to protect their stored value from loss, manage their accounts online, view fare card activity and current value, auto-reload online, at ticket windows, TVMs and at select retail locations. A credit/debit card is not required.
• New Bus Fare Box/Registers “will be more efficient and improve reliability of onboard fare collection. The new fare boxes will also accept additional bill denominations giving customers more flexibility with payments.”
• New mobile validation devices used by train crews for scanning rail tickets. These devices are currently being piloted and will be deployed systemwide in the coming months and will provide enhanced capabilities such as acceptance of the FARE-PAY card, which is not possible with the first generation of mobile validation devices.
• Ticket Vending Machines (TVMs) have been upgraded throughout the state to accept tap-and-go payments from credit/debit cards as well as sales of the new FARE-PAY cards.  The machines also have modern capabilities to accept mobile payment systems such as Apple Pay and Google Wallet. This latest generation of TVMs also feature additional customer information display boards.
• A Web Ticketing Platform allows customers to purchase rail tickets from their web browser and display or print the QR code without having to download the mobile app. This provides electronic ticketing options to infrequent users of the system who may not have the mobile app installed.

Conduent Transportation

“Our fare modernization program is focused on making every step of the customer journey more seamless, efficient, and secure,” said NJT President and CEO Kris Kolluri, a featured speaker at Railway Age’s Oct. 29-31 Next Gen Rail Systems Conference. “From advanced 3D fare gates to expanded contactless payments, we’re improving the way customers move through the system with greater ease and reliability while protecting revenue.”

The post NJT Accelerates Fare Modernization Program appeared first on Railway Age.

CN and Congebec, a Canadian logistics provider of distribution services for the food, retail and packaged goods industries, are collaborating on a “state-of-the-art” cold storage facility at CN’s Calgary Logistics Park in Alberta.

“Strategically located within CN’s integrated logistics hub, the facility will be designed to be in better proximity, accelerating the conversion of temperature-sensitive goods between rail and warehouse,” CN said. “Customers will benefit from a more reliable, timely and efficient service to get their perishable cargo to domestic and international markets. Developed with CN’s construction partner Matthews Tribal, the new Congebec facility will seamlessly integrate cold storage, cross-docking, transloading, and first- and last-mile services with CN’s established refrigerated programs. The proximity to rail of this new facility will also help streamline transfers, reduce dwell times, and ensure temperature-sensitive goods move more efficiently.”

“This innovative solution addresses long-standing challenges in the cold supply chain by enabling faster container flows, flexible on-demand capacity, and more reliable delivery schedules,” CN added. “This initiative will connect producers, retailers and logistics providers in Alberta and across the cold chain, reinforcing Canada’s food distribution network and global competitiveness. With this project, CN and Congebec are redefining cold chain logistics in Western Canada—giving customers greater speed, reliability, and confidence in moving their products across North America and into global markets.”

“This initiative with Congebec reflects CN’s commitment to building smarter, more sustainable supply chains, said CN Vice President, Intermodal Dan Bresolin. “This new hub will give our customers new options to move their temperature-sensitive products with greater efficiency, reliability, and reach, helping them compete in markets across North America and globally.”

“Working with CN on this new Calgary facility is a natural extension of our mission to provide reliable, sustainable cold chain solutions,” said Congebec Transport President Richard Patenaude. “By combining Congebec’s expertise in temperature-controlled logistics with CN’s expansive rail network, we’re giving customers the confidence to move their products anywhere they need to go, with efficiency and care.”

“We are proud to contribute our development expertise to a project that sets a new standard for cold chain logistics,” said Matthews Tribal Vice President, Development Carleigh Oude-Reimerink. “This facility represents the kind of genuine partnership Matthews Tribal believes in—built on trust and creating lasting value. By combining our Calgary presence with CN’s network and Congebec’s cold chain expertise, we’re helping customers overcome real challenges while supporting long-term growth in Western Canada.”

The post CN, Congebec Forge ‘Chilly’ Partnership appeared first on Railway Age.

The potential merger between Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern has stirred up lots of talk and speculation around its possible impact, from safety issues to job opportunities and other likely scenarios impacting the railroad industry. However, what a lot of folks are not discussing is the major disruption this merger will cause to local communities along its route, including one major city that’s played a central role in the nation’s connection of freight railroad–Chicago.

Throughout the course of my 54 years of experience in transportation and rail, including 37 years with CSX, I’ve witnessed or been directly involved in nine freight rail mergers, and the most common theme among each one can be summed up in one word: disruption.

