In the age defined by instant communication and real-time digital experiences, a tremendous amount of information is available at our fingertips at any given moment. I can track every step of an online pizza delivery, from oven to doorstep, yet there is often no way to track the status of a regulatory request that takes months to process. Regulatory culture, particularly at the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), remains stubbornly opaque and outdated. These procedures are frustrating and impede progress. It’s time for 21st century reforms that make the regulatory process objective, streamlined, and transparent.
Railroads remain one of the foundational pillars of the American economy, carrying 28 percent of the nation’s freight with remarkable efficiency. However, despite its importance, freight rail in the U.S. is held back by burdensome red tape. Unlike many competing industries, railroads shoulder the full responsibility of upgrading and maintaining their own infrastructure. Government regulators are concerned about the industry’s slow growth, but fail to realize that one of the greatest obstacles to modernization is the regulatory procedures themselves. Specifically, the FRA’s waiver process, a tool meant to allow flexibility, has instead become a significant barrier to progress.
By design, the FRA’s waiver system affords relief from rigid regulations to test new technologies or procedures without compromising safety. This approach has allowed railroads to pilot technology and practices that benefit the economy and lower costs. To receive a waiver, a railroad must demonstrate that the proposal is “in the public interest and consistent with railroad safety.” This admirable goal, in practice, can lead to inconsistent outcomes.
In recent years, the waiver process has become increasingly politicized, unpredictable, and slow, and the need for reform is clear. In some cases, railroads have waited over a year for the FRA to make a decision. These waiver delays halt innovation and deployment of new technology, increasing costs that could be passed on to consumers. In a system this difficult and slow, applicants need the ability to track their waiver status and review the FRA analysis in real time, the way we track an Amazon order from warehouse to doorstep.
Delays aren’t the only problem. As recent denials of Automatic Track Inspection (ATI) technology demonstrate, previously granted waivers can be denied by the FRA despite improving safety. The FRA offered little explanation for denying a formerly approved waiver for ATI, ultimately leading to a legal battle. Twice the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the FRA’s reasoning for denial was deficient, and eventually overturned the FRA’s decision and approved the waiver. In combination with delays, these denials stifle innovation, drive up costs, and limit safety improvements, all of which are burdens that are passed on to consumers. These failures demonstrate the need for a new FRA waiver system built on objectivity and consistency.
The ATI denial highlights a deeper issue. Even when the FRA wants to promote technology, politics has influenced the process.
ATI technology was developed by the railroads with help from the FRA and has been shown to detect exponentially more track defects than traditional visual inspections, helping reduce derailments and significantly improving safety. Despite its own role in developing the technology, the FRA abruptly began rejecting ATI waivers in 2021. The FRA’s reversal came amid political opposition to reducing manual inspections, despite prior waivers showing that ATI combined with reduced manual inspections measurably improved safety. In a later move, the FRA proposed mandating ATI in addition to manual inspections. This rule would reward railroad innovation with increased costs and burdens, without considering that the technology was developed to improve efficiency as well as safety.
Politics has crept into a process that should be focused on safety. It’s time to strip it out. In a reformed waiver process, waivers with a demonstrated record of safety and effectiveness should be impossible to reject for political reasons. No other industry could succeed in these conditions. If an Uber driver completes a ride safely and gets five stars, it would make no sense for the app to block them from accepting the same ride the next day when nothing has changed. Likewise, railroad companies safely moving freight with innovative technology and practices should be able to continue doing so. Previously approved waivers should be matched to objective requirements. If a waiver meets the predetermined criteria, it should be automatically reapproved, with any expansions undergoing an accelerated review.
The waiver process should be streamlined, with clear timelines and real-time updates the petitioner can track and understand. The FRA must follow established deadlines and demonstrate transparency by publishing deliberations to ensure fair decision making with clear rationales for petitioners to review. Like nearly everything else in today’s digital world, the waiver process should be transparent, efficient, and managed in real time.
The FRA has a choice. It can continue to restrict innovation at the cost of safety, risking industry stagnation, or it can build a regulatory framework that encourages modernization, promotes growth, and leaves politics at the station.
