A new MBTA locomotive procurement is drawing pushback from transit advocates, who warned Thursday that it could undercut long-term rail modernization goals.
The MBTA in February issued a request for proposals seeking 10 battery-electric locomotives and 10 new diesel engines that meet federal “Tier 4” emissions standards, as officials look to replace an aging commuter rail fleet and reduce pollution.
The procurement, which includes options for up to 50 additional locomotives, comes as the T faces a “fleet cliff,” with about half its engines expected to reach the end of their useful life in the 2030s.
The MBTA’s Capital Improvement Plan, released in March, budgets $373.7 million for the procurement, and the agency says it expects to award the contract this summer.
At an MBTA Board meeting on Thursday, TransitMatters Regional Rail lead Janet Cheung said the plan reflects a disconnect between the T’s capital spending and its long-term service goals.
“Our question to the MBTA and to the board today is: Is the Commonwealth committed to delivering Regional Rail or not?” Cheung said. “Our review of the FY27-31 MBTA CIP, and the recent approval of the commuter rail rolling stock procurement, suggest that, at present, the T’s capital investments are not aligned with that goal, pointing to a technology-driven, rather than service-driven, approach.”
In written comments on the MBTA’s five-year Capital Investment Plan, TransitMatters sharpened that critique, warning that “the proposed FY 2027–2031 Capital Investment Plan (CIP) makes costly decisions that prioritize legacy constraints over the established 2019 Rail Vision.”
That 2019 plan contemplated the possibility of an entire network run on electricity through overhead wires.
The group took aim at the locomotive RFP, urging officials to rethink the mix of equipment being pursued.
“Amend the locomotive RFP to replace 10 planned battery-electric locomotives (BEL) with 10 proven electric locomotives” and “decline the option for 50 additional diesel and battery-electric locomotives to preserve capital for future electric multiple unit (EMU) procurement,” the letter states.
Battery electric locomotives are single, heavy engines powered by batteries that haul conventional, unpowered coaches, while an electric multiple unit is a self-propelled trainset with electric motors distributed throughout the carriers.
EMUs are faster and can often carry more people, but require overhead catenary lines or a third rail, while the battery electric locomotives can be used on non-electrified track by charging their batteries, reducing the infrastructure investment.
Advocates also cautioned against investing in what they described as uncertain technology, writing, “Battery-Electric Risk — the purchase of BELs is a speculative investment on unproven, novel technology — a strategy that the MBTA has done repeatedly in the past and has resulted in less reliable equipment.”
The MBTA says the procurement reflects the realities of its current system and the urgency of replacing older trains before they begin to fail in larger numbers.
Responding directly to the criticism, General Manager Phil Eng emphasized that the agency is balancing immediate service needs with longer-term decarbonization goals.
“Right now we are running regional rail service and maximizing the equipment we have, maximizing the crews that we have, and taking full advantage of the infrastructure,” he said. “And in all cases, we need to continue to improve that, because, long term, just for reliability and to maintain the frequency, all of that needs upgrades.”
Eng noted that while the MBTA ultimately aims to electrify its system, only one corridor — the Providence Line — currently has overhead power infrastructure in place.
“The unfortunate thing is, we don’t have electric power throughout the whole system. We only have it on the Providence corridor where Amtrak runs today,” he said. “So for me to just buy electric without the money to upgrade and electrify all of our territory, does not get us to where we need to be, hence the battery electric.”
The inclusion of battery-electric locomotives, he said, is intended to bridge that gap by allowing trains to operate on both electrified and non-electrified segments.
“The battery electric allows us to electrify Providence, but also start to test out how battery electric can support us on other corridors,” Eng said.
At the same time, the MBTA plans to continue relying in part on diesel power — albeit cleaner versions — as it transitions.
“The procurement that we’re moving forward with, that TransitMatters is referred to, is going to include, initially, 10 ‘Tier 4’ diesel locomotives. They are the cleanest, 85-90% cleaner than the existing locomotives we have today, but they’re also far quieter,” Eng said.
The agency’s approach comes as it faces mounting pressure from an aging fleet.
Eng framed the locomotive purchase as one piece of a broader strategy that also includes track upgrades, bidirectional service and incremental electrification.
“So it really is a phased approach, but I don’t want to wait until I have enough money to fully electrify and modernize one line, because that could be decades,” he said.
TransitMatters, however, argued that without a clearer service plan, those phased investments risk locking the system into outdated technology.
“Service must drive investment. The MBTA is making rolling stock decisions without a service plan,” the group wrote.
The debate underscores a central tension facing the T: how to modernize quickly enough to maintain reliable service today while building toward a faster, more frequent, and fully electrified rail network in the future.
Sam Drysdale is a reporter for State House News Service and State Affairs Pro Massachusetts. Reach her at sdrysdale@statehousenews.com.