AAR Gives Railway Safety Act the Cold Shoulder

Should Congress decide to consider railroad safety legislation, such as the Railway Safety Act introduced earlier this year, don’t expect the railroad industry to consider the measure as it currently stands.

In February, U.S. Reps. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, and Seth Moulton, D-Massachusetts, two House members from opposite ends of the political and geographic map, introduced the Railroad Safety Enhancement Act of 2026. A similar measure was introduced in the U.S. Senate.

The proposal borrows from the Railway Safety Act of 2024, first pushed by then-U.S. Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, and others following the Norfolk Southern derailment in East Palestine, Ohio. However, the proposal did not advance.

The new iteration would require all Class I railroads and Amtrak to participate in the Confidential Close Call Reporting System, known as C3RS, for two years. The program is administered by NASA through an independent third party and is designed to let workers and railroads report close calls and unsafe conditions without fear of retaliation, while also limiting Federal Railroad Administration enforcement tied to events reported through the system.

However, the leading freight railroad industry association said it isn’t interested in what it sees as backward and all-encompassing mandates. Instead, it wants to focus on innovation.

“Freight railroads continue to advance safety through sustained investment in the core network, deployment of proven and emerging technologies, and rigorous operating standards,” Ted Greener, senior vice president for communications for the Association of American Railroads, told Railfanning.org News Wire. “Because of this, railroads are in the midst of their safest era ever and remain the safest way to move goods over land.

“As Congress considers any rail safety legislation, policymakers should reject backwards-looking, one-size-fits-all mandates that undermine competition and raise prices for consumers, and instead ensure each provision is objectively grounded in data to reduce risk,” Greener added. “The priority should be policies that encourage innovation and measurable safety outcomes without disrupting the supply chain or diverting resources from proven, safety-critical investments.”