Federal Executive Branch
Here's a look at documents from the U.S. Executive Branch
Federal Agencies
Featured Stories
Surface Transportation Board Issues Decision InvolvingMetra, Union Pacific Railroad
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 (TNSdock) -- The U.S. Department of Transportation Surface Transportation Board issued the following decision (Docket No. FD 36844) entitled "Commuter Rail Division of the Northern Illinois Transit Authority dba Metra - Terminal Trackage Rights - Union Pacific Railroad Co.":
* * *
ORDER GRANTING UP'S MOTION TO COMPEL METRA'S ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NUMBER 1(A)
On December 1, 2025, the Commuter Rail Division of the Regional Transportation Authority d/b/a Metra (Metra) requested the Board establish conditions and compensation for Metra's use of three rail lines owned by Union ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 (TNSdock) -- The U.S. Department of Transportation Surface Transportation Board issued the following decision (Docket No. FD 36844) entitled "Commuter Rail Division of the Northern Illinois Transit Authority dba Metra - Terminal Trackage Rights - Union Pacific Railroad Co.": * * * ORDER GRANTING UP'S MOTION TO COMPEL METRA'S ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NUMBER 1(A) On December 1, 2025, the Commuter Rail Division of the Regional Transportation Authority d/b/a Metra (Metra) requested the Board establish conditions and compensation for Metra's use of three rail lines owned by UnionPacific Railroad Company (UP) in the Chicago area (the UP Lines), pursuant to an application for terminal trackage rights granted by the Board's decision served September 3, 2025. Commuter Rail Div. of the Reg'l Transp. Auth.-- Terminal Trackage Rts.--Union Pac. R.R. (September 2025 Decision), FD 36844 (STB served Sept. 3, 2025). In March 2026, the Board denied Metra's request to set conditions and compensation as premature and directed the parties to continue negotiations for 60 days, followed by submission of a joint report describing the status of negotiations and any issues that remained unresolved. Commuter Rail Div. of the Reg'l Transp. Auth.--Terminal Trackage Rts.--Union Pac. R.R. (March 2026 Decision), FD 36844 (STB served Mar. 13, 2026). On May 22, 2026, the parties filed a joint report addressing the issues specified in the March 2026 Decision and advising the Board that they were unable to reach resolution absent Board intervention (hereafter, Joint Report). In a decision served on August 19, 2026, the Board set a procedural schedule and referred discovery matters to the undersigned for resolution. Commuter Rail Div. of the Reg'l Transp. Auth.--Terminal Trackage Rts.--Union Pac. R.R. (August 2026 Decision), FD 36844 (STB served Aug. 19, 2026). By its decision served on October 1, 2026, the Board extended the procedural schedule, and the close of discovery is now January 4, 2027. Commuter Rail Div. of the N. Ill. Transit Auth.--Terminal Trackage Rts.--Union Pac. R.R., FD 36844 (STB served Oct. 1, 2026).
The Board provided the background about the facilities (other than rail lines) relevant to the discovery dispute here in its August 2026 Decision. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 2-5. In September 2025, the Board granted Metra's application under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 11102(a) to continue commuter rail service over the UP Lines. See September 2025 Decision, FD 36844. The Board directed the parties to attempt to reach an agreement on the conditions and compensation for Metra's use of the UP Lines. Id. at 33. The Board directed the parties to file status reports every 60 days stating whether they reached agreement, needed more time, or were unable to agree. Id. The parties began filing status reports in November 2025. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 2.
On December 1, 2025, Metra filed a request for the Board to establish conditions and compensation, claiming the parties could not reach an agreement on disputed issues that would "remove the need for Board involvement." Id. (quoting Metra Request 1-2, Dec. 1, 2025). UP opposed Metra's request, argued the parties were making progress, and should continue their efforts to reach mutual agreement before proceeding to litigate the conditions and compensation. Id. (citing UP Reply 4, Dec. 15, 2025). UP's reply noted that one of issues on which the parties could not agree was what real estate and facilities were covered by the Board's September 2025 Decision. Id. (citing UP Reply 5, Dec. 15, 2025).
According to their next two status reports (January 2026 and March 2026), the parties continued to exchange proposals. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 2. In the March 2026 Decision, the Board denied Metra's request to establish conditions and compensation as premature, directed the parties to continue negotiations for 60 days (or longer if jointly requested), and then to file a joint status report. March 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 4-6. The Board also granted UP's motion for a protective order delaying the start of discovery, because negotiations were proceeding productively and discovery might have been unnecessary. Id. at 6.
On May 22, 2026, the parties filed their Joint Report and advised the Board that they "agree that they are unable to reach resolution absent Board intervention." (Joint Report 1, May 22, 2026.) In the Joint Report, UP renewed an earlier request to bifurcate the parties' dispute so that the Board could determine which facilities are encompassed by the September 2025 Decision before the parties litigate conditions and compensation. (Id., Ex. B at 1.) Metra objected. (Id.)
UP argued that this proceeding should be bifurcated into two phases, because UP assumed Metra would seek to expand the September 2025 Decision from the UP Lines to other real estate and/or other facilities and that scope-of-facilities issues needed to be resolved before compensation and conditions are addressed. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 34. UP argued, as a preliminary matter, Metra must identify with specificity the facilities to which it seeks access. Id. at 3. In response, Metra argued that it does not seek to expand the scope of the September 2025 Decision, but Metra disagrees about the term "terminal facilities" and argues it is applied broadly, per the September 2025 Decision. Id. at 4.
The Board denied UP's request to bifurcate the proceeding into two phases. Id. at 4. The Board ordered: "Metra will be directed to identify with specificity by August 26, 2026, the facilities (other than rail lines) to which it seeks access pursuant to the September 2025 Decision." Id. The Board also decided that discovery about the scope-of-facilities issues could start with the service of its decision. See id. at 5.
On August 26, 2026, Metra filed its List of Facilities, (Other than Rail Lines) to Which Metra Seeks Access Pursuant to the September 3, 2025, Decision (List of Facilities), by the deadline set in the August 2026 Decision.
On September 18, 2026, UP moved to compel Metra to respond to subpart (a) (only) of UP's Interrogatory Number One to specify to which facilities other than rail lines that Metra seeks access. (UP Motion 1, Sept. 18, 2026.) Metra responded with many arguments to deny UP's motion: Metra objected and responded fully, Metra provided documents instead, this is a merits issue and UP cannot preview Metra's case, UP has not provided reciprocal discovery, UP's motion is untimely, UP did not meet and confer, and Metra's supplemental information renders the motion moot. (Metra Reply, Sept. 24, 2026.)
Reviewing Metra's arguments, but out of order. First up is timeliness (i.e., Metra's fifth argument)./2 The Board stated that discovery on the scope-of-facilities issues could proceed on August 19, 2026. August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 5. UP propounded Interrogatory Number 1(a) (among others) upon Metra on August 21, 2026, and requested Metra serve its answers three business days later (i.e., August 26, 2026). (See Metra Reply 2, Sept. 24, 2026.) Metra argued it timely filed its objections and responses on August 26, 2026. (Id.; see also UP Motion, Ex. 1.) UP filed its motion to compel on September 18, 2026. (UP Motion, Sept. 18, 2026.)
UP argued that its motion to compel was timely. (UP Motion 3 n.6, Sept. 18, 2026.) UP argued the motion was:
filed within 10 days after expiration of the period allowed under 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.26(a). See 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.31(a) (a motion to compel is timely if filed "within 10 days after expiration of the period allowed for submission of answers to interrogatories"); 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.26(a) (setting a period of not less than 15 days after the service of such an interrogatory).
Id. Metra argued that UP filed its motion to compel twenty-three days later, without a request for extension or agreement from Metra. (Metra Reply 5-6, Sept. 24, 2026.)
According to 49 U.S.C. Sec. 1114.26(a), I calculate that interrogatory objections and responses would be due on Tuesday, September 8, 2026 (i.e., the fifteenth day would fall on Saturday, September 6, and Monday, September 7, 2026, was a holiday, making the following day the deadline). See 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1104.7(a) ("In computing any period of time, the day of the act, event, or default upon which the designated period of time begins to run is not included. The last day of the period is included unless it is Saturday, Sunday, or a legal holiday in the District of Columbia, in which event the period runs until the end of the next day which is not a Saturday, Sunday or holiday."). Then, the motion to compel would be due within ten days after that date or Friday, September 18, 2026, in compliance with 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.31(a). UP filed its motion to compel on September 18, 2026.
In support of its argument that UP's motion is untimely, Metra argued that the ten-day deadline is strictly enforced. (Metra Reply 5-6 (citing Kansas City S. Ry. Co.--Adverse Discontinuance App.--A Line of Arkansas and Missouri R.R. Co., AB 103 (Sub-No. 14) (STB served Jan. 11, 1999)).) In that matter, the Board denied a requested two-day extension for the filing of a motion to compel, which was requested due to "intervening holidays and the absence of counsel from the office during those holidays." Kansas City S. Ry. Co., AB 103 (Sub-No. 14), slip op. at 1. The discovery requests were served on December 9, 1998, and the order states that a motion to compel was due no later than January 4, 1999, pursuant to 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.31. Id. From the service of the discovery, and counting objections and responses as due on December 24, 1998, a motion to compel was due January 4, 1999 (i.e., ten days later is January 3, 1999, which was a Sunday, so the deadline got moved to Monday, January 4, 1999). The motion to compel deadline stated in Kansas City S. Ry. Co., AB 103, slip op. at 2 (cited by Metra), was determined the same way I calculated the motion to compel deadline in this matter.
Accordingly, UP's motion to compel was timely filed.
