Feed aggregator

CTA

CTA on Oct. 1 marked its 78th anniversary by bringing out two cars from its Heritage Fleet to serve riders on the inner loop. The 4000-series cars were built by the Cincinnati Car Company in 1923 and ran through 1973. They feature the orange-and-brown paint scheme they wore in the 1940s and are adorned with reproduction advertisements from the era.

According to CTA, the steel bodied cars have wooden interior floors, cushioned seats, and electrically controlled pocket doors. They are outfitted with sash windows riders could open and a collapsible cab the motorman would operate from.

“Initially, these cars would have a conductor who would stand outside, between each car and open the doors immediately adjacent him at every stop—rain or shine or blizzard,” according to CTA. “Later, the cars were upgraded to allow for all the doors to be open from one place, but conductors still generally did this from outside the cars.”

While today’s cars can easily reach CTA’s systemwide speed limit of 55 mph (and frequently do on many lines), these 4000-series cars tended to max out around 45 mph, according to the transit authority.

“Transit services by our predecessors date back to the late 1850s, with the first horse-drawn streetcar service operating south on State Street from downtown,” according to the CTA. “Since those days, local transit in Chicago has been provided through a variety of cable cars, electric streetcars, elevated railways, and subways and many types of buses, all of which have been a part of the important role transit has played in the Chicago and its region’s development, by linking people, jobs and communities. The CTA you ride today is an independent government agency incorporated by the State of Illinois. The first services operated under the CTA name ran in October 1947 when we acquired the then-private Chicago Rapid Transit Company (elevated and subway lines—the ‘L’ system) and the Chicago Surface Lines (which ran streetcars and buses), followed later by the acquisition of the Chicago Motor Coach company (buses). This consolidation formed one, unified public transit system whose services became complementary to each other. In fact, many of the services we provide today are descendants or evolutions of those once provided by these three companies, around which the city and its many neighborhoods grew. Today we operate a fleet of more than 3,300 railcars and buses, which operate over 1,500 miles of bus and ‘L’ routes. On a typical weekday, our modern fleet travels about 380,000 miles, providing roughly 1.6 million rides to the people of Chicago and 35 neighboring communities.”

WTTW, the Chicago PBS station that covered the CTA anniversary, noted that it “comes as Chicago-area transit systems face a $770 million fiscal cliff next year that could lead to drastic service cuts on the CTA, Pace and Metra.” Over the summer, “$74 million in funding was reallocated to the CTA, which is projected to hit its fiscal cliff first, in an effort to delay service cuts, according to the Regional Transportation Authority.”

The media outlet reported that state legislators, “who failed to pass a transit funding bill during their previous legislative session, are expected to try again in the fall,” and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker “told reporters in July he’s confident legislation will pass to address the fiscal cliff facing Chicago-area transit agencies.”

(Courtesy of MDOT MTA) MDOT MTA

MDOT MTA on Oct. 1 reported the implementation of a policy to ban individuals who commit physical or verbal assaults against riders or employees. Supported by legislation enacted this year, the agency said it will begin to issue permanent or temporary bans across all modes including Local Bus, Light Rail, Metro Subway, MARC Train, Commuter Bus and Mobility. The agency also reported launching the Elerts SeeSay® mobile app, enabling riders to “discreetly” report safety concerns and communicate in real time with the Maryland Transit Police. The app is available for free download in both the Apple App Store and Google Play Store or on the MTA website at mta.maryland.gov/safety.

The Elert SeeSay® platform is a safety communication tool used by other transit agencies across the U.S., including MBTA, DART, SEPTA, CATA and BART, according to MDOT MTA. “While riders are strongly encouraged to report safety concerns immediately to transit operators and station attendants, the SeeSay® app allows riders to report concerns in multiple ways: directly through the app, via text to 410-888-0675 or through an online form on the MTA’s website www.mta.maryland.gov,” the agency said.

Beginning Oct. 6, app users may submit photos or videos when reporting a safety concern. Each report is routed to Maryland Transit Police dispatch staff for review and response. The app integrates geo-location technology to provide MTA police dispatchers with the rider’s precise location, which MDOT MTA said allows for a “faster and more accurate response.”

The agency’s Code of Conduct, “Rules of the Ride,” was issued in August and outlines what MDOT MTA said are “clear expectations for behavior while on buses, trains and in stations.” The Code of Conduct is organized into three categories  of behavior:

• “Courteous Conduct: Everyday respectful actions that contribute to a safe and comfortable environment for everyone. This includes keeping seats accessible, speaking at a low volume, using headphones when listening to audio content, and being mindful of others.
   
• “Prohibited Conduct: Actions not permitted on MTA property or vehicles. Examples include smoking, vandalism, carrying concealed weapons illegally, and disruptive behavior.
   
• “Bannable Conduct: Unlawful acts that will result in a ban. This includes any type of assault—physical or verbal—threats, sexual harassment, or fighting against an MTA employee, another passenger, or anyone else on MTA property.”

Enforcement of the Rider Code of Conduct and the policy to suspend or ban individuals who violate the code will be conducted by the Maryland Transit Police, according to MDOT MTA. “If a rider is banned, they will receive formal notice of suspension or banning, as well as the process to appeal,” it said.

The agency is sharing information about the Code of Conduct and enforcement policy on its website, social media and through announcements on buses, trains and at stations.

“Our riders and employees deserve to feel safe every time they take transit,” Maryland Transit Administrator Holly Arnold said. “By holding accountable those who commit assaults and by providing riders with a new tool to report concerns, we are reinforcing our commitment to a safe and respectful transit experience.”

