News
The Boring Co.’s projects are making transit departments rethink above-ground travel
The Boring Company’s underground tunneling projects are widely-appealing to Transit Departments and Authorities across the United States. Because of the sustainable tone of Elon Musk’s Boring Company, along with the efficiency of an Express-based system, agencies responsible for solving the issue of public passenger transportation are considering underground options more often than ever before. Above-ground public travel options, like Monorails or buses, are being ditched for underground options, and subways are outdated and not widely considered by these agencies.
Elon Musk’s underground tunneling venture has made it from California to Las Vegas, and now, back to California again, as the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) is considering a new underground tunneling project from the Boring Company. Later today, on February 3rd, the entity will consider the Boring Company’s submission for an underground tunnel that would take travelers from several different locations to the Ontario International Airport, located in Southern California. While the Boring Company has already received the equivalent of preliminary approval from the Transportation Authority, more questions are being asked to secure the tunnel’s place in the densely-populated and traffic-heavy area of Southern California.
In September 2020, the SBCTA Board of Directors approved the release of a Request for Qualifications, seeking qualified entities to submit a Statement of Qualifications for a potential tunneling project in San Bernardino County. According to documents released by the SBCTA, the tunnel will run from the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station to the Ontario International Airport, procuring a design-build and transitional operate-maintain methodology that will have the two transit systems running concurrently to complement one another.
The 31-minute ride from the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station to the Ontario International Airport could be expedited thanks to a new Boring Company tunnel proposal. (Google Maps)
The only thing is, not many companies with expertise in tunneling stepped forward. And by not many, only one did: The Boring Company.
The SBCTA wrote:
“In response to the RFQ, one Statement of Qualifications (SOQ), from The Boring Company, was received on November 30, 2020. A review panel was assembled involving a technical review team and an executive oversight team consisting of representatives from the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the City of Ontario, the OIAA, Omnitrans, and SBCTA. The SOQ was deemed responsive and passed all the minimum requirements of the RFQ.”
After an initial assessment from SBCTA Board Members, the Boring Company met the minimum requirements to qualify for further scrutiny. The Boring Company’s Statement of Qualifications only received a score of 58/100. Still, more information regarding financing, timing, ridership, and how the system will operate in conjunction with the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station will likely increase that score. These issues are set to be brought up during the Board of Directors meeting later today.
Ditching Above-Ground Systems for Underground Tunnels
Above-ground systems of transportation have been around for ages. Monorails, trains, and other large-scale passenger transportation systems have been aligned with cost-effective and efficient travel for decades, but a new era has come in thanks to Elon Musk. While many argue that the Boring Company’s system is a simple revision of a subway, it is far from identical. The Boring Company loops use Tesla’s all-electric vehicles for passenger transport, eliminating jam-packed, unsanitary, and oftentimes, uncomfortable situations where underground travel is offered.
Sitting in an automotive seat, likely joined by colleagues, or in some cases, complete strangers, is much more comfortable in a smaller setting, especially as the COVID-19 pandemic rolls on. Additionally, the express-system eliminates the need for unneeded stops, decreasing total travel time.
While the San Bernardino project seems to indicate that the Boring Company will work with an already-operational monorail system, other projects have completely abandoned the idea of using an above-ground Monorail system. One of the most notable is the Boring Company’s Vegas Loop. After the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority (LVCVA) purchased the bankrupt Vegas Monorail system in 2020, it opened the door for the Boring Company to expand its possible tunneling to property exclusive to the Monorail.
The Boring Company has several other large-scale projects in the proposal stage, including one in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and Chicago, Illinois. These projects are in the early stages and will be subjected to the speed at which local authorities move. Some agencies are quicker to get the ball rolling on public transit projects than others. For example, a tunnel between Baltimore and Washington D.C. would eliminate the need to travel on the Maryland Transit Authority’s Lightrail system, a cost-effective, but not time-effective, way to travel from suburbs of Baltimore County to the Nation’s Capitol. This project has been in a stalemate for several years but would expedite the travel time from Baltimore’s Camden Yards, home of the Orioles, to Washington. The Boring Company’s website indicates that an environmental review is pending.
Underground tunnels may be the way of the future, much like electric cars. At the forefront, a South African-born entrepreneur named Elon Musk is leading the charge, changing how human beings will travel from one point to another.
The San Bernardino County Transportation Authority’s Agenda is available below, with The Boring Company’s consideration beginning on page 13.
Tbc San Bernardino Tunnel by Joey Klender on Scribd
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