The Board will ultimately decide whether it agrees with Metra's or UP's scope-of-facilities argument. The Board ordered Metra to file a list of facilities that Metra claims are included within the scope of the September 2025 Decision. August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 4. UP also seeks that list through discovery.
UP might disagree with Metra's list of facilities. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 5 ("UP must thereafter identify with specificity any additional facilities, not listed by Metra, that UP believes are encompassed by the September 2025 Decision, by September 2, 2026.") The parties may have a factual dispute about a facility (or a portion of a facility). The discovery process is available to develop the record about any such dispute, and if necessary, present it to the Board for the Board to decide. But right now, UP seeks to compel Metra to provide its list with specificity in discovery.
To explain the discovery issue, as I understand it, with a finer point. UP is requesting what I call Metra's "definitive" list of facilities and with specificity. UP wants a very clear starting point of what Metra claims falls under the scope-of-facilities issues pursuant to the September 2025 Decision (not Metra's legal theory), just the clear identification of those facilities by name or location of named station. (See UP Motion, Ex. 1.) Once UP has Metra's definitive list, then UP might disagree about some of those listed facilities. Then, the parties can work to resolve any disputed issues or clearly identify any disputed facilities. But Metra has not provided a definitive list. Metra's list has too many variables.
Let me explain with an even finer point. Maybe Metra and UP could agree on the facilities that Metra claims are subject to the September 2025 Decision, under Metra's argument, even if UP does not agree with Metra's scope-of-facilities legal interpretation. If the Board agrees with Metra's legal interpretation on the scope-of-facilities issues, then the Board would set conditions and compensation on the merits. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 4. The Board should have a definitive list of facilities for that purpose./3 See id. Where Metra and UP do not agree, then each would have definitive list. Id. at 5. In my opinion, however, the best scenario would be for the parties to file with the Board a Joint definitive list highlighting any dispute(s) for the Board to decide.
To get to the merits determination, the Board permitted discovery on the scope-of-facilities issues. August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 5 ("If necessary, discovery pertaining to scope-of-facilities issues may commence upon service of this decision.") Discovery enables the parties to develop the record when necessary. But more importantly, discovery narrowly focuses the disputed issues for the Board to decide.
Now, turning to UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a), which sought Metra's definitive facilities list with specificity.
Metra argued that UP did not meet and confer with Metra about the discovery requested in an attempt to resolve the issues without Board intervention (sixth argument). (Metra Reply 6, Sept. 24, 2026.) In reviewing the procedural history of this matter, the parties have been negotiating the disputed issues in this matter for some time. UP raised the scope-of-facilities issues with the Board nearly one year ago. See August 2026 Decision, slip op. at 2 (citing UP Reply 4, December 15, 2025). Therefore, this is not a sufficient reason to deny UP's motion to compel to require the parties to meet and confer some more in this matter. The parties are encouraged to meet and confer following the service of this order.
Metra complained that UP is not engaging in reciprocal discovery or cooperating in discovery (fourth argument). If UP is not cooperating in discovery, then Metra can file a motion to compel UP's discovery responses pursuant to 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.31./4 I have considered Metra's argument and will order Metra to supplement its interrogatory answer prior to the close of discovery (discussed later).
In another argument, Metra replied that "to the extent that UP believes that the specific facilities Metra has identified should not be included in those encompassed by the September 3, 2025, decision, that is an issue UP can raise in its evidentiary filings." (Metra Reply 4, Sept. 24, 2026) (third argument).) Metra further complained that UP is seeking a "sneak peek" of its case in discovery. Id. UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a) does not seek Metra's work product, which would be protected from disclosure. UP seeks a list, "identified with specificity of facilities (other than rail lines) to which [Metra] seeks access pursuant to the September 2025 Decision" and as the Board ordered in its August 2026 Decision. August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 4. UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a) requests the "Name of every Facility or descriptor sufficient to identify every Facility[.]" (UP Motion, Ex. 1.) The result would be a list, which leads to the next group of arguments.
The rest of Metra's arguments can be reviewed together. Metra argued that UP failed to overcome Metra's objections (first argument), Metra answered the interrogatory by pointing to the List of Facilities and provided business records as is permitted (second argument), and Metra's supplemental information renders UP's motion to compel moot (section "B"). (Metra Reply 4-6.) When Metra responded to UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a), Metra included multiple (threshold, general, and specific) objections. (UP Motion, Ex. 1.) Metra then "refers UP to the List of Facilities" filed with the Board on the same date. (Id.) Metra also answered Interrogatory Number 1(a): "Metra will produce (or has produced previously) nonprivileged, responsive documents that are sufficient to show the requested information. [49 C.F.R.] Sec. 1114.26(b) ('[o]ption to produce business records')." (Id.) Metra further answered Interrogatory Number 1(a) that "[w]ith respect to portions of facilities, Metra seeks access and use consistent with current operations." Id. According to UP, Metra began producing its business records on September 15, 2026, and specifying responsive records for its Interrogatory Number 1(a) answer on September 17, 2026. (UP Motion 3, Sept. 18, 2026.)
UP argued that Metra's List of Facilities fails to provide the information requested. (UP Motion 3, Sept. 18, 2026.) UP argued that Interrogatory Number 1(a) requested Metra's List of Facilities does not provide a specific facility list but rather categories of potential facilities. Id. UP gave examples of the problems with Metra's List of Facilities. (Id. at 4-6.) In its Reply, Metra provided clarification for each of UP's examples on the date it filed its reply and argued that with this supplemental information, UP's motion is now moot. (Metra Reply 6 & Ex. 4, Sept. 24, 2026.)
A party upon whom an interrogatory has been served may produce and specify records instead if the answer to the interrogatory may be derived from the records "and the burden is substantially the same for the party serving the interrogatory as for the party served[.]" 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.26(b). UP argued that Metra's use of the business records option to answer Interrogatory Number 1(a) under 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.26(b) was insufficient. (UP Motion 6-7, Sept. 18, 2026.) UP argued that Metra has specified Fixed Facility Agreements, Right of Entry Agreements, the parties' former Purchase of Service Agreement and related amendments and extensions, documents, concerning the transfer of commuter services to Metra, and out-of-date descriptions of station property. (Id. at 6-7.) UP further argued that the business records do not sufficiently answer the interrogatory, because the List of Facilities states Metra seeks access to facilities "not included in the Right of Entry" agreement. (Id. at 7 (quoting Listing of Facilities).) In short, Metra's answer is circular.
"Subject to and without waiving its objections," Metra argued that it fully responded to UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a). (Metra Reply 4, Sept. 24, 2026.) I disagree. The Board ordered Metra to file with specificity a list of facilities (other than rail lines) to which Metra seeks access pursuant to the September 2025 Decision. August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 4. Metra cannot seriously argue that it objects to UP discovering the scope-of-facilities list that the Board ordered Metra to file. UP did not ask for Metra's arguments. UP asked for the name or descriptor to identify each facility. (UP Motion, Ex. 1.)
In summary, Metra's answer is circular. It has too many expansive phrases. The documents produced raise additional questions. UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a) seeks one comprehensive list, with specificity, the identity (name or descriptor) of each facility to which Metra Seeks Access Pursuant to the September 2025 Decision. UP's motion to compel Metra to answer Interrogatory 1(a) is granted, without using the option to produce business records under 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.26(b). Metra shall answer UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a) on or before Friday, November 20, 2026, unless the parties agree to a later date.
Moreover, Metra shall complete its list without phrases like "including but not limited to" "without limitation," "all other relevant," "together with," "any other," "associated with." (See List of Facilities.) Any one of these phrases defeats the purpose of creating a complete and definitive list.
Metra may reserve the right to supplement its answer to Interrogatory Number 1(a) if additional information is later learned pursuant to 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.29(c) (supplementation of discovery responses may be imposed by order). Metra will serve any supplemental answer to Interrogatory Number 1(a) on or before Friday, December 11, 2026, unless the parties agree to a later date.
It is ordered:
1. UP's Motion to Compel Metra's Answer to Interrogatory Number 1(a) is GRANTED as set forth herein.
2. This decision is effective on the date of service.
By the Board, Jenifer J. Soulikias, Administrative Law Judge.
* * *
Footnotes:
1/ As of June 1, 2026, the Commuter Rail Division of the Regional Transportation Authority d/b/a Metra is now the Commuter Rail Division of the Northern Illinois Transit Authority d/b/a Metra.
2/ References are to Metra's arguments in its reply, and the numbered arguments are found in section "A" of Metra's reply. (Metra Reply, Sept. 24, 2026.)
3/ I understand that Metra wants to be thorough. I understand that lawyers always want to leave some "wiggle room." But there is a spectrum between some reasonable clause and something that is so expansive that it cannot be defined. Right now, Metra's answer to Interrogatory Number 1(a) with reference to the List of Facilities and objections falls in that second category.
4/ This order does not extend any deadline for Metra to file a motion to compel.