TransLink (Courtesy of TransLink)

More Metro Vancouver employers are offering transit as a benefit to employees, to ensure their staff’s commute is easier and more affordable, according to TransLink, which is responsible for planning, financing, and managing transportation modes and services in the region. Among those services: British Columbia Rapid Transit Company, Coast Mountain Bus Company, and West Coast Express.

The agency on Oct. 1 reported that more than 50 organizations are now participating in its Transit-Friendly Employer program, with nearly 15,000 employees receiving subsidized Compass transit passes.

Through the program, employers can cover half the cost of a monthly or Stored Value Compass Pass. Certified employers can display the exclusive “Transit-Friendly Employer” stamp on their websites and job postings to help attract talent and highlight their commitment to a cleaner environment.

According to TransLink, “Canada’s first-of-its-kind” Transit-Friendly Employer program launched in 2022. To be eligible for the program, large employers (defined as having 200 or more staff) must have at least 10% employee participation and small employers (fewer than 200 staff) must meet at least 25% participation.

Among the 54 participating organizations, 21 are large employers and 33 are small employers, TransLink reported. Participants include YVR Vancouver Airport Authority, Lush Handmade Cosmetics, Vancouver Coastal Health, Fairmont Vancouver Airport, Rivian Automotive, Herschel Supply Co. Canada, Melanie Auld Jewelry, and Grouse Mountain. A full list of participating organizations is available at translink.ca/transitfriendlyemployer.

“The Transit Friendly Employer program highlights how vital transit is to the success of our region,” said Kevin Quinn, CEO of TransLink. “By supporting workers and connecting communities, we’re helping build a healthier, more sustainable future for everyone.”

“The TransLink Transit-Friendly Employer program is immensely valuable to surrounding communities as well as Rivian employees in Vancouver,” commented Tim Waldrop, Senior Manager, Commute & Mobility Programs, Rivian Automotive. “Programs like Transit-Friendly Employer help to keep costs low, reduce traffic congestion and emissions, and provide a safe and efficient alternative to drive-alone commutes.”

The post Transit Briefs: CTA, MDOT MTA, TransLink appeared first on Railway Age.

CSX

Newly appointed President and CEO Steve Angel on Oct. 1 hosted a town hall to connect with employees across the CSX network, the Class I announced via a LinkedIn post.

(CSX via LinkedIn)

“During the event, Angel shared his focus for the future and expressed his excitement for building relationships with the people who drive CSX’s success. He emphasized his enthusiasm for building on the Class I’s achievements and working together to help CSX become the best-run railroad in America,” the Class I wrote in the post.

(CSX via LinkedIn)

Separately, CSX recently introduced its Badger Overland Commercial Trailer, a compact, towable mobile command unit that enables the railroad to respond quickly and safely to incidents, even in remote areas, with features like wireless connectivity, a drone base, and recharging facility.

“The Badger represents CSX’s commitment to innovation, safety, and protecting our people and operations,” the Class I wrote in a LinkedIn post.

Introducing the CSX Badger Overland Command Trailer! This compact, towable unit allows the #ONECSX team to respond quickly to incidents—even in remote areas—with wireless connectivity, a drone base, & recharging facility. It represents our commitment to #safety & #innovation. pic.twitter.com/ycZ5gu1doi

— CSX (@CSX) September 30, 2025 BNSF

BNSF recently congratulated its customer Tristar Transload, Inc., via an X post, on the official opening of its Muscal Spur Terminal, a renewable fuels unloading facility in Southern California.

After nearly 20 months of construction, the facility is fully operational as of Oct. 1. BNSF will daily deliver tank cars of renewable fuels to the terminal, which has six one-million-gallon storage tanks to support long-term decarbonization goals in the state.

(Screenshot Courtesy of BNSF via X)

Since 1999, Tristar Transload, Inc., has served the West Coast, “providing strategic solutions to supply chain management,” said BNSF. As a transload company, Tristar handles the onloading and offloading between different transportation modes, such as from rail to truck and vice versa.

Pictured (above) are test cars delivered by BNSF in September.

Congrats to BNSF customer Tristar Transload, Inc. as it nears official opening of its Muscat Spur Terminal, a renewable fuels unloading facility in Southern California.

After nearly 20 months of construction, the facility will be fully operational on Oct. 1. BNSF will daily… pic.twitter.com/OFM6nwpKWR

— BNSF Railway (@BNSFRailway) September 30, 2025

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

According to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) website, which lists Brightline West as a “loan applicant,” and as reported by Bloomberg, the price tag for the private high-speed passenger railroad has swelled by nearly 35%. The higher cost has led the Fortress Investment Group-backed company to seek a $6 billion from the POTUS 47 administration.

Last month, Brightline CEO Mike Reininger said construction costs were increasing “due to rising labor and material costs, in part caused by high demand due to proliferation of data centers, power plants, and transportation projects,” according to the Bloomberg report.

“Given the increase in project costs we needed to figure out a way to advance the project,” Reininger said in an email.

According to the report, the federal loan “will take the place of a $6 billion bank facility on Brightline West’s original financing plan.” The company, Reininger said, “plans to raise equity to cover most of the $5.5 billion increase in construction costs. It initially targeted an equity raise of $1 billion.”

“We have had very productive conversations with USDOT and the Federal Railroad Administration the last few months to continue to move Brightline West forward,” Reininger said in an email.

U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy “has bashed a separate long delayed effort in California to build a high-speed rail to connect Los Angeles to San Francisco as a waste of taxpayer dollars. Costs for the project, initially pegged at $33 billion in 2008, have ballooned to an estimated $89 billion to $128 billion. In August, Duffy said he was canceling $4 billion of federal support for the ‘boondoggle,” according to the Bloomberg report.