Merging railroads of this scale brings significant impact and complexity. On one hand, it can lead to long-term cost efficiencies for suppliers and manufacturers that rely on rail to transport goods across the country, and the short-term effects are often positive with job creation to support construction and integration efforts. On the other hand, the most lasting impact and disruption of these mass-scale mergers will be felt by the communities located along the expanded or newly built rail lines and tracks.

Increased traffic on some lines that will create congestion that is felt by local communities in the form of increased gate down times at crossings, noise impacts of additional horns where there are no quiet zones in place, locomotive noise impacts, and an increase in slowed or stopped trains at congested locations such as entrances to yards or at-grade crossings with other railroads. Not to mention the potential impacts to commuter and intercity passenger service that shares the tracks with the freight railroads of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern.

In taking a close look at local communities along this rail network across the U.S., there’s a variety of factors that can impact residents and neighborhoods ranging from environmental damage, safety concerns, noise pollution, traffic congestion and disruption, as well as socioeconomic displacement. In working in Chicago during the CN acquisition of the EJ&E, the impact on communities such as Barrington or Lynwood, in Illinois, created traffic pattern changes that increased train traffic by up to 400%. These communities and others alike were able to secure some concessions from the railroad through the STB process that allowed them to construct rail grade separations, thereby easing some of the impacts on their communities.

One metropolitan area with numerous surrounding communities that will feel the effects and disruption the most from this merger is Chicago. This merger will mean even more trains passing through already one of the major transportation hubs in the Midwest. The merger has the potential to also cause further disruption to residents and commuters who are already waiting sometimes more than 10 minutes for a freight train to cross a track—despite Illinois law prohibiting the blocking of crossings for this amount of time. The influx of freight trains through Chicago has the potential to cause substantial delays in local commuters’ schedules and inconvenience their daily lives.

This combined merger will also interfere with commuter rail, leading to delays for passengers on Chicago’s Amtrak and Metra rail lines, even though by federal law Amtrak passenger trains must be given preference over freight trains.

One initiative that resulted from the multiple mergers in the 1990s and culminating with a record snowstorm in January 1999—the Chicago CREATE program—is a great example of how a public-private partnership worked to improve the way passengers and goods are transported via rail. In my experience working on the CREATE program, I learned firsthand from meetings with local communities what impact freight trains had on them. In this case, the Union Pacific Geneva Subdivision and the Norfolk Southern Chicago Line are both expected to see additional train traffic.

During my experience as the Director of the Chicago Transportation Coordination Office (CTCO) in Chicago from 2003-2008, an incident at any point in the Chicago terminal had an almost immediate effect on trains not only in Chicago but a domino effect on trains enroute to Chicago. While the merger may eliminate some interchanges between railroads in Chicago, it will create new interchanges and modify others, resulting in changes to every railroad operating plan in Chicago. In addition, shippers that today use a specific railroad or multiple railroads will look to improve their costs and transit times, which will create more disruption that will take months to sort out.

During the CSX/NS acquisition of Conrail in 1999, when I was the Director of Train Operations in Chicago for CSX, up until the actual date of the split, it was unknown which railroad any shipper was going to use, and many shifted multiple times afterwards to avoid what I termed at the time “rolling congestion” where shippers would transition to the less-congested railroad, only to find out that the shift impacted both railroads, and the level of congestion would ebb and flow for up to one year afterwards. While the UP+NS merger is different than when CSX and NS “carved” up Conrail, shippers still have the ability stick with their current options or look elsewhere.

Before this merger gains approval, municipalities in its path should start planning sooner rather than later. One way to do so is to commission a study to better understand how the extended, enhanced or new railroad line will impact its community. For example, a detailed operating and infrastructure study can show whether infrastructure that needs to be built, such as a bridge to allow trains to travel under or over major streets and highways to reduce the amount of impact to residents from a traffic perspective. At the same time, any crossing closures can assist in the development of a Quiet Zone, which would also improve the quality of life for a community. This type of knowledge will also help in negotiations with the rail giants to help potentially offset the infrastructure costs to the municipality.

What I’ve learned in my tenure working for some of the nation’s biggest freight rail companies, like CSX, and on projects with other Class I railroads including CN, CPKC, NS and UP, is that it typically gets significantly worse before it gets better for the communities involved. My best advice for municipality leadership is to act early, stay informed and advocate consistently for your community’s interests.