* * *
Original text here: https://dcms-external.s3.amazonaws.com/DCMS_External_PROD/1794243034506/53316.pdf
* * *
ORDER GRANTING UP'S MOTION TO COMPEL METRA'S ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NUMBER 1(A)
On December 1, 2025, the Commuter Rail Division of the Regional Transportation Authority d/b/a Metra (Metra) requested the Board establish conditions and compensation for Metra's use of three rail lines owned by Union ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 (TNSdock) -- The U.S. Department of Transportation Surface Transportation Board issued the following decision (Docket No. FD 36844) entitled "Commuter Rail Division of the Northern Illinois Transit Authority dba Metra - Terminal Trackage Rights - Union Pacific Railroad Co.": * * * ORDER GRANTING UP'S MOTION TO COMPEL METRA'S ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NUMBER 1(A) On December 1, 2025, the Commuter Rail Division of the Regional Transportation Authority d/b/a Metra (Metra) requested the Board establish conditions and compensation for Metra's use of three rail lines owned by UnionPacific Railroad Company (UP) in the Chicago area (the UP Lines), pursuant to an application for terminal trackage rights granted by the Board's decision served September 3, 2025. Commuter Rail Div. of the Reg'l Transp. Auth.-- Terminal Trackage Rts.--Union Pac. R.R. (September 2025 Decision), FD 36844 (STB served Sept. 3, 2025). In March 2026, the Board denied Metra's request to set conditions and compensation as premature and directed the parties to continue negotiations for 60 days, followed by submission of a joint report describing the status of negotiations and any issues that remained unresolved. Commuter Rail Div. of the Reg'l Transp. Auth.--Terminal Trackage Rts.--Union Pac. R.R. (March 2026 Decision), FD 36844 (STB served Mar. 13, 2026). On May 22, 2026, the parties filed a joint report addressing the issues specified in the March 2026 Decision and advising the Board that they were unable to reach resolution absent Board intervention (hereafter, Joint Report). In a decision served on August 19, 2026, the Board set a procedural schedule and referred discovery matters to the undersigned for resolution. Commuter Rail Div. of the Reg'l Transp. Auth.--Terminal Trackage Rts.--Union Pac. R.R. (August 2026 Decision), FD 36844 (STB served Aug. 19, 2026). By its decision served on October 1, 2026, the Board extended the procedural schedule, and the close of discovery is now January 4, 2027. Commuter Rail Div. of the N. Ill. Transit Auth.--Terminal Trackage Rts.--Union Pac. R.R., FD 36844 (STB served Oct. 1, 2026).
The Board provided the background about the facilities (other than rail lines) relevant to the discovery dispute here in its August 2026 Decision. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 2-5. In September 2025, the Board granted Metra's application under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 11102(a) to continue commuter rail service over the UP Lines. See September 2025 Decision, FD 36844. The Board directed the parties to attempt to reach an agreement on the conditions and compensation for Metra's use of the UP Lines. Id. at 33. The Board directed the parties to file status reports every 60 days stating whether they reached agreement, needed more time, or were unable to agree. Id. The parties began filing status reports in November 2025. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 2.
On December 1, 2025, Metra filed a request for the Board to establish conditions and compensation, claiming the parties could not reach an agreement on disputed issues that would "remove the need for Board involvement." Id. (quoting Metra Request 1-2, Dec. 1, 2025). UP opposed Metra's request, argued the parties were making progress, and should continue their efforts to reach mutual agreement before proceeding to litigate the conditions and compensation. Id. (citing UP Reply 4, Dec. 15, 2025). UP's reply noted that one of issues on which the parties could not agree was what real estate and facilities were covered by the Board's September 2025 Decision. Id. (citing UP Reply 5, Dec. 15, 2025).
According to their next two status reports (January 2026 and March 2026), the parties continued to exchange proposals. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 2. In the March 2026 Decision, the Board denied Metra's request to establish conditions and compensation as premature, directed the parties to continue negotiations for 60 days (or longer if jointly requested), and then to file a joint status report. March 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 4-6. The Board also granted UP's motion for a protective order delaying the start of discovery, because negotiations were proceeding productively and discovery might have been unnecessary. Id. at 6.
On May 22, 2026, the parties filed their Joint Report and advised the Board that they "agree that they are unable to reach resolution absent Board intervention." (Joint Report 1, May 22, 2026.) In the Joint Report, UP renewed an earlier request to bifurcate the parties' dispute so that the Board could determine which facilities are encompassed by the September 2025 Decision before the parties litigate conditions and compensation. (Id., Ex. B at 1.) Metra objected. (Id.)
UP argued that this proceeding should be bifurcated into two phases, because UP assumed Metra would seek to expand the September 2025 Decision from the UP Lines to other real estate and/or other facilities and that scope-of-facilities issues needed to be resolved before compensation and conditions are addressed. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 34. UP argued, as a preliminary matter, Metra must identify with specificity the facilities to which it seeks access. Id. at 3. In response, Metra argued that it does not seek to expand the scope of the September 2025 Decision, but Metra disagrees about the term "terminal facilities" and argues it is applied broadly, per the September 2025 Decision. Id. at 4.
The Board denied UP's request to bifurcate the proceeding into two phases. Id. at 4. The Board ordered: "Metra will be directed to identify with specificity by August 26, 2026, the facilities (other than rail lines) to which it seeks access pursuant to the September 2025 Decision." Id. The Board also decided that discovery about the scope-of-facilities issues could start with the service of its decision. See id. at 5.
On August 26, 2026, Metra filed its List of Facilities, (Other than Rail Lines) to Which Metra Seeks Access Pursuant to the September 3, 2025, Decision (List of Facilities), by the deadline set in the August 2026 Decision.
On September 18, 2026, UP moved to compel Metra to respond to subpart (a) (only) of UP's Interrogatory Number One to specify to which facilities other than rail lines that Metra seeks access. (UP Motion 1, Sept. 18, 2026.) Metra responded with many arguments to deny UP's motion: Metra objected and responded fully, Metra provided documents instead, this is a merits issue and UP cannot preview Metra's case, UP has not provided reciprocal discovery, UP's motion is untimely, UP did not meet and confer, and Metra's supplemental information renders the motion moot. (Metra Reply, Sept. 24, 2026.)
Reviewing Metra's arguments, but out of order. First up is timeliness (i.e., Metra's fifth argument)./2 The Board stated that discovery on the scope-of-facilities issues could proceed on August 19, 2026. August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 5. UP propounded Interrogatory Number 1(a) (among others) upon Metra on August 21, 2026, and requested Metra serve its answers three business days later (i.e., August 26, 2026). (See Metra Reply 2, Sept. 24, 2026.) Metra argued it timely filed its objections and responses on August 26, 2026. (Id.; see also UP Motion, Ex. 1.) UP filed its motion to compel on September 18, 2026. (UP Motion, Sept. 18, 2026.)
UP argued that its motion to compel was timely. (UP Motion 3 n.6, Sept. 18, 2026.) UP argued the motion was:
filed within 10 days after expiration of the period allowed under 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.26(a). See 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.31(a) (a motion to compel is timely if filed "within 10 days after expiration of the period allowed for submission of answers to interrogatories"); 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.26(a) (setting a period of not less than 15 days after the service of such an interrogatory).
Id. Metra argued that UP filed its motion to compel twenty-three days later, without a request for extension or agreement from Metra. (Metra Reply 5-6, Sept. 24, 2026.)
According to 49 U.S.C. Sec. 1114.26(a), I calculate that interrogatory objections and responses would be due on Tuesday, September 8, 2026 (i.e., the fifteenth day would fall on Saturday, September 6, and Monday, September 7, 2026, was a holiday, making the following day the deadline). See 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1104.7(a) ("In computing any period of time, the day of the act, event, or default upon which the designated period of time begins to run is not included. The last day of the period is included unless it is Saturday, Sunday, or a legal holiday in the District of Columbia, in which event the period runs until the end of the next day which is not a Saturday, Sunday or holiday."). Then, the motion to compel would be due within ten days after that date or Friday, September 18, 2026, in compliance with 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.31(a). UP filed its motion to compel on September 18, 2026.
In support of its argument that UP's motion is untimely, Metra argued that the ten-day deadline is strictly enforced. (Metra Reply 5-6 (citing Kansas City S. Ry. Co.--Adverse Discontinuance App.--A Line of Arkansas and Missouri R.R. Co., AB 103 (Sub-No. 14) (STB served Jan. 11, 1999)).) In that matter, the Board denied a requested two-day extension for the filing of a motion to compel, which was requested due to "intervening holidays and the absence of counsel from the office during those holidays." Kansas City S. Ry. Co., AB 103 (Sub-No. 14), slip op. at 1. The discovery requests were served on December 9, 1998, and the order states that a motion to compel was due no later than January 4, 1999, pursuant to 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.31. Id. From the service of the discovery, and counting objections and responses as due on December 24, 1998, a motion to compel was due January 4, 1999 (i.e., ten days later is January 3, 1999, which was a Sunday, so the deadline got moved to Monday, January 4, 1999). The motion to compel deadline stated in Kansas City S. Ry. Co., AB 103, slip op. at 2 (cited by Metra), was determined the same way I calculated the motion to compel deadline in this matter.
Accordingly, UP's motion to compel was timely filed.
The Board will ultimately decide whether it agrees with Metra's or UP's scope-of-facilities argument. The Board ordered Metra to file a list of facilities that Metra claims are included within the scope of the September 2025 Decision. August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 4. UP also seeks that list through discovery.
UP might disagree with Metra's list of facilities. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 5 ("UP must thereafter identify with specificity any additional facilities, not listed by Metra, that UP believes are encompassed by the September 2025 Decision, by September 2, 2026.") The parties may have a factual dispute about a facility (or a portion of a facility). The discovery process is available to develop the record about any such dispute, and if necessary, present it to the Board for the Board to decide. But right now, UP seeks to compel Metra to provide its list with specificity in discovery.
To explain the discovery issue, as I understand it, with a finer point. UP is requesting what I call Metra's "definitive" list of facilities and with specificity. UP wants a very clear starting point of what Metra claims falls under the scope-of-facilities issues pursuant to the September 2025 Decision (not Metra's legal theory), just the clear identification of those facilities by name or location of named station. (See UP Motion, Ex. 1.) Once UP has Metra's definitive list, then UP might disagree about some of those listed facilities. Then, the parties can work to resolve any disputed issues or clearly identify any disputed facilities. But Metra has not provided a definitive list. Metra's list has too many variables.