The POTUS 47 administration earlier this year also terminated a $64 million planning grant for a high-speed rail line between Dallas and Houston, according to the report.

In contrast, Bloomberg reports, Duffy has “praised” the mostly privately financed Brightline West, which received a $3 billion grant from former President Joe Biden’s infrastructure law.

Chad Farrington, co-head of municipal-bond strategy at DWS Group, said the increased project costs “isn’t a positive development, but the tally is still lower than other similar high-speed rail projects,” according to the report. DWS Group holds $17 million of Brightline West’s $2.5 billion of municipal debt outstanding.

“Fortress has a proven ability in the past to secure financing, which is a plus,” said Farrington, referring to the project’s backer.

Prices on Brightline West bonds issued by the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank “declined [Oct. 1] following the disclosure of the railroad’s rising costs. Bonds with a 9.5% coupon traded at an average of 87.3 cents down from 91.6 cents on Sept. 23, the last time the securities changed hands. The spread, or risk premium, on the bonds compared with AAA-rated municipal bonds widened to an average of about 900 basis points from 825 basis points,” according to the report.

Brightline West, Bloomberg reports, “is betting it can capture about 20% of the 47 million annual trips projected between Southern California and Las Vegas by 2031,” according to bond offering documents. The all-electric trains on the rail line, built along a median on Interstate-15, are expected to reach speeds as high as 200 miles per hour. Service is expected to begin in September 2029.

Still, Brightline “has the challenge of convincing riders to commute to its rail station, in Rancho Cucamonga, which will be located about an hour from downtown Los Angeles. From there, the train to Vegas is expected to take roughly two hours,” according to the report.

Comparatively, a flight from Los Angeles to Las Vegas is about 2.5 hours, including idle time at the airport, while a drive between the two cities can range from 3.5 hours to six, according to the report.

The federal government, Bloomberg reports, is authorized to provide as much as $35 billion in direct loans and loan guarantees to finance development of railroad infrastructure via the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program. “The loan’s lower interest rate and long tenor make it an ideal source of capital,” Reininger said. “The loan can fund as much as 100% of a railroad project with repayment periods of as long as 35 years and interest rates equal to the cost of borrowing to the government plus a premium to account for credit risk.”

“Brightline West may line up a smaller bank facility to round out a financing plan, which also includes $5.5 billion of tax-exempt bonds,” according to Reininger.

“We need to aggregate a little more debt and a lot more equity than we originally planned and so in the face of this, the RRIF loan program became a more important and attractive alternative,” he said.

The post Report: Brightline West Costs Balloon to $21.5B appeared first on Railway Age.

Rail components and services provider A. Stucki Company (Stucki) on Oct. 2 reported acquiring Wheelworx, a railcar wheelset reconditioning services supplier. Terms of the transaction were not disclosed.

Wheelworx has 105 employees at manufacturing facilities in Calera, Ala., and Pekin, Ill.

Moon Township, Pa.-based Stucki said it is building an integration plan “to maintain production capabilities and customer service while creating opportunities for employees across both organizations during the ownership transition.”

Stucki, which provides engineered products, reconditioning and repair services, and maintenance of way services, now operates more than a dozen companies, with 23 operating centers in the United States, Mexico, and Brazil. Since 2022, it has been owned by a group of investors led by Stellex Capital Management.

“This acquisition strengthens our capabilities in wheel set production, repair, and logistics and enables us to capitalize on our longstanding relationships with railcar suppliers,” said Ron Port, who became Stucki CEO in 2024.  Additionally, it “opens new commercial opportunities and enhances our ability to provide end-to-end solutions to our railcar customers,” Port noted. “It also makes us competitive in additional locations in the South and Midwest.”

“Joining an industry leader like Stucki will benefit our company and our employees,” Wheelworx President Gary Schoenfeldt said. “We’re looking forward to serving our rail customers with greater capabilities and a broader line of products and services.”

Stucki in late 2024 completed the sale of Velocity Rail Solutions to private equity firm Wind Point Partners.

Further Reading:

• Eric Carter Tapped as Birmingham Rail VP, GM
• Creech, Dark Tapped as Stucki VPs
• A. Stucki Co. Announces Corporate Rebranding
• Force Control
• High Expectations, Hot Market

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

Designed and built by General Electric, the Silverliner IV is the fourth-generation EMU (electric multiple unit) in the Silverliner family and was delivered in batches between 1973 and 1976. The Silverliner IVs were operated by the Reading Company until Reading’s absorption into Conrail in 1976. SEPTA took over commuter rail operations and the Silverliner IV fleet from Conrail in 1983. As of 2025, Silverliner IVs represent 225 of the 390 passenger-carrying railcars (which include passenger coaches, cab cars, and self-propelled units) in SEPTA’s Regional Rail operations fleet, according to the NTSB. “The Silverliner IV fleet has not been refurbished since its original deployment,” reported the government agency, which noted that the Silverliner IV design predates federal fire safety standards established in 1999 and most recently amended in 2002. Under Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 238.103, new railcars and refurbishments must meet the performance standards, design standards, and testing procedures described in Appendix B of the same part, it said.

“The NTSB concluded that the outdated design of the Silverliner IV railcars, in combination with SEPTA’s maintenance and operating practices, represents an immediate and unacceptable safety risk because of the incidence and severity of electrical fires that can spread to occupied compartments,” said the government agency on Oct. 1, the day it issued Railroad Investigation Report: RIR-25-12 (download below). “Additionally, the NTSB found that the risks posed by the design cannot be fully addressed without an extensive fleet retrofit or replacement.” According to the NTSB, it also found that “SEPTA’s current operating practices have failed to protect passengers and crews because defective railcars have been kept in passenger service.”