Earl Wacker is a Director in RINA North America’s Rail & Transit Practice and has been with the firm since 2020. He has been involved in the railroad industry in North America for more than 50 years. With 37 years’ experience at CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT) and its predecessors, he worked in every aspect of the railroad business. In 2008, Wacker retired from CSXT and took a position at AECOM (URS), where he was responsible for all railroads in North and South America. He retired from AECOM in 2019 and formed his own company to consult with railroads and other entities on issues ranging from operating coordination, capital project management, rules compliance, etc.

The post A Tectonic Shift on the Tracks: The Disruptive Potential of a Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern Merger appeared first on Railway Age.

On Oct. 14, 2025, the 45th anniversary of the Staggers Rail Act of 1980 signing, the Association of American Railroads launched a new website, “Harley Explains,” hosted by a folksy, bearded, ponytailed, blue jeans-and-leather-jacket-clad animated character named—who else—Harley, who looks like he just hopped off his Harley Davidson at a railroad crossing. Named after the late Rep. Harley Orrin Staggers, for whom the Staggers Rail Act was named out of respect, this Harley doesn’t gesture with his hands very much, like the late Jim Florio, the Italian-descent New Jersey congressman who actually authored and near single-handedly managed the legislation, probably did.

“I’m here to help you know what’s going on in rail policy and to get an idea of how freight railroads work,” Harley says in a Western-brogue-free baritone reminiscent of Sam Elliott. “Think of me as your guide through the nuts and bolts of the industry, minus the jargon and the snooze (I hope he’s not referring to Railway Age). I’m a true rail guy and I get pretty jazzed (remember that expression?) about all this stuff. I’ll drop new videos regularly, so subscribe to AAR’s YouTube channel and check out their newsletter The Signal to stay in the loop.”

Cowboy hats off to the AAR for doing this. It’s a great idea, presenting rail “stuff” in a simple, easily digestible way, like pork and beans straight out of the can, heated just a tad on a campfire. John Q. Public—who last I heard don’t know nuthin’ ’bout railroads ’cept that when them bells start ringin’ and lights start flashin’ and them gates come down, is gonna be waitin’ a real long time for a real long train to pass—could use some learnin’ ’bout all the good things railroads do.

Come to think of it, most of them folk up on Capitol Hill could use some learning, ’specially since none were around when President Jimmy Carter signed Staggers into law.

President Jimmy Carter signing the Staggers Rail Act into law on Oct. 14, 1980. Representative Harley O. Staggers (D-W.Va.), sponsor of the bill, stands to the President’s right. AAR President William H. Dempsey, who led the railroad lobbying effort in support of the Staggers Rail Act, is at far left. Staggers (1907-1991) was chair of the House Interstate & Foreign Commerce Committee. But directly behind Carter is the person most responsible for crafting the actual legislation, Rep. James J. Florio (D-N.J.) chair of the House Transportation Subcommittee. White House photo.

But let’s be clear folks. Florio got it done, as Capitol Hill Contributing Editor Frank N. Wilner points out in his book, Railroads and Economic Regulation (An Insider’s Account): “Sensing strong opposition, Florio flashed remarkable political savvy, seizing on an announcement by House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee Chairperson Harley O. Staggers (D-W.Va.) that he (Staggers) would retire after 16 House terms. To attract additional votes for H.R. 7235—and cement Staggers’ support—Florio renamed the Rail Act of 1980 as the Staggers Rail Act, calling it ‘a fitting tribute [to Chairperson Staggers’] years of service and dedication to a sound rail transportation system in America.”

Wilner’s book also chronicles Staggers’ opposition to early economic deregulation, such as a railroad-sought “zone of rate freedom.” So, Harley Staggers was not a deregulator in any sense of the word. Jim Florio was the squeeze and the juice behind the Staggers Rail Act—which was bipartisan legislation, somethin’ we don’t hear too much about ’round these parts anymore.

But that’s OK. All water under the railroad trestle. What matters, AAR tells ya’ll, is that since Staggers, “rail rates are 44% lower than in 1981 (adjusted for inflation). Railroads have reinvested $840 billion—$1.4 trillion in today’s dollars—into their own networks. Railroads move one ton of freight nearly 500 miles on a single gallon of fuel, and make $23 billion each year in private investment, not taxpayer dollars. The legacy of the bipartisan partial economic deregulation continues to deliver results for railroads, customers and everyday consumers. Preserving this landmark legislation will help drive the investment necessary to continue enhancing safety and keep our economy growing. Bottom line: The Staggers Rail Act turned a failing industry into a global leader. [This] anniversary is a moment to reflect on the power of smart policy—and the importance of protecting it.”

Now, for railroaders, all them facts amount to making the obvious less obscure. But for political types and the public, well, heck, we need to keep hammerin’ away, drivin’ that spike into that crosstie—rather than into our own coffin.

