WASHINGTON — The Federal Transit Administration announced Wednesday announced the availability of $197 million to replace aging railcars on subway, light rail, commuter rail, and other systems under the Rail Vehicle Replacement Program, funded under the $1.5 billion Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
The agency says older cars contribute to service delays and increase costs, and many are not accessible to people with disabilities and lack features such as digital signage and audio tools that improve the riding experience.
“One-third of subway and commuter rail vehicles are more than 25 years old,” FTA Administrator Nuria Fernandez said in a press release. “Americans who ride transit deserve the opportunity to travel on newer, safer, and more efficient railcars, and we are proud to provide support for transit agencies to make the significant investments needed to replace their aging railcars and make their systems more accessible.”
Agencies can apply for the funding through a Notice of Funding Opportunity. General information on the program is available here; specific details on the notice and grant application are available here.
In May, the FTA awarded more than $700 million in funding for new equipment under the program [see “Six rail systems receive federal grants …,” Trains News Wire, May 8, 2023].
A support that should not be ignored in the name of urban rail systems!
Dr. Güntürk Üstün
What also limits bidders is often the requirement that it be manufactured in the U.S. We probably also have more stringent crash requirements which is what caused the Nippon Shirano (?) order to be cancelled when it failed crash testing.
Not all local transit systems have used Federal grants: SEPTA’s PCC-III rebuild is being done in-house with local money. Why? Because the co$t is less than 1/10 the cost of a new, yet to be designed, LRV. And no need for consultants to soak up half the money.
As I recall, San Diego Trolley’s original line was done without Federal assistance because they could buy off the shelf LRV’s for a fraction of what a Federalised car would cost, and get them much sooner.
Roger, part of the problem is government is obligated to accept the lowest bidder. Recently contracts (e.g., the regional rail, multi-state bi-level car fiasco) have shown the lowest bidders to be incompetent and non-qualified. You get what you pay for. Hopefully the qualifications for bidders have been tightened up to eliminate incompetent and inexperienced bidders. Should government be given the option to select a higher bid from a more qualified company? Surly the taxpayers deserve better accountability on how their money is spent.
Charles, your last sentence was to short. The federals print more money after they have taken it away from taxpayers.
Great idea and very needed. Now all they need to do is find manufacturers competent to build passenger cars correctly with no defects. And competent managers to firmly handle this building program. How many rail systems have suffered years of delays and then major problems with cars delivered? How many light rail and subways have had problems with wheelsets? And bearings? Has years of experience just been ignored? Is a puzzlement.
In other words, one more subsidy.
I’m not against transit subsidies. It’s that a full and transparent accounting would be in order. If you buy a ticket for $2.75 for a subway ride, or $6.00 on METRA, or $35.00 on Amtrak, have the entire subsidy revealed. This would be capital grants and operational subsidies combined state, local and federal.
Ditto for highways (above the fuel tax) and for air transport (above the ticket price). Putting the big subsidy into a number of little boxes doesn’t change the amount.
Oh, one more thing. Why do local transit systems (not interstate travel) depend so highly on federal grants? Because the states and localities “balance” their budgets, countng federalgrants as revenue. Which of course isn’t the case. The federals print money.