Let me explain with an even finer point. Maybe Metra and UP could agree on the facilities that Metra claims are subject to the September 2025 Decision, under Metra's argument, even if UP does not agree with Metra's scope-of-facilities legal interpretation. If the Board agrees with Metra's legal interpretation on the scope-of-facilities issues, then the Board would set conditions and compensation on the merits. See August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 4. The Board should have a definitive list of facilities for that purpose./3 See id. Where Metra and UP do not agree, then each would have definitive list. Id. at 5. In my opinion, however, the best scenario would be for the parties to file with the Board a Joint definitive list highlighting any dispute(s) for the Board to decide.
To get to the merits determination, the Board permitted discovery on the scope-of-facilities issues. August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 5 ("If necessary, discovery pertaining to scope-of-facilities issues may commence upon service of this decision.") Discovery enables the parties to develop the record when necessary. But more importantly, discovery narrowly focuses the disputed issues for the Board to decide.
Now, turning to UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a), which sought Metra's definitive facilities list with specificity.
Metra argued that UP did not meet and confer with Metra about the discovery requested in an attempt to resolve the issues without Board intervention (sixth argument). (Metra Reply 6, Sept. 24, 2026.) In reviewing the procedural history of this matter, the parties have been negotiating the disputed issues in this matter for some time. UP raised the scope-of-facilities issues with the Board nearly one year ago. See August 2026 Decision, slip op. at 2 (citing UP Reply 4, December 15, 2025). Therefore, this is not a sufficient reason to deny UP's motion to compel to require the parties to meet and confer some more in this matter. The parties are encouraged to meet and confer following the service of this order.
Metra complained that UP is not engaging in reciprocal discovery or cooperating in discovery (fourth argument). If UP is not cooperating in discovery, then Metra can file a motion to compel UP's discovery responses pursuant to 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.31./4 I have considered Metra's argument and will order Metra to supplement its interrogatory answer prior to the close of discovery (discussed later).
In another argument, Metra replied that "to the extent that UP believes that the specific facilities Metra has identified should not be included in those encompassed by the September 3, 2025, decision, that is an issue UP can raise in its evidentiary filings." (Metra Reply 4, Sept. 24, 2026) (third argument).) Metra further complained that UP is seeking a "sneak peek" of its case in discovery. Id. UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a) does not seek Metra's work product, which would be protected from disclosure. UP seeks a list, "identified with specificity of facilities (other than rail lines) to which [Metra] seeks access pursuant to the September 2025 Decision" and as the Board ordered in its August 2026 Decision. August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 4. UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a) requests the "Name of every Facility or descriptor sufficient to identify every Facility[.]" (UP Motion, Ex. 1.) The result would be a list, which leads to the next group of arguments.
The rest of Metra's arguments can be reviewed together. Metra argued that UP failed to overcome Metra's objections (first argument), Metra answered the interrogatory by pointing to the List of Facilities and provided business records as is permitted (second argument), and Metra's supplemental information renders UP's motion to compel moot (section "B"). (Metra Reply 4-6.) When Metra responded to UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a), Metra included multiple (threshold, general, and specific) objections. (UP Motion, Ex. 1.) Metra then "refers UP to the List of Facilities" filed with the Board on the same date. (Id.) Metra also answered Interrogatory Number 1(a): "Metra will produce (or has produced previously) nonprivileged, responsive documents that are sufficient to show the requested information. [49 C.F.R.] Sec. 1114.26(b) ('[o]ption to produce business records')." (Id.) Metra further answered Interrogatory Number 1(a) that "[w]ith respect to portions of facilities, Metra seeks access and use consistent with current operations." Id. According to UP, Metra began producing its business records on September 15, 2026, and specifying responsive records for its Interrogatory Number 1(a) answer on September 17, 2026. (UP Motion 3, Sept. 18, 2026.)
UP argued that Metra's List of Facilities fails to provide the information requested. (UP Motion 3, Sept. 18, 2026.) UP argued that Interrogatory Number 1(a) requested Metra's List of Facilities does not provide a specific facility list but rather categories of potential facilities. Id. UP gave examples of the problems with Metra's List of Facilities. (Id. at 4-6.) In its Reply, Metra provided clarification for each of UP's examples on the date it filed its reply and argued that with this supplemental information, UP's motion is now moot. (Metra Reply 6 & Ex. 4, Sept. 24, 2026.)
A party upon whom an interrogatory has been served may produce and specify records instead if the answer to the interrogatory may be derived from the records "and the burden is substantially the same for the party serving the interrogatory as for the party served[.]" 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.26(b). UP argued that Metra's use of the business records option to answer Interrogatory Number 1(a) under 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.26(b) was insufficient. (UP Motion 6-7, Sept. 18, 2026.) UP argued that Metra has specified Fixed Facility Agreements, Right of Entry Agreements, the parties' former Purchase of Service Agreement and related amendments and extensions, documents, concerning the transfer of commuter services to Metra, and out-of-date descriptions of station property. (Id. at 6-7.) UP further argued that the business records do not sufficiently answer the interrogatory, because the List of Facilities states Metra seeks access to facilities "not included in the Right of Entry" agreement. (Id. at 7 (quoting Listing of Facilities).) In short, Metra's answer is circular.
"Subject to and without waiving its objections," Metra argued that it fully responded to UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a). (Metra Reply 4, Sept. 24, 2026.) I disagree. The Board ordered Metra to file with specificity a list of facilities (other than rail lines) to which Metra seeks access pursuant to the September 2025 Decision. August 2026 Decision, FD 36844, slip op. at 4. Metra cannot seriously argue that it objects to UP discovering the scope-of-facilities list that the Board ordered Metra to file. UP did not ask for Metra's arguments. UP asked for the name or descriptor to identify each facility. (UP Motion, Ex. 1.)
In summary, Metra's answer is circular. It has too many expansive phrases. The documents produced raise additional questions. UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a) seeks one comprehensive list, with specificity, the identity (name or descriptor) of each facility to which Metra Seeks Access Pursuant to the September 2025 Decision. UP's motion to compel Metra to answer Interrogatory 1(a) is granted, without using the option to produce business records under 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.26(b). Metra shall answer UP's Interrogatory Number 1(a) on or before Friday, November 20, 2026, unless the parties agree to a later date.
Moreover, Metra shall complete its list without phrases like "including but not limited to" "without limitation," "all other relevant," "together with," "any other," "associated with." (See List of Facilities.) Any one of these phrases defeats the purpose of creating a complete and definitive list.
Metra may reserve the right to supplement its answer to Interrogatory Number 1(a) if additional information is later learned pursuant to 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1114.29(c) (supplementation of discovery responses may be imposed by order). Metra will serve any supplemental answer to Interrogatory Number 1(a) on or before Friday, December 11, 2026, unless the parties agree to a later date.
It is ordered:
1. UP's Motion to Compel Metra's Answer to Interrogatory Number 1(a) is GRANTED as set forth herein.
2. This decision is effective on the date of service.
By the Board, Jenifer J. Soulikias, Administrative Law Judge.
* * *
Footnotes:
1/ As of June 1, 2026, the Commuter Rail Division of the Regional Transportation Authority d/b/a Metra is now the Commuter Rail Division of the Northern Illinois Transit Authority d/b/a Metra.
2/ References are to Metra's arguments in its reply, and the numbered arguments are found in section "A" of Metra's reply. (Metra Reply, Sept. 24, 2026.)
3/ I understand that Metra wants to be thorough. I understand that lawyers always want to leave some "wiggle room." But there is a spectrum between some reasonable clause and something that is so expansive that it cannot be defined. Right now, Metra's answer to Interrogatory Number 1(a) with reference to the List of Facilities and objections falls in that second category.
4/ This order does not extend any deadline for Metra to file a motion to compel.
* * *
Original text here: https://dcms-external.s3.amazonaws.com/DCMS_External_PROD/1794243034506/53316.pdf
State Department Issues Public Schedule for Nov. 10, 2026
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Department of State issued the daily public schedule for Nov. 10, 2026:
* * *
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO
Secretary Rubio is on travel to France from November 8-10, 2026.
8:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio meets with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha in Paris, France.
(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)
9:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio holds a meet and greet with employees and families of U.S. Mission France and U.S. Mission to the OECD in Paris, France.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
10:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio participates in a G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting session ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Department of State issued the daily public schedule for Nov. 10, 2026: * * * SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO Secretary Rubio is on travel to France from November 8-10, 2026. 8:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio meets with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha in Paris, France. (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP) 9:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio holds a meet and greet with employees and families of U.S. Mission France and U.S. Mission to the OECD in Paris, France. (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE) 10:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio participates in a G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting sessionon Stability in the Middle East in Paris, France.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
12:05 p.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio participates in a G7 family photo with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha in Paris, France.
(POOLED PRESS COVERAGE)
12:15 p.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio participates in a G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting working lunch on Support to Ukraine in Paris, France.
(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)
DEPUTY SECRETARY CHRISTOPHER LANDAU
Deputy Secretary Landau attends meetings and briefings at the Department of State.
UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS ALLISON M. HOOKER
Under Secretary Hooker joins Secretary Rubio on travel to France from November 8-10, 2026.
UNDER SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY SARAH ROGERS
11:00 a.m. Under Secretary Rogers meets with Kazakhstan's Special Representative of the President for Negotiations with the United States Ambassador Erzhan Kazykhan at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR GLOBAL PUBLIC AFFAIRS DYLAN JOHNSON
Assistant Secretary Johnson joins Secretary Rubio on travel to France from November 8-10, 2026.
BRIEFING SCHEDULE
No Department Press Briefing.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesman/2026/11/public-schedule-november-10-2026/
* * *
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO
Secretary Rubio is on travel to France from November 8-10, 2026.
8:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio meets with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha in Paris, France.