The post ‘Harley’ Explains it All appeared first on Railway Age.

“A continued downward trend in import volumes, which is driving tighter assessment of accessorial fees as ports seek to capture revenue during peak season,” has been confirmed by ITS Logistics’ recently released October forecast for its US Port/Rail Ramp Freight Index. “Outside the ports, the evolving regulatory situation surrounding non-domiciled CDLs is driving lower-cost capacity out of the market, increasing the risk of financial insolvency for some carriers. These compounding factors are placing a downward squeeze on an already soft drayage market, which could cause problems for shippers in both the short and long term.”

(ITS Logistics)

ITS Logistics, a Nevada-based third-party logistics (3PL) firm, releases each month an index forecasting port container and dray operations for the Pacific, Atlantic and Gulf regions; ocean and domestic container rail ramp operations are also highlighted for both the West and East inland regions.

“Terminals and rail ramps should not face any major challenges due to inbound or export volumes,” said ITS Logistics Vice President of Global Supply Chain Paul Brashier. “There are, however, some storm clouds on the horizon that could negatively impact trucking and, by extension, terminal and port operations upstream.”

On Sept. 26, following the review of findings from a nationwide audit of CDL licenses, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) issued an emergency interim ruling restricting eligibility for non-domiciled CDLs. In response, several states have implemented enforcement efforts to verify CDL compliance and English language proficiency (ELP) at weigh stations, ports of entry, and along major transportation routes, according to ITS Logistics. “Industry experts warn that non-domiciled CDL holders account for a significant portion of the lower-cost capacity market and that regulatory crackdowns will likely result in a surge in bankruptcies across small and mid-size carriers. This is especially true for the drayage market, which has seen multiple major providers close their doors throughout 2025. It is anticipated that stricter enforcement of non-domiciled CDLs and ELP requirements will exacerbate financial challenges, pushing out capacity and ultimately impacting terminal and port operations.”

“In the near term, these new regulations will remove capacity from the ecosystem and cause market disruption,” Brashier continued. “In the long term, it could drive many carriers out of business as they struggle to withstand both evolving regulatory pressures and the ongoing freight recession that has pushed rates down to or below operating levels. Vetting service provider health will become even more important as shippers begin late 2025 and early 2026 RFP activity.”

U.S. September import volume is projected at 2.12 million TEUs, down from 2.28 million TEUs in August and representing a 6.8% year-over-year decrease, according to ITS Logistics report. “The National Retail Federation anticipates that monthly import volumes will continue to drop for the remainder of the year, citing tariffs and frontloading activity in the first half of 2025. In response to low container demand and declining per-container revenue, ocean carriers are strictly enforcing their accessorial schedules to maintain profitability. With minimal exceptions beyond clear operational failures, ITS Logistics recommends shippers review their supply chains for any inefficiencies that could be exposed and penalized under this renewed focus.”

“Shippers should take this opportunity to confirm that accessorial dispute processes and documentation requirements are clearly defined in their SOPs,” Brashier said. “If your supply chain utilizes rail for ocean container movement, it’s also important to ensure you understand items like chassis pool flip policies and which parties to engage with to resolve issues within free time.”

The post ITS Logistics Issues October US Port/Rail Ramp Freight Index appeared first on Railway Age.

Expanding storage capacity at the rail yard, the agency says, “is a key component to delivering more frequent service that better serve existing, changing and new travel markets” as outlined in the MARC Growth and Transformation Plan (download below).

The project scope includes increased storage capacity for MARC Trains at the Martin Maintenance Yard (located near Martin State Airport), new tracks with catenary electrification, crossover tracks, a new inspection pit, and equipment that includes water hydrants, air piping extensions and light fixtures to support train car maintenance. The yard and shop improvements are needed to support the MTA’s future commitment to operate electrified trainsets on the Penn Line following the completion of Amtrak’s Frederick Douglass Tunnel. The Martin Maintenance Yard project also supports Amtrak’s redevelopment of Penn Station—plans that require an alternative to Penn Station as a storage area, where many MARC trains are currently located when not in service.

The $35 million investment in improvements and increased capacity for the Martin Maintenance Yard is set to begin later this fall, with completion slated for summer 2027, according to the agency. It is supported by a discretionary grant from the Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) Program.

“Investing in our rail infrastructure today ensures we can deliver improved service in the future,” said Maryland Transit Administrator Holly Arnold. “It is a critical element in our goal to transform MARC Train from a commuter rail to a regional rail service.”