RIR-25-12Download

The NTSB said that it issues “urgent recommendations to address immediate, critical issues that threaten lives or property,” noting that it “does not need to wait until the end of investigations to issue recommendations”; recipients have 30 days to respond.

The recommendations for SEPTA stem from the NTSB’s investigation of five fires involving Silverliner IVs in 2025:

• Feb. 6, in Ridley Park, Pa.: The NTSB is continuing its investigation of the fire that started on the lead car of a six-Silverliner IV car train as the train departed Crum Lynne Station. It reported, however, that “preliminary findings indicate that the fire started in the railcar’s undercarriage when electrical components associated with the train’s propulsion system overheated and ignited.” Everyone aboard—four crew and about 325 riders—was evacuated. Four passengers later reported minor injuries, according to the NTSB.

Damage to a SEPTA Silverliner IV involved in the Ridley Park, Pa., fire on Feb. 6. (Photograph credits: SEPTA, left, and NTSB, right)

• June 3, Levittown, N.J.: The rearmost car of a five-Silverliner IV car-train caught fire as the train stopped at Levittown Station. “The fire was mostly confined to the roof area of the railcar and a rooftop ventilation duct,” the NTSB reported. “As part of the investigation into the earlier Ridley Park fire, the NTSB examined the damaged railcar from Levittown and found signs of overheating on the dynamic brake resistor banks, which normally convert mechanical energy into heat when the dynamic brakes are applied. Preliminary findings indicate that a cam controller pilot motor (part of the system that controls the railcar’s dynamic brakes) failed and that the dynamic braking pressure switch (which engages or cuts out the dynamic brakes during air brake applications) was out of calibration. Together, these two issues allowed this railcar’s braking system to become stuck in dynamic braking mode as the train remained in motion and under power, causing the resistor grid to overheat and ignite a fiberglass rooftop ventilation duct.” According to the NTSB, the crew evacuated the train’s 150 riders, and no injuries were reported.

• July 22, Paoli, Pa.: The fifth car of six Silverliner IV-car train caught fire as the train stopped at Paoli Station. “The railcar that caught fire was destroyed,” the NTSB reported. “The NTSB examined the involved railcar … again as part of the ongoing investigation of the Ridley Park fire. Preliminary findings indicate that the fire began in the undercarriage with electrical components in the train’s propulsion system and spread to the passenger compartment, similar to the February 6 fire in Ridley Park.” According to the government agency, the crew evacuated the train’s 14 riders; the conductor was transported to a local hospital for treatment for smoke inhalation and no other injuries were reported.

• Sept. 23, Fort Washington, Pa.: The crew observed smoke coming from the fifth car of a six Silverliner IV-car train while the train was approaching Fort Washington Station. “This incident involved the same railcar that caught fire in Levittown,” the NTSB reported. “The NTSB examined the involved railcar … and preliminary findings indicate that the fire began with electrical components near the dynamic brake resistor banks on the railcar’s roof. The electrical components had been replaced during repairs and maintenance after the Levittown fire; preliminary findings indicate that the fire was associated with these repairs rather than the defects that led to the Levittown fire. As in the Levittown fire, the fire did not spread to occupied compartments.” Four crew members and about 350 riders were on board; all were evacuated at the station and no injuries were reported, according to the NTSB.

• Sept. 25, Philadelphia, Pa.: The crew noticed that the second car of a five-Silverliner IV car train was on fire while stopped at Gravers Station, according to the NTSB. “Based on the NTSB’s interviews with crew members and maintenance personnel, the train had been operating since the previous day with an illuminated fault light,” the government agency said. “Multiple crews operated the train during this period. The NTSB examined the involved railcar … Preliminary findings indicate that the fire started on a traction motor in the train’s undercarriage and that a crew member put out the fire with a handheld extinguisher.” Four crew members and about 25 riders were on board; all were evacuated at the station and no injuries were reported, according to the NTSB.

Investigations are ongoing, but preliminary findings from the Ridley Park and Paoli fires, the NTSB reported, “indicate that fires spread from exterior electrical compartments to interior occupied compartments, a type of failure current design standards are intended to limit or prevent.”

According to the NTSB, its investigators reported that “the recurrence of fires—despite SEPTA’s attempted fixes—shows organizational lapses that block effective risk mitigation.” The NTSB said that “SEPTA’s proposed changes to its operations, maintenance and engineering activities require ongoing monitoring to ensure they protect passengers and crews.”

NTSB in its report recommendations called on SEPTA to:

• “Suspend operation of the Silverliner IV fleet until you have determined the root causes of fires, developed and implemented a plan to address these causes, and identified and corrected the organizational factors that have prevented effective risk mitigations. (R-25-12) (Urgent)

• “Create an expedited procurement or retrofit schedule and seek funding from appropriate sources as soon as possible to accelerate the replacement of the Silverliner IV fleet or its retrofit to include modern feedback systems and meet Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 238 fire safety standards for new railcars. (R-25-13) (Urgent)

• “Pending replacement or retrofit of the Silverliner IV fleet, implement a plan to monitor the success of your risk-mitigation approach to the Silverliner IV fleet, including provisions for immediately removing the fleet from service again if your mitigations fail to prevent fires. (R-25-14) (Urgent)”

According to NBC10 Philadelphia, “SEPTA General Manager Scott Sauer said he was surprised by the NTSB report and disagreed with it. Sauer said SEPTA has already implemented about 40 mitigation measures since the first train fire … Sauer also said that despite the recommendations, the Silverliner IV railcars will remain on the tracks.”