(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)
9:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio holds a meet and greet with employees and families of U.S. Mission France and U.S. Mission to the OECD in Paris, France.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
10:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio participates in a G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting session ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Department of State issued the daily public schedule for Nov. 10, 2026: * * * SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO Secretary Rubio is on travel to France from November 8-10, 2026. 8:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio meets with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha in Paris, France. (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP) 9:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio holds a meet and greet with employees and families of U.S. Mission France and U.S. Mission to the OECD in Paris, France. (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE) 10:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio participates in a G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting sessionon Stability in the Middle East in Paris, France.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
12:05 p.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio participates in a G7 family photo with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha in Paris, France.
(POOLED PRESS COVERAGE)
12:15 p.m. LOCAL Secretary Rubio participates in a G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting working lunch on Support to Ukraine in Paris, France.
(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)
DEPUTY SECRETARY CHRISTOPHER LANDAU
Deputy Secretary Landau attends meetings and briefings at the Department of State.
UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS ALLISON M. HOOKER
Under Secretary Hooker joins Secretary Rubio on travel to France from November 8-10, 2026.
UNDER SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY SARAH ROGERS
11:00 a.m. Under Secretary Rogers meets with Kazakhstan's Special Representative of the President for Negotiations with the United States Ambassador Erzhan Kazykhan at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR GLOBAL PUBLIC AFFAIRS DYLAN JOHNSON
Assistant Secretary Johnson joins Secretary Rubio on travel to France from November 8-10, 2026.
BRIEFING SCHEDULE
No Department Press Briefing.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesman/2026/11/public-schedule-november-10-2026/
President Trump Issues Statement on National American History and Founders Month
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- President Trump issued the following statement:
* * *
Presidential Message on National American History and Founders Month
November 9, 2026
The story of America is the greatest story of freedom in all of human history. During National American History and Founders Month, we honor the legendary patriots whose vision gave birth to our Republic; we celebrate the magnificent heritage they entrusted to us; and we pledge to carry their spirit of courage, faith, and patriotism into America's next great chapter.
From the battlefields of the Revolution to the stunning achievements ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- President Trump issued the following statement: * * * Presidential Message on National American History and Founders Month November 9, 2026 The story of America is the greatest story of freedom in all of human history. During National American History and Founders Month, we honor the legendary patriots whose vision gave birth to our Republic; we celebrate the magnificent heritage they entrusted to us; and we pledge to carry their spirit of courage, faith, and patriotism into America's next great chapter. From the battlefields of the Revolution to the stunning achievementsthat propelled our civilization into the heavens, Americans have advanced the cause of freedom and lifted our Nation to extraordinary new heights. Their triumphs are our triumphs, their legacy is our inheritance, and their unyielding spirit of greatness courses through the veins of every American patriot--filling us with immense pride in our past and tremendous optimism for our future.
In recent decades, however, across our schools, government, and most cherished institutions, radical left-wing ideologues have worked to tarnish this indelible history and portray our past as a source of shame. At my direction, my Administration issued a report revealing that the Smithsonian's National Museum of American History--a taxpayer-funded organization entrusted with preserving our national treasures--has become a battleground in this campaign to undermine our founding principles and diminish our Nation's extraordinary achievements.
I proudly took action to reverse this heinous betrayal of our history and restore patriotism and truth to the Smithsonian, signing an Executive Order to utilize all resources available to correct the injustices found in the report; inform visitors of the museum's ideological bias; and ensure the Smithsonian presents an accurate, fair, and truthful understanding of American history. My Administration has restored our beloved landmarks and capital to their original beauty and moved to combat anti-American indoctrination in the classroom. In the past year, Task Force 250 has worked tirelessly to deliver the greatest, grandest, and most spectacular birthday celebration in the history of the world. Under my leadership, our national treasures are being preserved with care, our history is being presented with integrity, and our founders are once again being honored for their extraordinary contributions to human freedom.
During this National American History and Founders Month, as we celebrate our exceptional heritage and our heroic Founding Fathers, we renew our sacred promise to always honor the pioneers who built our Nation and to continue safeguarding the blessings of liberty for generations to come. I encourage all Americans--especially our Nation's youth--to learn more about our incredible history and to draw inspiration from the noble example of those who forged our Republic. With faith in Almighty God, unwavering patriotism in our hearts, and supreme confidence in our Nation's destiny, we affirm that the greatest chapters of the American story are yet to come.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2026/11/presidential-message-on-national-american-history-and-founders-month/
* * *
Presidential Message on National American History and Founders Month
November 9, 2026
The story of America is the greatest story of freedom in all of human history. During National American History and Founders Month, we honor the legendary patriots whose vision gave birth to our Republic; we celebrate the magnificent heritage they entrusted to us; and we pledge to carry their spirit of courage, faith, and patriotism into America's next great chapter.
From the battlefields of the Revolution to the stunning achievements ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- President Trump issued the following statement: * * * Presidential Message on National American History and Founders Month November 9, 2026 The story of America is the greatest story of freedom in all of human history. During National American History and Founders Month, we honor the legendary patriots whose vision gave birth to our Republic; we celebrate the magnificent heritage they entrusted to us; and we pledge to carry their spirit of courage, faith, and patriotism into America's next great chapter. From the battlefields of the Revolution to the stunning achievementsthat propelled our civilization into the heavens, Americans have advanced the cause of freedom and lifted our Nation to extraordinary new heights. Their triumphs are our triumphs, their legacy is our inheritance, and their unyielding spirit of greatness courses through the veins of every American patriot--filling us with immense pride in our past and tremendous optimism for our future.
In recent decades, however, across our schools, government, and most cherished institutions, radical left-wing ideologues have worked to tarnish this indelible history and portray our past as a source of shame. At my direction, my Administration issued a report revealing that the Smithsonian's National Museum of American History--a taxpayer-funded organization entrusted with preserving our national treasures--has become a battleground in this campaign to undermine our founding principles and diminish our Nation's extraordinary achievements.
I proudly took action to reverse this heinous betrayal of our history and restore patriotism and truth to the Smithsonian, signing an Executive Order to utilize all resources available to correct the injustices found in the report; inform visitors of the museum's ideological bias; and ensure the Smithsonian presents an accurate, fair, and truthful understanding of American history. My Administration has restored our beloved landmarks and capital to their original beauty and moved to combat anti-American indoctrination in the classroom. In the past year, Task Force 250 has worked tirelessly to deliver the greatest, grandest, and most spectacular birthday celebration in the history of the world. Under my leadership, our national treasures are being preserved with care, our history is being presented with integrity, and our founders are once again being honored for their extraordinary contributions to human freedom.
During this National American History and Founders Month, as we celebrate our exceptional heritage and our heroic Founding Fathers, we renew our sacred promise to always honor the pioneers who built our Nation and to continue safeguarding the blessings of liberty for generations to come. I encourage all Americans--especially our Nation's youth--to learn more about our incredible history and to draw inspiration from the noble example of those who forged our Republic. With faith in Almighty God, unwavering patriotism in our hearts, and supreme confidence in our Nation's destiny, we affirm that the greatest chapters of the American story are yet to come.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2026/11/presidential-message-on-national-american-history-and-founders-month/
Justice Department Sues the City of Glendale, California for Violating Citizens' Second Amendment Rights Through Unreasonable Fees and Processes for Legal Firearm Permitting
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release:
* * *
Justice Department Sues the City of Glendale, California for Violating Citizens' Second Amendment Rights Through Unreasonable Fees and Processes for Legal Firearm Permitting
November 9, 2026
Today, the United States Department of Justice sued the City of Glendale, California, for violating citizens' fundamental rights under the Second Amendment by requiring unreasonable fees to obtain concealed carry permits.
"The Department of Justice is committed to protecting law abiding citizens' right to keep ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release: * * * Justice Department Sues the City of Glendale, California for Violating Citizens' Second Amendment Rights Through Unreasonable Fees and Processes for Legal Firearm Permitting November 9, 2026 Today, the United States Department of Justice sued the City of Glendale, California, for violating citizens' fundamental rights under the Second Amendment by requiring unreasonable fees to obtain concealed carry permits. "The Department of Justice is committed to protecting law abiding citizens' right to keepand bear arms under the Second Amendment," said Acting Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Jesus Osete. "The City of Glendale cannot impose unreasonable fees and unbridled discretion that undermines that core constitutional right."
"The right to bear arms is a fundamental right the Founding Fathers enshrined during our republic's earliest years," said First Assistant United States Attorney Bill Essayli for the Central District of California. "Exorbitant government fees that interfere with this right are abhorrent to our Constitution and our nation's founding principles. This Justice Department will not stand by and watch our freedoms be eroded."
The Glendale Police Department (Glendale PD) administers a permitting regime with a total cost of an initial application for a concealed carry permit ranging from $1,971.00 to $2,106.00. The total cost for a renewal application, which citizens must complete every two years, is $1,271.00 to $1,406.00. These exorbitant amounts are a stark contrast to costs from the previous fiscal year when Glendale PD required only a $100 fee for first-time applicants and a $25 fee for renewals. Glendale PD also requires applicant reference interviews, psychological exams, interviews of the applicant, and a review of public statements including social media. Glendale PD does not publish any objective standards that they apply to these checks.
It is well established that concealed carrying is a right. New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1, 38 n. 9, 70 (2022). Glendale PD's permitting fees are an unreasonable barrier to exercising that right, and its permitting regime lacks the "narrow, objective, and definite standards" which Bruen requires. Glendale PD's policies and practices, therefore, violate the fundamental rights to keep and bear lawful firearms.