MARC Growth Plan_Final Report_20250624_redDownload

The post MDOT MTA to Expand, Modernize MARC Storage Facilities at Martin Maintenance Yard appeared first on Railway Age.

Before the M 

The area surrounding the M Ocean View was largely undeveloped farmland until well into the 20th century. Since the 1860s, passenger trains to and from San Jose stopped nearby but service was infrequent and slow. In the early 1900s, electric streetcar lines skirted today’s Oceanview on San Jose Avenue and Ocean Avenue. This helped drive growth in the area: streets, housing and other infrastructure. The core area now served by the M remained without service. 

This 1910 map shows the area surrounding the M Line. Red lines show streetcar lines. Two steam train lines are shown as solid black lines. Most of the streets seen here were only plans on a map and remained unpaved for decades. (Map: David Rumsey Map Collection, David Rumsey Map Center, Stanford Libraries, Courtesy of SFMTA) The M Line Proposed and Built 

Muni opened the K Ingleside in 1918 and the L Taraval 1919, its first lines west of Twin Peaks. With the K and L in operation, Muni was looking to further expand service in the southwest part of the city. The M was proposed as an extension with two different plans. One plan charted it from the K Line terminal on Brighton and Grafton. The route would snake downhill through mostly empty lots to Randolph Street. This proposal was rejected due to high cost and slow travel times along the steep route. 

A second proposal placed the M on a path west of Junipero Serra Boulevard. This route would be cheaper to build and provide faster service to downtown. This proposal envisioned the M as a branch off a future rapid transit line to the peninsula. 

Construction on the M began in early 1924. The M Line split off St. Francis Circle to what would become 19th Avenue. After almost a mile, it wound eastward to Randolph and ended at Broad Street and Plymouth Avenue. 

This Feb. 13, 1924 photo shows just how empty the area served by the M was. (Courtesy of SFMTA) A Slow Start 

The M Line opened Oct. 6, 1925 with little fanfare. In the beginning, it ran only as a shuttle from Broad and Plymouth to the end of West Portal Avenue at St. Francis Circle. Initially, only two streetcars were assigned to the line. For trips downtown, people would transfer to the K Ingleside. 

In 1927, Muni partially expanded M Line service through the Twin Peaks Tunnel. Downtown service was only provided on four trips per day, at the beginning and end of the two cars’ runs. Full downtown service was not established for nearly 20 years. 

A decade after opening, the M Ocean View rolled through empty land along most of its route. This 1936 view shows the desolate intersection of 19th Avenue and Junipero Serra Boulevard. (Courtesy of SFMTA) 

Development of the area was slow to take hold and ridership remained low on the M Line. Revenues failed to cover operating costs, and the Great Depression compounded the problem. After 14 years, streetcar service was replaced with the 10 Ocean View bus route in August 1939. Buses were cheaper to operate and were already in use as feeder routes in other areas. 

Post-War Growth Along the M 

Demand finally increased during WWII, and Muni brought streetcars back to the M in 1944. Service was restored along the entire line to downtown. After the war, the M Line helped drive development of the Lakeside, Stonestown, Parkmerced and Oceanview neighborhoods. 

This 1957 photo shows construction of a “wye” track at Broad and Plymouth to improve the M Line terminal. (Courtesy of SFMTA)

In 1952 Stonestown Mall and hundreds of adjacent apartments opened. A year later, San Francisco State University opened its new main campus along 19th Avenue. The M quickly became a staple for shoppers and students. 

This March 1979 photo shows people boarding an M Line streetcar near St. Francis Circle. Soon, these cars would be replaced with Light Rail Vehicles (LRVs). (Courtesy of SFMTA) Muni Metro Extends and Modernizes the M 

Between 1974 and 1978, service on the M was again replaced by buses. This time, it was for track reconstruction in the Twin Peaks Tunnel and along the M Line for the Muni Metro system. 

With the Muni Metro system nearing completion, new ideas to improve the M surfaced. Muni’s 1979 5-year plan included a proposal to interconnect the M with the J Church. This plan would extend tracks on San Jose Avenue to Broad Street and along the Embarcadero to 4th and King. While this exact plan was never implemented, the M Line was extended to Balboa Park along San Jose Avenue that year. 

M Ocean View track construction on Broad Street and San Jose Avenue in 1979. (Courtesy of SFMTA)

Muni Metro opened in early 1980. By December, the M Ocean View ran on weekdays from Balboa Park to Embarcadero using new LRVs.