The media outlet reported that “According to Sauer, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) wants the transit agency to follow its own mitigation practices. He also said the FRA agrees that SEPTA does not have to remove the Silverliner IV railcars from its fleet.”

“Throughout this process we have tightened up all those procedures which is why the incidents have been less frequent,” NBC10 Philadelphia quoted Sauer as saying. “So, we are responding to every single mitigation measure that we either come up with on our own or that the FRA tells us to do. The FRA being the regulator, they can order us to change. When they do, we respond.”

According to the media outlet, Sauer “also said that replacing the entire Silverliner IV fleet would require SEPTA to take out a loan, a process that could take up to six to 10 years.”

U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy released “a statement announcing the FRA issued an emergency order requiring that SEPTA take ‘immediate, sweeping action’ following the fires,” reported NBC10 Philadelphia. “According to Duffy, the FRA is ordering SEPTA to follow ‘several safety-related steps’ to prevent future fires.”

“At my direction, FRA is taking swift and immediate action to ensure the safety of all passengers and transit workers on SEPTA,” said Duffy, according to the media outlet. “This includes deploying our team of experts to SEPTA’s trains, repair shops, dispatch center, to ensure thorough safety precautions are being implemented. Recent fires and ongoing mechanical problems are unacceptable to such a critical rail line.”

Meanwhile, “[t]he Fiscal Cliff that has been haunting the transit industry in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in ridership and revenue that it caused has placed SEPTA and many other providers in difficult financial straits,” according to a recent article by Railway Age Contributing Editor David Peter Alan. Read more of his SEPTA articles by clicking here and here.

The post NTSB Recommends Sidelining SEPTA Silverliner IVs appeared first on Railway Age.

Presented in a modern, digital-first format, the interactive report highlights new public awareness campaigns, education materials, volunteer engagement and key partnerships—all reinforcing OLI’s vision to stop track tragedies through education, enforcement and engineering, the nonprofit noted.

“This year’s theme reflects not just what we accomplished, but how we’re growing,” said OLI Executive Director Rachel Maleh. “We’ve reached farther through new partnerships and historic events—like during the April 8 eclipse—and we’ve reached more audiences by releasing new resources for transit riders, professional drivers, school bus drivers and more.”

2024 milestones include:

• Awarding $620,000 in competitive rail safety awareness grants to Operation Lifesaver programs in 33 states—$220,000 funded by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Posner Foundation of Pittsburgh in 11 states, as well as $400,000 funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in 22 states.
• Releasing school bus driver training—Decide Smart, Arrive Safe—and two new PSAs sharing the rail safety education message with an extended audience.
• Welcoming new State Coordinators across six states and Washington, D.C., expanding OLI’s grassroots reach.
• Launching a pledge push for OLI’s Transit Safety Pledge Campaign.
• Earning national certification for OLI’s Railroad Investigation and Safety Course (RISC) for First Responders.
• Sharing two new #STOPTrackTragedies campaign PSAs and videos highlighting personal stories from individuals impacted by rail incidents.

The report also recaps See Tracks? Think Train!® Week 2024, the largest coordinated public engagement effort of the year, with themed outreach activities, new campaign materials, partner activations, and a wide reach across digital and traditional media channels.

“We’re proud of the momentum we built in 2024—but we’re not done. Stay engaged with us, follow us on social and learn about our 2025 initiatives as we continue to creatively find ways to deliver our lifesaving message,” Maleh said.

The post OLI 2024 Report: ‘Growth, Outreach, and Lifesaving Education’ appeared first on Railway Age.

Our survey is comprehensive and covers a broad range of industrial and consumer industries, among others (see chart below). “Manufacturing”; “Transportation”; and “Logistics” comprised the largest percentages of participants. Shippers completing this survey had approximately $16 billion of transportation spend.

(Courtesy of TD Cowen) Pricing Continues Downward Trend, Below 5-Year Average

Rate hike expectations for the next 6-12 months came in at 3.1%, down 10bps vs. our second-quarter survey, and below the survey’s five-year average of 3.7%. Prolonged industrial softness and an OTR market that has yet to see any signs of life continue to pressure the overall freight market.

Shippers Would Move approximately 3% of Carload and IM Freight to Rails if Transcon Service Was Offered

We asked shippers how much freight they would move to the rails if a single-line network was offered. On the carload side, 46% would move none, 31% of shippers answered in the 0%-5% range (the most frequent response), and 15% of shippers answered in the 5%-10% range, while 8% see shifts beyond 15%. On a weighted average basis, 3% of freight is contemplated to be shifted at this time. For intermodal, 41% would move none, 36% would move 0%-5%, and 13% would move 5%-10%. On a weighed average basis, a similar 3% of IM freight could move. We acknowledge that rails have not yet marketed this service to shippers yet and believe this figure could potentially move up significantly as this service is rolled out and matures.

A slight majority of shippers (57%) do not intend to participate in comments with the Surface Transportation Board review. Of those that do, however, three times as many intend to oppose the merger than support it. Only 10% intend to endorse the Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern merger. As we have previously written, the STB has historically offered little concessions to shippers (or other Class I’s) formally through the review process and typically agreements have been reached independently between affected shippers and the relevant rails. The largest concern shippers have (75% of responses) is that upon a rail merger, monopolistic practices will be implemented. However, we would also expect support for this merger to grow over time when UN-NS offers concessions to the shipping community in exchange for support.