The Second Amendment Section of the Civil Rights Division enforces the Second Amendment, the Police Pattern or Practice Act (34 U.S.C. Sec. 12601), and Executive Order 14206. If you are a current or prospective gun owner and believe that a state or local government has infringed your right to keep and bear arms, please submit a complaint through www.justice.gov/crt/second-amendment-section.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-city-glendale-california-violating-citizens-second-amendment-rights
* * *
Justice Department Sues the City of Glendale, California for Violating Citizens' Second Amendment Rights Through Unreasonable Fees and Processes for Legal Firearm Permitting
November 9, 2026
Today, the United States Department of Justice sued the City of Glendale, California, for violating citizens' fundamental rights under the Second Amendment by requiring unreasonable fees to obtain concealed carry permits.
"The Department of Justice is committed to protecting law abiding citizens' right to keep ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release: * * * Justice Department Sues the City of Glendale, California for Violating Citizens' Second Amendment Rights Through Unreasonable Fees and Processes for Legal Firearm Permitting November 9, 2026 Today, the United States Department of Justice sued the City of Glendale, California, for violating citizens' fundamental rights under the Second Amendment by requiring unreasonable fees to obtain concealed carry permits. "The Department of Justice is committed to protecting law abiding citizens' right to keepand bear arms under the Second Amendment," said Acting Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Jesus Osete. "The City of Glendale cannot impose unreasonable fees and unbridled discretion that undermines that core constitutional right."
"The right to bear arms is a fundamental right the Founding Fathers enshrined during our republic's earliest years," said First Assistant United States Attorney Bill Essayli for the Central District of California. "Exorbitant government fees that interfere with this right are abhorrent to our Constitution and our nation's founding principles. This Justice Department will not stand by and watch our freedoms be eroded."
The Glendale Police Department (Glendale PD) administers a permitting regime with a total cost of an initial application for a concealed carry permit ranging from $1,971.00 to $2,106.00. The total cost for a renewal application, which citizens must complete every two years, is $1,271.00 to $1,406.00. These exorbitant amounts are a stark contrast to costs from the previous fiscal year when Glendale PD required only a $100 fee for first-time applicants and a $25 fee for renewals. Glendale PD also requires applicant reference interviews, psychological exams, interviews of the applicant, and a review of public statements including social media. Glendale PD does not publish any objective standards that they apply to these checks.
It is well established that concealed carrying is a right. New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1, 38 n. 9, 70 (2022). Glendale PD's permitting fees are an unreasonable barrier to exercising that right, and its permitting regime lacks the "narrow, objective, and definite standards" which Bruen requires. Glendale PD's policies and practices, therefore, violate the fundamental rights to keep and bear lawful firearms.
The Second Amendment Section of the Civil Rights Division enforces the Second Amendment, the Police Pattern or Practice Act (34 U.S.C. Sec. 12601), and Executive Order 14206. If you are a current or prospective gun owner and believe that a state or local government has infringed your right to keep and bear arms, please submit a complaint through www.justice.gov/crt/second-amendment-section.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-city-glendale-california-violating-citizens-second-amendment-rights
Justice Department Awards St. Louis More Than $68M to Combat Violent Crime and Restore Law and Order Through Model Cities Initiative
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release:
* * *
Justice Department Awards St. Louis more than $68M to Combat Violent Crime and Restore Law and Order Through Model Cities Initiative
November 9, 2026
St. Louis Was Selected Out of Nearly 50 American Cities to Receive Federal Funding to Strengthen Law Enforcement and Enhance Public Safety.
-
Today, the Justice Department awarded St. Louis, Missouri, more than $68 million through its Model Cities Initiative (MCI), a flagship effort to reduce violent crime, restore law and order, and strengthen ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release: * * * Justice Department Awards St. Louis more than $68M to Combat Violent Crime and Restore Law and Order Through Model Cities Initiative November 9, 2026 St. Louis Was Selected Out of Nearly 50 American Cities to Receive Federal Funding to Strengthen Law Enforcement and Enhance Public Safety. - Today, the Justice Department awarded St. Louis, Missouri, more than $68 million through its Model Cities Initiative (MCI), a flagship effort to reduce violent crime, restore law and order, and strengthenpublic safety in communities across the country.
"The Model Cities Initiative reflects the Trump Administration's commitment to reducing crime across the country and ensuring the safety of every American," said Attorney General Todd Blanche. "These cities are setting an example of proactive law enforcement that will strengthen the rule of law and improve public safety in their jurisdictions. As violent crime rates continue to fall to historic lows, the Department of Justice is redoubling our efforts to invest in local communities and keep American families safe."
St. Louis was selected, in large part, because of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department's (SLMPD) significant progress in reducing violent crime through data-driven policing, innovative technology, and strong partnerships with federal law enforcement agencies. The department has reported year-to-date reductions of 21% in homicides, 25% in robberies, 14% in auto thefts, and 22% in juvenile shootings. Under the leadership of Police Commissioner Robert Tracy, SLMPD has expanded its use of advanced technologies, including gunshot detection systems and drones, to strengthen investigative capabilities, improve situational awareness, and enhance emergency response times.
"All Missouri families deserve to feel safe in their communities, and strengthening public safety in St. Louis is critical to the success and prosperity of our entire state," said Governor Mike Kehoe of Missouri. "We were proud to partner with the Trump Administration in securing this game-changing investment that will strengthen efforts to crack down on violent crime and support the brave men and women in law enforcement."
"I'm a proud St. Louisan, but for too long violent crime has tormented our communities and left families feeling unsafe," said Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri. "As Missouri's Attorney General and now as a U.S. Senator, I have spent my career fighting for a safer Missouri, and I am so proud that St. Louis was one of the four cities chosen as part of the Model Cities Initiative to support our law enforcement officers and serve as an example for the rest of the nation. We've gotten far too used to seeing violence in our city's headlines, but that doesn't have to be our reality. I am grateful that President Trump, Attorney General Blanche, and the entire Trump Administration are focused on fighting crime, and I look forward to our continued efforts to make life better -- and safer -- in the Show-Me State."
"This federal investment in public safety strengthens our hand in the fight against violent crime in St. Louis, and it supports the work of those who do that job every day," said Missouri Attorney General Hanaway. "We stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the men and women of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, who carry the responsibility of placing themselves between our communities and harm with courage and resolve. "This public safety effort represents our unified commitment to hold violent offenders accountable, strengthen public confidence, and build a safer St. Louis for every family."
"The progress we've made in reducing violent crime belongs to our officers, our law enforcement partners and the St. Louis residents who work alongside us," said St. Louis Metropolitan Police Chief Robert J. Tracy. "I'm grateful to Attorney General Todd Blanche and the Department of Justice for investing in that work. This funding will help us recruit and retain officers, give them better information when they respond to emergencies and equip detectives to solve more violent crimes. Our goal is to improve quality of life in every neighborhood and make St. Louis a safer city for all."
Through the Model Cities Initiative, St. Louis aims to build on this momentum by further expanding its use of cutting-edge public safety technologies, strengthening officer recruitment and retention efforts, and enhancing coordination among federal, state, and local law enforcement partners. Proposed investments include doubling the department's drone fleet, expanding gunshot detection coverage, modernizing its Real-Time Crime Center, and providing additional equipment and resources to frontline officers. Collectively, these efforts are intended to create a sustainable and replicable model for reducing violent crime, enhancing public safety, and improving the quality of life for St. Louis residents.
The MCI takes a whole-of-city approach to public safety, bringing together law enforcement agencies, local government officials, and community partners to develop comprehensive strategies that address the unique public safety challenges facing their communities. The applications submitted by the four selected jurisdictions exemplified the innovative, forward-thinking approaches the Department sought through the initiative.
While each jurisdiction faces unique public safety challenges and brings different priorities, resources, and starting points to the initiative, the Department is confident in the strength of their proposals and their commitment to achieving meaningful results. Despite differing approaches, all four jurisdictions demonstrated a shared determination to reduce violent crime and make their communities safer.
Through the initiative, the Justice Department will work with each jurisdiction to finalize and implement its public safety plan. Funding will support a range of priorities, including hiring sworn and non-sworn law enforcement officers and other personnel to support enforcement, prosecution, and related public safety activities; adopting new and improved technology; purchasing or leasing equipment; enhancing forensic capabilities and capacity; and providing services to address mental health and substance use issues and reduce recidivism.
The Justice Department announced the Model Cities Initiative in June 2026 to build on early successes in jurisdictions such as Memphis, Tennessee, and Washington, D.C., in reducing violence, crime, and disorder. The initiative directs nearly $300 million in federal resources toward comprehensive public safety strategies that strengthen law enforcement, improve coordination among public safety partners, and address the factors contributing to crime and recidivism.
Through these investments, the Justice Department will work alongside local partners to implement sustainable public safety solutions and deliver measurable results. The four Model Cities will help advance the Administration's efforts to reject the status quo of allowing crime and disorder to go unchecked and restore law, order, and safety to communities across the nation.
Jacksonville, Florida; Jackson, Mississippi; and Baton Rouge, Louisiana, have additionally been selected to receive federal investments supporting innovative, comprehensive, locally driven strategies to combat crime and enhance coordination among federal, state, and local law enforcement partners.
The specific departments funded are:
* Baton Rouge - East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana;
* Jackson - City of Jackson, Mississippi;
* Jacksonville - City of Jacksonville Sheriff's Office; and
* St. Louis - St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-awards-st-louis-more-68m-combat-violent-crime-and-restore-law-and-order
* * *
Justice Department Awards St. Louis more than $68M to Combat Violent Crime and Restore Law and Order Through Model Cities Initiative
November 9, 2026
St. Louis Was Selected Out of Nearly 50 American Cities to Receive Federal Funding to Strengthen Law Enforcement and Enhance Public Safety.