One of Muni’s first LRVs runs on new tracks over I-280 along the M Line extension on San Jose Ave. in 1982. (Courtesy of SFMTA)

In 1990, the M was Muni’s second-busiest rail line with close to 32,000 weekday boardings. In 1995, Muni built two new high-level platform stations at the Stonestown and SF State stops. 

Mayor Frank Jordan (center) and Muni General Manager Philip Adams (left of Mayor) at ribbon cutting ceremony for the new SF State platform. (Courtesy of SFMTA)

Opened on March 1, 1995, the stations improved both safety and accessibility at these two heavily used stops. 

An M Line LRV stops at SF State in this 1995 shot, just two weeks after the station opened. (Courtesy of SFMTA) The Future of the M Ocean View 

100 years after its opening, we are making more improvements to the M Ocean View. Read all about these and the future of the M in Part Two of our series, which debuts soon. 

This article first appeared on the SFMTA website.

The post Celebrating 100 Years on the M Ocean View! appeared first on Railway Age.

We are on the cusp of what has the potential to be one of the most transformational times in the history of U.S. railroading. On July 24 of this year, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern announced what had been rumored for a few weeks prior: The two would seek the first-ever transcontinental U.S. railroad merger, uniting lines connecting both coasts under a single banner.

While this has the potential to be groundbreaking in the railroads’ abilities to compete more directly with major nationwide trucking companies, it comes under the shadow of significant uncertainty, including integration challenges with combining two massive operations, the concerns of shippers and labor unions, and regulatory concerns—chiefly, the Surface Transportation Board’s significantly more complex and untested 2001 merger rules adopted after the denied merger of BNSF and CN from 1999-2000. While I intend to touch on all these issues, I’m primarily focused on what will likely be necessary to obtain approval under the new rules, focusing especially on the competition enhancement—an STB requirement.

Of foremost importance for railroad growth and relevance in the 21st century is the ability to compete with as well as compliment major U.S. trucking company networks. A significant drawback of the current eastern and western duopolies is lack of a transcontinental corridor under a single banner. This creates interchange issues that are often based on the railroads’ internal desire to not “short-haul” themselves—in other words, wanting to maximize the mileage (and thus revenue) for freight hauled. One result has been making Chicago, already a significant freight origin and destination point, into the main interchange point between the East and West (significant alternatives including St. Louis, Kansas City, New Orleans and Memphis). These routings are often more circuitous, with transit times bogged down by unavoidable interchanges between carriers (these handoffs necessary, even if using some of the less-busy interchanges).

The Midwest is particularly affected by this problem, due to the railroads’ natural competitive advantages with higher freight volumes over longer distances (500+ miles), essentially creating a freight rail “service desert” in the Midwest whose void is filled by trucks. As examples, many customers served solely by UP trying to move their freight east or by NS trying to move their freight west find they aren’t well-served (or served at all) by rail for those routings due to the shorter-haul distances the eastern carriers would need to haul their freight before handing it off to a western carrier, or vice-versa. This is uneconomical, resulting in trucks taking much of this traffic.

The STB must take a broader approach in how it views enhancing competition: Railroads currently suffer a competitive disadvantage due to geographical constraints not suffered by other modes of freight tfrom ransport such as trucking and air freight. To quote rail industry veteran Nate Clark, “Major railroads have a recurring problem with wearing blinders that trick them into forgetting that the real competition rides on rubber tires.” I encourage the STB to avoid wearing those same blinders as it considers the UP+BS merger.

Having a nationwide network with complimentary overlap to major trucking companies isn’t enough, though. One can look to Canada, where the two primary rail carriers, CN and CPKC, under similar regulatory, operational and market conditions as their U.S. Class I counterparts, operate transcontinental networks, and yet find themselves losing volume to trucks due to abandonments and service cuts. Canadian rail service has seen recently experienced some growth following rollbacks of certain negative PSR aspects.

In the U.S., under pressure from Wall Street and activist investors (hedge funds) and pressing on with extreme applications of Precision Scheduled Railroading, some railroads have pursued staff reductions and curtailed investment in capacity improvements and other capital projects—all in the name of driving down the operating ratio. Meanwhile, railroaders and customers have suffered, both consistently saying these cuts have been too large, making railroaders’ lives miserable and customers’ service levels unsustainable.

Among additional cautionary tales in the history of consolidation and resource reduction without sufficient planning, often accompanied by what’s best described as “us vs. them syndrome”:

• The ill-fated Pennsylvania Railroad-New York Central merger in 1968, resulting in the Penn Central bankruptcy, which led to the 1976 creation of government-owned Conrail, requiring decades to repair the damage to the eastern rail network.
• The two-year operational meltdown following the 1996 Union Pacific-Southern Pacific merger, whose effects were acutely felt in the Houston region.
• The operational meltdown of former Conrail territory after the 1999 Conrail split.

