AI generated image
U.S. Customs and Border Protection has proposed a rule that would require every railroad running trains into or out of the United States to send the agency a full electronic list of the passengers and crew on board before the train leaves the station. The proposal, placed on public inspection at the Federal Register on Oct. 9 and scheduled for formal publication on Oct. 13, would turn a voluntary program that only one passenger railroad still uses into a legal obligation, and it would reach far beyond passenger service to the roughly 70,000 freight trains CBP expects to cross the border each year.
For anyone who has flown into the country, the idea will sound familiar. Airlines and cruise lines have transmitted passenger manifests to CBP for years under the Advance Passenger Information System. Trains have been the exception. Under current regulations, a railroad must report a train’s arrival and, for freight, send cargo data two hours ahead, but nothing requires it to tell CBP in advance who is riding, and nothing at all is required when a train leaves the country. The proposal closes that gap, and CBP says in the document that a parallel rule for cross-border buses is already being drafted.
Nothing changes yet. This is a notice of proposed rulemaking, comments are open until Dec. 14, 2026, and the requirements would apply only after CBP publishes a final rule.
What a railroad would have to hand over, and when
The rule creates two separate transmissions. The first is a notice of the train itself, due at least 24 hours before it reaches the border crossing, with the train and car numbers, the full route, estimated times at the origin, the crossing and the destination, and a 24-hour emergency contact. The second is the traveler list, due no later than 60 minutes before departure, covering every passenger and every crew member, including the conductor and engineer. For each person, the carrier would send:
- Identity: full name, date of birth, sex, citizenship and country of residence.
- Travel document: type, number, issuing country and expiration date.
- Trip details: the complete itinerary and, for anyone not merely passing through, an address in the United States.
- Where they apply: an alien registration number, reservation locator, Known Traveler Number or redress number, plus baggage tag and seat information if the railroad has it, and a phone number and email address if the traveler provides them.
Changes would have to be sent before the train leaves its next stop, and anything that changes after departure would have to reach CBP before the train crosses. A schedule slip of 30 minutes or more would oblige the railroad to call CBP to confirm that inspection officers will be ready. The only group carved out is active-duty U.S. military personnel traveling on orders aboard a train chartered by what the document calls the Department of War.
CBP would answer each transmission one of two ways: accepted, or call us before departure. The agency could recommend that a railroad not board a flagged traveler, but the proposal leaves the final boarding decision with the carrier. Railroads would also have to check each traveler’s documents against the data they sent. Violations would fall under the Tariff Act’s penalty provision, 19 U.S.C. 1436, which allows civil fines and, in some cases, seizure of the train.
A passenger rule that is mostly about freight
The headline is about travelers, but CBP’s own numbers show where the weight of the rule falls. Freight trains outnumber passenger trains at the border by roughly 20 to one, and every one of them carries a crew that would now need to be listed in advance. No freight railroad has ever joined the voluntary program, according to the proposal, which means the freight industry is starting from zero.
| Year | Passenger trains crossing the border |
|---|---|
| 2019 | 3,293 |
| 2023 | 3,172 |
| 2024 | 2,817 |
| 2025 onward (CBP projection) | 3,497 a year |
The cost estimates follow the same pattern. CBP puts the annual cost for passenger railroads at $58,430 and about 1,078 hours of staff time, against $380,495 and about 7,022 hours for freight carriers, in both cases for 2026 through 2030. Those are modest sums by federal rulemaking standards, and the White House budget office classified the proposal as a significant regulatory action but not an economically significant one. The proposal states that CBP identified no new costs for passengers, since the work of collecting and sending the data falls on the railroads.
There is also a facilitation argument in the document. CBP’s analysis puts border processing time for a passenger train at about 60 minutes before advance data and about 30 minutes for trains that send it, offset in part by roughly 10 minutes of new vetting work per passenger train on CBP’s side. Whether riders actually see shorter stops will depend on staffing at each crossing, which the rule does not address.
The questions travelers are likely to ask
Does this apply to me if I take the train between the U.S. and Canada? If the final rule looks like the proposal, yes. It covers everyone on a train arriving in or departing from the United States, U.S. citizens and green card holders included, as well as trains that pass through U.S. territory in transit. The document does not single out particular routes or railroads.
Do I have to do anything differently right now? No. The rule is only proposed. In practice, if it is finalized, the change most travelers would notice is being asked for passport and contact details when booking or checking in, much as airlines do now.
Why would CBP want departure data? The stated purpose is security and smoother processing. As a matter of analysis, an outbound manifest also gives CBP a record of who leaves the country by rail, the kind of data DHS uses to match entries with exits. That matters for visa holders, because departure records are how the government tells a lawful exit from an overstay. The DHS inspector general’s recent report on millions of unworked overstay leads shows how much weight the agency places on that matching, though the rail proposal itself does not frame its purpose that way.
Could a railroad refuse to let me board? Possibly. CBP could recommend against boarding someone, and the carrier would decide.
Will my information be kept? The proposal relies on CBP’s existing passenger-data systems and privacy documentation for the data elements. Readers concerned about retention periods should look to those privacy filings and raise the issue in comments, since the proposed rule text does not itself set a retention schedule.
Why a 2005 pilot is becoming a mandate now
CBP launched the voluntary rail program in 2005. Over two decades, three passenger railroads sent data at one point or another, and only one still does. That track record is the agency’s core argument: a voluntary system that most carriers have ignored leaves the land border’s rail crossings as the one major mode of commercial travel without advance traveler screening. The legal footing is customs law rather than immigration law. The proposal rests on the Tariff Act’s arrival and departure reporting provisions, 19 U.S.C. 1431 and 1433, rather than on the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Our read is that the rule is unlikely to draw the kind of litigation that has followed this year’s higher-profile immigration measures. It extends an established practice to a small corner of cross-border travel, and the costs CBP projects are small. The more likely friction points are practical: whether freight railroads can build or certify systems to send crew lists for tens of thousands of trains, how the 60-minute deadline works for passengers who buy tickets at the last minute, and whether the companion bus rule follows quickly. That bus proposal, which would bring cross-border coach lines under the same kind of reporting, is the next document to watch.
Comments can be filed on the Federal Register document under docket number USCBP-2026-0992 until Dec. 14, 2026. Rail carriers, travel groups and privacy advocates are the commenters most likely to shape the final version.
Immigration Analytics will update this story when CBP publishes the companion bus proposal or a final rail rule. This article is for general information and is not legal advice. The situation is changing quickly, so please consult an immigration attorney about your specific case.
Sources
- U.S. Customs and Border Protection, “Advance Traveler Information for Rail,” notice of proposed rulemaking, 91 FR 64840 (public inspection Oct. 9, 2026; publication Oct. 13, 2026)
- Immigration Analytics, coverage of the DHS inspector general’s report on visa overstay leads (Oct. 9, 2026)
About the Author
Discover more from Immigration Analytics
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