-
Today, the Justice Department awarded St. Louis, Missouri, more than $68 million through its Model Cities Initiative (MCI), a flagship effort to reduce violent crime, restore law and order, and strengthen ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release: * * * Justice Department Awards St. Louis more than $68M to Combat Violent Crime and Restore Law and Order Through Model Cities Initiative November 9, 2026 St. Louis Was Selected Out of Nearly 50 American Cities to Receive Federal Funding to Strengthen Law Enforcement and Enhance Public Safety. - Today, the Justice Department awarded St. Louis, Missouri, more than $68 million through its Model Cities Initiative (MCI), a flagship effort to reduce violent crime, restore law and order, and strengthenpublic safety in communities across the country.
"The Model Cities Initiative reflects the Trump Administration's commitment to reducing crime across the country and ensuring the safety of every American," said Attorney General Todd Blanche. "These cities are setting an example of proactive law enforcement that will strengthen the rule of law and improve public safety in their jurisdictions. As violent crime rates continue to fall to historic lows, the Department of Justice is redoubling our efforts to invest in local communities and keep American families safe."
St. Louis was selected, in large part, because of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department's (SLMPD) significant progress in reducing violent crime through data-driven policing, innovative technology, and strong partnerships with federal law enforcement agencies. The department has reported year-to-date reductions of 21% in homicides, 25% in robberies, 14% in auto thefts, and 22% in juvenile shootings. Under the leadership of Police Commissioner Robert Tracy, SLMPD has expanded its use of advanced technologies, including gunshot detection systems and drones, to strengthen investigative capabilities, improve situational awareness, and enhance emergency response times.
"All Missouri families deserve to feel safe in their communities, and strengthening public safety in St. Louis is critical to the success and prosperity of our entire state," said Governor Mike Kehoe of Missouri. "We were proud to partner with the Trump Administration in securing this game-changing investment that will strengthen efforts to crack down on violent crime and support the brave men and women in law enforcement."
"I'm a proud St. Louisan, but for too long violent crime has tormented our communities and left families feeling unsafe," said Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri. "As Missouri's Attorney General and now as a U.S. Senator, I have spent my career fighting for a safer Missouri, and I am so proud that St. Louis was one of the four cities chosen as part of the Model Cities Initiative to support our law enforcement officers and serve as an example for the rest of the nation. We've gotten far too used to seeing violence in our city's headlines, but that doesn't have to be our reality. I am grateful that President Trump, Attorney General Blanche, and the entire Trump Administration are focused on fighting crime, and I look forward to our continued efforts to make life better -- and safer -- in the Show-Me State."
"This federal investment in public safety strengthens our hand in the fight against violent crime in St. Louis, and it supports the work of those who do that job every day," said Missouri Attorney General Hanaway. "We stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the men and women of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, who carry the responsibility of placing themselves between our communities and harm with courage and resolve. "This public safety effort represents our unified commitment to hold violent offenders accountable, strengthen public confidence, and build a safer St. Louis for every family."
"The progress we've made in reducing violent crime belongs to our officers, our law enforcement partners and the St. Louis residents who work alongside us," said St. Louis Metropolitan Police Chief Robert J. Tracy. "I'm grateful to Attorney General Todd Blanche and the Department of Justice for investing in that work. This funding will help us recruit and retain officers, give them better information when they respond to emergencies and equip detectives to solve more violent crimes. Our goal is to improve quality of life in every neighborhood and make St. Louis a safer city for all."
Through the Model Cities Initiative, St. Louis aims to build on this momentum by further expanding its use of cutting-edge public safety technologies, strengthening officer recruitment and retention efforts, and enhancing coordination among federal, state, and local law enforcement partners. Proposed investments include doubling the department's drone fleet, expanding gunshot detection coverage, modernizing its Real-Time Crime Center, and providing additional equipment and resources to frontline officers. Collectively, these efforts are intended to create a sustainable and replicable model for reducing violent crime, enhancing public safety, and improving the quality of life for St. Louis residents.
The MCI takes a whole-of-city approach to public safety, bringing together law enforcement agencies, local government officials, and community partners to develop comprehensive strategies that address the unique public safety challenges facing their communities. The applications submitted by the four selected jurisdictions exemplified the innovative, forward-thinking approaches the Department sought through the initiative.
While each jurisdiction faces unique public safety challenges and brings different priorities, resources, and starting points to the initiative, the Department is confident in the strength of their proposals and their commitment to achieving meaningful results. Despite differing approaches, all four jurisdictions demonstrated a shared determination to reduce violent crime and make their communities safer.
Through the initiative, the Justice Department will work with each jurisdiction to finalize and implement its public safety plan. Funding will support a range of priorities, including hiring sworn and non-sworn law enforcement officers and other personnel to support enforcement, prosecution, and related public safety activities; adopting new and improved technology; purchasing or leasing equipment; enhancing forensic capabilities and capacity; and providing services to address mental health and substance use issues and reduce recidivism.
The Justice Department announced the Model Cities Initiative in June 2026 to build on early successes in jurisdictions such as Memphis, Tennessee, and Washington, D.C., in reducing violence, crime, and disorder. The initiative directs nearly $300 million in federal resources toward comprehensive public safety strategies that strengthen law enforcement, improve coordination among public safety partners, and address the factors contributing to crime and recidivism.
Through these investments, the Justice Department will work alongside local partners to implement sustainable public safety solutions and deliver measurable results. The four Model Cities will help advance the Administration's efforts to reject the status quo of allowing crime and disorder to go unchecked and restore law, order, and safety to communities across the nation.
Jacksonville, Florida; Jackson, Mississippi; and Baton Rouge, Louisiana, have additionally been selected to receive federal investments supporting innovative, comprehensive, locally driven strategies to combat crime and enhance coordination among federal, state, and local law enforcement partners.
The specific departments funded are:
* Baton Rouge - East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana;
* Jackson - City of Jackson, Mississippi;
* Jacksonville - City of Jacksonville Sheriff's Office; and
* St. Louis - St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-awards-st-louis-more-68m-combat-violent-crime-and-restore-law-and-order
FCC Chairman Carr Announces New Legal Advisor
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following news release:
* * *
Chairman Carr Announces New Legal Advisor
WASHINGTON, November 9, 2026--Today, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr announced that Will Holloway will join his office as a legal advisor. Most recently, Will served as a legal advisor in the Office of Commissioner Trusty.
Chairman Carr issued the following statement:
"It is an honor to have Will Holloway join our office as a legal advisor. Will has been doing excellent work across the FCC for many years now, including most recently serving as a legal advisor ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following news release: * * * Chairman Carr Announces New Legal Advisor WASHINGTON, November 9, 2026--Today, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr announced that Will Holloway will join his office as a legal advisor. Most recently, Will served as a legal advisor in the Office of Commissioner Trusty. Chairman Carr issued the following statement: "It is an honor to have Will Holloway join our office as a legal advisor. Will has been doing excellent work across the FCC for many years now, including most recently serving as a legal advisorfor Commissioner Trusty. Will began his career at the FCC as an honors attorney, and I look forward to drawing on his counsel on a range of matters."
Additional Background Information:
During his time at the FCC, Will has served in a number of important roles. As a legal advisor for Commissioner Trusty, he led legal and policy analysis on wireless, space, international, engineering and technology, and public safety issues. Prior to this role, he served as Counsel for the FCC's Broadband Data Task Force and provided legal and policy support on matters related to the implementation of the Broadband DATA Act and the Commission's Broadband Data Collection. Before that, he served in the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau as an Attorney Advisor focusing on broadband mapping and wireless infrastructure. Will initially joined the FCC as an honors attorney in the Wireless Bureau's Competition and Infrastructure Policy Division. He received his Juris Doctorate from the Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law and his undergraduate degree from Sewanee: The University of the South.
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-426658A1.pdf
* * *
Chairman Carr Announces New Legal Advisor
WASHINGTON, November 9, 2026--Today, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr announced that Will Holloway will join his office as a legal advisor. Most recently, Will served as a legal advisor in the Office of Commissioner Trusty.
Chairman Carr issued the following statement:
"It is an honor to have Will Holloway join our office as a legal advisor. Will has been doing excellent work across the FCC for many years now, including most recently serving as a legal advisor ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following news release: * * * Chairman Carr Announces New Legal Advisor WASHINGTON, November 9, 2026--Today, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr announced that Will Holloway will join his office as a legal advisor. Most recently, Will served as a legal advisor in the Office of Commissioner Trusty. Chairman Carr issued the following statement: "It is an honor to have Will Holloway join our office as a legal advisor. Will has been doing excellent work across the FCC for many years now, including most recently serving as a legal advisorfor Commissioner Trusty. Will began his career at the FCC as an honors attorney, and I look forward to drawing on his counsel on a range of matters."
Additional Background Information:
During his time at the FCC, Will has served in a number of important roles. As a legal advisor for Commissioner Trusty, he led legal and policy analysis on wireless, space, international, engineering and technology, and public safety issues. Prior to this role, he served as Counsel for the FCC's Broadband Data Task Force and provided legal and policy support on matters related to the implementation of the Broadband DATA Act and the Commission's Broadband Data Collection. Before that, he served in the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau as an Attorney Advisor focusing on broadband mapping and wireless infrastructure. Will initially joined the FCC as an honors attorney in the Wireless Bureau's Competition and Infrastructure Policy Division. He received his Juris Doctorate from the Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law and his undergraduate degree from Sewanee: The University of the South.