One of the best ways for the STB to manage and account for downstream merger effects will be to give shippers and rail labor a say in creating minimum staffing and capex spending requirements as a condition, based on mileage operated, anticipated freight traffic growth and worker needs.

The final and possibly most important focus of my observations is related to route optimization through competition-enhancing line transfers. With the duopolies in the eastern one-third (NS and CSX) and western two-thirds (UP and BNSF) of the U.S., there are significant regional service gaps where one of the two carriers has successfully blocked the other out of the market, creating Class I monopolies within those regions. Major metropolitan regions such as Salt Lake City, Seattle, Nashville, Tampa, Indianapolis, Boston and San Antonio, among others, are served by one Class I. A few technically have limited service from a competing carrier via trackage rights. These situations have often been created due to perceived intentional anti-competitive behavior, such as the CSX predecessor Chessie System abandoning parallel routes into Tampa to prevent NS predecessor Southern from accessing Tampa, today the highest-tonnage U.S. port served by a single Class I.

As part of the approval process of a UP+NS merger, potentially followed by BNSF+CSX, the STB must mandate sale of certain routes to enhance competition where regional monopolies currently exist. I propose the full sale of certain routes and partial sale of others (such as in cases where there is only a singular route), where partial sales would result in each railroad owning an equal share, similar to the creation of Conrail Shared Assets in the North Jersey, South Jersey/Philadelphia and Detroit regions.

Such key transfers would give the other carrier access to regions currently served by only one Class I. In the case of routes being sold outright, the selling railroad would retain full trackage rights at predetermined access rates. In the case of partial ownership transfers, the lines involved would be jointly owned by each railroad and operated similar to Conrail Shared Assets. These proposed changes (as seen on the maps) would enhance competition by providing unhindered (i.e. not requiring trackage rights) dual-railroad access to the Seattle region, Salt Lake City, Boston, Tampa, San Antonio, the Mexican border, and other places. BNSF owns its own route to the Mexican border at El Paso, but it connects only with Ferromex on the Mexican side, of which UP owns 26%. CPKC has its own route to the Mexican border, crossing at Laredo, Tex., but requires significant stretches of trackage rights over UP—which has full or partial control of all routes between the U.S. and Mexico.

Mandating trackage rights access for captive Class II and Class III railroads to interchange with other Class I’s as a merger condition could also provide competitive enhancements. Additionally, the STB could require fast-track rebuilding of key abandoned routes, such as:

• The ex-PRR Pittsburgh-Dayton-Indianapolis line.
• Lines down the west side of Florida to Tampa.
• The ex-Milwaukee Road across Washington State.
• The ex-CRI&P (Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific) Memphis-Amarillo line.
• The ex-Illinois Central Meridian-Mobile line.

The STB could also require freight railroads improve passenger train priority or give passenger rail agencies an option to purchase partial widths of rights-of-way to enable the construction of passenger-only lines parallel to existing freight lines as a more sustainable long-term solution. In all cases of lines designated for full sale, partial sale, parallel right-of-way access or trackage rights access, the selling and purchasing railroads would be able to negotiate prices, with mandatory arbitration for unresolvable disputes. The purchasers would maintain the right to opt out of purchasing designated routes. To enhance competition, the selling railroads would maintain full trackage rights on routes sold. Railroads would be encouraged to keep directional operation arrangements (such as on routes across Arkansas and Nevada), even with line transfers, to help maintain network fluidity.

In summary, freight railroads have a significant opportunity to expand their footprint and competitive edge if they play their cards right. This will require:

• Significant STB oversight.
• Concessions from all parties, including transfers of key routes.
• Input from employees and customers.
• Commitments to merger integration plans that minimize or prevent service meltdowns.
• Willingness to better accommodate passenger trains on shared or parallel routes with freights, or to sell redundant routes outright as passenger-only lines.
• Rollback on the harmful impacts of PSR on safety, service quality and competition.

Transcontinental mergers may be necessary for U.S. Class I’s to compete in the 21st century, provided they’re done properly. Like UP and NS, Berkshire Hathaway/BNSF and CSX should pursue a merger, not because they believe there’s no other alternative, but because they believe it’s the right thing to do.