Growth Expectations Continues To Worsen, Macro Skews Negative

Shipper estimates of business growth fell to 1.2%, which stepped down again vs. last quarter and now sit at COVID lows. 66% of participants are less confident in the economy vs. 61% in our second-quarter survey. Confidence and growth expectations remain below survey averages, and our channel checks align with the survey results that the industrial economy continues to worsen.

Thoughts Into Rail Earnings

Survey results are a near-term negative for the U.S. rail group as pricing continues to decelerate and sits below the survey average. Business growth expectations fell sequentially to levels not seen since 2020 during COVID, and economic confidence runs well below the survey average. We lowered estimates for both of the eastern rails, while modestly raising estimates for UP (coal, IM) in our concurrently published preview, though acknowledge rail earnings will likely be dominated by M&A discussion despite diverging third-quarter operations.

SURVEY QUESTIONS

Question 1: How Much Of A Blended Base Price Increase Do You Anticipate Over The Next 6-12 Months?

Shippers anticipate rail prices to increase by 3.1% over the next 6-12 months, down 10bps compared to last quarter and still below the five-year survey average of 3.7%. Soft industrial outlook is likely putting a lid on rails’ ability to price. TL spot rates declining back to trough levels has also likely prevented much rail pricing upside.

Question 2a: What Is The Current Price Differential You Are Seeing Between Specific Rail And Truckload Freight Moves (Bulk/Carload)?

39% of respondents indicated that truckload is a cheaper option than rail, up a material 11 points compared to last quarter, the highest reading on record. TL spot deterioration through August and September has prevented rail from seeing any improvement in the differential. Spots are now -17% off early July peak and have returned to freight recession trough levels.

Question 2b: What Is The Current Price Differential You Are Seeing Between Specific Rail And Truckload Freight Moves (Intermodal)?

38% of intermodal shippers answered that truck is cheaper than rail compared to 28% a quarter ago, a 10-point decrease. Results are similar to those observed for the bulk category amid renewed weakness in TL spot rates.

Question 3: How Are You Planning Your Business Around Tariff Uncertainty?

We once again asked shippers about how they are adapting to tariff uncertainty. Notably, 4 percentage point more shippers said they are ordering less while 3 percentage point more shippers attested to pulling forward. Both outcomes point to a modified peak season with the fourth quarter expected to be seasonally soft as inventories are built.

Question 4a: If you had access to a single-line rail service via a transcon rail merger, how much bulk/carload eligible freight would you push towards the railroads?

We asked shippers how much carload freight they would move to rails given access to a single-line network. A little under half of eligible shippers said none. 31% of shippers answered in the 0%-5% range and this was the most frequent response. 15% of shippers answered in the 5%-10% range while 8% see shifts beyond 15%. On a weighted average basis, 3% of freight is contemplated to be shifted at this time. We acknowledge that rails have not yet marketed this service to shippers yet and believe this figure could potentially move up significantly as this service is rolled out and matures.

Question 4b: If you had access to a single-line rail service via a transcon rail merger, how much intermodal eligible freight would you push towards the railroads?

Intermodal results are similar to bulk but notably 5 percentage point more shippers see shifts likely compared to carload.

Question 4c: What are your key concerns regarding a potential rail merger? (select all that apply)

Three quarters of shippers surveyed have concerns regarding monopolistic practices in a consolidated railroad industry, which is unsurprising. The second most cited concern is integration related. Among other concerns cited was reduced customer service and loss of experienced staff.

Question 4d: Do you plan to endorse/oppose a rail merger during STB review (either publicly or in comment period)?

A majority of shippers do not intend to participate in comments with the STB review. Of those that do, however, three times as many intend to oppose the merger than support it. Only 10% intend to endorse the UNP/NSC merger. We remind investors that the STB has historically offered little concessions to shippers (or other Class I’s) formally through the review process and typically agreements have been reached independently between affected shippers and the relevant rails.

Question 5a: Over The Past Quarter, Have You Shifted More Off The Highway To The Railroads?

13% of bulk shippers and 16% of intermodal shippers now report having shifted volumes onto the rails. Declining TL spot rates approaching trough levels once again has put a lid on truck to rail conversions.

Question 5b: If So, Why (Bulk/Carload and Intermodal)?

“Concerns about tight TL capacity,” declined sharply by 8 points among participants that did shift freight which tracks with rate volatility. Participants that cited higher truck prices decreased by 10 percentage points to 22%. 38% of shippers answered, “improved rail service,” up 12 points from last quarter.

Question 6a: Are You Concerned About Rail Capacity?

37% of shippers answered that they are concerned about rail capacity, up 7 percentage points compared to last quarter. These are at 2024 levels but well below COVID congestion levels. About that concern, we asked, “If so, why?” Compared to a quarter ago, 4 percentage point fewer shippers cited “Equipment,” 1 percentage point less for “Track,” and 9 percentage points more answered “Manpower.”

Question 6b: Has Rail Service Impacted Your Modal Choices?

36% of survey respondents report that the quality of rail service has impacted their modal choices down 4 percentage points compared to last quarter.

Question 7a: How Would You Rate The Railroads On Service Measures, Using A Y/Y Comparison?

The average “positive” (excellent or good rating) rating of Class I (including KCS, KCSM, and Ferromex) rail service held flat at 55% in the third quarter. UP was the only declining U.S. Class I relative to the five-year average. This quarter, we again segment KSU’s operations by geography, separating Kansas City Southern (KCS, or KSU’s U.S. railroad) and Kansas City Southern de México (KCSM, or KSU’s Mexico railroad), and including service measure results for Mexican railroad Ferromex.

Question 7b: How Would You Rate The Railroads On Digital Ease Of Use And Freight Visibility?

