The Public Utilities Commission convened a virtual hearing on July 8, 2025, to review progress on template construction and maintenance agreements and preliminary engineering agreements for public rail crossings under the commission’s jurisdiction. Administrative Law Judge Melody Murbaba set a deadline for participants to meet at least once by Aug. 8 and said a further hearing is scheduled for Sept. 8 at 10 a.m.

The issue matters because standardized, commission-approved templates are intended to reduce repeated negotiation costs and speed approval for highway-rail and other public crossing projects across Colorado. Parties said the Union Pacific and BNSF templates are close to final, and participants will next focus on a grade-separated crossings template and whether a single preliminary engineering agreement can be used across project types.

“We are still working out some of the final issues,” Caitlin Warner, counsel for BNSF, told the hearing, reporting meetings on May 28 and June 30 but noting outstanding provisions such as force majeure language. Union Pacific’s Sean Lanka said the railroad had incorporated changes from the June 30 meeting and “I just got those sent out this morning,” indicating updated redlines had been circulated to stakeholders.

Several local governments and utilities joined the proceeding to monitor and participate. Nathan Cash, attorney for Washington County and the city of Yuma, said his clients had filed notices of appearance but “we didn’t receive an invite to either the May 28 meeting or the June 30 meeting,” and he asked to be included in future scheduling and document exchanges.

Murbaba, the administrative law judge assigned to the case, repeated procedural expectations: participants who have filed a notice to participate must ensure an accurate email in eFilings so staff can send meeting invitations; she set Aug. 8 as the latest date by which participants should meet again and said she will issue a short written decision outlining deadlines and next steps.

On the substance, participants agreed the next drafting priority is a construction and maintenance template for grade-separated crossings. The group also discussed whether a single preliminary engineering agreement could cover diverse crossing projects; David C. LaPlante advised that preliminary engineering agreements are generally separate from upgrade and grade-separated agreements and deferred to engineering teams for a technical determination.

The commission does not typically review the fine-grain terms of private agreements, Murbaba said, but she signaled an intent to accept consensus templates into the docket and make approved templates publicly available so they can be used by agencies and railroads without repeated formal proceedings. She cautioned the process is “very odd procedurally” and that she is still determining how to manage approvals and web posting for templates as they are finalized.

The judge reminded participants that the original plan to start using templates in November did not occur and said parties should seek any necessary waivers for ongoing cases. She also noted the Office of Administrative Hearings will provide technical assistance for service and invitation issues; the staff contact provided on the record was Lisonbee Torvik, (303) 894-2885.

With deadlines and a September hearing on the calendar, participants were asked to continue bilateral and multilateral drafting and to file any consensus templates in this proceeding when ready. The hearing was adjourned after the parties confirmed the schedule and outstanding drafting items.