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-426658A1.pdf
ERDC Researchers Develop "Bug-Crete" to Harden Sand for Military Construction
VICKSBURG, Mississippi, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center issued the following news story:
* * *
ERDC researchers develop "Bug-Crete" to harden sand for military construction
By Kaley Webb, public affairs specialist
VICKSBURG, Miss. -- Researchers at the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) are testing an innovative technology that could allow military forces to transform naturally occurring sand into a hardened, stone-like surface using bacteria, fertilizer, calcium chloride and water. The technology is based on microbial induced carbonate ... Show Full Article VICKSBURG, Mississippi, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center issued the following news story: * * * ERDC researchers develop "Bug-Crete" to harden sand for military construction By Kaley Webb, public affairs specialist VICKSBURG, Miss. -- Researchers at the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) are testing an innovative technology that could allow military forces to transform naturally occurring sand into a hardened, stone-like surface using bacteria, fertilizer, calcium chloride and water. The technology is based on microbial induced carbonateprecipitation (MICP), and the resulting stabilized sand is useful for supporting military operations in remote environments where conventional construction is difficult. The technology, known as "Bug Crete," uses naturally occurring soil bacteria to bind individual grains of sand together through a process that produces calcium carbonate, essentially creating limestone between the sand particles.
"We've basically taken sand and turned it into sandstone," said Dr. Jesse Doyle, a research civil engineer with the ERDC's Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory.
The process begins by growing the bacteria and then spraying them onto loose sand. The bacteria move into the spaces between the sand grains before researchers apply urea and calcium chloride to feed the bacteria and provide the calcium needed for the process.
As the bacteria metabolize the area, they produce carbonate ions. Those interact with the calcium to form tiny deposits of calcium carbonate between the grains, binding the sand together.
"You get under a microscope, there's little tiny bits of limestone in between every little gap between the sand, and it holds it all together," said Doyle.
While sandstone can take thousands or even millions of years to form naturally, researchers are producing a similar hardened material in a matter of days.
"We've taken geologic time and condensed it down to human time," said Doyle.
The potential military application is particularly significant in remote and resource constrained environments, where transporting traditional construction materials and heavy equipment can be difficult, costly and time-consuming.
"The dream is that you could use this in the Pacific or somewhere where you have limited materials," Doyle said. "I don't need a lot of heavy construction equipment. I literally just need a sprayer and a mixing tank."
On a remote island, for example, sand and water may be readily available while rock and aggregate would have to be transported hundreds or thousands of miles. The rock/ aggregate will be used for military operations in remote environments.
"I can take naturally occurring sand, and I can just make it hard right where it is," said Doyle.
That could reduce the amount of material and equipment military forces need to transport into an austere environment.
"If I'm on a little island, I can't just go buy rock because there is no rock on this island," Doyle said. "It's 2,000 miles that way, and you have to wait on a boat, and that costs a lot of time and money."
The team has also experimented with salt water, an important consideration for potential applications in maritime environments. While salt water can slow the process, researchers said testing showed the technology could still work.
Previous testing has also demonstrated the hardened material's ability to withstand repeated aircraft loading. They have tested the surface using a C-130 aircraft tire configuration and completed approximately 1,200 passes, representing about 600 aircraft sorties, while remaining below the established failure threshold.
Now, the team plans to increase the challenge.
"We're going to go up to the bigger aircraft," said Doyle. We're going to go to the C-17."
The upcoming test will use a full six-wheel gear configuration, placing approximately a quarter-million pounds on the test section. Researchers will also evaluate different configurations, including stabilized sand paired with concrete, airfield matting and other pavement materials.
The work brings together experts from across ERDC, including researchers from the Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory, Environmental Laboratory and Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.
ERDC's involvement in biomineralization technology extends to its collaboration with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), exploring the potential use of biological processes for ground hardening and military construction. Through DARPA's MEDUSA program, executed by Biomason ERDC researchers helped explore how the emerging technology could be applied to military operations. Maneesh Gupta of the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) served as the program's technical point of contact.
ERDC is also evaluating different approaches to the process. In addition to its internally developed method using freshly grown bacteria, the team is working with the Air Force Research Laboratory on a version using freeze-dried bacteria that can be mixed with water in the field.
Each method presents potential advantages and tradeoffs. Fresh bacteria have demonstrated stronger performance in testing, while freeze-dried or frozen approaches could simplify transportation and reduce the equipment and expertise required in the field.
Researchers plan to construct different systems using the same sand and test them under similar conditions, allowing for a direct comparison of their performance.
This technique can also be tailored to the mission. A surface intended to support large aircraft requires significantly more treatment than one designed for tents, personnel, pickup trucks or tactical vehicles. Lighter applications could potentially be completed in only a few days while requiring fewer resources.
Ultimately, researchers are exploring whether biology can give military forces another tool for rapidly building infrastructure in places where conventional construction methods are difficult. Rather than transporting large quantities of rock and aggregating to an isolated location, the material beneath soldiers' feet could become part of the solution.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.erdc.usace.army.mil/Media/News-Stories/Article/4645057/erdc-researchers-develop-bug-crete-to-harden-sand-for-military-construction/
* * *
ERDC researchers develop "Bug-Crete" to harden sand for military construction
By Kaley Webb, public affairs specialist
VICKSBURG, Miss. -- Researchers at the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) are testing an innovative technology that could allow military forces to transform naturally occurring sand into a hardened, stone-like surface using bacteria, fertilizer, calcium chloride and water. The technology is based on microbial induced carbonate ... Show Full Article VICKSBURG, Mississippi, Nov. 10 -- The U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center issued the following news story: * * * ERDC researchers develop "Bug-Crete" to harden sand for military construction By Kaley Webb, public affairs specialist VICKSBURG, Miss. -- Researchers at the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) are testing an innovative technology that could allow military forces to transform naturally occurring sand into a hardened, stone-like surface using bacteria, fertilizer, calcium chloride and water. The technology is based on microbial induced carbonateprecipitation (MICP), and the resulting stabilized sand is useful for supporting military operations in remote environments where conventional construction is difficult. The technology, known as "Bug Crete," uses naturally occurring soil bacteria to bind individual grains of sand together through a process that produces calcium carbonate, essentially creating limestone between the sand particles.
"We've basically taken sand and turned it into sandstone," said Dr. Jesse Doyle, a research civil engineer with the ERDC's Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory.
The process begins by growing the bacteria and then spraying them onto loose sand. The bacteria move into the spaces between the sand grains before researchers apply urea and calcium chloride to feed the bacteria and provide the calcium needed for the process.
As the bacteria metabolize the area, they produce carbonate ions. Those interact with the calcium to form tiny deposits of calcium carbonate between the grains, binding the sand together.
"You get under a microscope, there's little tiny bits of limestone in between every little gap between the sand, and it holds it all together," said Doyle.
While sandstone can take thousands or even millions of years to form naturally, researchers are producing a similar hardened material in a matter of days.
"We've taken geologic time and condensed it down to human time," said Doyle.
The potential military application is particularly significant in remote and resource constrained environments, where transporting traditional construction materials and heavy equipment can be difficult, costly and time-consuming.
"The dream is that you could use this in the Pacific or somewhere where you have limited materials," Doyle said. "I don't need a lot of heavy construction equipment. I literally just need a sprayer and a mixing tank."
On a remote island, for example, sand and water may be readily available while rock and aggregate would have to be transported hundreds or thousands of miles. The rock/ aggregate will be used for military operations in remote environments.
"I can take naturally occurring sand, and I can just make it hard right where it is," said Doyle.
That could reduce the amount of material and equipment military forces need to transport into an austere environment.
"If I'm on a little island, I can't just go buy rock because there is no rock on this island," Doyle said. "It's 2,000 miles that way, and you have to wait on a boat, and that costs a lot of time and money."
The team has also experimented with salt water, an important consideration for potential applications in maritime environments. While salt water can slow the process, researchers said testing showed the technology could still work.
Previous testing has also demonstrated the hardened material's ability to withstand repeated aircraft loading. They have tested the surface using a C-130 aircraft tire configuration and completed approximately 1,200 passes, representing about 600 aircraft sorties, while remaining below the established failure threshold.
Now, the team plans to increase the challenge.
"We're going to go up to the bigger aircraft," said Doyle. We're going to go to the C-17."
The upcoming test will use a full six-wheel gear configuration, placing approximately a quarter-million pounds on the test section. Researchers will also evaluate different configurations, including stabilized sand paired with concrete, airfield matting and other pavement materials.
The work brings together experts from across ERDC, including researchers from the Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory, Environmental Laboratory and Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.
ERDC's involvement in biomineralization technology extends to its collaboration with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), exploring the potential use of biological processes for ground hardening and military construction. Through DARPA's MEDUSA program, executed by Biomason ERDC researchers helped explore how the emerging technology could be applied to military operations. Maneesh Gupta of the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) served as the program's technical point of contact.
ERDC is also evaluating different approaches to the process. In addition to its internally developed method using freshly grown bacteria, the team is working with the Air Force Research Laboratory on a version using freeze-dried bacteria that can be mixed with water in the field.
Each method presents potential advantages and tradeoffs. Fresh bacteria have demonstrated stronger performance in testing, while freeze-dried or frozen approaches could simplify transportation and reduce the equipment and expertise required in the field.
Researchers plan to construct different systems using the same sand and test them under similar conditions, allowing for a direct comparison of their performance.
This technique can also be tailored to the mission. A surface intended to support large aircraft requires significantly more treatment than one designed for tents, personnel, pickup trucks or tactical vehicles. Lighter applications could potentially be completed in only a few days while requiring fewer resources.
Ultimately, researchers are exploring whether biology can give military forces another tool for rapidly building infrastructure in places where conventional construction methods are difficult. Rather than transporting large quantities of rock and aggregating to an isolated location, the material beneath soldiers' feet could become part of the solution.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.erdc.usace.army.mil/Media/News-Stories/Article/4645057/erdc-researchers-develop-bug-crete-to-harden-sand-for-military-construction/