We asked shippers to rate the Class I’s by digital ease of use and freight visibility as technology becomes an increasingly central part of rails’ efficiency strategies. The average “positive” (excellent or good rating) rating of Class I’s digital ease of use rating was 52% in the third quarter, down 3 percentage points compared to last quarter.

Question 8a: If Rail Service Improves, How Much More Freight Would You Push Toward The Railroads (Bulk/Carload)?

In the bulk/carload category, 67% of survey respondents indicated they would push 0%-5% more freight toward the rails, up vs. last quarter, while the share of those responding they would move 5%-10% decreased by 8 points.

Question 8b: If Rail Service Improves, How Much More Freight Would You Push Toward The Railroads (Intermodal)?

On the intermodal side, 65% of shippers answered 0%-5% more freight would be shifted to rails, 9 points less compared to last quarter. Participants responding that 5%-10% of their freight would be shifted was up 11 points. At the 10%-15% level, responses were up 2 points. Finally, those answering they would move more than 15% of freight decreased by a percentage point sequentially.

Question 9: Have ESG Targets Become A Part Of Your Decision-Making?

Responses that ESG targets were a factor decreased to 20% compared to 22% last quarter. We will continue to monitor trends in this space.

Question 10: Given Current Economic Conditions, How Much Do You Anticipate That Your Business Will Grow Over The Next 12 Months?

Business growth expectations over the next 12 months declined 30bps to reach 1.2%. Growth expectations have now touched the COVID low. Results line up with our channel checks indicating incremental weakness in the industrial economy.

Question 11: Over The Next 12 Months, How Will Your Employee Count Change?

The percentage of shippers expecting their employee counts to increase over the next 12 months was up 4 points sequentially. The percentage of shippers expecting to decrease headcount was up 6 points while those expecting it to be unchanged was down 10 points in the quarter.

Question 12: Is Your Company Having Difficulty Hiring Employees?

We asked participants if their companies are having difficulty hiring employees. Results were up 3 points compared to last quarter with 44% of participants stating that they are having trouble hiring employees, and 47% not having trouble hiring employees.

Question 13: Are You More Confident In The Direction Of The Economy Today Than You Were Three Months Ago?

Economic confidence slipped again in the third quarter and remains well below the survey average with a majority of participants still less confident in the economy.

Question 14: On A Scale Of 1 To 5, 5 Being The Most Positive, How Have Business Levels Trended Over The Last 3 Months?

Business levels over the past few months were positive (“good,” “very good,” or “excellent”) for 33% of respondents, down 5 points compared to last quarter. This figure has also reached the lows seen during the COVID shock amid poor macro outlook.

The post TD Cowen 20th Anniversary Quarterly Rail Survey Says … appeared first on Railway Age.

Where We Stand

We update our rail estimates to reflect QTD carloadings, fuel, and mix changes. QTD U.S. rail carloadings are +0.5%, with motor vehicles & equipment leading the growth at +6.5%. IM volumes have decelerated through the quarter now -0.4% QTD and -4.7% last week, with most of the pressure coming from the West Coast. We lower estimates for both eastern carriers, with the largest downward revision at NSC; full likely year guidance likely unachievable given muted demand environment that will pressure OR significantly in Q3. NSC continues to be a special situation given deal announcement so NT results less impactful to stock reaction. We continue to see a 90% deal approval probability.

At the NEARS conference earlier in September, NSC and western rival the BNSF offered sobering industrial development outlook noting that the number of projects moving into engineering and construction declined from 30 in 1Q to 20 in 2Q and then sharply down to 5 in 3Q. Tariff uncertainty was attributed to the freeze and 3Q’s number was the lowest number the NSC panelist has ever seen. Tariffs present a hurdle to reindustrialization due to the degree of import input that takes place in industrial projects.

CSX has been affected by a meaningful slowdown in chemicals, ag, and food. Margins are expected to step down meaningfully sequentially, though Howard Street tunnel is expected to open up this week, and the company should benefit from easy comparisons in 4Q given the hurricane impact last year. In a surprising announcement, CSX announced a CEO change that will take effect immediately after Joe Hinrichs spent 3 years running the rail. The incoming CEO comes from a non-rail background, though he oversaw and led the successful integration of a large industrials merger at Praxair. Investor feedback on the incoming CEO has been positive.

UNP is the only U.S. rail we are raising estimates for ahead of earnings, largely driven by intermodal that has come in much better than feared and strength in coal. LA+LB ports saw modest declines in August though better than commentary from Executives that suggested much larger import declines into the critical peak season that could leave shelves empty. UNP and NSC have announced that their shareholder vote for the deal will be November 14.

3Q25 Rail Shipper Survey

Survey results are a negative for the U.S. rail group. Pricing continues to decelerate in Q3, running well below the survey’s average. Business growth expectations worsen, akin to COVID lows. Economic confidence skews negative. Shippers would move LSD volume onto rails if transcon service offered though we acknowledge it will take time before rails can market this single-line service to customers in a transcon setting.

Transcon Watershed Opportunity Could Surprise to Upside

We believe a unified UNP/NSC sees potential upside to disclosed revenue synergies as we quantify the watershed opportunity. As such, we expect synergy estimates to be walked up over time (as observed in the CP-KCS merger detailed in table below). Our recently published deep-dive analysis of over 4,000 watershed O-D pairs suggests that even ~10% truck conversion exceeds UNP’s total net synergy target disclosed in a recent S-4 filing (noting that UNP’s estimate includes the larger transcon intermodal piece). Further upside should not be ruled out given rails’ price advantage over truck.