Top: Current UP and NS. Proposed lines to transfer full or partial ownership in white. Bottom: Hypothetical post-merger UP+NS. Top: Current BNSF and CSX. Proposed lines to transfer full or partial ownership in white. Bottom: Hypothetical post-merger BNSF+CSX. Map Key

• White: Lines currently owned by the railroad in the “Current” map designated for either full or partial ownership transfer; or trackage rights access when competitor does not desire ownership.
• Pink: Lines to be jointly own between the combined UP+NS and BNSF+CSX systems. The receiving railroad can obtain trackage rights and retain the option to purchase partial ownership.
• Dark Green: Sold by UP, to be jointly owned by BNSF and CPKC as route to the Mexican border.
• Light Green: Partial ownership sold by NS, to be jointly owned by NS and CPKC.
• Light Blue: To be jointly owned by UP+NS, BNSF+CSX and CPKC. In Texas, this is the HB&T (Houston Belt & Terminal Railway Company, jointly owned by BNSF and UP), whose service limits would be extended from Beaumont to Rosenberg. In Indiana, Genesee & Wyoming’s CF&E (Chicago, Fort Wayne & Eastern) short line operates on CSX-owned tracks, which would be owned by all three.
• Orange: Current or proposed future BNSF-owned lines.
• Yellow: Current or proposed future UP-owned lines.
• Black: Current or proposed future NS-owned lines.
• Blue: Current or proposed future CSX-owned lines.
• Red: Current or proposed future CN-owned lines.
• Brown: Current or proposed future CPKC-owned lines.
• Purple: Current short lines or passenger rail routes on which Class I’s have trackage rights.

Jim Dodds is an industry observer who likes to think outside the box and approach ideas from a different angle than other observers, offering a fresh perspective. A 2018 graduate of Southeast Missouri State University with double majors in International Business and Spanish, he is currently a Talent Acquisition Coordinator at investment firm Edward Jones. While Jim’s primary focus is North American freight and passenger rail, he is also knowledgeable about the airline industry, having developed network strategy ideas. He additionally has significant knowledge along with first-hand observation of transportation systems around the world, giving him an international perspective on changes and enhancements that could be made to U.S. transportation. Jim’s longer-term professional goal is a career in freight rail, public transportation or airlines. The opinions expressed here are his alone, not those of Railway Age.

The post Mergers: Proceed With Caution appeared first on Railway Age.

Ricardo operates in more than 20 countries across Europe, Australia, North America, Asia, and the Middle East. It works on projects in the air quality, water management, energy resilience, policy strategy, and advisory services and Rail and Mass Transit (Rail) business segments, as well as the automotive and Industrial (A&I) and Performance Products (PP) business segments.

WSP operates in 50-plus countries and manages projects in the transportation, infrastructure, environment, building, energy, water, and mining and metals sectors.

“In keeping with WSP’s 2025–2027 Global Strategic Action Plan, the acquisition both accelerates growth in advisory, energy transition, water solutions and rail, and strengthens WSP’s presence in key markets such as the UK, Australia and the Netherlands,” reported WSP, which announced reaching agreements to acquire Ricardo in June.

Following shareholder approval and the successful sanctioning of the transaction at a UK court hearing on Oct. 7, the acquisition became effective Oct. 9. 

“We are pleased to bring Ricardo into WSP and welcome new colleagues across the globe,” said Alexandre L’Heureux, President and CEO of WSP. “The team’s deep, differentiated expertise in areas that are increasingly critical to our clients—air quality, water management, energy resilience, policy strategy and rail—enhances our offering and accelerates our momentum toward our strategic ambitions in high-growth sectors and markets. We will now focus on integrating our teams and building on our combined strengths. Our complementary capabilities and shared passion for technical excellence position us to drive greater innovation and deliver added value as we support our clients through complex transitions.”

“Today [Oct. 9] marks a significant milestone for Ricardo as we proudly join WSP,” commented Graham Ritchie, CEO of Ricardo. “WSP’s belief in our strategy and support for our continued journey reflects the strength of what we have built over the past few years since we launched our strategy focused on sustainable growth in key markets. Ricardo and WSP share values and a purpose-led culture, so this acquisition accelerates our ability to deliver a broader, more impactful offering to our clients. It also opens up exciting new opportunities for our talented teams—opportunities that would not have been possible without this partnership. We are committed to supporting WSP’s dynamic strategic vision and look forward to shaping the future together.”

Gleacher Shacklock served as financial adviser to Ricardo in connection with the transaction with WSP. Investec plc acted as the company’s broker, while Ashurst LLP provided legal counsel throughout the process, according to Ricardo.

The post WSP Expands its Portfolio appeared first on Railway Age.