In the realm of public policy, momentum is everything—a force not unlike the steel wheels of a train, steadily turning toward a destination. For months, advocates for railway safety and efficiency have closely watched the Department of Transportation as it prepared to approve a waiver for Automatic Track Inspections (ATI), a technology poised to modernize how America maintains and monitors its vast rail networks. ATI systems harness advanced sensors and data analytics to scan tracks with greater frequency and precision than traditional manual inspections. These technologies promise to catch defects sooner, reduce costly delays and, most critically, save lives by preventing accidents before they happen.
The ATI waiver under review would allow railroads to use a combination of both visual track inspections and ATI. The ATI systems, mounted on trains or track vehicles scan for cracks, misalignments, and other hazards at speeds of up to 60 mph. The data is sent instantly to maintenance teams, who can respond rapidly to emerging threats. Supporters of ATI note that current manual inspections, while vital, are labor intensive and subject to human error. Automation, they argue, doesn’t replace human skill—it enhances it, supporting inspectors with actionable intelligence and freeing them to focus on complex maintenance tasks.
Pilot programs, like the one conducted bt BNSF that lowered the track geometrydefect rate by 88%, are a prime example what can be accomplished through ATI. The pilot program didn’t stop at better tracks though—ATI also helped speed up rail traffic, which means faster shipping and cheaper goods, all of which contributes to a stronger economy. With rail traffic increasing and infrastructure aging, these benefits are more urgent than ever.
Unions, on the other hand, want to defend jobs, despite the efficiency gains, despite the safety gains, and despite the fact that the ATI inspections don’t replace human inspections. However, given the role that unions play, their defense of these jobs makes sense—they can see the long-run writing on the wall. This is currently the worst form of ATI that will ever exist, and it already has the ability to make railroads safer and more efficient. In the long run, humans won’t be necessary for inspections, just as lamplighters are no longer necessary to kindle electric lights. However, in this case that date is so far away that we can’t even forecast a day when human inspections won’t be needed. What we do know is that railroads can currently be made safer by allowing more ATI today. And, because ATIs can actually identify more flaws than human inspections, there will likely be more jobs available for maintenance.
Rail safety as a national conversation has momentum. However, administration officials have pulled the brake lever, and are now slow walking the ATI waiver.
This slowdown is more than a bureaucratic inconvenience. It’s a missed opportunity to transform how we protect those who rely on the rails every day. ATI technology can help in early detection and the prioritization of human inspections.
But as Newton’s first law teaches us: a body at rest will stay at rest until acted upon by a force. Policy, too, is subject to inertia. The administration’s pause might make this waiver harder to move now that it appears to be at a standstill. The only way forward is for leadership to provide the necessary push to set things in motion once again.
The administration now faces a pivotal choice. They can allow the train of progress to sit idle, its engine cooling and its promise fading into the distance. Or they can act, applying the deliberate force needed to move Automatic Track Inspections out of the station and onto the main line of American rail policy.
Let’s not leave the future of rail safety waiting. The train was moving—let’s get it rolling again. In both physics and policy, momentum matters. It’s time for the administration to let Automatic Track Inspections deliver the safety and efficiency our nation needs.
Charles Sauer (@CharlesSauer) is an author and a contributor to many publications. He is the president of the Market Institute and previously worked on Capitol Hill, for a governor, and for an academic think tank.