We believe a transcon faces significant conversion TAM but outcomes hinge on execution, which will occur over a multi-year period. The fmr Class I CEO we hosted recently highlighted the opportunity to strike contracts with customers (auto mainly) for ~75%-80% of their volumes (full note here). Such outcomes likely represent the upside scenario given that our 10% capture assumption yields outsized EBITDA gains. The chart below visualizes the watershed EBITDA opportunity in various share capture scenarios relative to UNP’s disclosed total synergy estimate.

Both NSC and CSX are trading above their 5-year forward PE average, with NSC trading the highest in the U.S. group at 21.4x due to the pending deal with UNP. UNP is the only U.S. Class I trading below its average as the company embarks on a multi-year effort to create a transcontinental railroad. The rail group has outperformed the rest of our coverage YTD despite an industrial economy that has been under continued pressure. September ISM data contracted for the seventh consecutive month. See our supply chain tracker for a more detailed look at how the macro has evolved through September.

The post TD Cowen Insight: Merger to Dominate Rail Earnings Despite Diverging Q3 Operations appeared first on Railway Age.

On July 30, 2025, at the Surface Transportation Board, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern filed a notice of intent to file an Application for authority to merge. The earliest the Application may be filed is October 29. The STB will have 30 days (i.e., Nov.28) to determine whether it complies with the STB’s regulations.

The proceeding will be the first involving two Class I railroads that will be subject to the 2001 merger rules, because the merger of Canadian Pacific Railway and Kansas City Southern Railway was determined to be subject to the “KCS exemption” in the 2001 rules. So, that merger was only required to preserve existing competition, not enhance it, and CP and KCS were not required to consider “downstream impacts.” The STB made its views clear, during the battle between CP and CN for KCS, that it preferred CP over CN in large part due to concerns over “balance” in the railroad industry and the supposed fact that the CP-KCS merger presented few if any competitive concerns.

The STB’s rules will require UP and NS to demonstrate that their proposed merger would “enhance” competition, not just preserve it. They also require UP and NS to explain in their application what the “downstream impacts” will be, and how the merger will not negatively impact service. These are daunting requirements.

CPKC has made clear already that it is opposed to any more Class I mergers. Also, Berkshire Hathaway (which owns BNSF Railway) has made clear that it is not interested in acquiring CSX Transportation. So, it is not clear that a UP+NS merger would—or even could—lead to a balanced industry.

The opposition of other Class I railroads is a significant development. A large number of shipper associations have already announced their opposition. If that opposition persists or grows, it would undoubtedly have a significant impact on the STB’s consideration of the Application. It is true that Class I railroads have opposed other Class I mergers—BNSF initially opposed the UP-SP merger, only to withdraw its opposition when it entered into a consequential settlement agreement with UP that led directly to approval of that merger by the STB. The UP-BNSF Settlement Agreement, which became a condition of the merger and still applies, granted BNSF access to many shippers, resulted in 4,000 miles of trackage rights for BNSF and a formulaic rate agreement that allowed BNSF merely to request a rate from UP for its portion of joint movements that would allow BNSF to quote a shipper a rate on its system and compete on a commercial basis, among other aspects. The Board has heard and resolved many disputes between BNSF and UP that have allowed BNSF to be competitive with UP in many areas.

Also, CN filed a “responsive application” in the CP-KCS merger proceeding, seeking divestiture of a line in Illinois. We can expect responsive applications in the UP-NS proceeding that may allow the Board to rectify problematic aspects of the proposed merger so as to maintain balanced competition in regions where UP and NS lines are in close proximity.

The Board’s broad authority to condition a merger has preserved build-out rights to permit future competitive options for shippers to avoid captivity from mergers.  If the Board approves the UP-NS merger, we can expect substantial conditions to satisfy the 2001 merger-rule requirements.

Moreover, the STB’s composition is uncertain. Not only did POTUS 47 terminate Robert Primus as an STB Board Member (although that termination may still be challenged in court), but also the terms of Board Members Hedlund and Schultz end soon (but they can serve during a “holdover year” if a successor has not been confirmed). Recently, Schultz has been re-nominated, and Richard Kloster nominated, for two Republican Board positions. If Hedlund is not renominated and confirmed by early 2027, and Schultz and Kloster are not confirmed by then, they will not be available to vote on the UP-NS merger. The STB is not subject to a requirement that there be a quorum (i.e., three) Board Members to vote in order to act on a matter. But would Chairman Fuchs vote to approve such a momentous merger if he is the only Board Member who could vote when the 15-month deadline following the acceptance date arrives? Former Chairman Nober attempted to avoid taking significant actions while he was the only Board Member.

These circumstances suggest that UP and NS would be wise to try to cut deals with likely parties, including not only railroads, shipper associations, and rail labor, but also the Departments of Justice, Transportation, and Agriculture. The Administration’s position on the merger is not clear; Commerce Secretary Lutnick said that it would leave the decision to the STB. The President apparently did not take a position on the UP-NS merger when he met with UP CEO Vena, but subsequent reports suggest that he thinks the merger would be acceptable. But the Board must base its decision on the evidence, and the law, if its decision is to be upheld in court. If it approves the merger, it is more likely to be upheld if it acknowledges the adverse impacts on competition, balance, and service the merger may present, and responds with appropriate conditions.

The Board will be under more pressure than usual to get this one right. It is, after all, the “end game” for the railroad industry.

Michael McBride is a partner at the law firm Van Ness Feldman, LLP in Washington D.C., where he practices transportation law and represents rail shippers, ports and other customers of railroads, including in rail-merger proceedings before the STB.

The post The ‘End Game’ UP-NS Merger appeared first on Railway Age.